English
If one examines thoroughly the refutation of inherent existence, etc., faith will arise. In this treatise of the Abbot [Śāntarakṣita], first, having accomplished the two truths with immaculate wisdom that measures the two truths separately, finally, in the great ultimate truth that is non-conceptual, even the clinging to the two truths separately is prevented, and thus, in accordance with the non-conceptual wisdom of meditative equipoise, it is established as being free from all assertions. Therefore, these two treatises are equal, without any distinction in their ultimate intention. Now, one might think, wouldn't the treatises of the Prāsaṅgikas become meaningless? No, because emptiness, which is free from all assertions, is extensively established by reasoning. Therefore, to emphasize and explain the ultimate truth with conceptualization and assertions is the characteristic of the Svātantrikas. One should know that to emphasize and explain the non-conceptual ultimate truth that is free from all assertions is the Prāsaṅgika. When establishing the characteristics of these two, the differences such as whether or not to accept things established by their own character in conventional truth, and the way of formulating reasoning, are merely differences in branches, and are included in the above characteristics. Whether there are assertions or not, whether or not one accepts things established by their own character in conventional truth, the way of formulating the reason for establishing the lack of inherent existence as either Prāsaṅgika or Svātantrika, and the point of whether or not to apply the distinction of ultimate truth to the object of negation, are also due to the very reason just explained. Therefore, if a Prāsaṅgika remains in the ultimate truth of conceptualization and has separate assertions of the two truths in every way, then it would be impossible to distinguish them from the Svātantrikas. Because however many reasons there are for negating things established by their own character in conventional truth, it is the same for the valid cognition of one's own conventional truth, because they are equally unbearable to any examination. Merely because things established by their own character are also negated in conventional truth, it only leads to inconvenience in establishing conventional truth, and no difference in qualities is obtained. And since the Svātantrikas also do not establish that things established by their own character in ultimate truth can withstand examination, what difference in meaning is superior in the way of realizing ultimate truth? Therefore, deep and firm faith will not be found. Thus, in this Ornament of the Middle Way by the great Abbot [Śāntarakṣita], the Prāsaṅgikas and Svātantrikas both converge in meaning, and therefore it is the ornament of all Middle Ways. The reason for calling them Prāsaṅgika and Svātantrika is that the two truths separately...
English
From their respective positions of accepting things according to how they are measured by valid cognition, they primarily refute the opponent's courage by applying reasons that are established by valid cognition for the other party, and are called Svatantrikas. Remaining free from all assertions and the four extremes of their own side's elaboration, they refute opponents who have assertions by formulating their own accepted reasons into consequential arguments to reverse their wrong conceptions, and are called Prasangikas. As the teacher [Chandragomin] said: "If one aims at something with perception, etc., to accomplish or refute it, I have no fault because it does not exist." And: "Whatever has a little that is not empty, that also becomes a little empty. If there is not a little that is not empty, how can there be emptiness?" As such, when one sees that all phenomena are merely these conditions, and that there is no self-characteristically established or arising, etc., even nominally, but that they have been abiding in a state of no self-nature from the beginning, there is nothing to accomplish or aim at, or to negate or eliminate. Having understood that one is free from all extremes of elaboration, and having touched the meaning of non-abiding union, which is free from all assertions and grasping, this is the immaculate doctrine of the Madhyamaka school. In the Madhyamakavatara, it is also said: "Both negation and affirmation are merely negation; in reality, there is neither negation nor affirmation." In general, because it is difficult to clearly reveal the meaning of the words that show the very profound meaning of non-origination from the beginning, without elimination or establishment, one should prolong the practice. If you hold the true Prasangika system, then hold it in the manner of great emptiness, free from elaboration, as in the meaning of the verses just mentioned. Therefore, it should be known that the way to explain the differences between Prasangika and Svatantrika is to exert effort in the wisdom that unifies the two truths, conventional and ultimate, in equipoise, and in the wisdom that distinguishes the two truths separately in subsequent attainment. Therefore, by dividing the ultimate truth into two, the tenets of Prasangika and Svatantrika are also mixed like water and milk, and the result of analyzing with the wisdom that distinguishes and individually understands in subsequent attainment is to enter into the non-conceptual wisdom in all extremes in equipoise, etc., which is the best of necessities.
Chinese
确实存在许多这样的情况。正如以上所说，总的来说，对于任何纯正的宗派，如果掌握了要点，就像把余甘子放在手掌中一样，能够达到宗派的深处，从而超越怀疑。否则，就非常困难。我认为，在西藏，中观应成派的观点也倾向于自续派，这或许是前世因缘的一种特殊表现吧。这明晰决断的理智诀窍，是文殊欢喜的雷鸣之声。对于尚未区分宗派的梦幻睡眠，一旦与此相遇，顷刻间便能唤醒。这是中间的偈颂。第五，不混淆胜义谛和世俗谛各自的承许的必要性在于：因为等持的智慧是远离言说、思虑和表达的，所以它超越了声音和概念的范畴。如果不以无垢智慧的量度如实地生起，即使进入那样的智慧，也无法做到。即使圣者们进入，在后得位中，所有关于有无、是与非等否定和肯定的方面，都没有超出声音和概念的范围，因此，为了教导和引导他人，以及与论敌辩论等，像这样有，像这样没有等等，所有这些意义都必须通过不混淆、不错误的，以善于分辨的智慧来考察后才能说出。这样，对于业果、道和果的道理，所有否定和肯定，都能以理性的方式，毫无障碍地安立由理证成立的正确的名言。并且，依靠获得能够区分所有知识对象的各个方面的辨别智慧之眼，才能有能力获得现量见到远离一切戏论的平等性的智慧之见。也就是说，如果将显现和空性的大平等，衡量非四边戏论的胜义谛的觉识作为主导，那么执着于胜义谛和世俗谛也仅仅是分别念而已，因此，即使在名言中，自相成立的世俗谛也是被遮破的。如果仅仅安住于名言胜义谛的无有，那么就永远无法遮破以名言量所获得的意义的世俗自性成立。如果遮破之后仅仅修习无有，就会堕入二谛的偏颇，从而诽谤显现的一面。
English
Indeed, there are many such cases. As mentioned above, in general, for any pure tenet system, if one grasps the key points, it is like placing an emblic myrobalan in the palm of one's hand, one can reach the depths of the tenet system and thus transcend doubt. Otherwise, it is very difficult. I think that in Tibet, the views of the Prasangikas also tend towards the Svatantrikas, perhaps due to some special connection from previous lives. This clear and decisive instruction on reasoning is the thunderous sound that pleases Manjushri. For the dreamlike sleep of not distinguishing tenets, encountering this will awaken one in an instant. This is the intermediate verse. Fifth, the necessity of not confusing the assertions of the two truths separately is that: because the wisdom of meditative equipoise is free from speech, thought, and expression, it transcends the realm of sound and concept. Unless the measure of the two truths, the stainless wisdom, arises properly, one cannot enter into such wisdom. Even if the noble ones enter, in the subsequent attainment, all aspects of affirmation and negation, such as existence and non-existence, being and non-being, do not go beyond the scope of sound and concept. Therefore, in order to instruct and guide others, and to speak argumentative words to opponents, such as 'in this way it exists, in this way it does not exist,' all these meanings must be examined by the wisdom that thoroughly distinguishes the Dharma without confusion or error. In this way, for all the principles of karma and its effects, the path and its result, all negations and affirmations can be established without harm as valid conventions established by reasoning. Furthermore, by relying on obtaining the eye of discriminating wisdom that distinguishes all aspects of knowable objects, one will be able to gain mastery over the vision of wisdom that directly sees the meaning of equality, which is free from all elaborations. That is, if one takes the great equality of appearance and emptiness, the awareness that measures the ultimate truth that is free from the four extremes, as the dominant factor, then clinging to the two truths separately is merely conceptual thought. Therefore, even in conventional terms, the conventionally established self-character is refuted. If one merely abides in the mere absence of the nominal ultimate truth, one can never refute the conventionally established self-nature of the meaning obtained by conventional valid cognition. If one refutes it and only meditates on absence, one will fall into partiality towards the two truths, thereby slandering the side of appearance.
Chinese
乌布巴认为，即使没有世俗谛也可以禅修，他考虑到了与七种禅定信心的论典和方式相似的形态。如意宝藏中也说：“不了解此理，空性成断灭，虽说词句有无离边，却不知离边之基，是世间顶的见解者。因为已成此教之外道，如同天生之人以灰涂身。”如是四边戏论寂灭生于相续之方式，若对于初学者渐次引导而言，首先以无垢的正理遣除对于有为无为一切法，执著实有之耽著境，之后也遮止无等剩余三者的耽著境，以不滞留于任何一方耽著境的特殊定解，随顺修习，何时不作轮番，一切戏论边同时遮止，于法界获得明相。一切智者索南僧格尊前说：“以观察实相的凡夫智慧，虽不能同时遮止四边戏论，然以轮番之方式遮止四者之后，如理修习生起见道之时，立名为见法界之见。”如是。如是四边戏论寂灭，真谛无别的实相，此对于宁玛派的智者成就者们，毫无垢染地执持自宗，以具足金刚乘甚深口诀之门，从四种证悟之理等清净理路生起定解，从而修习，获得对于本来清净任运成就真谛无别之义的决定之把握，成就者未曾间断地涌现，从心中涌出十万法藏，以及前往虹身光明之地的众多，是引导道的见解清净之真实征相。那么，是否认为这仅仅是宁玛派的观点呢？并非如此，胜者于甚深经续中也屡屡宣说的四边戏论寂灭，六庄严等智者们也以直接和间接的方式非常清楚地阐明，大成就者智慧