English
If asked: Sound. The sound consciousness with objects such as a pot and the number of pots, has the characteristic that the pot and the number of pots etc. are not established by relying on other substances, because these two are established by relying on different entities. For example, in merits etc. and the past and future, even if there is no other meaning in numbers etc., it and the sound concept of numbers etc. exist in different ways. The third question is: If it is said that merits etc. can be used as a false name for the sound of numbers etc., there is no fault. Then, all things have the characteristic that they can be used as a false name for the sound of numbers. Whatever merit can be used as a false name for the sound of numbers, because there is no reason to distinguish. If it is said that not all things can be used as a false name for the sound of numbers, but on things that have other characteristics that distinguish the meaning of numbers, the sound of numbers can be used as a true name, and on things that do not have these characteristics, it can be used as a false name. Then, the sound of numbers has the characteristic that it is unreasonable to distinguish the difference between true and false names by whether or not there are other characteristics that distinguish the meaning of numbers. Because you (the sound of numbers) there, for the object of unerringly understanding numbers, you (the sound of numbers) are used as a true name. The second part is divided into two parts: eliminating the transformation of sound without other meaning, eliminating the impossible transformation of the six sounds. The first part is: the sounds of the pot and the number of pots etc., have the nature of becoming different kinds. Because they do not refer to names that have no other meaning. If asked, the sound expressed by merits white etc. and its number etc., has the nature of becoming different kinds. Because of this reason. If it is said that merits white etc. also have other meanings such as numbers, so the reason is not established. Then, merit has the characteristic that you will become indistinguishable from things. Because the definition of merit as the basis of other things depends on your own entity. Therefore, the sounds of the pot and the number of pots etc., even if there is no other meaning, are not different kinds, because they refer to different entities. For example, like the sound of "not a universal, not a substance". The second part is divided into two parts: explaining the way of expressing dharma and the possessor of dharma, explaining the way of expressing kinds and collections. The first part is: the number of pots etc. has the characteristic that the sixth sound does not
Chinese
是合理的。如果说，因为瓶子在意义上没有差别。答：事物。瓶子的数量等，作为有法。你所说的陈述法的声音，你从瓶子中显示出的差别，不是因为所表达的物质是其他事物而产生的，而是为了排除瓶子的其他特征而产生的。答：对于想要了解瓶子的数量，而排除了其他属性的听者来说，瓶子的数量这个声音，作为有法。即使你说瓶子的数量与瓶子不同，但仅凭这一点，它们两个也不会成为不同的事物。因为你以它们两个是不同的反体为理由，来说它们两个是不同的。例如，就像说“具有手指”并不能使手指和具有者成为不同的事物一样。答：瓶子一个这个声音，作为有法。你和瓶子的数量这两个声音都表达同一个意思，但你被称为陈述有法的声音。因为你把瓶子的所有特征都抛向了所表达的事物，所以被标记为陈述有法的声音。例如，就像“手指变得具有”一样。第二，那么，集合的表达和种类的表达有什么区别呢？答：形。瓶子这个声音，作为有法。你相对于瓶子的八种微粒物质来说，是集合表达的声音。因为你抛弃了瓶子的八种微粒物质的各自能力作为所表达的事物，而将共同的能力作为所表达的事物。答：瓶子，作为有法。你和你的形状，不能是基础相同、声音意义相同，因为你这个声音抛弃了你的形状作为所表达的事物。答：种类和集合表达的声音，作为有法。你的区别是成立的，因为不抛弃具有种类者作为所表达的事物，以及不抛弃具有集合者作为所表达的事物，是你的区别。如果瓶子和瓶子的形状等在意义上没有差别，那么用“瓶子的形状”这个声音来表达差别就没有必要了，会变成这样吗？答：瓶子的形状这个声音，作为有法。有必要，因为是为了特别显示瓶子的形状产生自相认知眼识的能力。也适用于檀香的气味这个声音。
English
It is reasonable. If it is said that because there is no difference in meaning from the pot. Answer: Thing. The number of pots, etc., as the subject of debate. The sound of the statement of the predicate that you speak, the difference you show from the pot, is not because the expressed substance is another thing, but because it is used to exclude other characteristics of the pot. Answer: For the listener who wants to know only the number of pots, excluding other attributes, the sound of the number of pots, as the subject of debate. Even if you say that the number of pots is different from the pot, just by that, the two will not become different things. Because you say that the two are different entities as a reason to say that the two are different. For example, just as saying "having fingers" does not make the fingers and the possessor different things. Answer: The sound of "one pot", as the subject of debate. You and the sound of "the number of pots" both express the same meaning, but you are known as the sound of stating the subject of debate. Because you throw all the characteristics of the pot to the expressed thing, so it is marked as the sound of stating the subject of debate. For example, like "the finger becomes possessed". Second, then, what is the difference between the expression of a collection and the expression of a kind? Answer: Form. The sound of "pot", as the subject of debate. You are the sound of expressing a collection in relation to the eight particulate substances of the pot. Because you abandon the respective abilities of the eight particulate substances of the pot as the expressed thing, and take the common ability as the expressed thing. Answer: Pot, as the subject of debate. You and your shape cannot be the same basis and the same meaning of sound, because the sound of "you" abandons your shape as the expressed thing. Answer: The sound of expressing kind and collection, as the subject of debate. Your difference is established, because not abandoning the possessor of kind as the expressed thing, and not abandoning the possessor of collection as the expressed thing, is your difference. If the pot and the shape of the pot, etc., have no difference in meaning, then it is not necessary to express the difference with the sound of "the shape of the pot", will it become like this? Answer: The sound of "the shape of the pot", as the subject of debate. It is necessary, because it is to specifically show the ability of the shape of the pot to generate self-cognizing eye consciousness. It also applies to the sound of "the scent of sandalwood".
Tibetan
གཉིས་པ་ཡན་ལག་དུ་མ་ཉིད་ཀྱང་རྒྱུར་མི་འཐད་པ་ལ་གཉིས་ཏེ། ཡན་ལག་ཚོགས་པ་རྒྱུར་མི་འཐད། ཡན་ལག་རེ་རེ་རྒྱུར་མི་འཐད་པའོ། །དང་པོ་ནི། ལུས་ཀྱི་ཡན་ལག་དུ་མ་ཡིད་བློའི་དངོས་རྒྱུ་ཡིན་ནོ་ཞེ་ན། ཡན་ལག་ཐམས་ཅད་ཚོགས་པའམ། རེ་རེ་བ་ཡིན། དང་པོ་ལྟར་ན། མཾ། ཡིད་བློ་ཆོས་ཅན། ལུས་ཀྱི་ཡན་ལག་གང་རུང་གཅིག་དང་བྲལ་ན་ཁྱོད་མི་བསྐྱེད་པར་ཐལ། ལུས་ཀྱི་ཡན་ལག་ཀུན་ཚོགས་པ་དེ་ཁྱོད་ཀྱི་དངོས་རྒྱུ་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱིར། གཉིས་པ་ལ་གསུམ་སྟེ། གནོད་བྱེད་ཐལ་བ་བརྗོད། དེ་ཡི་ཉེས་སྤོང་དགག རང་ལ་མཚུངས་པ་སྤང་བའོ། །དང་པོ་ནི། ཕྱོགས་གཉིས་པ་ལྟར་ན། རེཾ། ལུས་ཅན་གཅིག་ལས་ཆོས་ཅན། ཡིད་བློ་རྫས་རྒྱུན་དུ་མ་ཅིག་ཅར་འབྱུང་བར་ཐལ། ལུས་ཀྱི་ཡན་ལག་དུ་མ་ཅིག་ཅར་ཡོད་པའི་ཕྱིར། གཉིས་པ་ལ་གཉིས་ཏེ། དབུགས་གཅིག་ཡིད་བློའི་རྒྱུར་མི་འཐད། དུ་མ་ཡིད་བློའི་རྒྱུར་མི་འཐད་པའོ། །དང་པོ་ནི། དབུགས་འབྱུང་རྔུབ་གཅིག་ཁོ་ན་ཡིན་པས་ཡིད་བློ་རེ་རེ་ཁོ་ན་སྐྱེ་བར་ངེས་པ་ཡིན་ནོ་ཞེ་ན། དུཾ། དབུགས་འབྱུང་རྔུབ་ཆོས་ཅན། ཁྱོད་གཅིག་ཁོ་ན་ཡིན་པའི་རྒྱུ་མཚན་གྱིས་ཡིད་བློ་རེ་རེ་ཁོ་ན་སྐྱེ་བ་ངེས་པར་མིན་པར་ཐལ། ཁྱོད་དུ་མ་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱིར། གལ་ཏེ་མ་གྲུབ་སྟེ། དབུགས་དང་ལུས་རྟག་པ་གཅིག་ཉིད་ཀྱིས་ཡིད་བློ་རིམ་གྱིས་བསྐྱེད་པའི་ཕྱིར་ཞེ་ན། གཅིགཾ ལུས་ཅན་གཅིག་ལ་ཆོས་ཅན། ཡིད་བློ་རྫས་རྒྱུན་དུ་མ་ཅིག་ཅར་འབྱུང་བར་ཐལ། དབུགས་དང་ལུས་རྟག་པ་དུ་མ་ཅིག་ཅར་ཡོད་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ། །གལཾ། གལ་ཏེ་ཡིད་བློ་ཅིག་ཅར་བསྐྱེད་པ་མ་ཡིན་གྱི། རིམ་གྱིས་བསྐྱེད་པ་ཡིན་ནོ་ཞེ་ན། དབུགས་དང་ལུས་རྟག་པ་ཆོས་ཅན། ཡིད་བློ་རིམ་གྱིས་ཀྱང་མི་སྐྱེད་པར་ཐལ། སྔར་ཡིད་བློ་མི་སྐྱེད་པ་དང་ཁྱད་པར་མེད་པའི་ཕྱིར། དབུགསཾ། དབུགས་འབྱུང་རྔུབ་དེ་ཆོས་ཅན། ཁྱོད་གཅིག་ཡིན་པའི་རྒྱུ་མཚན་གྱིས་ཡིད་བློ་གཅིག་ཁོ་ནར་ངེས་པ་མིན་པར་ཐལ། ཁྱོད་གཅིག་གི་ཡུན་ཚད་ལ་ཡིད་བློ་དུ་མ་སྐྱེ་བའི་ཕྱིར། དུཾ། གལ་ཏེ་མ་གྲུབ་སྟེ་དོན་དུ་མ་ཡིད་བློ་ཆ་མེད་གཅིག་གིས་ཤེས་པའི་ཕྱིར་ཞེ་ན། ཡིད་བློ་ཆོས་ཅན། དོན་སྔ་ཕྱི་ཅིག་ཅར་དུ་ཤེས་པར་ཐལ། དོན་སྔ་ཕྱི་ཤེས་པ་གང་ཞིག ཁྱོད་ཆ་མེད་གཅིག་ཡིན་པའི་ཕྱིར། མ་གྲུབ་ན། ཡིད་བློ་ཆོས་ཅན། དོན་སྔ་ཕྱི་རིམ་གྱིས་མི་འཛིན་པར་ཐལ། དོན་སྔ་ཕྱི་མི་འཛིན་པ་དང་ཁྱད་པར་མེད་པའི་ཕྱིར། གཉིས་པ་ལ་གཉིས་ཏེ། དུ་མ་རིམ་གྱིས་འབྱུང་བས་བསྐྱེད་པ་དགག དུ་མ་ཅིག་ཅར་འབྱུང་
Chinese
第二，多种支分本身也不应理作为因，这有二：支分集合不应理作为因，支分一一不应理作为因。第一，如果说身体的多种支分是意识的近取因，那么是所有支分集合，还是各个支分？如果是前者，མཾ。（藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思）意识，有法。如果离开身体的任何一个支分，则你不产生，应成。因为身体的所有支分集合是你的近取因的缘故。第二有三：说出破斥的过失，遮破它的过失，遣除与自己相同之处。第一，如果是第二种情况，རེཾ。（藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思）从一个有身者，有法。意识的相续流多体同时产生，应成。因为身体的多种支分同时存在的缘故。第二有二：一个呼吸不应理作为意识的因，多个呼吸不应理作为意识的因。第一，如果说因为呼吸一次呼出吸入，所以必定只产生一个意识，དུཾ。（藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思）呼吸呼出吸入，有法。因为你唯一一个的缘故，必定只产生一个意识，不应成。因为你不是唯一的缘故。如果未成立，因为呼吸和身体恒常唯一，所以意识次第产生。གཅིགཾ。（藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思）对于一个有身者，有法。意识的相续流多体同时产生，应成。因为呼吸和身体恒常多体同时存在的缘故。གལཾ。（藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思）如果不是同时产生意识，而是次第产生，那么，呼吸和身体恒常，有法。意识次第也不产生，应成。因为与先前不产生意识没有差别之故。དབུགསཾ。（藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思）呼吸呼出吸入，有法。因为你唯一一个的缘故，必定唯一一个意识，不应成。因为你一个的期间产生多个意识的缘故。དུཾ。（藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思）如果未成立，因为多个事物被意识无分一体所知之故。意识，有法。前后事物同时被知，应成。知前后事物，你无分一体的缘故。如果未成立，意识，有法。不次第执持前后事物，应成。因为与不执持前后事物没有差别之故。第二有二：遮破多个次第产生而产生，多个同时产生
English
Second, multiple limbs themselves are also not reasonable as a cause, which has two aspects: the collection of limbs is not reasonable as a cause, and each individual limb is not reasonable as a cause. First, if it is said that the multiple limbs of the body are the substantial cause of consciousness, then is it the collection of all limbs, or each individual limb? If it is the former, maṃ. (藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思) Consciousness, the subject. If separated from any one of the body's limbs, then you do not arise, it follows. Because the collection of all the body's limbs is your substantial cause. The second has three aspects: stating the fault of refutation, refuting its fault, and rejecting similarity to oneself. First, if it is the second case, reṃ. (藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思) From a single embodied being, the subject. Multiple streams of consciousness arise simultaneously, it follows. Because multiple limbs of the body exist simultaneously. The second has two aspects: one breath is not reasonable as a cause of consciousness, and multiple breaths are not reasonable as a cause of consciousness. First, if it is said that because there is only one inhalation and exhalation, it is certain that only one consciousness arises, duṃ. (藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思) Inhalation and exhalation, the subject. Because you are only one, it is not certain that only one consciousness arises, it should not be so. Because you are not one. If it is not established, it is because breath and body are constantly one, so consciousness arises sequentially. gaciṃ. (藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思) For a single embodied being, the subject. Multiple streams of consciousness arise simultaneously, it follows. Because multiple constant breaths and bodies exist simultaneously. galaṃ. (藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思) If consciousness does not arise simultaneously, but arises sequentially, then, breath and body are constant, the subject. Consciousness does not arise sequentially either, it follows. Because there is no difference from not arising consciousness before. dbhugaṃ. (藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思) Inhalation and exhalation, the subject. Because you are only one, it is not certain that there is only one consciousness, it should not be so. Because multiple consciousnesses arise during your one duration. duṃ. (藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思) If it is not established, it is because multiple things are known by one indivisible consciousness. Consciousness, the subject. Prior and posterior things are known simultaneously, it follows. Knowing prior and posterior things, because you are one indivisible. If it is not established, consciousness, the subject. Prior and posterior things are not apprehended sequentially, it follows. Because there is no difference from not apprehending prior and posterior things. The second has two aspects: refuting the arising from multiple sequential arisings, multiple simultaneous arisings.