Chinese
就像微尘与金质大地之间的数量一样，能够获得转轮王的果位。同样地，对三宝生起信心，或因见到功德而心生清净，或因见到利益安乐的力量而生起希求的信，这三种信心在心中生起，以刹那间的意念作礼拜，发出赞颂的声音，以语言作礼拜之后，这些果报是不可思议的，永远不会改变。而且，只会产生悦意的结果，而且会比其他的结果更加殊胜，而且会迅速产生，最终也会获得非常美好的佛果。不仅如此，即使仅仅以对三宝自然欢喜的心，或怀疑的心，或仅仅是为他人奉承的心来作礼拜，也会获得圆满的天人安乐。为什么要做供养和赞颂呢？有三个必要的原因：自己获得的必要，自己成为圣者之列。他人获得的必要，任何其他人见到这个供养和赞颂，都会对导师佛陀等生起三种信心，并且会极其珍视先前流传下来的论典，从而产生精进修学的愿望。双方都能获得的必要，无量的福德善业会在现世等中体验到，这会在自己的相续中产生，见到和听到论典也会在他人身上产生，自己的著作不会有障碍，讲说听闻和禅修实修也会圆满完成。立誓造论：以五大总纲来讲述讲说方法的诀窍，在这五个总纲中，第一个是为了让听众生起恭敬心，也是为了说明必要。一般而言，举例说明仅仅存在于语言中的必要等四法。以存在于必要关联的语言中的必要等四法，来阐述进入论典的原因。以存在于论典事业中的必要等四法，来确定意义，这有三种情况。第一种情况是，世俗普通人所说的所有有意义的词语都具备，例如“拿水桶来打水”这句话中，水是所要表达的，在家里得到水是必要的，用水消除口渴等意义得以实现。
English
Just as the number of particles between dust and the golden earth, one can attain the state of a Chakravartin king. Similarly, having faith in the Three Jewels, or having a pure mind upon seeing virtues, or having the three kinds of faith born in one's mind from seeing the power to bring benefit and happiness, making prostrations with a momentary thought, and uttering sounds of praise, making prostrations with speech, the results of these are inconceivable and will never change. Moreover, only pleasing results will occur, and they will be superior to other results, and they will occur quickly, and ultimately, only the excellent result of Buddhahood will be attained, as it is said. Furthermore, even if one makes prostrations to the Three Jewels with a naturally joyful mind, or a doubtful mind, or merely with a mind of flattering others, one will attain the complete happiness of gods. Why should one offer and praise? There are three necessary reasons: the necessity of what one obtains oneself, that one becomes part of the assembly of the holy. The necessity of what others obtain, when anyone sees that offering and praise, they will generate three kinds of faith in the teacher Buddha, etc., and they will highly value the previously transmitted treatises, thus generating the desire to diligently study and practice. The necessity of what both obtain, immeasurable merit and virtue will be experienced in this life, etc., which will arise in one's own mind-stream, and seeing and hearing the treatises will also arise in others, there will be no obstacles to one's own writing, and teaching, listening, contemplation, and practice will also be completed. Vowing to compose: The key points of the method of explanation are to be explained by the five great general principles. Among these five, the first is for the purpose of generating respect in the listeners, and also for the purpose of explaining the necessity. In general, exemplify the four qualities such as necessity that exist only in speech. Explain the cause of entering the treatise with the four qualities such as necessity that exist in speech related to necessity. There are three situations in which the meaning is determined by the four qualities such as necessity that exist in the activity of the treatise. The first situation is that all meaningful words spoken by ordinary worldly people are complete, for example, in the sentence "Bring a bucket and fetch water," water is what is to be expressed, obtaining water at home is necessary, and the meaning of quenching thirst with water is achieved.
Chinese
必要。如果先前没有，那么后续就不会产生，这种关系成立即是关系。第二，著论之初完整地阐述了必要关系的语句，著论之身等的必要等四法是所诠释的内容。需要断除具有思辨能力之人的疑惑，从而了知论著具有四法。由于这个原因而进入论著是究竟必要。如果不存在，就不会产生，这种关系依次成立即是关系。第三，这部论著本身也具有（四法），这部论著的所诠释内容是：从所有善逝的教言中，所阐述的皈依之事物。必要是：对此论著进行闻、思、修三者的人们，能够完全领会所有皈依之事物。究竟必要是：领会之后，能够证得一切种智。关系是：所诠释的内容作为方法存在于所证得的事物中，而能诠释的论著则转变为方法，因此这两者以方法和以方法所证得之方式相关联。能诠释的和必要以从方法中产生方法的方式相关联。必要和究竟必要以从彼产生彼的方式成立关联。如此在论著之初阐述必要关系语句的必要是什么呢？对此，有四种广为人知的智者观点：产生具有四法的定解；通过阐述具有四法来创造论著的美观；遣除他人的恶劣行为；对于钝根者产生定解，对于利根者产生意义转变的怀疑。其中，第四种观点是教师狮子贤等人的无诤之观点，前两种观点被认为是具有诤议的，第三种观点是堪布吉祥寂护的观点，但对此也有藏地的持律者措纳巴·喜饶桑波等人进行辩驳。吉祥阿底峡尊者说：‘啊啦，我们印度人不知道的，你们藏人都知道。’如同这样，印度的智者不接受藏地的理智，并且由于没有胜过堪布观点的竞争对手，因此不应驳斥堪布的观点，因为堪布自己的弟子，比如教师莲花戒，就像在辩论中击败和尚一样，给予了如同头顶遭受雷击般的理智。而且堪布自己的观点是，其他人...
English
It is necessary. If the former does not exist, then the latter will not arise, and the establishment of this relationship is the relationship. Secondly, the statement of necessary relationship is complete at the beginning of the treatise, with the four dharmas such as the necessity of the body of the treatise being the content to be expressed. It is necessary to dispel the doubts of others who possess discernment, thereby realizing that the treatise possesses the four dharmas. Entering into it because of this is the ultimate necessity. If it does not exist, it will not arise, and the relationship is established sequentially as the relationship. Thirdly, this treatise itself also possesses (the four dharmas). The content to be expressed in this is: from all the words of the Sugata, those that explain the objects of refuge. The necessity is: those who engage in listening, contemplation, and meditation on this treatise will fully comprehend all the objects of refuge. The ultimate necessity is: having comprehended that, one will manifest omniscience. The relationship is: the content to be expressed exists as the object to be accomplished by means, and the expressive treatise transforms into the means, therefore the two are related in the manner of means and object to be accomplished by means. The expressive and the necessity are related in the manner of the arising of means from means. The necessity and the ultimate necessity are established as related in the manner of the arising of that from that. Thus, what is the necessity of stating the words of necessary relationship at the beginning of the treatise? Regarding this, there are four widely known views of the wise: to generate the definite understanding of possessing the four dharmas; to create the beauty of the treatise by explaining that it possesses the four dharmas; to avert the evil actions of others; and to generate definite understanding for those of dull faculties and to generate doubt of meaning transformation for those of sharp faculties. Among these, the fourth view is the undisputed view of teachers such as Simhabhadra, the former two views are considered to be disputed, and the third view is the view of Khenpo Śāntarakṣita, but this is also disputed by Tibetan Vinaya holders such as Tsonapa Sherab Zangpo. The glorious Lord Atiśa said: 'Ah la, what we Indians do not know, you Tibetans know.' Just like that, the wisdom of the Indian scholars does not go along with the Tibetan reasoning, and since there is no competitor who surpasses the Khenpo's view, it is not appropriate to refute the Khenpo's view, because the Khenpo's own disciple, such as the teacher Kamalaśīla, gave reasoning like being struck on the head in debate, just like defeating a Heshang. Moreover, the Khenpo's own view is that others...
Chinese
有人这样陈述：这部论著不应写作，因为它缺少必要等四法。通过陈述必要等（四法），并展示其反驳方式，即通过展示标志未成立，从而证明论著具备四法。因此，论著可以写作得以成立，因为它能使钝根者产生思维的定解，并使利根者产生对意义转变的怀疑，所以非常合理。辩论者说：堪布只是陈述了自己的疑惑，而像这样的陈述，其作者的基础并未成立。并且，这个必要等不应写作，因为它也缺少四法，这也需要驳斥，因为首尾相同，所以产生了无穷的过失。这样说也不合理。因为论师并没有说没有陈述却有陈述。而且，你没有见过所有的印度论典，所以即使他人成立了，你也不知道。不仅如此，当阻止乌鸦侦察等没有必要等时，也必须抛出陈述，所以陈述的作者基础并未成立。谁能这样说呢？你的这种观点也能被证明有无穷的过失。也就是，你的必要等语言的必要陈述是所立宗，陈述的方式是无穷的。因为像你这样能陈述的人无数。你见识狭隘，而且非常自负。因为寂天论师等也这样认为，而你却认为是堪布自己的观点。第二，必要之事的成就方式是总结意义：通过善于了解皈依的自性的智慧，以及了解后在自相续中接受的精进二者来总结。次第是，通过这二者总结了前五个支分和后一个支分。因为通过分别了解五个，就能善于了解皈依的自性，并且它非常稳固。后一个支分则安住在精进中。第三，总结意义的理解方式是词义：皈依的体性，安立为希求的信心和意乐二者的方式是：在《经庄严论》中说：对于三宝，以寻求其事物意义的希求来承诺。在《月灯经》中说：发心的所依是皈依，以意义来表示。对于他相续中已经生起的三宝，以信心的因皈依来总结。
English
Someone stated: This treatise should not be written because it lacks the four necessities, etc. By stating the necessities, etc. (the four dharmas), and demonstrating the method of refuting it, i.e., by showing that the sign is not established, it is proven that the treatise possesses the four dharmas. Therefore, it is established that the treatise can be written because it can cause dull-witted individuals to generate a definitive understanding of thought, and it can cause sharp-witted individuals to generate doubt about the transformation of meaning, so it is very reasonable. The debater said: The Khenpo only stated his own doubts, but the basis for someone making such a statement is not established. Furthermore, this necessity, etc., should not be written because it also lacks the four dharmas, and this also needs to be refuted because the beginning and end are the same, so an infinite fault arises. Saying this is also unreasonable. Because the teacher did not say that there is a statement without a statement. Moreover, you have not seen all the Indian treatises, so even if others have established it, you do not know. Not only that, when preventing crows from scouting, etc., which have no necessity, etc., a statement must also be thrown out, so the basis for the author of the statement is not established. Who can say that? Your view can also be proven to have an infinite fault. That is, your statement of the necessity of the necessity of speech is the subject, and the way of stating it is infinite. Because there are countless people like you who can state it. You have narrow views and are very arrogant. Because Shantideva, etc., also think so, but you consider it to be the Khenpo's own view. Second, the way to accomplish the necessary thing is the summarized meaning: It is summarized by the wisdom that knows well the nature of refuge, and the diligence to take it into one's own mind after knowing it. The order is that these two summarize the first five limbs and the last one. Because by knowing the five separately, one can know well the nature of refuge, and it is very stable. The last one abides in diligence. Third, the way to understand the summarized meaning is the meaning of the words: The nature of refuge is established as the faith and aspiration of wanting, in the way that: In the Ornament of the Sutras, it is said: For the Three Jewels, one promises with the desire to seek the meaning of their objects. In the Sutra of the Moon Lamp, it is said: The basis for generating bodhicitta is refuge, which is shown by meaning. For the Three Jewels that have already arisen in the minds of others, it is summarized by the refuge of the cause of faith.