Chinese
那位精进修持的菩萨，在无住的法界中入灭后，虽然现在努力和能取所取的戏论已经寂灭，但仍然成办一切有情的暂时和究竟的利益。又，那些人会这样想：如果以互相供养和接受供养的心来供养，就会产生福德。但是，如果佛是无分别或无心识的，那么对他进行供养，怎么会具有福德的果报呢？如果对无心识者供养没有果报，那么对如来的舍利和佛塔进行供养也应该没有果报。然而，因为无论是佛陀亲自安住，还是佛陀入灭后的舍利，以及具有其精华的佛塔，进行供养的福德是相等或相同的，所以在《慈氏狮子吼经》等经典中反复宣说。如经中所说：现在供养我和，未来供养舍利二者，福德相同且异熟相同。等等。因此，我们认为佛陀和供养的福德二者仅仅是世俗的幻象，或者您认为它们是胜义谛，无论哪种情况，对佛陀进行供养都有巨大的果报，这是根据圣言量，即依赖于圣言量而认定的。例如，您如何承认供养真实的佛陀会有果报，即具有果报，也是根据圣言量。同样，我们也承认对未成立为真实的佛陀进行供养，也会产生非真实的、如幻象般的果报。第三，关于确立大乘为殊胜，分为以圣言量确立大乘和以道路空性作为对治来确立两种。第一种是：一般而言，声闻乘有四种情况：化身并转为大菩提，趋入寂灭为一，以及具有增上慢者或僧伽。其中后两种，即使没有见到真谛，却自认为已经见到，因此对自己的宗派非常执着。他们认为，通过串习现量见到四谛的十六种行相，如无常等，就能获得解脱，即阿罗汉的果位。而一切法无自性
English
That bodhisattva who diligently practiced, having passed into nirvana in the realm of non-abiding, although the elaborations of effort and grasping are now pacified, still accomplishes all the temporary and ultimate benefits of all sentient beings. Furthermore, those might think this: If one offers with the intention of mutually offering and receiving offerings, merit will arise. However, if the Buddha is non-conceptual or without mind, then how can offering to him be endowed with the fruit of merit? If there is no fruit from offering to the mindless, then offering to the relics and stupas of the Thus-Gone One should also have no fruit. However, because the merit of offering to the Buddha himself residing, or to the relics after the Buddha's passing, and to the stupas containing their essence, is equal or the same, it is repeatedly taught in the "Maitreya's Lion's Roar Sutra" and others. As it is said in the sutra: "Offering to me now, and offering to the relics in the future, both have equal merit and equal maturation." And so on. Therefore, whether we consider the Buddha and the merit of offering to be merely conventional illusions, or whether you consider them to be ultimately true, in either case, there is a great fruit from offering to the Buddha, which is based on scripture, that is, it is asserted based on scriptural authority. For example, how do you acknowledge that offering to the true Buddha has a result, that is, is endowed with a result, is also based on scripture. Similarly, we also acknowledge that offering to a Buddha who is not established as true will also produce a non-true, illusion-like result. Third, regarding establishing the Great Vehicle as supreme, there are two divisions: establishing the Great Vehicle through scripture and establishing the emptiness of the path as an antidote. The first is: In general, there are four types of Hearers: those who emanate and transform into great Bodhi, those who enter into peace as one, and those who have pride or Sangha. Among the latter two, even though they have not seen the truth, they presume to have seen it, and therefore are very attached to their own tenets. They believe that by familiarizing themselves with the sixteen aspects of the Four Noble Truths, such as impermanence, etc., which are seen directly, they will attain liberation, that is, the fruit of an Arhat. But all phenomena are without inherent existence.
Chinese
说见到空性有什么用，没有什么必要，大乘中说一切法皆是空性，对此感到害怕并舍弃，即使没有证悟那样的空性，也自以为证悟了人无我而争论。那样的争论是什么呢？因为舍弃空性之外，不可能有从根本上断除烦恼的对治，因此在《胜母经》等经文中也说，没有证悟空性的道路，就没有解脱、菩提和佛果。例如，对于执着实有的人来说，不可能有解脱、菩提和佛果。声闻和缘觉的果位，也无法依靠般若波罗蜜多空性之道获得，因此说这是产生四圣的母亲。对此，他们说：你们用来证明的圣教大乘，对我们来说并不是正确的圣教，也不是佛语，因为佛陀涅槃后，是魔的力量使然，是论师自己造作的言辞，所以不能作为可信的圣教。如果大乘不是佛语，那么请问，声闻部的你们的圣教，又是如何证明是佛语的呢？对此，他们回答说：我们的圣教，如律藏《律部四分》和《经藏》中的《增一阿含经》等，以及《阿毗达磨》中的《七论》等，这些为什么不是我们双方都认可的佛语呢？因此，这些是佛语，没有争论。那么，这个“双方”是指你和你吗？还是指其他任何双方？如果是前者，你刚出生时，你还没有认可这些小乘的经典是佛语，那么那时“双方都认可”的说法就不成立，又怎么能说是佛语呢？圣教和个人之间没有必然的联系，所以你一开始就认为这是正确的圣教是不可能的。即使你一开始不认可，也有可以相信的理由：最初是导师宣说的，中间由阿罗汉们结集，并通过注释进行阐明，这与从上师传承听闻以及对法进行三种观察的结果并不矛盾。
English
Saying that seeing emptiness is of what use, there is no need, in the Mahayana it is said that all dharmas are emptiness, being afraid of this and abandoning it, even if not realizing such emptiness, they boast of having realized the selflessness of persons and argue. What is such an argument? Because apart from abandoning emptiness, it is impossible to have an antidote that can eradicate afflictions from the root, therefore in the sutras such as the Mother of the Conquerors, it is also said that without the path of realizing emptiness, there is no liberation, bodhi, and Buddhahood. For example, for those who cling to things as real, it is said that there is no liberation, bodhi, and Buddhahood whatsoever. The fruits of the Hearers and Solitary Buddhas also cannot be obtained by relying on the Prajnaparamita emptiness path, therefore it is said that this is the mother who gives birth to the four noble ones. To this, they say: The Mahayana scriptures that you use to prove your point are not established as valid scriptures or the words of the Buddha for us, because after the Buddha passed away, it was due to the power of demons, and the words were fabricated by logicians themselves, so they cannot be trusted as scriptures. If the Mahayana is not established as the words of the Buddha, then how is it established that your Hearer's scriptures are the words of the Buddha? To this, they reply: Our scriptures, such as the Vinaya Pitaka, the four divisions of the Vinaya, and the Ekottara Agama Sutra from the Sutra Pitaka, and the seven treatises of the Abhidharma, etc., are these not established as the words of the Buddha for both of us? Therefore, there is no dispute that these are the words of the Buddha. Then, does this "both" refer to you and yourself, or to any other two parties? If it is the former, when you were first born, you had not yet established that these Hinayana collections were the words of the Buddha, so at that time the statement "both have established this" is not valid, so how can it be the words of the Buddha? Since there is no inherent connection between the scriptures and the individual, it is impossible for you to have established this as a valid scripture from the beginning. Even if you do not establish it from the beginning, there is a reason to be trustworthy: initially, it was spoken by the Teacher; in the middle, it was compiled by the Arhats and clarified by commentaries, which does not contradict the three limits of hearing from the lineage of lamas and examining the Dharma.
Chinese
至于在正确的道路上引导的圣言中，以何种通过理证成立的因，而使四阿含等经由对佛陀教言的信任而成立呢？像那样值得信任的因，在大乘中也同样存在。首先，是导师所说；其次，文殊和弥勒等结集教典，弥勒、龙树等以释论阐明，从值得信任的上师传承次第中听闻，并且与观察佛法的三个界限不相违背，如果你有智慧且公正，就很容易成立，因此这对我们双方来说都是可以成立的，并非不能成立。如果按照后者，由任何两个人都认可，即在那方面成立之后，从承认开始，如果那个圣言是真实的，那么梨俱吠陀等外道典籍也会变成真实的。因为许多人，比如两个人，都认为那是正确的圣言。如果说小乘经典是否是佛语没有争议，而大乘经典有争议，所以不是佛语。仅仅因为有争议，圣言也不会变成不正确。如果那样的话，佛教的整个圣言都会受到外道徒的争议。并且，抓住圣言的个别方面或其他方面，各个宗派和十八部声闻部等，内部彼此之间也存在争议，因此小乘经典也会被你抛弃。这样一来，正确住持教法的根本，即正确的比丘也很难安住，难以存在。而且，对于比丘，有五种以词语表达的区分，即名称比丘、自称比丘、乞食行为的比丘、具足戒比丘、断除烦恼的比丘。其中前三种只是名称而已，后两种是殊胜的，因此这两种是教法的根本。而其中，究竟的比丘是断除烦恼者，因此很难安住，因为不可能见到断除烦恼之因的真谛，因为他们认为不具备佛法的实相空性。具足戒的比丘也很难安住，因为有争论的缘故。
English
As for the Agamas that guide on the correct path, by what reasons established through reasoning is it established that the Four Agamas, etc., are established by faith in the Buddha's teachings? Such trustworthy reasons are equally present in the Mahayana. First, it was spoken by the Teacher; second, Manjushri and Maitreya, etc., compiled the scriptures, and Maitreya, Nagarjuna, etc., clarified them with commentaries, having heard from the trustworthy lineage of lamas, and without contradicting the three limits of examining the Dharma, if you are wise and impartial, it is easy to establish, so this can be established for both of us, it is not impossible to establish. According to the latter, if any two people whatsoever agree, that is, once it is established in that respect, from the moment of acceptance onwards, if that scripture is true, then the scriptures of the Tirthikas, such as the Rigveda, etc., would also become true. Because many people, such as two people, consider it to be a correct scripture. If you say that there is no dispute as to whether the Hinayana scriptures are the Buddha's words or not, but the Mahayana scriptures are disputed, therefore they are not the Buddha's words. Merely because there is dispute, a scripture does not become incorrect. If that were the case, the entire Buddhist scripture would be disputed by the Tirthikas. And, grasping particular aspects or other aspects of the scripture, various schools and the eighteen schools of Shravakas, etc., also have internal disputes among themselves, so the Hinayana scriptures would also have to be abandoned by you. In that case, the root of the correct abiding of the Dharma, that is, the correct bhikshu, is also difficult to abide, difficult to exist. Moreover, for a bhikshu, there are five distinctions expressed in words, namely, a bhikshu in name, a self-proclaimed bhikshu, a bhikshu by way of begging, a fully ordained bhikshu, and a bhikshu who has abandoned afflictions. Among these, the first three are only names, the latter two are superior, so these two are the root of the Dharma. And among them, the ultimate bhikshu is one who has abandoned afflictions, so it is difficult to abide, because it is impossible to see the truth that is the cause of abandoning afflictions, because they believe that it does not possess the emptiness that is the reality of the Dharma. A fully ordained bhikshu is also difficult to abide, because of the presence of disputes.
Chinese
也就是说，因为承诺放弃所有争论，所以必须放弃四部律藏。他们说：为什么没有断除烦恼的比丘呢？即使没有空性，也有见到四谛的人。对此，四谛的无常等并非主要，道的主要对治是证悟无我的智慧，能从根本上断除烦恼。因此，舍弃空性，以有相之心也难以获得寂灭。其原因是，如果我执没有从根拔起，就没有断除烦恼的方法，而要从根拔起，除了见到境为空性之外，根本没有其他方法可以扭转。如果没有舍弃执著于境的习气，即使暂时用禅定等压制，也会像无想定一样再次产生。因此，从证悟我执俱生之境的自性空性中见到真谛，才能断除烦恼，否则是不合理的。对此，他们说：我们认为必须见到无我，但这与空性意义不同，空性是对色等实有之法说没有，这是可怕的诽谤之见，而了知人我本来就没有，这是符合实情的正确见解。这二者在空性上没有任何差别，人我只是依蕴而假立，没有自性，这是人无我。依肢分等聚合而假立的身体和瓶子等蕴，也各自空无自性，这是法无我。因此，这二者只是空性所依之法的差别，法无我是总法，人无我是轮回之因的对治，只是分开而已，空性的方式没有任何差别。在此，有些人自认为法无我和人无我之间有很大差别，认为不需要法无我的空性，仅仅人无我就可以解脱，这些人的意图是：凡是存在的