English
Furthermore, because there is no division of prior and subsequent moments, it will be harmed by faults such as asserting that consciousness is permanent. Therefore, whatever appears as an object is nothing other than appearing as one's own mind; just as appearances such as horses and cattle in dreams, all appearances are considered to be mind. This mind, which considers the knowledge that is empty of the apprehended and the apprehender, merely self-aware and self-illuminating, to be ultimately true, also has a way of establishing the two truths in this system. All knowable things are summarized into the three: the completely imputed, the dependent, and the thoroughly established. Therefore, the completely imputed, which appears as the apprehended and the apprehender being far apart, is the conventional truth. If the knowledge of emptiness, which is the dependent, is emphasized in terms of how it appears, it is the conventional truth. If it is emphasized in terms of how it exists, it is the ultimate truth of a subject. And the thoroughly established is solely the ultimate truth. This will prevent the assertion that self-awareness is truly established, as will be explained regarding the harm of Madhyamaka reasoning. The Madhyamikas, who do not accept either external objects or self-awareness as ultimately true, consider all knowable phenomena to be of a nature free from elaboration, the union of the two truths, and thus are superior to other philosophical systems. Within that, there are two types, Svatantrika and Prasangika, based on the intellectual capacity to analyze the two truths. The way of establishing the two truths is: from the perspective of analyzing the ultimate truth of existence, the way things appear is the conventional truth, and the way things exist is the ultimate truth. From the perspective of analyzing the conventional truth of appearance, both the object and the subject that are inconsistent in existence and appearance are the conventional truth, and both the object and the subject that are consistent in existence and appearance are the ultimate truth. In short, the intellectual faults of philosophical systems, the main intellectual faults of the Shravaka Vaibhashika and Sautrantika, are that they consider both the mind that self-importantly conceptualizes the conventional truth and the partless nature of the ultimate truth to be the ultimate truth. The Chittamatrins consider self-awareness and self-illumination to be the ultimate truth. The Svatantrika Madhyamikas cling to the separate aspects of the two truths. Therefore, even for yogis, it is the difference in the wisdom that sees the way things exist that causes the higher systems to harm and overwhelm the philosophical tenets of the lower systems. Because the wisdom that sees the way things exist becomes increasingly better, whoever has valid cognition can refute the lower systems, but not others. Thus.
Chinese
而且，十地和五道也是，由于越来越高的证悟和功德的获得，会压倒越来越低的证悟和功德。第二，对于此进行辩驳的消除，有对基础二谛进行辩驳的消除，对道空性进行辩驳的消除，对果利他进行辩驳的消除这三种。第一种中，有世俗者的辩驳消除，声闻者的辩驳消除，唯识宗的辩驳消除这三种。第一种是：瑜伽士如何损害世俗者的心识呢？如果说，世俗者执着于如实见到生等显现，并且与此相违，因此会互相损害，那不是的。如此，万物不真实和认为真实这二者，也是，二者也共同认为虚假的例子，比如幻术和梦境等，这些虽然显现，但并未成立为真实，因此，如同显现而自性未成立的幻术梦境一样，最初的一切色等，也能够在世俗者面前成立为显现而无自性。由于没有显现却成立为真实的相同例子，因此世俗者无论何时都无法向瑜伽士证明事物是真实的。如果一切法皆不真实，如同幻术，那么学习布施等道又有什么用呢？如同购买幻术之马的辛劳一样，没有必要啊。如果这样说，对此进行考察和分析，即使没有成立，但为了果，即为了果或必要的目的，仅仅是不经考察分析就进入，因此是有必要的。必要是什么呢？在此，轮回涅槃的显现如同幻术，依靠缘起的力量而无欺存在，因此，只要能取所取的执着未融入法界，众生的显现就不会中断，并且会带来利益和损害，因此为了平息自他的痛苦，以及为了利益安乐的方法，而精进于此道。在此，并非执着于道和果是真实的，如同变幻出强大的幻术军队，从而从敌人的恐惧中解脱，以及如同努力使沉睡中痛苦的人醒来一样。那么，瑜伽士和世俗者二者都共同显现的事物，又有什么可争论的呢？显现的
English
Moreover, the ten bhumis and five paths are such that, due to the attainment of increasingly higher realizations and qualities, the lower and lower ones are overcome by the realizations and qualities. Second, regarding the refutation of objections to this, there are three: refuting objections to the two truths of the basis, refuting objections to the emptiness of the path, and refuting objections to the fruit of benefiting others. In the first of these, there are three: refuting objections from ordinary people, refuting objections from shravakas, and refuting objections from Mind-Only proponents. The first is: How does a yogi harm the minds of ordinary people? If you say that ordinary people cling to things as they appear, such as birth, etc., and since it is the opposite of that, they will harm each other, that is not the case. Like this, both the non-truth of all things and the belief in their truth are examples of things that are commonly accepted as false by both, such as illusions and dreams. These appear, but are not established as true. Therefore, like illusions and dreams that appear but whose nature is not established, all initial forms, etc., can be established as appearing but without inherent existence in the eyes of ordinary people. Since there is no similar example of something appearing and being established as true, ordinary people can never prove to yogis that things are true. If all phenomena are untrue, like illusions, then what is the use of studying the path of generosity, etc.? It is like the labor of buying an illusory horse, there is no need. If you say that, then if you investigate and analyze it, even if it is not established, it is necessary because it is only entering without investigating or analyzing for the sake of the fruit, that is, for the sake of the fruit or the necessary purpose. What is the need? Here, the appearances of samsara and nirvana are like illusions, existing infallibly by the power of dependent origination. Therefore, as long as the clinging to the apprehended and the apprehender has not subsided into the expanse, this appearance will not cease for sentient beings, and it will bring benefit and harm. Therefore, one strives on this path in order to pacify the suffering of oneself and others, and as a means of benefit and happiness. Here, it is not that one clings to the path and the fruit as being true, just as one conjures up a great illusory army and is freed from the fear of enemies, and just as one strives to awaken a person who is suffering in sleep. So, what is the dispute about things that appear in common to both yogis and ordinary people? The appearing
Chinese
并非仅仅争论事物是否存在，因为没有遮止显现方式的中观派。当世间人见到事物时，他们所见和所显现的色等事物，就认为是真实且在胜义中成立的。但他们不像瑜伽士那样，视其显现却不真实，如同幻象。因此，瑜伽士和普通世间人在此处争论。其次，小乘论者说：如果一切法都是无根的空性，那么眼等显现所成立并存在着的色等事物是不合理的。回答：色等由显现成立并存在，这些说法也只是未经观察的世间共许，仅仅是名声而已。如果经过观察和分析，就不能以量成立。正如将要解释的那样，因为通过对根境相遇和不相遇的观察等方式进行遮破。如果像那样安立色等成立，那就好比女人的身体是不净和无常等，但在世间却被认为是清净和常等，是虚假的。色等事物是真实存在的，因为佛陀说过有界、蕴、处，并且也说过蕴的自性是刹那的，所以是存在的。回答：那是具有不了义的意趣。像这样，考虑到意趣仅仅是显现的方式，为了让那些不能证悟空性的世间人逐渐进入正确的、中观的道路，因此，一切众生的怙主，即圆满的佛陀，才宣说了色等事物是存在的。但在真实的意义上，蕴等并非是刹那成立的，因为如果进行分析，它们既不是一也不是多，并且没有生灭。如果刹那不是胜义谛，那么在世俗谛中安立也是相违的，因此会变成两个谛都不是。如果那样，在世俗谛中如何相违呢？通过理和教相违。世俗是共同显现的，必须连小孩子也能见到，但他们却不能见到，因此不是世俗。而且，薄伽梵也没有将见到刹那作为事物的实
English
It is not merely arguing about the existence or non-existence of things, because there is no Madhyamaka that prevents the manner of appearance. When worldly people see things, they consider the form and other things they see and that appear to be true and established in the ultimate sense. But they do not see and understand it like a yogi, who sees it as appearing but not being true, like an illusion. Therefore, yogis and ordinary worldly people argue here. Secondly, the Hearers say: If all dharmas are emptiness without a basis, then it is unreasonable for form and other things, which are established and exist by the direct perception of the eye and so on. Answer: These statements that form and so on are established and exist by direct perception are also merely worldly conventions that have not been investigated; they are merely reputations. If they are investigated and analyzed, they are not established by valid cognition. As will be explained, because they are refuted by examining whether the sense faculty and object meet or do not meet, and so on. How can it be established that form and so on are established? For example, like the body of a woman, which is impure and impermanent, but is conventionally regarded as pure and permanent in the world, it is false. Form and other things are truly existent, because the Buddha said that there are elements, aggregates, and sources, and also said that the characteristic of the aggregates is momentary, so they exist. Answer: That is of interpretable meaning, with an intention. Like this, considering the intention to be merely the manner of appearance, for the purpose of gradually leading worldly people who cannot realize emptiness onto the correct Middle Way, therefore, the protector of all beings, the complete Buddha, taught that form and other things exist. But in the true sense, the aggregates and so on are not established as momentary, because if analyzed, they are neither one nor many, and have no arising or ceasing. If the momentary is not the ultimate truth, then it is contradictory to establish it in the conventional truth as well, so it would become neither of the two truths. If so, how is it contradictory in the conventional truth? It is contradictory through reason and scripture. The conventional is something that can appear commonly, and even children must be able to see it, but they cannot see it, so it is not conventional. Moreover, the Blessed One did not regard seeing the momentary as the reality of things.
Chinese
如果有人问，难道不是说能见到实相吗？因为其他的相似之处被错觉所迷惑，所以世间凡夫的意识即使不能立刻认识到瓶子等事物，但通达名言之道的瑜伽行者们却能立刻见到并确定这一点，因此瑜伽是世俗谛，所以没有不包含在二谛之中的过失。相对于世间凡夫执著常有的意识来说，不能立刻见到实相，实际上就是见到了实相，因为见到了名言的实相。如果不是这样，而是相对于瑜伽行者的世俗谛或者世间来说，见到或没见到实相没有差别，那么修习不净观的瑜伽行者确定无疑地见到并认识到女人的身体是不清净的，也会被世间人认为女人是清净的这种观念所损害，因为这两种意识对于见到或没见到实相没有差别。即使如此，见到不清净等会损害清净执著等，但反过来永远不会损害。又，如果一切法都如幻如化，不真实，那么佛也如幻如化，因此供养他怎么会产生巨大的福德呢？对于如幻的，也就是如幻的胜者佛陀们，供养如幻的供品，就会产生如幻的福德，这就像你认为供养真实的佛陀真实的供品，就会产生真实的福德一样。仅仅是福德和佛陀是否真实存在有差别，对于福德的产生与否没有差别。如果众生都如幻如化，那么就像幻化的马和牛死后不会再生一样，众生死后怎么能合理地转生到其他地方呢？只要药物、咒语等的因缘聚合，马、牛等幻化的显现也会产生，同样，只要业和烦恼的因缘聚合，众生的生也会持续不断地产生，因此这两者仅仅是因缘聚合是否完整有差别，而真实存在与否没有任何差别。即使如此，