Chinese
即使已经变成这样，就像住在小井里的乌龟后来看到大海一样，各自满足于自己所见的狭隘观点，因为超越了狭隘观点的范围，所以对于极其难以理解的广大而深奥的佛法之海，许多其他不可思议的事物，因为没有见过、没有听过、没有经历过，不仅不灰心，而且还希望和执着于精通经续深奥意义的名声，随意地进行各种看似辩论的活动，这就像恶劣种姓的人贪恋国王的妃子，进行邪淫，会导致丧命的大灾难一样，因为舍弃了深奥的佛法，自己和他人将在无间地狱中从劫到劫燃烧和剧烈燃烧的痛苦中度过，所以想要自己好的人们，请谨慎行事！如果要询问深奥的意义，就像这样，各位贤哲为了维护宗派的立场，以及为了竞争经文和理性的智慧翅膀，虽然因为需要而广泛地进行互相辩论，但在任何地方都难以找到与经文、理性和口诀不相违背的无过失的承诺，所以要询问这样的问题：关于究竟的见解，有些贤哲说是无遮止，有些说是非遮止，在这两者中，无论怎样说，都安住在究竟实相的意义中，并且与理路不相违背，哪一种更合理？同样，声闻和缘觉的阿罗汉，是证悟了法和补特伽罗的二无我，还是没有证悟？哪一种说法更合理？在安住于实相的意义中，或者在安住时，是否存在执着？哪一种说法更合理？关于禅修，是经过观察而禅修，还是不观察而安住并禅修？关于这两种真谛，哪一种是世俗谛或胜义谛为主？对于像水一样的事物，六道众生的所见各不相同，显现为六种不同的事物，对于这种情况，是否存在共同的相似显现的对境？关于中观，是否存在自宗的承认？哪一种说法与经文和理性不相违背，哪一种更合理？像这样，从实相空性出发……
English
Even if it has become like this, just as a turtle living in a small well later sees the great ocean, each is content with their own narrow view, and because it transcends the scope of narrow views, it is extremely difficult to understand the vast and profound ocean of Dharma. Many other inconceivable things, because they have not seen, have not heard, have not experienced, not only are they not discouraged, but they also hope and cling to the fame of being proficient in the profound meaning of the sutras and tantras, and freely engage in various activities that appear to be debates. This is like a person of low caste lusting after the king's concubine, engaging in adultery, which will lead to a great disaster of losing life. Because of abandoning the profound Dharma, oneself and others will spend kalpas upon kalpas in the burning and intensely burning suffering of the Avici hell. Therefore, those who want good for themselves, please be careful! If you want to ask about the profound meaning, like this, the wise ones, in order to maintain the position of the sect, and in order to compete with the wings of wisdom of scripture and reason, although they widely engage in mutual debates because of need, it is difficult to find in any place a faultless commitment that does not contradict scripture, reason, and oral instructions. Therefore, ask such questions: Regarding the ultimate view, some wise ones say it is non-affirming negation (prasajyapratiṣedha), and some say it is affirming negation (paryudāsa). Among these two, no matter how it is said, which one abides in the meaning of ultimate reality and does not contradict reason and logic, which is more reasonable? Similarly, do the Arhats of the Hearers and Solitary Realizers realize the two selflessnesses of phenomena and persons, or do they not realize them? Which statement is more reasonable? In abiding in the meaning of reality, or when abiding, is there clinging or not? Which statement is more reasonable? Regarding meditation, is it meditating after investigation, or is it abiding without investigation and then meditating? Regarding the two truths, which one is the main focus, conventional truth or ultimate truth? For things like water, the perceptions of the six types of beings are different, appearing as six different things. For this situation, is there a common object of similar appearance or not? Regarding Madhyamaka, is there an acceptance of one's own system or not? Which statement does not contradict scripture and reason, and which is more reasonable? Like this, starting from the emptiness of reality...
Chinese
对于这七个具有甚深意义的问题，请给出符合经文，不违背经文意义，且以真实力量的理智所成立的正确答案。除此之外，以理智无法成立的答案，徒劳无益。像这样，即使以看似辩论的彻底驳斥之词的连串，如荆棘之矛般的理智，同时刺击成千上万次，也丝毫不能穿透。由于无法进行任何反驳或成立，那些被称为智者或伟大之人也变得愚昧和迷惑，无法如实理解。对于这无法理解的甚深困难之关键，请伸出如闪电般快速且不短的舌头，说出以经教和理证成立的答案。像这样，以分别的智慧极力催促，言语之风稍微或微小地摇动，即使是提问，也像末劫之风撼动山岳般，撼动了公正正直之人的心，最终陷入了沉默，不语任何答案的差别，稍微或缓慢地保持沉默，陷入了不知所措的境地。最后这样说：唉！长久以来，依赖着成百上千的勤奋努力之重担，并反复以敏锐的智慧之火持续燃烧的大学者，对于这些问题，也无法给出与经教和理证不相违背，以量成立的答案之差别，无法在如精炼黄金般的承诺中成立，是这样的。往昔修习的与生俱来的勇气智慧之力变得薄弱。像这样，没有承担起以巨大努力长期修习的成百上千的重担的卑微的我，怎么能对这个问题说出无过失的答案之差别呢？于是，从内心深处以虔诚的信仰，以悲伤的力量呼唤并祈祷至尊之神，文殊菩萨。在那时，似乎是由于至尊之神的加持力所致，凭借着至尊之神的加持融入内心的力量，心中如黎明时分无误的显现般，出现了答案的差别，无过失的承诺。
English
For these seven questions with profound meaning, please provide correct answers that are in accordance with the scriptures, do not contradict the meaning of the scriptures, and are established by the power of reality and reason. Apart from that, what is the use of laboring with answers that cannot be established by reason? Like this, even if one were to simultaneously strike thousands of times with reasoning that appears like a string of thorough refutations of debate, like a thorn-like spear, it would not penetrate even slightly. Since one cannot make any refutation or establishment, those who are known as wise or great also become ignorant and confused, unable to understand as it is. For this key to the profound and difficult meaning that cannot be understood, please extend your tongue, which is not short but long and as swift as lightning, and give an answer that is established by scripture and reason. Like this, urged on by discriminating wisdom, the wind of speech stirred slightly or minutely, and even that question stirred the heart of the impartial and upright person like the wind of the final age moving a mountain, and in the end, they fell silent, not speaking any difference in answers, holding a slight or slow silence, falling into a state of bewilderment. Finally, they said this: Alas! For a long time, relying on the burden of hundreds and thousands of diligent efforts, and constantly burning the fire of sharp wisdom through repeated analysis, even that great scholar could not give a difference in answers that do not contradict scripture and reason and are established by valid cognition for these questions, unable to establish it in a state like refined gold, it is like this. The power of the innate courage and wisdom of past practice has become weak. Like this, how could I, a lowly one who has not taken on the hundreds and thousands of burdens of long-term practice with great effort, speak of a difference in answers that is without fault for this? Then, from the depths of my heart, with fervent faith, I called out and prayed to the supreme deity, the venerable Manjushri, with the force of sorrow. At that time, it seemed to be due to the power of the blessing of that supreme deity, and by the power of the blessing of the supreme deity entering my heart, a difference in answers appeared in my mind like an unmistakable manifestation at the time of dawn, a faultless promise.
Chinese
凭借正量成立，远离一切疑惑的黑暗，稍微获得能够说话的勇气之际，立即以真实的理智，如实地考察善说之经续和诀窍的意旨，像这样说道。第二，分开详细解说，如问答纲要所示，共有七个部分。第一个问答是关于究竟的见解，即否定之否定和非否定之否定，哪一个更合理。分为两部分：简述他宗观点并确立自宗观点，以及详细解说。第一部分，通过格鲁派的见解等五颂半来阐述。其中，一般来说，如来藏自性不空，则与外道的常我没有区别，因此阐述了解脱三门之自性。光明智慧也不存在，如果变成断灭空，如同虚空一般，则与裸体外道没有区别，因此阐述了光明智慧是不作的。因此，导师以决定性的经文，阐述了体性空和自性光明。其意旨的解释是，弥勒菩萨的《宝性论》和《经庄严论》等，以及圣龙树的理聚论和赞颂集都很好地阐述了这些。在印度，圣龙树的《中观根本慧论》等理聚论的意旨，由佛护和清辨阐释。圣月称分别解释，对于所破，加上胜义的差别，以及由于它的作用，在名言中是否承认自相成立等差别，互相进行各种辩论。因此，在西藏，也认为中观有自续派和他空派，理解为非常不一致。诸位智者也指出了中观自续派的空性变成了非否定之否定的矛盾。圣月称的《入中论》本释的意旨，解释者雪域的智者们也互相辩论，争论是否理解了圣月称的意旨。同样，弥勒菩萨的《宝性论》等的意旨，解释者雪域的智者们也互相展开各种辩论。然而，公正的
English
Having been established by valid cognition, free from all the darkness of doubt, and having gained a slight opportunity for the courage to speak, immediately, with accurate reasoning of reality, examining the meaning of the well-spoken sutras, tantras, and instructions as they are, I say this. Secondly, dividing and explaining in detail, as indicated in the summary of questions and answers, there are seven parts. The first question and answer concerns the ultimate view, whether it is negation of negation or non-negation of negation, which is more reasonable. It is divided into two parts: briefly stating the views of others and establishing one's own view, and explaining in detail. The first part is presented through five and a half verses, including the Gelug view. In general, if the essence of the Tathagata is not empty in its own nature, it would be no different from the permanent self of the outsiders, therefore, the nature of the three doors of liberation is explained. Also, if there is no clear light wisdom, and it becomes a nihilistic emptiness like the sky, it would be no different from the naked ascetics, therefore, the clear light wisdom is explained as unconditioned. Thus, the teacher, with definitive scriptures, explained the essence as emptiness and the nature as luminosity. The commentaries on this are also well explained by Maitreya's Ornament of Realization and Sublime Continuum, etc., and by Nagarjuna's collections of reasoning and collections of praises. In India, the meaning of Nagarjuna's Root Wisdom of the Middle Way, etc., was explained by Buddhapalita and Bhavaviveka. Chandrakirti explained them separately, adding the distinction of ultimate truth to what is to be refuted, and because of its function, whether or not to accept self-characterization in conventional truth, etc., they made various debates with each other. Therefore, in Tibet, Madhyamaka is also considered to have Svatantrika and Prasangika, understood as very inconsistent. The wise scholars also pointed out the contradiction that the emptiness of the Madhyamaka Svatantrika school has become a non-negation of negation. The meaning of Chandrakirti's Commentary on the Middle Way, the commentators, the wise scholars of the snowy land, also debated each other, arguing whether or not they understood Chandrakirti's meaning. Similarly, the meaning of Maitreya's Sublime Continuum, etc., the commentators, the wise scholars of the snowy land, also engaged in various debates with each other. However, the impartial
Chinese
以智慧依于意义的无垢理路，如果修持要义，诸佛的事业会因所化众生的根器而各自展现其意趣，虽然名言上的承诺稍有不同，但实际上就像说汉藏成就者的意趣相同一样，最终的意趣，即大中观离戏平等性，毫无分别地趋向和汇入一体。对此，宗喀巴大师在《中观庄严论释》和《如来藏狮子吼》等著作中已详细阐述了深刻的经论意趣，我已亲自修持，故在此不再赘述。因此，名言上的承诺即使稍有不同，无论自他，对此不应吹毛求疵，即使有，也不会因此成为邪见或非法，因为经中说要依于意义，不要依于文字。即使如此，无论自他，也不应随声附和，而应以正确的理路进入无误的名言，这非常重要。如云：“名言真谛是方便。”因此，在所有问答中，都应以公正的心态，不偏颇地看待，而应寻求正确的意义，这是智者们应珍视为心之宝的瑜伽。实际上，在雪域高原上，以格鲁派为首的先后出现的多数智者认为，中观的究竟见解必须是断除所破真实成立的空性，即无遮止。而其他先后出现的智者则说，究竟的实相，即胜义谛，不是以二取轮回之法的空性为空性的非遮止。那么，宁玛派不与其他宗派相混的自宗承许是什么呢？究竟的实相是远离增益损减二边的离戏平等性，或者说是双运大智慧的舍弃无遮止，也就是说，不是在遮破真实成立等之后留下的空无一物的空性，也不是断灭空，也不是增益，而是非遮止，即在遮破所破之后，又安立了法性等其他法。这二者都是以智慧从他处遣除的方式来确立的。