English
Whether it is Sutra or Tantra, as long as one is committed to practicing the true path, one must have deep faith in this, and there is nothing more important than this. Even in the various appearances in a dream of one night, if one tries to abandon them by other means, they cannot be exhausted. However, if one understands that these all arise from the nature of mind, then all these appearances will immediately and naturally subside. Similarly, one should understand that the appearances of samsara, whether the limit of time or the boundlessness of space, are the same as this. Fourth, dividing the ultimate truth into two, nominal and non-nominal, is the most excellent and good tradition. Like this, if non-inherent existence is not shown at the very beginning, then there is no way to destroy the inverted clinging to reality that has been habitual since beginningless time. If only that much is shown as the ultimate truth, then some of the small-minded will think that the mere absence of what is to be negated is the reality, and thus cling to emptiness, turning into an incurable view. Moreover, there are two ways of clinging: clinging to emptiness as a real entity and clinging to it as non-existent. If it is said that one should not cling to any extreme, then the antidote to all the diseases of samsara, the source of the nectar of profound emptiness, and the ascertainment drawn by the discernment of reason will be lost. If one enters into such a state of unconscious darkness, thinking that nothing should be kept in mind, then this profound Dharma is difficult to see, perceive, contemplate, and experience. As it is said in the treatises of the Middle Way: Those who wrongly view emptiness will be destroyed by their small wisdom, like holding a snake or performing a mantra incorrectly. Therefore, the Buddha, knowing that the depths of this Dharma are difficult for the weak to understand, turned away from teaching the Dharma. Therefore, first, by destroying the clinging to reality with the ultimate truth of mere designation, and then by revealing the ultimate truth that is not a designation, the clinging to non-existence is also prevented. In short, without adding any distinctions such as true establishment to the four extremes of existence, non-existence, both, and neither, it is necessary to easily recognize the profound meaning that is to be individually realized by each person, the great freedom from elaboration in which the objects of these disappear. These principles are stated by Shantideva: By habituating the imprints of emptiness, the imprints of things will also be abandoned.
Chinese
而且，如果习惯于认为“什么都没有”，那么之后也会抛弃它。当任何事物都不存在时，如果考察的对象不可见，那么无实有将如何存在于心的面前，因为它是无所依赖的？当实有和无实有都不存在于心的面前时，由于没有其他形式，它会完全寂灭而没有目标。如是说，应当如是理解。那么，如果不可能有超出四边的思考对象，那么如果完全遮止四边，与什么都不作意（哈尚）的宗派有什么区别呢？哈尚等并非因为所有实有执着都被遮止，以至于什么目标相状都看不到，所以才不作意。仅仅是遮止心中所有的念头而已，更不用说遣除一切边了，也没有理由遣除有边。而无分别则不是这样，如《法性分别》中所说：不作意完全超越，寂静和本体之义，显现、征相、执持五种，是断除的自性。应当如其所说，了知它与世间的不作意等五种不同。如果以理智分析“无”，并连同执持方式一起修习，虽然能对治有实执着，但由于没有舍弃对无实有的执着，又怎么会是具有特征的、证悟空性的离戏智慧呢？有些人说，如果执着于遮止真实成立的“无遮”，那就是断见。但断见是指在具有实有执着的同时，否认因果。因此，这怎么会是断见呢？因为这与作为真实存在的有实执着的对治的执持方式相符，所以就像无常和不净等一样，也是初学者的修习对象。然而，如果与远离一切见解和承诺的大中观无分别智慧的自性相比，则非常低下，因为它是具有分别自性的“无”的见解。即使对于初学者来说，也可能在心中显现仅仅是遮止了所破的“仅仅是无”。但是，对于通过中观分析而达到要点的人来说，通过清楚地区分“无自性”和“仅仅是无”的差别，以无自性和缘起在意义上无别的特殊定解的执持方式，就像悬崖一样，是对治常断二边的对治品。
English
Moreover, if one becomes accustomed to thinking, "There is nothing at all," then one will abandon even that later on. When anything whatsoever does not exist, if the object of investigation is not perceived, then how will the non-existent exist before the mind, since it is without support? When neither the existent nor the non-existent exist before the mind, since there is no other aspect, it will be utterly pacified without an object. As it is said, one should understand it in that way. Now, if there is no object of thought other than the four extremes, then if all four extremes are blocked, what difference is there from the Ha Shang's system of not attending to anything? The Ha Shang and others do not refrain from attending to anything because all clinging to existence has been blocked and no sign of an object of focus is seen. It is merely blocking all the movements of the mind. Let alone eliminating all extremes, there is no reason to eliminate even the extreme of existence. Non-conceptualization is not like that. As it says in the Dharmata-vibhanga: "Non-attention is perfectly transcendent, peaceful, and the meaning of essence. Manifestation, signs, and grasping are the five aspects, the self-nature of abandonment." One should understand that it is taught in a way that is not mixed with the five kinds of worldly non-attention. If one analyzes "non-existence" with reason and meditates on it together with the way of grasping, although it acts as an antidote to the clinging to existence, it is not the wisdom that realizes freedom from elaboration and emptiness, because the object of non-existence has not been abandoned. Some say that if one clings to the negation of true existence, it is nihilism. However, nihilism is known as the act of slandering cause and effect while still clinging to existence. Therefore, how could this be nihilism? Because this is in accordance with the way of grasping as an antidote to the clinging to existence as truly existent, it is also something to be meditated on by beginners, like impermanence and ugliness. However, if it is compared to the great Madhyamaka non-conceptual wisdom that is free from all views and commitments, it is very inferior, because it is a view of "non-existence" that is of the nature of conceptualization. Even for beginners, it is possible that only the mere absence of what is to be negated, the mere "non-existence," may appear in the mind. However, for a person who has reached the point of Madhyamaka analysis, through clearly distinguishing the difference between "selflessness" and "mere non-existence," the way of grasping with a special conviction that selflessness and dependent arising are inseparable in meaning is like a precipice, an antidote that eliminates the two extremes of permanence and annihilation.
Chinese
顶礼！只要存在肯定和否定之执着，那么就不是远离四边戏论之自性。不住于四边之任何一边，以理智彻底决断的定解所引导的法界，以各自自证的方式安住，就能消除一切戏论之边。由此，会对断除增益和损减的真实边，以及经由佛母所宣说的不作意之真实意义生起信解。如是，就成为等持之行境的究竟实相而言，因为没有四边之执着，也不是言语分别之境，所以也不承认。明明有执着却不承认，乃是虚伪之见。虽然仅仅是不承认这一点相似，但实际上有真假之差别。这就像是，明明是盗贼却不承认偷窃，和不是盗贼而不承认偷窃一样。而且，为了进入等持之行境不可言说之义，以随后的定解将言说施设为词语的名称，以诸如无生、无自性、空性、离戏、无相、离边等名称进行成立的方式进行宣说之时，词语是以必定把握自己所诠释之义的方式而运用的。因此，反过来说，因为从不言说，所以除了像是在那个意义上承认一样来显示之外别无选择，而且心识也如此执持。但实际上，这些词语是为了遣除一切承认和执着之行境而宣说的。例如，就像“我没有承认”这句话，以及“佛陀的智慧不是思议言说之境”一样，这些承认之词是为了遮止有承认和是思议言说之境而宣说的。即便如此，就像用手指指月亮时，不看月亮而看手指一样。愚昧者执着于词句，认为因为无承认而承认，因为不可思议而思议，因为不可言说而说，而将圣教的这些词句，像外道否认比量是量一样，理解为相违，这是非常错误的，极其不应理。
English
Homage! As long as there is clinging to affirmation and negation, it is not the nature of being free from the four extremes of conceptual proliferation. By abiding nowhere in the four extremes, and by settling into the expanse of reality led by the certainty that thoroughly cuts through with reasoning, one is able to eliminate all extremes of proliferation by abiding in equanimity in the manner of self-knowing awareness. From that, one will have faith in the true limit that cuts through imputation and dispels exaggeration, and in the true meaning of non-attention explained by the Mother. Thus, in terms of the ultimate reality that has become the domain of meditative equipoise, since there is no object of the four extremes and it is not an object of sound and thought, it is not accepted. Not accepting while having an object of focus is a deceitful view. Although the mere act of not accepting is similar in both cases, in reality there is a difference between truth and falsehood, just as it is like a thief not admitting to stealing and a non-thief not admitting to stealing. Moreover, as a means of entering into the inexpressible meaning that is the domain of meditative equipoise, subsequent ascertainment designates expressions as verbal terms, and when expressing in the manner of establishing with names such as unborn, without self-nature, emptiness, free from elaboration, without object, free from extremes, etc., the words enter in a way that necessarily grasps their own object of expression. Therefore, conversely, since one never speaks, there is no choice but to show it as if acknowledging that very meaning, and the mind also holds it in that way. But in reality, those words are taught for the sake of eliminating all objects of acceptance and focus. For example, just as the words "I have no acceptance," and "The wisdom of the Buddha is not an object of thought and expression," are spoken to prevent acceptance and being an object of thought and expression. Even so, just as when pointing out the moon with a finger, one looks at the finger instead of looking at the moon, the ignorant cling to words and think that because there is no acceptance, they accept, because it is inconceivable, they conceive, and because it is inexpressible, they speak. To understand these words of scripture as contradictory, like those who reject inference as a valid cognition, is a great mistake and is extremely inappropriate.
Chinese
而且，在这里，将无法言说的意义作为表达的符号，以及用确定的词语来承诺没有承诺的意义，这两者不应被视为矛盾，而是理解为一个要点非常重要。像这样，用无生等词语来显示所有目标的对境为空性，任何法为空性，对它的执着就会消失，因此仅仅是显示没有目标而已。因此，所谓“无实”的词语，仅仅是显示事物经过分析后无法成立，而不是像用其他需要否定的东西来使瓶子等为空性。任何法没有真实，就必须对它消除执着。因此，认识到一切法没有真实之后，必须摧毁所有的执着方式。如果仅仅执着于“无实”的词语意义，那么仍然是没有摧毁见解。对此，在任何基础上，用阻止对空性的真实成立的理证，也能确定执着于“它是无自性”的执着对象也无法成立。即使对于无自性，虽然没有真实成立，也不应摧毁对它的执着，那么所有的瓶子等事物也与此相同。这样一来，用胜义谛的理证，仅仅是否定真实成立，而不会否定任何一个法，也不会消除对它的对境的所有的执着，那么空性就无法否定所有的能取所取戏论。此外，圣者的等持会成为事物毁灭的原因等三种过失也会产生。如果用胜义谛分析后，有无法否定的东西，那么就会变成真实成立。因此，应该将无生等词语理解为进入平息一切戏论的意义。因此，没有任何目标的甚深般若波罗蜜多，与和尚的那个有什么相似之处呢？远离四边的戏论是没有落入有无两边的，虽然无法像各自自证的对境那样用言语概念来显示，但作为象征的词语，就是显空无别，或者被称为二谛双运的中观。而且，执着总是与其所执着的对境相连的，如果与它分离就无法见到真实的意义，那么具有如实对境的等持，就不会以一切二取显现消失的方式来观察实相。