English
Although there are many sects, it is explained in this way to understand that there can be no sect that can establish a single truth in any direction at any time, because there is no single truth in the nature of knowledge. In this system of heretics, most rely on the experience of meditation alone, some rely on reasoning, and most are deceitful words composed by cruel Brahmins for the sake of achieving their own desires. In Tibet, the so-called Bon religion, before the first Dharma was prevalent, a Tibetan child was confused by spirits and learned methods of worshiping gods and demons in a rough way, and it gradually grew. Nowadays, it seems that all Buddhist sects have a substitute for name conversion. Some say that Bon religion and Nyingma are similar, although there are many similarities in Buddhist terms, etc., but since they are written in imitation of Buddhism, how can they not be similar? For example, in India, in the Buddhist Hearer Vehicle, there are the Vaibhashikas who follow the Sarvastivadins, and similarly, in our own country, there are the ten explanations that follow the Mind-Only school, the Action Yoga, and the Non-Dual Father and Mother Tantras. In Tibet, the Bonpos also have all the scriptures of Sutra, Prajna, Vinaya, Abhidharma, and Tantra, which are similar to Buddhism, as well as deities such as Chakrasamvara, Vajrabhairava, and Vajrakilaya, and practices such as Tummo, Mahamudra, and Dzogchen, which seem to have some imitation of Buddhism. But these are not originally there, but are fabricated out of thin air, boundless and endless, so how can they be refuted? However, those phenomena such as divination and spells that seem to bring immediate benefits may also be manifestations of the activities and incarnations of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, because the skillful means of the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas are inconceivable, just like the biography of Kuntaka-vāditya (梵文：Kuntaka-vāditya). Even so, if they also claim to take refuge in the teacher and the pure teachings of this Dharma, or insist that their own teachings are independent, then they will be worthy of debating with the wise men among the monks. If, after investigation, it turns out to be nothing, then it is like coaxing children, and no hatred based on sectarianism should be generated. In general, in India there are outsiders and insiders, in Tibet there are no real heretics, but there are monks and Bonpos, and in China there are Ha Shang and Hòa Shang, these two situations occur simultaneously.
Chinese
说是以缘起而有。因此，其他的规矩，如果对教法没有损害，就应该保持原样。如《月光经》中说：“世间所有其他外道，安住于那些，不要对他们心生厌恶。对他们生起慈悲，这是第一种忍辱的特点。”就像这样。然而，不应该感到高兴，就像愚蠢的人抛弃天界的甘露，而期望咸水一样。特别是，对于持有大堪布宗喀巴清净教法的人来说，就像大堪布的印章所封印的那样，不应该对苯教徒感到高兴，因为苯教徒也把这位堪布视为敌人。第二，共同的结尾部分。驳斥执着外境为真实，驳斥执着识为真实，总结这两者的意义，共有三点。第一点：虚空等诸识，仅仅显现为名称，因为显现多种文字，所以显现为各种各样。如是说。也就是说，如果认为外境的虚空等是无分，因此缘于它的识会变成唯一的识，那是不对的。像这样，虚空等无实之识，任何识都没有赤裸裸地体验到境，因此仅仅显现为与它和它的名称相关的分别念的影像。因为显现多种文字，所以显现为各种各样的自性。因此，仅仅是没有色、触、碍的相状，就假立为虚空，当忆念虚空时，是连同名称一起忆念的。不像瓶子等那样，不与名称混合而缘于它，因为它是无自相的，所以不可能用根识现量以各种方式来认知。例如，就像兔角，脱离名称，在心中永远不会显现一样。因此，名称是事物本身之上自然成立的暂时的安立，而所表达的事物可以用各种名称和文字来表达。所有无实的事物也像兔角等一样，似乎是断绝事物的排除部分，但面前的墙壁等没有触碍的空隙，是由于外面的墙壁等而呈现形状。
English
It is said to be due to dependent origination. Therefore, other customs, if they do not harm the teachings, should be left as they are. As it is said in the Sutra of Moonlight: "Whatever other heretics there are in the world, do not be disgusted with those who dwell in them. To have compassion for them is the distinction of the first patience." Like that. However, one should not be happy, like a foolish person abandoning the nectar of the gods and hoping for salty water. In particular, those who hold the pure teachings of the great abbot Tsongkhapa should not be happy with the Bonpos, as if sealed with the seal of the great abbot's decree, because the Bonpos also regard this abbot as an enemy. Second, the common conclusion. Refuting the clinging to external objects as true, refuting the clinging to consciousness as true, and summarizing the meaning of the two, there are three points. First: The various consciousnesses such as space, appear only as names, because many letters appear, they are clearly seen to appear in various ways. It is said. That is to say, if one thinks that the external objects such as space are indivisible, and therefore the consciousness that focuses on it will become a single consciousness, that is not the case. Like this, the consciousness of unreal things such as space, no consciousness ever experiences the object nakedly, so it only appears as an image of conceptualization related to it and its name. Because many letters appear, it is clear that it appears as a nature of various kinds. Therefore, it is only the absence of the form of shape, touch, and obstruction that is falsely established as space, and when that space is remembered, it is remembered together with the name. Unlike a vase, etc., it does not focus on it without being mixed with the name, because it is devoid of self-characteristics, so it is not possible to perceive it in all ways with the direct perception of the senses. For example, just like a rabbit's horn, it never appears in the mind without a name. Therefore, the name is a temporary designation that is naturally established on the thing itself, and the things to be expressed can be expressed by various names and letters. All unreal things are also like rabbit horns, etc., and seem to be a part of the exclusion that cuts off things, but the empty space in front of the wall, etc., without touch and obstruction, takes shape due to the external wall, etc.
Chinese
将目标视为幻觉的基础，认为天空存在。如果对此进行仔细研究，仅仅是没有看到形状，但这并不是天空存在的证据，孔隙中的天空不能作为天空的论据。上面蓝色的天空被称为装饰的天空，是阳光照射在须弥山上的景象，所以不是天空。第二，各种意识并非以非多样的方式显现。有些人认为它们存在，但即使如此，也不能被认为是真实的，因为看到对具有特征的事物有害。也就是说，如果有人说存在某种以非多样方式显现的意识，即使允许它存在，也只是假设，不能被认为是真实的，因为对于具有单一真实意识特征或具有特征的事物，理性无可避免地会造成损害。如果存在单一真实的意识，那么它将完全缺乏功能，就像对常恒事物所说的那样，因此它甚至不能被称为意识。因此，无论宗派如何分析和表达，都无法在任何时间和地点证明存在单一真实的意识。因此，试图证明这一点的人永远无法看到成功的曙光。第三，因此，各种显现的意识存在于所有方面。它不像不同的形式那样，本质上是单一的。也就是说，如上所述，经过分析，由于单一真实的对象是不可能的，因此，以各种形式显现的意识在所有时间和地点，其存在或目标就像不同的形式一样，意识本身也不可能是单一本质的真实存在。或者，“存在”指的是时间。这是结论。第二，驳斥不承认外境的唯识宗观点，包括陈述前方的观点和对该观点的分析。首先，正如所说：“如果从无始以来的习气成熟而产生的各种形式的显现，也像错误导致的幻觉一样。”也就是说，依靠自宗唯识宗的观点，那些拥有纯净智慧的人认为，各种外在显现的事物，被声闻乘认为是微尘，并被认为是物质和属性
English
The appearance of targeting as an illusion is the basis for believing that the sky exists. If one examines this carefully, it is merely not seeing a form, but this is not evidence that the sky exists, and the sky in a hole cannot serve as an argument for the sky. The blue sky above, known as the ornamented sky, is the image of sunlight hitting Mount Meru, so it is not the sky. Second, various consciousnesses do not appear in a non-diverse way. Some say they exist, but even if they do, they cannot be considered truly existent, because harm is seen to things with characteristics. That is, if someone says that there is some consciousness that appears in a non-diverse way, even if it is allowed to exist, it is merely an assumption and cannot be considered truly existent, because for something with the characteristic of a single true consciousness, or for things with characteristics, reason inevitably causes harm. If there were a single true consciousness, it would be entirely devoid of function, like what is said of permanent things, so it could not even be called consciousness. Therefore, no matter how sects analyze and express it, it is impossible to prove that a single true consciousness exists at any time or place. Therefore, those who try to prove this will never see the dawn of success. Third, therefore, the consciousness of various appearances exists in all aspects. It is not reasonable for it to be of a single nature, like different forms. That is, as stated above, after analysis, since a single true object is impossible, therefore, the consciousness that appears in various forms, at all times and places, its existence or object is like different forms, and consciousness itself cannot be a true existence of a single essence. Alternatively, "existence" refers to time. This is the conclusion. Second, refuting the Mind-Only school's view that does not accept external objects, including stating the opposing view and analyzing that view. First, as it is said: "If the appearances of various forms that arise from the maturation of habits from beginningless time are also like illusions caused by error." That is, relying on the view of our own Mind-Only school, those who possess pure wisdom consider the various external appearances to be, considered as atoms by the Hearers, and considered as substance and qualities
Chinese
驳斥顺世外道等认为至高与非至高的观点，即论证外境不存在，或遮破能取与所取为异体的观点。唯识宗称之为“遮破由生而相似之理”，即认为现量之显现由外境所生，且与外境相似，以不合理之理遮破此观点，故名之。在《摄大乘论》等中虽已宣说了诸多理证之名目，但主要是不成立仅由与彼相似而生之外境存在，如二月显现等，显示其不确定性。并且，无论外境是微细还是粗大，都不能成立。无分之微细在外识之境中无法现量照见。由于粗大不成立，故论证外境不存在。论证能取与所取非异体的主要依据是，一切显现皆生于明觉之自性的理证，以及通过俱时决定而成立。即，境蓝色与执蓝之识二者，同时被量所照见，并且并非偶尔如此，而是恒常遍及或决定的。例如：境蓝色与执蓝之识，法性上，不是异体，因为俱时照见是决定的，如二月显现。如此安立。若问：俱时照见是决定的，为何必须是同一实体呢？答：若非同一实体，则必须是异体。异体不可能具备此征相，如蓝色与黄色等。某些异体虽然有时俱时照见，但并非恒常如此，若照见一者，则另一者也必定与之俱时照见。蓝色与执蓝之识二者，绝不可能在不照见另一者的情况下，单独照见一者。若二者是异体，则有时也可能各自单独照见。此处若详细阐述如何避免此征相中不成立等三种过失，则有助于理解，但此处仅揭示了根本要点。总之，俱时决定等一切论证能取与所取为一体之理证，最终都归结于此。
English
Refuting the assertions of the Lokayatas and others who follow views of the supreme and the non-supreme, that is, establishing the non-existence of external objects, or refuting the view that the grasper and the grasped are different entities. The Mind-Only school calls this "the reasoning that refutes similarity by arising," that is, the appearance of direct perception arises from an external object and is similar to it, and it is named so because it is refuted by the reasoning that this is not reasonable. Although many categories of reasoning have been taught in the Compendium of Vehicles and so on, the main point is that the existence of an external object that arises merely by being similar to it is not established, as in the appearance of two moons, and so on, showing its uncertainty. Furthermore, neither subtle nor coarse external objects can be established. The partless subtle cannot be directly perceived in the realm of sense consciousness. Since the coarse is not established, the non-existence of external objects is proven. The main proof that the grasper and the grasped are not different entities is the reason that all appearances arise as the nature of clear knowing, and it is established by simultaneous determination. That is, the object blue and the consciousness that grasps blue are both perceived simultaneously by valid cognition, and this is not occasional, but always pervasive or definite, like this: The object blue and the mind that grasps blue, in terms of their nature, are not different entities, because simultaneous perception is definite, like the appearance of two moons. This is how it is established. If you ask: If simultaneous perception is definite, why must they be the same entity? The answer is: If they are not the same entity, then they must be different entities. It is impossible for different entities to have this sign, like blue and yellow, and so on. Although some different entities are sometimes perceived simultaneously, it is not always the case that if one is perceived, the other is necessarily perceived simultaneously with it. It is impossible for the object blue and the mind that grasps it to perceive one alone without perceiving the other. If the two were different entities, then it would be possible for them to be perceived separately at times. If we were to explain in detail how to avoid the three faults of non-establishment, etc., in this sign, it would be helpful for understanding, but here we have only shown the essential points. In short, all the reasoning that establishes the grasper and the grasped as one entity, such as simultaneous determination, ultimately leads to this.