Chinese
如是宣说于《绕多》中：由于所有异生皆见世俗，故亦将见胜义；如依世俗增长烦恼，同样依胜义亦应增长烦恼；如胜义无有差别，同样世俗亦应无有差别；如不需从所见所闻中寻求世俗，胜义亦应如是，此为四者。因此，不应承许处所与显现为一或异。如经中所说：‘诸行界与胜义之自性，是一与异离之自性。谁于一与异而生心，彼等即是趣入非理之见。’如是宣说。第二，以彼理遣除其他邪分别之显示。以彼理，以佛等三颂与二句显示。如前，于处所与显现，无论一或异皆不承许之彼理，于此，佛与有情亦仅是处所之实况与显现之方式，若认为有情是因，佛是果，则应知是小乘。因此，由于处所与显现二者，无论一或异皆不承许，若有情是佛，则应能显现为具足妙相之佛陀，且所有道之修习与精进皆将变得毫无意义，若果位于因中，则应承许食饭者是食不净物等，以此等理所害，于自宗皆无有。何为有情之处所，何为佛，彼亦因有情自显现之暂时的障碍所障蔽，故不能显现为佛陀，因此不显现为佛，为脱离彼暂时的障碍，而需努力修道与精进，此乃自他二者皆应认可。汝亦承许有情自性清净，然亦认为需行道之努力，岂非如此？说此等无关联之语又有何用，毫无意义。第三，显示自宗无有承许二谛自相矛盾之过失。以二谛相违等六颂显示。于自宗，如火与热。
English
It is said in the Ramdo: Because all ordinary beings see the conventional, they will also see the ultimate; just as afflictions increase based on the conventional, it would follow that afflictions also increase based on the ultimate; just as there is no distinction in the ultimate, it would follow that there is also no distinction in the conventional; just as the conventional does not need to be sought from what is seen and heard, the ultimate should also be the same, these are the four. Therefore, one should not assert that the place and appearance are one or different. As it is said in the sutra: 'The nature of the realm of formations and the ultimate, is the nature free from one and different. Those who think of one and different, they have entered into a wrong view.' Thus it is said. Secondly, showing that other wrong conceptions are refuted by that principle. By that principle, it is shown by three verses and two lines about the Buddha and others. As before, by that principle of not accepting the place and appearance as either one or different, here, Buddha and sentient beings are only the state of affairs and the way of appearance, and to think that sentient beings are the cause and Buddha is the result should be known as the Lesser Vehicle. Therefore, since neither the place nor the appearance are accepted as one or different, if sentient beings are Buddhas, then they should be able to appear as Buddhas adorned with marks and signs, and all the practice and effort of the path would become meaningless, and if the result is in the cause, then one would have to accept that eating food is eating impure things, etc. Harmed by these reasons, this own system has none of these. What is the state of sentient beings, what is the Buddha, that is also because sentient beings are obscured by their own appearance of temporary obscurations, so they cannot appear as Buddhas, therefore they do not appear as Buddhas, and for the sake of being free from that temporary obscuration, one must strive to practice the path and diligence, this is what both oneself and others must agree to. You also acknowledge that sentient beings are naturally pure, but you also think that the effort of the path is necessary, isn't it? What is the use of saying such irrelevant words, there is no meaning. Thirdly, showing that there is no fault of internal contradiction in accepting the two truths in one's own system. It is shown by six verses such as the contradiction of the two truths. In one's own system, like fire and heat.
Chinese
因为显现与空性，二谛之间没有任何偏颇的矛盾，所以在名言上存在，在胜义上不存在的观点，这两种观点如何矛盾呢？根本不矛盾。而且，显现与空性二者也不是互相一样的，因此，在世俗上存在，在胜义上不存在的两种承许的安立也是非常合理的。因此，只要显现与空性这二者，连同显现空性的各自显现的心之行境没有融入法界之前，只要存在，那么显现与空性这二者就是互相观待而安立的，因此不可能一个存在一个不存在，所以显现与空性二者是存在相同，不存在也相同，所以在任何情况下力量都是相同的，因此不是承许一个存在一个不存在的单方面，而是以一异等理证成立一切事物皆无实有，从而断定胜义为空性，并且以普遍名言之理，未经观察，世间共称的名言中，因果、前后世等无欺存在，从而确定缘起之显现，这两种确定，交替或次第以二谛的量，在衡量内外一切事物时，这两种量各自所获得的意义或所见之义，就仅仅是称之为显现空性，或者世俗和胜义，即二谛。因为这二谛的自性既非一体也非异体，所以显现空性二谛不能互相不观待，舍弃其中任何一个而执取另一个，譬如不能执取不依赖于火的热，也不能执取不依赖于热的火一样。因此，对于这二谛，以各自观察的量，心所智慧，将显现空性的存在与不存在分别开来而说的比喻是：在果的究竟，获得心与心所的一切二取灭尽的智慧法身之时，心与心所的一切二取在名言的权下灭尽，必须这样承许，并且在实相胜义中，本来清净，所以也没有灭尽，也必须这样承许。
English
Since there is not even the slightest contradiction of falling to either side between appearance and emptiness, the two truths, how could the views that it exists conventionally and does not exist ultimately contradict each other? They are simply not contradictory. Moreover, since appearance and emptiness are not the same as each other, the establishment of the two assertions that it exists conventionally and does not exist ultimately is also very reasonable. Therefore, as long as these two, appearance and emptiness, and all the activities of the mind with the appearance of appearance and emptiness separately, have not dissolved into the expanse, as long as they exist, then appearance and emptiness are merely established in dependence on each other. Therefore, it is impossible for one to exist and the other not to exist. So, appearance and emptiness are equal in existence and equal in non-existence. Therefore, in all ways, their power is equal. Therefore, it is not an acceptance of only one side, saying one exists and the other does not. Rather, it is certain that all things are not truly established by reasons such as oneness or otherness, thus decisively determining ultimate truth as emptiness. And it is certain that in conventional truth, without investigation, in the worldly conventions of cause and effect, past and future lives, etc., there is unerring existence of dependent arising. These two certainties, alternately or sequentially, by the two valid cognitions that examine the two truths, when measuring all internal and external phenomena, the meaning or the seen meaning that these two valid cognitions each find is merely called appearance and emptiness, or conventional and ultimate, that is, the two truths. Since these two truths are neither the same nor different in essence, the two truths of appearance and emptiness cannot be mutually independent, abandoning one and grasping the other. For example, just as one cannot grasp heat that does not depend on fire, nor can one grasp fire that does not depend on heat. Therefore, the example of speaking by separating the acceptance of existence and non-existence of appearance and emptiness by the valid cognition, mental wisdom, which separately examines these two truths, is: At the ultimate result, when one obtains the wisdom Dharmakaya in which all dualistic appearances of mind and mental factors have ceased, one must accept that all dualistic appearances of mind and mental factors cease under the power of convention, and one must also accept that in the ultimate meaning of reality, it is primordially pure, so there is no cessation either.
Chinese
第三，通过经论所示的种种遮破与建立之方式，无有相违地归纳要义：经与论等以五颂来阐述。所谓的诸佛之母般若波罗蜜多，以及二谛等，还有宣说心要之经等，以及伟大的论典，圣龙树菩萨的《中观理聚论》和《法界赞》等，还有，地上十地的菩萨大士们在《般若波罗蜜多》和《宝性论》等一切论典中，所开示的种种遮破与建立的方式，从这些教义中，有些是就安住实相胜义谛的角度而言，宣称基、道、果的一切法皆是空性或无有；有些是就世俗显现名言的角度而言，宣称基、道、果的一切法皆是存在。也就是说，如果仅仅就安住实相胜义谛的角度而言，那么五道十地以及佛陀和有情等，总而言之，由基、道、果所涵盖的一切法，本来清净，故为空性或无有，无需犹豫也可如此宣说。然而，就名言显现世俗谛而言，在任何情况下，都不可能独立存在不存在或空性，因为不存在或空性本身，虽然是空性，但显现的缘起却不会停止，因此，由基、道、果所涵盖的轮回与涅槃的显现之分，都显现为真实不虚的存在。就显现名言量而言，可以毫不犹豫地说，地道、佛陀和有情等，基、道、果的无量显现都是显而易见存在的。然而，就安住空性胜义谛而言，在任何情况下，都不可能独立存在存在或显现，因为虽然一切无量显现都是显而易见存在的，但实际上并非如此成立，因此，胜义谛的理性能确定其为空性。因此，有与无，或显现与空性，或世俗谛与胜义谛这两者，无论何时都如水与湿性般，若无一者，另一者也不可能存在；同样，若有一者，另一者也不可能不存在，务必了知这一点，此乃关键之所在。第二，二者力量相等，是真实的
English
Third, summarizing the meaning without contradiction through the ways in which refutation and establishment are shown in the scriptures: Sutras and treatises, etc., are explained in five verses. The so-called Prajnaparamita, the mother of all Buddhas, and the two truths, etc., as well as the sutras that explain the essence, etc., and the great treatises, the "Collection of Reasoning" of the noble Nagarjuna's Madhyamika and the "Praise of Dharmadhatu," etc., and the great bodhisattvas of the ten bhumis, in all the scriptures such as the Prajnaparamita and the Uttaratantra, etc., whatever aspects of refutation and establishment are taught, from those teachings, some are based on the ultimate truth of reality, asserting that all dharmas of the ground, path, and fruition are empty or non-existent; others are based on the conventional appearance of phenomena, asserting that all dharmas of the ground, path, and fruition are existent. That is to say, if only based on the ultimate truth of reality, then the five paths and ten bhumis, as well as Buddhas and sentient beings, in short, all dharmas encompassed by the ground, path, and fruition, are primordially pure, hence empty or non-existent, and it is permissible to say so without hesitation. However, in terms of conventional appearance, it is impossible for non-existence or emptiness to exist independently in any way, because even though it is non-existence or emptiness, the arising of dependent origination does not cease, therefore, all aspects of appearance of samsara and nirvana encompassed by the ground, path, and fruition are manifestly and infallibly established as existent. In terms of valid cognition of conventional appearance, it is reasonable to say without hesitation that the paths and bhumis, Buddhas and sentient beings, etc., all the myriad appearances of the ground, path, and fruition are manifestly existent. However, in terms of the ultimate truth of emptiness, it is impossible for existence or appearance to exist independently in any way, because although all the myriad appearances are manifestly existent, they are not established as such in reality, therefore, the ultimate truth's reasoning can ascertain that they are empty. Therefore, existence and non-existence, or appearance and emptiness, or the two truths of conventional and ultimate, are at all times like water and its moisture, if one is absent, the other cannot exist; similarly, if one exists, the other cannot be non-existent, it is essential to understand this, as it is the key point. Second, both are equally powerful, being true
Chinese
辩论的驳斥是，以“二者力量相等”等十个偈颂来阐述。以各自衡量二谛的正量所获得的显现空性或二谛成立，如果力量相等或地位相同而成为真实，那么所有世俗事物都不会是空性，而是会变成胜义谛吗？二谛从原始以来就不是自性成立的，因此在空性上是平等或相同的。显现的世俗和空性的胜义二者，并非自性或实义上成立为不同的，因此，凡是显现的，其自性就是空性，所以事物怎么会不是空性呢？不是的。因为二谛显现为相同，所以显现空性二谛也必定成立为相同而空。如果显现本身不存在，又怎么知道它是空性的呢？不会知道的。因为凡是不显现的，也无法证悟为空性。因此，显现和空性二者不仅不互相矛盾，而且互为因果，即空性是缘起，缘起显现为空性，如果显现和空性中的任何一个存在，另一个也像火和热一样不可分离地存在。当内心深处生起这种定解时，显现和空性在任何时候都原本没有分离的意义上的所有疑惑之网都会被斩断。因此，显现和空性二者之间，任何一个都没有不被另一个遍及的，所以，凡是显现的，就一定是空性，凡是空性的，就一定是显现，因此，无论如何衡量显现和空性二者，都没有矛盾，所以这样观察是真实的，即凡是显现的就是空性，空性就是显现。色即是空。空即是色。色不异空。空不异色。如是说。也就是说，如果知道色等显现本身是空性的，就能证悟显现本身并非真实成立，而是空性的。如果知道空性显现为色等，或者说是显现，也不会认为空性是真实存在的，因此不会执着，从而也能证悟空性是无自性的。因此，显现和空性是不可分离的。