English
It is said. If one takes as an object of focus something that one thinks has a support or does not have a support, and then, by way of grasping, thinks that that object is the way things are, that is not the case. For whatever object is grasped by the mind as a support, it is impossible that it cannot be refuted by the reasoning of the Madhyamaka, because the nature of reality does not favor any side. Those who are fond of signs, taking whatever they have made into an object of focus as the object itself, should not establish it as such. In that way, when the ship of clinging to reality is destroyed in the great ocean of emptiness free from extremes, the merchants of the mind of existence who are attached to the boxes of signs of various objects will be frightened and flustered, and although they will try to grasp onto some support of an object, it is the nature of things that the support itself is also unstable. In the great ocean of the expanse of reality, which is free from beginning and end, what is there that would not be pleasing to anyone, even when all the conceptualizations that bind one to samsara from beginningless time have died away? Because the wisdom of non-conceptualization, which has power over the kingdom of unlocalized nirvana, has arisen, those who are devoted to the profound will not be afraid of that way of being, but will be very pleased. Therefore, although all the Madhyamaka treatises teach that things do not have inherent existence, depending on whether one understands non-inherent existence and emptiness as being differentiated or undifferentiated, according to the latter, all elaborations are reversed, and the term 'emptiness' is just an empty word that does not see anything. As it is said, one should be certain of this and not cling to the word 'non-inherent existence,' because it is taught as the meaning of reversing elaborations. As it says in the Clear Words: If someone says to you, 'I have nothing to give you,' and then you say, 'Please give me that thing that you have nothing of,' how can you possibly make him grasp onto having nothing? Clinging to emptiness is said to be similar to that, so one should understand it in that way. In short, one must distinguish whether the grasping that things have inherent existence is an object of the conventional ultimate truth, or whether it is the absence of affirmation and elaboration, as in the latter case, which is the crucial point of the matter. One should not just recognize the mere words of non-inherent existence, etc., without truly understanding their meaning. Therefore, one should combine the explanatory methods of the Prasangika and Svatantrika schools, and although the ultimate intention is one of freedom from elaboration, when distinguishing in the subsequent attainment, one should understand the meaning like the Svatantrika.
Chinese
将誓言分为二是有利的，进入无分别的等持智慧时，无需分开，而是证得离戏大境界，如果明白这一点，就能彻底掌握中观的要点，否则就困难了。而且，在名言的范畴内，生和无生等只是相互依存而安立的，如果用理智分析，两者都同样不能成立。如果能够驳倒执着的对象，却始终不放弃对无生的执着，那就是没有战胜事物自有的规律，因此也不会舍弃对生等的执着。对此有人会想：即使是执着于无瓶，也需要所破的瓶子的形象，以及消除它的分别念，否则就无法执着于无瓶。但是，这种分别念只是以破除为对象的，因为在远离瓶子的那一侧，连瓶子的名称也没有，所以没有空性、缘起、双运的意义。虽然生等在名言中存在，但真正的无生是空性缘起的实相，与此相应的智慧，执着于无生是永远不能改变的，这种想法也是不正确的。因为是双运，所以它的本体如何是无法言说的，否则也会变成可以执着的对境。然而，仅仅是用分别念将显现和空性结合起来执取，并不能成为与究竟实相相符的智慧。而且，如果用探究胜义谛的理智来分析，就找不到不可否认的名言之生，以及其上的无生，因为两者是平等的，所以在非名言的胜义谛的场合，应成派和自续派的观点就融为一体了。如果因为声义的分别念执着于无自性等错误而看不到实相，那么圣者们也很难用远离分别念的现量来照见实相了。如果认为在凡夫的阶段，除了修习之外别无选择，那么为什么不能生起随顺无分别的智慧呢？如果因为不能这样做，暂时不放弃执着，那么又有谁会强迫你放弃呢？但是，必须对不可思议的法性生起信心，为什么深奥呢？因为不是思辨的对境。智慧
English
It is beneficial to divide the vows into two. When entering the wisdom of non-conceptual equipoise, there is no need to divide, but rather to realize the great freedom from elaboration. If one understands this, one can thoroughly grasp the key point of Madhyamaka; otherwise, it is difficult. Moreover, in terms of nomenclature, terms such as "arising" and "non-arising" are merely established in dependence on each other. When analyzed with reason, both are equally unestablished. If one can refute the object of attachment but still does not relinquish the attachment to non-arising, then one has not overcome the inherent nature of phenomena, and thus one will not abandon the attachment to arising and so forth. In this regard, one might think: Even in the case of apprehending the absence of a pot, one needs the appearance of the pot to be negated and the conceptualization that eliminates it; otherwise, one cannot apprehend the absence of the pot. However, that conceptualization has only negation as its object, because on the side devoid of the pot, even the name "pot" does not exist, so there is no meaning of emptiness, dependent arising, and union. Although arising and so forth exist nominally, the true non-arising is the reality of emptiness and dependent arising, and the wisdom that accords with this, the apprehension of non-arising, can never be reversed. Such a thought is not correct. Because it is union, its essence is beyond expression; otherwise, it would become an object to be fixated upon. However, merely combining appearance and emptiness with conceptual thought does not become wisdom that accords with the ultimate reality. Moreover, if one analyzes with the reasoning that investigates ultimate truth, one cannot find either the undeniable nominal arising or the non-arising above it, because they are equal. Therefore, in this case of ultimate truth, which is not nominal, the views of Prasangika and Svatantrika become one. If one does not see reality because of the erroneous conceptual thought of sound and meaning, such as clinging to selflessness, then it would be difficult even for the noble ones to see reality with the direct perception that is free from conceptual thought. If one thinks that there is no alternative to meditation in the stage of ordinary beings, then why can't one generate subsequent conformity with non-conceptualization? If one cannot do so and thinks of not abandoning the clinging for the time being, then who would force one to abandon it? However, one must generate faith in the inconceivable nature of reality. Why is it profound? Because it is not an object of speculation. Wisdom
Chinese
如果将心识的行境引导为能识的行境，那么如来教法的精要就会衰退，因此，不要为了自己容易理解而偏执一方，从而舍弃深奥的佛法。如果长期熟悉二谛的道理，就会生起与智慧相应的忍。那时，对超越心识的事物稍微信任，由于串习的力量，最初的证悟就会显现。因此，要思维诸佛菩萨安慰的教言，抛弃只求表面理解的期望，以及骄慢和沮丧，逐步进入不可思议的智慧之境。正如《楞伽经》所说：有由无而生，有亦由无生。因此，不应说无，也不应执着于有。于彼何亦不生，何亦不灭。见世间寂静，彼无有无。如是说。其他外道如青年取等也认为：牛奶中没有酸奶，这是先前没有的；酸奶中没有牛奶，这是后来没有的；兔子头上没有角，这是根本没有的；牛身上没有马，这是相互没有的。这四种没有被认为是事物转变的结果。其中，有由无而生，例如后来的没有等三种情况。因此，非事物也是由事物而产生的。如果像寡妇一样，一般情况下不确定是否有儿子，那么寡妇的儿子这个词只是一个概念，依靠这个概念，才能说它是没有的。兔子角等也是如此。无由有而生，例如，生这个词是由于先前没有而产生的。如果先前有，那么生就矛盾了，因为如果已有的东西再生，那么已生的东西也会再次生，这样就没完没了了。因此，有无、真不真、空不空等，所有这些都只是由分别念所安立的，而不是法性离戏的实相。当获得无分别的智慧，安住于离戏的境界时，要知道，那时就远离了遍计动摇的魔境，进入了诸佛欢喜的道路。如《华严经》所说：细微而难知
English
If the object of consciousness is led to the object of the knower, then the essence of the Tathagata's teachings will decline. Therefore, do not abandon the profound Dharma by taking a position that is easy to apply to one's own mind. If one becomes familiar with the nature of the two truths for a long time, then a forbearance that is in accordance with wisdom will arise. At that time, having a little faith in what is beyond the mind, due to the power of habituation, the original manifestation will appear. Therefore, thinking about the words of comfort from the Buddhas and their sons, abandon both arrogance and dejection with the hope of only seeing the surface, and gradually enter into the state of inconceivable wisdom. As it is said in the Lankavatara Sutra: 'Existence is brought forth by non-existence. Existence is also brought forth by non-existence. Therefore, one should not speak of non-existence. One should not even contemplate existence. In that which nothing is born, nothing ceases. Seeing the world as completely empty, there is neither existence nor non-existence.' It is said. Other non-Buddhist schools, such as the Youth Taker, etc., also say: 'There is no yogurt in milk, which did not exist before. There is no milk in yogurt, which did not exist from then on. There are no horns on a rabbit's head, which never existed. There is no horse on a cow, which is mutually non-existent.' These four non-existences are considered to be the result of the transformation of things. Among them, non-existence is established by existence, such as the three cases of non-existence from then on. Therefore, non-existence is also established by the existence of things. If, like a widow, it is generally uncertain whether there is a son, then the word 'widow's son' is just a concept, and based on this concept, it can be said that it does not exist. The same is true for rabbit horns and so on. Existence is brought forth by non-existence. For example, the word 'birth' is known because of the absence of it before. If it existed before, then birth would be contradictory, because if something that already exists is born again, then what is already born will be born again, and so on without end. Therefore, existence and non-existence, truth and untruth, emptiness and non-emptiness, etc., are all merely established by conceptual thought, and are not the reality of the nature of phenomena, which is free from elaboration. When one attains non-conceptual wisdom and abides in the state of freedom from elaboration, one should know that at that time one has gone far beyond the realm of the demon of fluctuating conceptualization and has entered the path that pleases the Buddhas. As it is said in the Avatamsaka Sutra: 'Subtle and difficult to know.'
Chinese
乃大仙之道，不可思议，非思虑之境，难以观见。自性寂静，无灭无生。智者以明智了达。本体性空寂静，痛苦止息。从相续中解脱，一同寂灭。无边无中，言语无法表达。解脱三时，如虚空般相同。又如《宝积经》所说：就胜义谛而言，在圣者的智慧和觉悟面前，没有任何法可以完全被知、被舍、被修或被证悟。又如《龙王海请问经》所说：前际空，后际亦空。空于生、灭、住之事物。此非有物，亦非无物。何以故？诸法皆自性空。又如《慧海所说经》所说：梵天，任何未完全成立之法，皆不应承认其为有或为无。又如《智慧光明庄严经》所说：求义者不言有，亦不言无。无答复，无言路，不依赖于汝，我向您顶礼。又如《功德宝聚经》所说：若于不解之时，执著于色，行于受、想、识蕴，虽思此蕴为空，然菩萨非行于相，亦不信无生之境。如是显示于有与无任何一方执著皆不可行，以及：何者非有，则称之为无。愚童衡量之，分别有与无。有与无，此二者皆为无有之法。任何菩萨知晓此理，必得解脱。如是显示舍弃二边的般若波罗蜜多能从一切见解中解脱，又说：不思有生与无生，此乃最胜般若波罗蜜多之行。又如《密集庄严经》所说：无论有多少见解，凡是众生所执持的，为了彻底舍弃这些见解，才宣说了空性之理。即使听闻了空性之见，如果某些人的见解没有消除，那就是不可救药的邪见者，如同被医生抛弃的病人一样。