Chinese
有什么理由说莫西姆之子等也是存在的呢？第二，驳斥鸡蛋半边的观点，分为表达观点和驳斥观点两部分。第一，关于白色的等等，知识是逐渐产生的，因为发生得很快，所以愚蠢的人认为是一瞬间。说形式也是一个，知识也是一个的人是这样认为的：对于蓝色物体和易于成立的单一事物所产生的无常等各种形式，并不单独产生，而是只产生蓝色的形式，知识也产生为具有蓝色的形式。对于识别杂色的眼识来说，杂色物体的蓝色、黄色等多种颜色并没有同时产生形式，而是只产生杂色的形式。有境也产生为具有杂色的形式，因此认为在一个知识的本体上，直接存在一个所取形式和一个能取形式，所以被称为鸡蛋半边，这是以相似之处为理由而命名的。那么，对于花蝴蝶和画布上绘制或展开的各种图案，眼识可以在同一时间作为目标，这难道不是一种妨碍吗？他们说，对于黄色和白色等等，以及它们各自的有境的知识，并不是同时进入，而是将每个不同的部分分开，只能逐渐产生。然而，看起来像是一瞬间作为目标，就像用针刺穿一百层花瓣的莲花一样。因为知识进入对象的速度非常快，所以愚蠢的孩子们认为蓝色、黄色等是在同一时间作为目标。例如，如果快速旋转火把，看起来像一个轮子，但火把只是一小块，不可能在所有方向上产生连续的景象，之所以会这样，是因为将火把前后瞬间作为目标的意识混合在一起，就像轮子一样显现，他们这样错误地认为。第二，驳斥它，分为驳斥意义和驳斥例子两部分。第一部分，不能确定以字母为目标的意识。不能确定仅仅通过意识分别念进入对象的方式。表明不能被所有意识确定。第一，如果竹子的声音等的意识发生得非常快，那么为什么在这里不能同时发生呢？
English
What reason is there to say that the son of Mohsim, etc., also exists? Second, refuting the view of the half-egg, divided into two parts: expressing the view and refuting it. First, regarding white, etc., knowledge arises gradually, because it occurs quickly, so foolish people think it is instantaneous. Those who say that the form is one and the knowledge is one think like this: For the various forms of blue objects and easily established single things, such as impermanence, they do not arise separately, but only produce the blue form, and knowledge also arises as having the blue form. For the eye consciousness that identifies variegated colors, the blue, yellow, etc., of the variegated object do not produce forms at the same time, but only produce the variegated form. The object-possessor also arises as having the variegated form, so it is believed that on the entity of one consciousness, a grasped-aspect and a grasping-aspect directly exist, so it is called half-egg, which is named based on the reason of similarity. Then, for the variegated butterfly and the various patterns drawn or spread on the canvas, the eye consciousness can target them at the same time, isn't this an obstacle? They say that for yellow and white, etc., and the knowledge of their respective object-possessors, they do not enter simultaneously, but only gradually arise by separating each different part. However, it seems like targeting at the same time, just like piercing a hundred-layered lotus flower with a needle. Because the knowledge enters the object very quickly, foolish children think that blue, yellow, etc., are targeted at the same time. For example, if you spin a torch quickly, it looks like a wheel, but the torch is just a small piece, and it is impossible to produce a continuous scene in all directions. The reason why it happens like this is because the minds that target the torch in previous and subsequent moments are mixed together, appearing like a wheel, they wrongly think like this. Second, refuting it, divided into two parts: refuting the meaning and refuting the example. First part, it cannot be determined by the consciousness that targets letters. It cannot be determined merely by the way that conceptual consciousness enters the object. It shows that it cannot be determined by all consciousnesses. First, if the consciousness of the sound of bamboo, etc., occurs very quickly, then why can't it occur simultaneously here as well?
Chinese
如果像这样仅仅以快速的方式，就能产生像同时显现的明相，那么，领会竹子的声音等的智慧也会非常快速地产生。因为非常快速的缘故，同时产生的智慧，在这种情况下为什么不会产生呢？应该会产生啊！对此，如果像对蓝色、黄色等境由次第而快速地缘取一样，对作为境的文字的声音的缘取也必须与之相同，那么，如果“拉达”是竹子的名称，“达拉”是塔拉树的名称，对这两个字母，智慧由次第进入，但因为进入快速而显得像同时一样，那么，先“拉”后“达”与先“达”后“拉”就没有差别了。无论如何，因为这二者像同时看到蓝色和黄色的线条一样，没有先后地显现，所以，缘取“拉达”的智慧也可能误认为“达拉”，缘取“达拉”的智慧也可能理解为竹子，字母的顺序就没有意义了，或者二者都无法理解。同样，如果“萨ra”是海洋的名称，“ra萨”是味道等，所有字母顺序颠倒的另一种能够理解的，都会变得味道相同，无论怎么说，都会像没有先后一样显现的缘故。因此，像字母的音节一样，对于由次第缘取的智慧来说，再要体验比这更快的次第，是很困难的。在没有体验的情况下，说是由次第的，也是没有意义的。如果产生的速度相似，但没有产生同时的显现，也不能安立它就是那个原因，因为一旦是原因，就必然周遍于结果随之而行、随之而止。第二，仅仅是意的分别念，也不会次第了知。因为不是长久住留，所以一切心识的生起都相似迅速。如是说，像这样，对境的自性作意，对它的特点进行观察，以及对修心的意作意等，仅仅是意的分别念，即与眼识等不相混杂的那些，如果相续不断地产生，那么，对于那些前后二者同时显现的意识已经产生，不会次第产生而被了知。那是因为什么呢？因为刹那刹那生灭，时间
English
If, in this way, merely by being swift, one generates an appearance of clarity that seems to focus on everything at once, then the mind that grasps the sound of bamboo, and so forth, will also arise very swiftly. Because of that extreme swiftness, why would a mind that arises all at once not arise in this instance as well? It must arise! In that case, if focusing swiftly on objects like blue and yellow, and so on, in a gradual manner is the same as focusing on the sound of letters as objects, then, if "la ta" is the name for bamboo and "ta la" is the name for the tala tree, and the mind enters those two letters gradually, but because the entry is swift, it appears as if it is all at once, then there would be no difference between placing "la" first and placing "ta" first. In any case, because those two appear without any before or after, just like seeing blue and yellow lines at the same time, the mind that focuses on "la ta" might mistake it for "ta la," and the mind that focuses on "ta la" might understand it as bamboo, so the order of the letters would be meaningless, or else neither would be understandable. Similarly, if "sa ra" is the name for the ocean and "ra sa" is taste, and so on, all the other understandable permutations of the letters would become the same in taste, because however they are spoken, they appear as if there is no before or after. Therefore, if it is difficult to experience a gradual process that is even faster than the mind that focuses gradually on something like individual letters, then it is meaningless to say that it is gradual without having experienced it. And even if the arising is similar in swiftness, if it does not generate the appearance of being all at once, then it cannot be established as the cause of that, because as long as it is the cause, it is invariably pervaded by the effect following and ceasing along with it. Secondly, even with just mental conception, it will not be known as gradual. Because it does not last long, all minds arise similarly swiftly. As it is said, like this, thinking about the nature of an object, examining its qualities, and thinking about the mind that trains the mind, and so on, are purely mental conceptions, that is, those that are not mixed with eye consciousness, and so on. If those arise continuously without interruption, then for those, a consciousness arises in which both before and after appear at once, and it will not be known as having arisen gradually. Why is that? Because it arises and ceases moment by moment, the duration
Chinese
因为不是长久住留的，所以所有的心识都和快速生起一样，没有差别。从对方的宗派来说，也承认一切心识都是快速坏灭的。第三，因此对于所有境，不会次第执取，而是像各种不同的显现一样，会显现为同时执取。如是说，像这样，所有心识都和快速生起一样，没有差别，因此对于心识的所有境，也不会知晓是次第执取的方式。而是像青色黄色等各种不同的显现，在同一时间被执取一样，会显现为同时执取。对此，即使在展开的图画中，青色黄色等同时存在，但心识是次第进入，而不是同时进入，所以和专注文字等没有差别。进入的方式也是前一个文字的心识灭尽后，后一个心识生起的开始和结尾是刹那，除此之外不可能长久停留。同样，如果观察有次第的心识前后连接，就会产生对此深刻的理解。对此，只要在心识面前显现为前后次第，就会遮止同时显现。而同时显现，就无法辨识前后产生，所以在心识面前，有次第显现为同时，这是永远无法通过现量成立的。无论将此运用在什么所知上，都不可能超出它的状态，所以无法找到比喻和推测。第二，驳斥比喻，有立宗和成立它两种。第一，火把也会同时显现为轮状的错觉，因为清晰地显现，所以不是通过见而连接。如是说，你的比喻也不合理。像这样，火把也会在同一时间产生显现为轮状的错觉。这是因为对于无分别的意识来说，清晰地显现，所以是现量所见。现量的见，不可能将前后时间连接在一起。火把本身快速旋转，随后进入的本身，是能产生同时清晰显现的事物轮状错觉的错觉显现。要知道，这不是心识连接前后多个刹那的境，而错觉为轮状。
English
Because it is not long-lasting, all minds are the same as arising quickly, without difference. From the opponent's point of view, it is also admitted that all minds are quickly destroyed. Third, therefore, for all objects, there will be no gradual grasping, but like various different appearances, it will appear to be grasping simultaneously. It is said, like this, all minds are the same as arising quickly, without difference, therefore, for all objects of mind, it will not be known as the way of gradual grasping. Rather, like various different appearances such as blue and yellow, being grasped at the same time, it will appear to be grasping simultaneously. Regarding this, even if blue, yellow, etc. exist together in an unfolded drawing, the mind enters gradually, not simultaneously, so there is no difference from focusing on letters, etc. The way of entering is also that the beginning and end of the subsequent mind arising after the previous mind of the letter has ceased is a moment, and it is impossible to stay longer than that. Similarly, if one examines the connection between the previous and subsequent gradual minds, a deep understanding of this will arise. Regarding this, as long as it appears as a sequential order of before and after in the mind, it will prevent simultaneous appearance. And simultaneous appearance cannot distinguish the occurrence of before and after, so in the mind, gradual appearance as simultaneous is never established by direct perception. No matter what object of knowledge this is applied to, it is impossible to go beyond its state, so no analogy or inference can be found. Second, refuting the analogy, there are two: establishing the sign and proving it. First, even a torch will simultaneously have the illusion of appearing as a wheel, because it appears clearly, so it is not connected by seeing. It is said, your analogy is also not valid. Like this, a torch will also produce the illusion of appearing as a wheel at the same time. This is because it appears clearly to non-conceptual consciousness, so it is seen by direct perception. Direct perception cannot connect the times of before and after together. The torch itself, quickly rotated, the very thing that follows is an illusion that can generate the illusion of a wheel, a thing that appears clearly simultaneously. It should be known that this is not the mind connecting multiple moments of previous and subsequent objects, and being mistaken for a wheel.
Chinese
第二，为了成立它的周遍性，显示见与忆境相违。因此，如果结合，则显示不应理显现。第一，如此结合诸界限是，忆念所作是，见非已逝，非境故。如果问，是否显现与结合相违？答：相违。如此，结合先后之界限，是忆念先前已逝者而结合，不忆念则不能结合，因此忆念是结合之作者。现在见不是结合之作者，见是进入现在之境，因为不是执持已逝之境。第二，彼之境中为何者，彼乃坏灭故非明。是故显现轮相此，非明乃转变之类。如是，对于火把显现轮相，如汝所欲，如果结合先后诸多刹那而显现为一，则必须以忆念结合。忆念之境为何者，彼乃先前已坏灭，故仅能忆念而不能明了体验。因此，忆念唯是已逝之境，故对于面前之事物亦不甚明了认识，因为不是现在之境。彼之理由，如果必须结合，则现在之轮相显现，亦将成为不明显之忆念境，将成为非如现量般显现之类。譬如，知晓贯穿百瓣青莲花者，并非如见火把之轮等般一时显现，因为不可能一时贯穿，故有智者必定确定为次第。例如，如同铜制之书页等孔洞般，上下堆叠众多，若由一人贯穿，则一时贯穿之孔洞为量所害，故贯穿青莲花亦是推测由一人所作。第三，遮破识之数量相等，说所许，彼之遮破。第一，见伸展之图时，于彼如是多心，若以一分之方式，如何发生若欲如是。如是说，于彼所取相之数量，如是知