Chinese
萨所。此义在《学集论》中也说：“如实正等持，能知如是佛所说。”因此，想要平息自他的痛苦，就应当生起智慧。轮回的一切痛苦都来自于有漏的业和烦恼，而这些又来自于执着实有。如《六十正理论》所说：“若有实事之承许，则生难忍贪嗔恚。”因此，通过证悟空性的智慧断除这些，一切痛苦都会平息。《圣者集经》中说：“以智慧能遍知诸法自性后，将从无余三界中真实解脱。”当自己证悟空性时，《心释》中说：“如是瑜伽士，若已串习空性，其心喜乐于利他，此事易成无艰难。”因此，也应为他人宣说空性，从而平息痛苦。第二，分为三：确定智慧的自性，智慧融入无我之境，以及遣除所断的实执。第一，分为二：确立二谛，以及将有境确立为道。第一，分为二：分别二谛的自性，以及遣除对此的诤论。第一，分为三：分类、体性和衡量它的智慧的差别。第一，世俗谛是遮蔽真实义的错乱之识，依于此识而成立，故为世俗谛。《入行论》中说：“以愚昧自性覆障故，是名世俗谛。由此（世俗谛）所造作，显现为真实，佛说彼为世俗谛，虚假之事物即世俗谛。”如是等等。胜义谛是圣者的无显现之智慧，是其所证悟之义，故为胜义谛。《中边分别论》中说：“如圣者之行境，如是宣说故，此二即是二谛。”第二，胜义谛。《二谛经》中说：“天子，若胜义谛成为身语意的对境，则不入胜义谛之数，而成为世俗谛。”乃至胜义
English
Sa so. This meaning is also stated in the Compendium of Trainings: "The Tathagata said that one will know the correct samadhi as it is." Therefore, wishing to pacify the suffering of oneself and others, one should generate wisdom. All the suffering of samsara arises from contaminated actions and afflictions, and these arise from clinging to things as real. As the Sixty Stanzas on Reasoning states: "If there is an acceptance of things as real, unbearable desire and hatred will arise." Therefore, by abandoning these through the wisdom that realizes emptiness, all suffering will be pacified. The Noble Collection Sutra states: "Having fully known the nature of phenomena through wisdom, one will truly pass beyond the entirety of the three realms." When one realizes emptiness oneself, the Commentary on the Mind states: "Thus, when yogis have become accustomed to emptiness, their minds will delight in benefiting others, and this will be easy without difficulty." Therefore, one should also teach emptiness to others, thereby pacifying suffering. The second has three parts: identifying the nature of wisdom, that entering the object of selflessness, and refuting the object to be abandoned, the clinging to reality. The first has two parts: establishing the two truths of objects, and establishing the subject as the path. The first has two parts: distinguishing the nature of the two truths, and refuting disputes about them. The first has three parts: the divisions, the essence, and the difference in the minds that measure it. First, the conventional is the deluded mind that obscures the true meaning, and it is true in its own terms, so it is the conventional truth. The Entering states: "Because it obscures the nature of ignorance, it is called conventional. Whatever is fabricated by it appears to be true, the Buddha said that is the conventional truth, and fabricated things are conventional." And so on. The ultimate is the non-appearing wisdom of the noble ones, and it is the object to be realized by it, so it is the ultimate. The Middle Beyond states: "As it is said to be the field of activity of the noble ones, these two are considered to be the two truths." Second, the ultimate. The Sutra on the Two Truths states: "Son of the gods, if the ultimate truth becomes the object of body, speech, and mind, it will not be counted among the ultimate truths, but will become the conventional truth." And so on, the ultimate
Chinese
如经中所说，胜义谛甚至超越了遍知智慧的境界。因此，它不能被确定为是心识所能把握的对象。格拉认为，心识是遮蔽证悟胜义谛的世俗。夏炯和南囊则认为，心识是分别念，是无明，因此不是胜义谛的境界。此处所说的心识，如《中边论》所说：“非真遍计者，谓心及心所，三界所摄故。”因此，它是三界所摄的心和心所，不是如来境界。但它与圣者智慧所证悟的对象并不矛盾。经中说，它也不是佛陀智慧的境界，这是指它未成立任何事物。因为它未成立任何事物，所以在任何地方都无法证悟它。然而，无缘智慧不执著任何事物，因此可以被认为是证悟。如《未生怨忏悔经》所说：“大王，不见一切法，是为正见。大王，正见者，无所见也。”因此，这二者并不矛盾。 第三部分有三点：补特伽罗的分类、损害的次第和损害的方式。 第一点是：对于这两种谛理进行修习的世间人，可以分为两种：具有寂止和胜观禅定的瑜伽士，以及不具有这些禅定的普通人。虽然有些论典是这样解释的，但更合理的是根据是否具备相应的通达无我之义的三种智慧来进行区分。 第二点是：在两种世间中，普通世间人认为身体是唯一的，心是常恒的等等。对于这些观点，瑜伽士的理证会造成损害，例如：身体不是唯一的，因为它由许多部分组成；心不是常恒的，因为它会变化等等。此外，外道实事论者、唯识宗和中观宗这三者，也会因为各自的智慧与所知实相相符或不符，而导致后者会损害前者。例如，实事论者认为所取是不可分割的极微，能取是刹那生灭的识
English
As it is said in the scriptures, the ultimate truth transcends even the realm of omniscient wisdom. Therefore, it cannot be definitively established as an object that can be grasped by the mind. Gelha explains that the mind is the conventional that obscures the vision of the ultimate truth. Sher Jung and Namnang explain that the mind is conceptual thought, which is ignorance, and therefore not the realm of the ultimate truth. Here, the mind, as stated in the Madhyāntavibhāga (Distinguishing the Middle from the Extremes): "The unreal conceptualization, is mind and mental factors, included in the three realms." Therefore, it is the mind and mental factors included in the three realms, and not the realm of the Tathāgata. However, it is not contradictory that it is to be realized by the wisdom of the noble ones. The sutras say that it is not even the realm of the Buddha's wisdom, which refers to the fact that it is not established as anything. Because it is not established as anything, it cannot be realized anywhere. However, non-apprehending wisdom does not grasp anything, so it can be considered realization. As stated in the Undoing the Regrets of Ajātaśatru: "Great King, not seeing all dharmas is the correct view. Great King, the correct view is not seeing." Therefore, these two are not contradictory. There are three aspects to the third point: the classification of individuals, the order of harm, and the reasoning of harm. The first point is: worldly people who practice these two truths are seen as two types: yogis who possess calm abiding and insight meditation, and ordinary people who do not. Although some commentaries explain it this way, it is more reasonable to distinguish them based on whether they possess the three types of wisdom that appropriately understand the meaning of selflessness. The second point is: among the two worlds, ordinary worldly people view the body as singular and the mind as permanent, and so on. These views are harmed by the reasoning of yogis, such as: the body is not singular because it is composed of many parts; the mind is not permanent because it changes, and so on. Furthermore, the three, the externalist realists, the Mind-Only school, and the Madhyamaka school, also harm each other, with the higher ones harming the lower ones, due to the difference in whether their wisdom aligns with the nature of knowable objects. For example, the realists assert that the object of apprehension is indivisible atoms, and the apprehending consciousness is momentary.
Chinese
嘎嘛认为胜义谛是实有的，对此，唯识宗的理路是：如果将六者同时结合，极微会变成六个部分。如果这六个部分占据同一个位置，那么聚合物也会变得像极微一样。诸如此类的说法会造成损害，因为作为积累对象的极微如果不存在，那么积累它的粗大之物也不会存在。如果粗大之物不存在，那么这两者都不会是真实的。唯识宗认为能取和所取二者皆无的自证识是胜义谛，对此，中观宗所阐述的破斥自证识等的理路会造成损害，就像那样。第三，善天认为两者都存在，并且不需要用众所周知的例子来论证所要证明的事物。这里如果问，因为在世间人的心识中事物是那样显现的，所以那些境并不成立为不真实，那么他们的心识怎么会是错乱的呢？回答说，因为凡夫和瑜伽士都认为事物是不真实的，通过幻术等例子，对于瑜伽士和实在论者来说，显现也是对真实的否定，所以如果他们的心识成立为错乱，更何况是凡夫呢？这样解释之后，用“果”等来辩论和反驳，这是现观的观点。第二，辩论和反驳分为两种：依靠世俗谛的辩论和反驳，以及依靠胜义谛的辩论和反驳。第一种分为五种：不入于道，不争论境，被量否定，与教证相违，以及避免太过分。第一，如果一切法都不真实，那么通过布施等就不会获得菩提，因此为了菩提的缘故，就不会行持布施等，如果这样问。回答说，虽然在胜义谛中没有，但在未经观察的世俗谛中是存在的，因此为了果菩提的缘故而行持布施等，这并不矛盾。第二，如果事物显现给瑜伽士和凡夫，那么争论什么呢？回答说，虽然显现是相同的，但世间凡夫见到色等事物，并且认为那是真实的，但他们并不像幻术那样理解，而瑜伽士是那样理解的，因此瑜伽士和世间人在这里争论。第三，如果问，因为色等通过现量成立，所以与虚假相违，回答说，不相违，因为那也只是在世间中被认为是那样，但并不是作为量而真实存在的，因为身体是不净和无常等，却被认为是清净等
English
Ga-ma considers ultimate truth to be real. To this, the reasoning of the Mind-Only school is: if six are combined simultaneously, the subtle particles will become six parts. If these six parts occupy the same position, then the aggregate will also become like a subtle particle. Such statements are harmful because if the subtle particles, which are the objects of accumulation, do not exist, then the gross objects accumulated from them will not exist. If the gross objects do not exist, then neither of these two will be real. The Mind-Only school considers the self-aware consciousness, in which the grasper and the grasped are non-dual, to be the ultimate truth. To this, the reasoning of the Middle Way school, which refutes self-awareness, etc., is harmful, just like that. Third, Gewa Lha believes that both exist and that there is no need to use well-known examples to prove what is to be proven. Here, if one asks, since things appear that way in the minds of ordinary people, those objects are not established as unreal, so how can their minds be mistaken? The answer is that since both ordinary people and yogis consider things to be unreal, through examples such as illusions, for yogis and realists, appearance is also a negation of reality, so if their minds are established as mistaken, what more needs to be said about ordinary people? After explaining this, using "fruit," etc., to debate and refute is the view of Manifest Cognition. Second, debate and refutation are divided into two types: debate and refutation based on conventional truth and debate and refutation based on ultimate truth. The first is divided into five types: not entering the path, not arguing about objects, being negated by valid cognition, contradicting scriptural statements, and avoiding being too extreme. First, if all phenomena are not real, then one will not attain enlightenment through generosity, etc., so for the sake of enlightenment, one will not practice generosity, etc., if one asks this. The answer is that although it does not exist in ultimate truth, it does exist in conventional truth without investigation, so it is not contradictory to practice generosity, etc., for the sake of the fruit of enlightenment. Second, if things appear to both yogis and ordinary people, then what is there to argue about? The answer is that although the appearance is the same, ordinary people in the world see objects such as forms and think that they are real, but they do not understand them as illusions, while yogis understand them that way, so yogis and ordinary people argue here. Third, if one asks, since forms, etc., are established by direct perception, it contradicts being false, the answer is that it does not contradict, because that is only considered to be so in the world, but it is not real as a valid cognition, because the body is impure and impermanent, etc., but is considered to be pure, etc.
Chinese
就像名声远扬的那样，是虚假的。如《三摩地王经》所说：眼和耳鼻也不是量，舌和身与意也不是量，如果这些根是量的话，那么圣道对于谁又有什么用呢？如是说。第四，如果一切法都没有自性，那么能仁如何宣说事物是刹那无常的自性呢？这是有密意的，密意在于观待显现的假象，为了逐渐引导执着事物为实的世间，怙主才显示事物是无常的。如经所说：胜者说“我”和“我的”，是依于密意而说的，蕴、界和处，也是同样依于密意而说。实际上，那些事物也不是刹那的真实，因为有能损害刹那的理证。如果刹那对于世间来说是不显现的，那么在世俗中也是相违的，如果这样说，虽然对于普通人来说不显现，但是对于瑜伽士的世间，即对于那些仅仅见到人无我的人来说是显现的，因此，在世俗中是成立的，没有过失。如果这样，那么见到刹那也就是见到实相，这与经中所说相违，如果这样说，观待世间常等之见，瑜伽士没有见到刹那，就被认为是见到了，因为刹那只是名言的胜义谛。否则，如果仅仅是普通人相对于瑜伽士来说，就是见到了，那么瑜伽士确定地认识到女人是不净的，而世间却认为是清净的，这将会成为一种妨害，格拉是这样解释的。第五，有四点：不获得福德，不连接相续，没有善恶，舍弃无意义的行为。第一，如果一切法都没有真实的，那么佛也是虚假的，因此供养佛也不会产生福德，如果这样说，就像你认为供养真实的佛会产生真实的福德一样，供养如幻的佛也会获得如幻的福德，所以没有过失。第二，如果众生如幻，那么他们死后如何转生呢？转生的因是聚合，只要因