English
and is also called permanent. They say this, and also emphasize Brahma, Ishvara, Vishnu, etc., separately, boasting themselves as creators, and there are also many paths such as sacrifices, peaceful and violent practices, wind practices, and meditations. If we talk about the most important desire, it is to attain liberation through ten vows: They accept Vishnu, who has ten incarnations such as fish, as a god. Similarly, they consider the Vedas, which are not created by humans, as valid sources of knowledge. They believe that bathing in the Ganges River can purify sins. They believe that if a woman has a son, she will be reborn in heaven, so they must have sons. They believe that participating in battles brings great merit, and dying in battle leads to rebirth in heaven, so they value battles, and they believe that protecting battles purifies them. They believe that preserving life, for example, if one is about to die from famine, stealing will purify and be beneficial, because it preserves the most important thing, which is life. They believe that things arise without cause. They believe that harming or killing Brahmins, Vedas, and gurus purifies them, and they believe that protecting the Dharma purifies them. They believe that being born in places like Kuru, or even being touched by the dust there, leads to rebirth in heaven. Knowledge and not knowing oneself, and ten things. Those non-Buddhists rely on their own scriptures and prove their points with seemingly logical reasons. They mostly rely on the malicious secret language of Brahmins, and although they point out contradictions in various aspects, they foolishly boast that later inferences do not harm the words of the sages who directly saw the truth, and there are very many subtle differences in internal views. If we were to explain in detail the views of these non-Buddhist schools, the sectarian claims based on them, and the ways in which these claims are unreasonable, it might be helpful for increasing wisdom, and it would be possible to clearly distinguish the claims of Samkhya and other schools, but it would become too lengthy here, so I will leave it at that. If I do not mention the tenets of the schools even briefly, I fear that I will lose my way and not know which previous school to point to. In order to symbolically illustrate the five forms of reasoning, including the hidden one, I will ask questions in each of their respective areas. Here, the main refutation is based on the way in which knowledge engages with objects, so the views of the Vaisheshika and Vatsiputra schools are similar, for example, how is the nature of a jewel with various colors? The object is not the same, but all kinds of appearances.
Chinese
然而，如果执着地认为本体是一个，那么按照这些观点，对于各种各样的外境事物，执持的那些心识，也不应该显现为单一的本体。如果不将各种外境视为各种各样，那么知识如何与外境相符？如果不相符，也不能安立它了知那个外境。因此，那些人的观点是，一切所知都是一个完整的自性，就像宝石和杂色一样。如果说，因为目标是一个，所以一切的证悟都变得相同，那也不会相同。因为其中有声音的表达方式和意识的进入方式两种。第一，他们认为对于具有多种本体的唯一事物，可以表达为单一的多种，因此认为或安立青色、黄色等各自的本体就是那个。像“许多”或“一切”这样一次性表达，或者像“色声”等事物那样逐渐表达，除了这两种用词语表达的方式之外，没有其他方式了。因此，无论是逐渐表达想要表达的事物的各个部分，还是一次性表达它本身，实际上都没有超出事物唯一的自性。同样，意识的执持方式也是如此。例如，对于一个杂色的本体，虽然相似，但每个人都按照自己喜欢的方式来区分其各个部分，如青色、黄色等，并进行执持。因此，事物本身不是单一的，而是具有多种自性，所以意识对它的执持方式有两种：不区分而执持为一，以及区分而执持。裸体派等就是这样说的。在自释中，也引用了先前论者所说的两个偈颂。那些人的意图是，杂色是一种自性，如果杂色没有各种颜色，就不能成为杂色，因此将具有各种颜色的杂色安立为一个。同样，他们也认为具有各种法的物体是一个。他们没有理解这只是假立的“一”，而是将其视为真实的“一”。因此，如果真实的一中存在多，那么没有什么是不可能的，各种各样的理性的利剑会同时击中它。
English
However, if one clings to the idea that the essence is one, then according to those views, the minds that grasp the various external objects should not appear as a single essence. If various external objects are not regarded as various, how can knowledge conform to the external object? If they do not conform, it is not possible to establish that it knows that external object. Therefore, their view is that all knowable things are a single, complete nature, like a jewel and a variegated thing. If it is said that because the object is one, all realizations become the same, that is not the case. Because there are two ways of expressing with sound and entering with mind. First, they believe that for a single object with multiple essences, it can be expressed as a single multiple, so they believe or establish that the respective essences of blue, yellow, etc., are that. Like expressing "many" or "all" at once, or gradually expressing things like "form and sound," there is no other way to express with words other than these two ways. Therefore, whether one gradually expresses each part of the object one wants to express, or expresses it all at once, in reality, it does not go beyond the single nature of the object. Similarly, the way of holding with the mind is also like that. For example, for the essence of a variegated object, although similar, each person distinguishes and holds its various parts, such as blue, yellow, etc., according to their own preferences. Therefore, the object itself is not single but has various natures, so there are two ways in which the mind holds it: holding it as one without distinguishing it, and distinguishing and holding it. The Naked Ascetics and others say this. In the self-commentary, two shlokas spoken by previous proponents are also quoted. Their intention is that variegation is one nature, and if variegation does not have various colors, it cannot be variegation, so they establish a variegation with various colors as one. Similarly, they also view an object with various dharmas as one. They do not understand that this is merely an imputed "one," but regard it as a real "one." Therefore, if many exist in a real one, then nothing is impossible, and hundreds of sharp swords of reason will strike it simultaneously.
Chinese
关于这一点，有些人将“诺布的格孜”理解为地方上的酥油，这种理解是不恰当的，因为它与先前的观点无关。第二，驳斥顺世外道的观点：‘地等聚合时，处所和诸根皆安立，谁承认彼之宗派中，事物一与相符无。’如是说。那是以前天神与非天战斗时，天神们自性上对法是清白的，不乐意战斗，天神们接近失败时，天神普布造了没有前后世的论典，逐渐地被蚂蚁城堡等在人间弘扬等作为衡量标准的是普布派、顺世外道、悦意派等，这些的观点简而言之，不承认前后世以及因果，不承认没有见到一切智的众生等。为了仅仅利益今生，将帝释天和日月视为神，观点的核心是将六部敦普布的续部等作为衡量标准，宗派也以理性的一个门、三个比喻、四种方式来理解，即没有前后世，因为没有在自己的根识的行境中见到，这是理性的一个门。三个比喻是：无因的比喻是草地上冒出蘑菇，无果的比喻是被风吹散的灰烬，自性生的比喻是日出、河流向下流、豆子是圆的、荆棘是尖的等。四种方式是：即使没有前后世，也有现在的世间安乐痛苦等的方式，像我主一样，即使没有前后迁移，突然身体形成时有自性的方式，地等诸要素有产生智慧能力的因聚合时，像酒糟有使人陶醉的能力一样，新产生了识的方式，即使没有通过修道苦行解脱，自性死亡时，一切都解脱，安住在同一个法界中，知道没有因果的方式，为了解脱不依赖辛苦等，顺世外道的论典所说并非无意义的方式，是这样认为的。这些宗派安立的根本原因是来世不会显现，所以认为没有来世，仅仅有现在。
English
Regarding this, it is inappropriate for some to understand "Norbu's Gezi" as butter in the area, as this understanding is unrelated to the previous view. Second, refuting the Lokayata view: 'When earth and so on are assembled, places and all faculties are established. Who accepts that in his system, there is no agreement with a single entity.' It is said. That is, previously, when the gods and asuras were fighting, the gods were naturally pure in dharma and unwilling to fight, and when the gods were close to defeat, the god Purbu composed treatises without past or future lives, which were gradually propagated in the human realm by ant castles and others. Those who take these as standards are the Purbu school, the Lokayata, the Tsulrol Dzepa, etc. To summarize their views, they do not accept past and future lives or cause and effect, nor do they accept beings who have not seen omniscience, etc. For the sake of benefiting only this life, they regard Indra and the sun and moon as gods, and the essence of their view is to take the six sections of the Dung Purbu tantras as standards. Their tenets are understood through one door of reason, three examples, and four modes. That is, there are no past or future lives because they are not seen in the realm of one's own sense consciousness, which is one door of reason. The three examples are: the example of no cause is mushrooms sprouting on the grass; the example of no result is ashes scattered by the wind; the example of arising from nature is the sunrise, rivers flowing downwards, beans being round, thorns being sharp, and so on. The four modes are: even though there are no past or future lives, there is the mode of present worldly happiness and suffering; like the self-ruler, even though there is no migration, there is the mode of having inherent qualities when the body is suddenly formed; when the elements such as earth assemble with the cause of being able to generate intelligence, like the ability of mash to intoxicate, there is the mode of newly arising consciousness; even though there is no liberation through practicing the path of asceticism, when one naturally dies, everything is liberated and abides in the same dharmadhatu, knowing the mode of no cause and effect, and not relying on hardship etc. for the sake of liberation, the way the Lokayata scriptures teach is not meaningless, that is how they think. The root cause for establishing these tenets is that the next world does not appear manifestly, so they think there is no next world, only the present.
Chinese
如果推测，因为没有明天和后天的时间，所以供养食物等也不合适。虽然没有亲眼见到有来世，但也没有见到没有，那么用什么来推测没有呢？自己不认为后来的推测是正确的，却执着于宗派的错误推测，真是既可怜又可笑，这种道理真是令人叹息啊！考虑到这样的道理，那些认为究竟存在的地等四大元素聚合，以及五境和五根都安立，谁会认同那种道理呢？所谓聚合，是因为不是众多聚合在一起，所以，执着于聚合的意识也会变成众多，不可能与一个实物相符。如是说。第三，在数论派的观点中，阐述了不可能存在真实的单一意识，其中有驳斥陈述和驳斥辩解的回答两种。首先，勇气等自我之声等，在方向上也显现为一个意思。意识不是理性的，因为是三者的自性，显现为境。这样说，是因为名为贤者迦毗罗的人，获得了苦行的功德，在国王统治国家的时候出现，住在雪山上。他根据自己禅定的体验，创作了《自在黑天六十经》、《五十年相经》等，以及三量、七释等，以这些作为标准的，被称为迦毗罗派或数论派。他们说一切所知都是二十五谛，也就是分为有情和无情两种。其中，自我，即有情识的补特伽罗是有情识，具有常、实等五种差别。一切无情的来源，主物是常、一、无情、非食者而是作者。它的本体是微尘、黑暗、勇气三者平等，难以理解，微尘是痛苦或悲伤，勇气是快乐，黑暗是舍弃，这三种是 गुण（藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思）。这三者没有大小之分，不偏向任何一方，是主要的原因，就像瓶子等的材料是泥土一样。他们认为由此产生了二十三种变化，也就是从主物中产生了 महान（藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思）或 बुद्धि（藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思），就像清澈的镜子一样，从外面是境，从里面是有情识的