Chinese
如果我等从显现之时起，就没有见到本来就安住于大清净之中，这完全是由于向内看时，被不净的错觉所造成的边见。依靠圣者的观察，在普遍共称的量士夫面前，器情世间万物，显现为空性的法界与无二的智慧本尊和坛城，如其所是地安住和显现相符，正如大圣者们如实照见的那样，对于不如此行持的金刚乘的宗见，却说并且认为是殊胜的。因此，认为一切器情世间本来就不是清净为本尊坛城的所依和能依，像这样一边以不净的观点看待，一边又认为清净的本尊所依和能依的坛城是存在的，这两种就像光明和黑暗一样，矛盾的自相非常明显地显露出来，这样的道，比起金刚乘道的影像，也仅仅是影像而已，像这样无论多么努力地修持，最终也不会获得器情世间清净为本尊和坛城的果位或解脱。例如，黑色的煤炭无论多么努力地清洗，也不会变白或者变成白色一样。如果器情世间本来就不是清净为本尊，仅仅凭借认为“是本尊”的虚假修持，就能获得器情世间清净为本尊或解脱的果位，那么对于以理智分析的宗见，对于自性或真实的空性没有任何定解的情况下，外道太阳派的人们，仅仅凭借修持舍弃显现或者无有而空等，也应该能够如实地见到自性或真实的空性，从而断除烦恼，这实在是太不合理了。第二，以行部、事部、无上部等三颂两句来阐述。对此，如果金刚乘的事部、行部、瑜伽部、无上部等四部或六部，在安住的方式上，对于见解的高低没有任何差别，那么就会出现非常不合理的两种过失。这是怎么回事呢？明明是已经习惯并确信一切显现存在本来就远离好坏二法的大平等中而证悟的瑜伽士，却对自己的誓言物和智慧本尊执着好坏、清净和不净等。
English
If we, from the very moment of appearance, have not seen that it abides in the great purity from the beginning, this is entirely due to the extreme view established by the impure delusion of looking inward. Relying on the vision of the noble ones, in the face of the measure of universal convention, the state of the container and its contents appears as the empty realm of reality and the non-dual wisdom deity and mandala, just as the great saints truly see the state and appearance in harmony, and those who do not act in this way speak of and consider as supreme the established view of the Vajrayana. Therefore, thinking that all containers and contents are not originally pure as the support and supported of the deity's mandala, while looking at them as impure, and at the same time thinking that the pure deity's support and supported mandala exists, these two, like light and darkness, reveal a very clear contradictory nature, and that path is merely an image of the Vajrayana path, and no matter how much effort is put into practicing it, in the end, the result of the container and its contents being pure as the deity and mandala, or liberation, will not be attained. For example, just as black coal, no matter how much effort is put into washing it, will not turn white or become white. If the container and its contents are not originally pure as the deity, but merely by the artificial practice of thinking "it is the deity," the result of the container and its contents being pure as the deity or liberation can be attained, then, without any certainty about the nature or true emptiness through the reasoning of definitive analysis, the external Tirthika sun-worshippers, merely by practicing abandoning appearance or emptiness without existence, should also be able to truly see the nature or true emptiness, thereby abandoning afflictions, which is extremely unreasonable. Second, it is explained by three verses and two lines, such as Kriya, Charya, and Anuttara. In this regard, if the Kriya, Charya, Yoga, and Anuttara tantras of the Vajrayana, or the four or six sections, have no difference in the height or lowness of the view of seeing the way of abiding, then there will be two very unreasonable faults. How is this so? Clearly, the supreme yogi who is accustomed to and confident in the view of realizing that all appearances and existence are originally in the great equality of purity, free from the two dharmas of good and bad, is attached to good and bad, pure and impure, etc., to his own samaya substance and wisdom deity.
Chinese
因为对于享用，取舍分别在实相中是不存在的，在没有见到实相的情况下，对于没有取舍的事物，如果以各种取舍的区分来承受辛劳，那么自己明明知道却以各种取舍来无意义地遭受痛苦的损害。或者，如同事续等下部续部一样，对于自我和本尊的好坏、洁净与不洁等取舍，如果执着于这些分别，并且贪恋不舍，却认为无上续部的清净平等之见行深奥，行持合一解脱和食用肉酒等没有取舍，是平等性，而随意享用，那么在没有领会无上清净平等、没有取舍的深奥见行的情况下，如此行持就是没有领悟的胡作非为，如经续中诸佛屡次呵责，不是吗？确实如此。第三，如何如何等三句偈颂阐述。其中，如何如何是指，将实相显空或清净平等无别双运之义，以越来越深入的方式，视为逐渐增上的次第的甚深定解，称为见，并且认为以见如何如何确定和决断，就应以禅修来修持，以行持来取舍和守护，因此，上下乘的次第必须以见的深浅来区分，不要作其他想法。如果这样，乘的次第不一定是九乘，那么，这是非常确定的。如何呢？从所有内道宗义中最低的声闻乘，到最终圆满的金刚顶阿底瑜伽乘之间，划分为九个部类的原因是正确的，并且对于上中下三种根器，每一种又分为下下、下中、下上等三种，因此有这样的划分。例如，乘有高低和分类归纳的多种方式，但分为三乘等，是根据所化众生的根器、意乐等而作出的考量，就像那样。第四是总结要义，即以“因此，内在的”等两句偈颂阐述。如上所述，因此，证悟二谛双运的实相大清净的内在智慧之力。如何如何力量增
English
Because, regarding enjoyment, the distinctions of acceptance and rejection do not exist in reality. Without having seen reality, if one takes on the labor of various distinctions of acceptance and rejection for things that have no acceptance or rejection, then one knowingly inflicts suffering upon oneself with various meaningless acceptances and rejections. Or, like the lower tantras such as the Kriya Tantra, if one clings to and is attached to the distinctions of good and bad, clean and unclean, etc., for oneself and the deity, while claiming that the view and practice of the unsurpassed tantra are profoundly pure and equal, that the union of means and liberation and the consumption of meat and alcohol are without acceptance or rejection, and are of equal nature, and thus indulges in enjoyment as one pleases, then without having understood the profound view and practice of unsurpassed purity and equality, which is without acceptance or rejection, such conduct is merely the behavior of an uncomprehending fool, as the Buddhas have repeatedly condemned in all the sutras and tantras. Is it not so? Indeed, it is. Third, "How, how," etc., is explained in three verses. Among these, "How, how" refers to the profound certainty of seeing the reality of appearance and emptiness, or pure equality, the indivisible union, as increasingly profound and progressive stages, which is called view. And it is held that however one ascertains and decides through view, one must cultivate it through meditation, and one must accept, reject, and protect it through conduct. Therefore, the order of higher and lower vehicles must be distinguished by the depth of view, and one should not think otherwise. If so, the order of vehicles is not necessarily nine. This is very certain. How so? The reason for classifying all inner Buddhist philosophical systems, from the lowest Hearer Vehicle to the ultimate Vajra Pinnacle Ati Yoga Vehicle, into nine categories is valid. And for each of the three faculties—superior, middling, and inferior—there are divisions into three, such as the lowest of the lowest, the middling of the lowest, and the highest of the lowest. For example, although there are many ways to classify and categorize vehicles as higher and lower, the division into three vehicles, etc., is based on considering the dispositions, faculties, and inclinations of those to be trained, just as it is. Fourth is the summary of the meaning, which is explained in two verses beginning with "Therefore, the inner." As stated above, therefore, the power of the inner wisdom that sees the reality of the great purity of the union of the two truths. How, how the power increas
Chinese
像那样，器情世间的一切，都见到安住和显现一致的清净，内在的智慧力量有多大，执着就有多大，见到安住和显现不一致的不清净，像那样分别见到清净和不清净。因此，视显现和空性本来自性不分离，安住于无别或双运是基础。如实通达以真俗二谛双运无别之方式的那个基础是道。如实串习那个道，从究竟圆满中获得法身和色身二身双运的究竟智慧，就是真正的果。那个空性为何是自性显现之故？那个显现为何是本体空性之故？显现空性本来自性不分离之故？除了这个双运之外，还能有什么更重要的呢？也这样说了。第六个问题的回答是，对于将同一显现视为不同一的共同所见，哪两种是合理的？不合理的其他宗派各自驳斥。确立合理的自宗。第一，用水一，众生等十个偈颂来阐述。像这样，对于显现的水一，六道众生显现不一，各自显现为脓血等不一之物时，有些人认为对此存在共同的所见，那是什么呢？就是水本身，并且说见到它的有境者都是量，这也是不合理的。因为水有自性成立的共同所见，如果某些以量成立，并且六道众生见到这个和那个，有境者都是量，那么对于将清水视为脓血等的六道众生的各自所见，没有量和非量的区别，所以根本不可能有错乱。如果各自的境相显现，脓血和水等，各自所显现的与他者不共同，那么就像见到柱子和瓶子二者的心识没有共同的所见一样，不可能有共同的所见，所以说存在共同的所见是不成立的。还有些人说，共同的所见仅仅是湿润，这也是不合理的。因为六道众生共同地，各自没有颠倒地见到湿润，如果见到那个，那么
English
Like that, all of the container and contents realms are seen as pure, with abiding and appearance in harmony. The more attachment there is to the power of inner wisdom, the more the impure, non-harmonious abiding and appearance are seen. Thus, purity and impurity are seen separately. Therefore, the basis is the state of appearance and emptiness being inseparable from the beginning, abiding in non-duality or union. The path is realizing that basis as it is, in the manner of the union of the two truths, inseparable. The fruit is attaining the ultimate wisdom of the union of the two kayas, Dharmakaya and Rupakaya, from perfecting that path as it is. Why is that emptiness the nature of appearance? Why is that appearance empty in essence? Why are appearance and emptiness inseparable from the beginning? What else is more important than this union? So it is said. The answer to the sixth question is, regarding the common object of perception of seeing the same appearance as different, which two are reasonable? Refuting the unreasonable other systems separately. Establishing the reasonable own system. First, it is explained by ten verses, such as 'water one, beings,' etc. Like this, regarding the one appearance of water, when the six types of beings have different appearances, each appearing as different things such as pus and blood, some people think that there is a common object of perception for this. What is that? It is the water itself, and they say that all those who have the object of seeing it are valid cognizers. This is also unreasonable. Because water has a common object of perception that is established by its own nature, if some are established by valid cognition, and the six types of beings see this and that, and the object-possessors are all valid cognizers, then for the separate perceptions of the six types of beings who see pure water as pus and blood, there is no distinction between valid and invalid cognition, so there is absolutely no possibility of confusion. If the respective object-appearances, pus and blood, water, etc., whatever appears to each is not common with others, then just as the mind that sees the two, pillar and pot, has no common object of perception, there will be no possibility of a common object of perception, so this statement that there is a common object of perception is not established. Also, some say that the common object of perception is just moisture. This is also unreasonable. Because the six types of beings commonly, each individually, see moisture without reversing it, and if they see that, then
Chinese
仅仅是共同的湿气，六道众生就会产生水、脓等不同的、不相同的显现，互相之间，一个所见的显现于另一个，从而显现为不可见的，显现为水和脓等。除了这些之外，作为显现基础的湿气又是什么呢？这样的东西是不存在的。另外，在无形的无边虚空中，仅仅是湿气，所有显现的一切怎么会变成仅仅显现为虚空的基础呢？不会变的。如果考察是一还是他，共同的观察对象仅仅是湿气，如果它与水本身是一体，那么它就应该总是显现为水，而不应该以任何方式显现为脓等其他东西，因为它显现为水本身，例如水本身显现为水并被认知一样。如果湿气与水等是不同的他体，那么仅仅是湿气就什么也认知不到，因为显现和认知的是水等其他东西，例如认知水本身就不是认知其他东西一样。因此，对于水和脓等不相同、显现不相同的各个事物，不可能存在一个共同的观察对象，说“这就是共同的观察对象”，并且在名言上也同样不可能存在共同一致显现的一个事物，却显现为各种不同的事物，例如柱子、瓶子等显现为不同的事物，不可能存在一个共同的观察对象，对于业和显现相同的人们来说，对于共同一致显现的水，显现为水，而不显现为脓等不同的事物也是不可能的。因此，仅仅是互相观待而安立水和脓等所见不同，除此之外，如果以理智分析，承认水和湿气等共同的观察基础或观察对象，那么它必须成立为实相胜义谛，如果那样，它就变成了可以被理智分析成立等等，无论如何考察或承认，都是不合理的。如果根本不存在共同显现的共同观察对象，那么就像唯识宗所主张的那样，色等外境不存在，仅仅是内在的意识受到习气的影响而显现为色等境