English
Because presence or absence cannot make it impure or pure. If the essence of that Samadhi's wisdom is without defilement, then does it also not have the seed of defilement? Answer: The seed is present in the Alaya, but not in the Samadhi, because it is not the support of the seed. Therefore, the self-nature being pure from defilement is no different from the wisdom of the Buddha. If the self-nature is without obscuration, then it will become omniscient of all knowable objects, because depending on all knowable objects, the self-nature is the pure wisdom. Like the wisdom of the Buddha. If admitted, then will it become omniscient? Answer: It will not become omniscient, because even if the self-nature is pure from defilement, the mind-stream is not pure from defilement. For example, even if the sense of the eye is not touched by an obscuring object, it cannot see forms because it is obstructed by walls, etc. Secondly, clarity means that with the wisdom of knowing the suchness and the extent of things, the characteristics of the two truths of knowable objects are directly known as they are, possessing the appearance of light rays, which is to realize clearly. In the Pramāṇavārttika it says: 'Like fear and so on, through the power of meditating, what is clearly manifest, whatever knowledge is not deceptive, that non-conceptual is direct perception.' Some say: The Samadhi of the Mahayana noble ones does not make appearances the object, as the sutra says: 'The yogi who abides in non-appearance, he sees the Great Vehicle.' Therefore, realizing the nature of non-appearance is like the sky. This is completely not understanding the way the mind engages. Thus, does the Samadhi of the path of seeing directly realize the object, the nature of reality, that is, suchness, or indirectly? If the former, then the object will become something to be abandoned, because it becomes the actual object of direct perception. If the latter, then what is the direct realization that induces indirect realization? Is it directly realizing it as something false, like an illusion? If the nature of these two wisdoms is different, then the direct realization and its indirect realization will contradict each other. If they are the same, then the statement that it does not make appearances the object will fail. If neither directly nor indirectly is realized, then realizing the nature of reality is unreasonable. If realizing it as an illusion, because it makes appearances the object, then afterwards
Chinese
如果说这是后得，那么所有能做到的都将变成后得。这样一来，如果拥有未入定的心，就与“没有未入定的心”相违背。有些人说，像见、修、入定等，以如实知的方式，瑜伽士不会将显现的法作为对境，并且法性不是所知，因此没有对境的证悟。因此，它也不是心，因为对境和有境的戏论已经寂灭。这样说是智慧迷乱。对于见、修、入定的人来说，有意识还是没有意识？如果是前者，如果他没有证悟无我的对境，那就与见、修、入定的意识相违背；如果证悟了，那它就是心，因此违背了誓言。如果是后者，那么对于人来说，没有意识的状态就不会仅仅局限于灭尽定等五种情况，因为即使在不是这五种情况的见、修、入定中也没有意识。如果承认这一点，就与《三十颂》相违背：“意识的生起，除了恒时无意识、两种入定、无心睡眠和昏厥之外。”此外，如果不是心，那就不是等持，因此不适合入定；如果没有证悟无我，就无法断除执著二取的增益；如果不是智慧，就无法成为断除所断种子之对治，因为从二障中解脱的原因是两种智慧：不分别和随行。因为“除了智慧之外，没有其他断除这些的因，因此”说了遮遣。同样，对于知忍一刹那和十六刹那等的分类也是不合理的。如果没有作者，那么新证悟法性、串习已证悟的、以及以其力量清晰地证悟对境等大乘道的分类都将变得无意义。唉，这种恶见的巨大魔障会降临到哪个可怜的人身上？因此，珍视殊胜乘道的人们，应该像远离臭气熏天的泥潭一样远离它。因此，实相是这样的：在资粮道中，闻思的智
English
If it is said that this is post-attainment, then all that can be done will become post-attainment. In that case, if one possesses a mind that is not in equipoise, it contradicts "not possessing a mind that is not in equipoise." Some say that, like seeing, meditating, and entering into equipoise, the yogi who knows things as they are does not make manifest dharmas into objects, and since the nature of reality is not an object of knowledge, there is no realization of an object. Therefore, it is also not mind, because the proliferation of object and subject is pacified. To say this is a wandering of intelligence. For the person who sees, meditates, and enters into equipoise, is there consciousness or not? If the former, if he has not realized the object of selflessness, then it contradicts the consciousness of seeing, meditating, and entering into equipoise; if he has realized it, then it is mind, thus violating the commitment. If the latter, then the state of a person without consciousness will not be limited to the five, such as cessation, because even in seeing, meditating, and entering into equipoise that are not those five, there is no consciousness. If this is admitted, it contradicts the Thirty Verses: "The arising of mind-consciousness is always except for perpetual unconsciousness, the two kinds of absorption, mindless sleep, and fainting." Furthermore, if it is not mind, then it is not samadhi, therefore it is not suitable for entering into equipoise; if selflessness is not realized, then the imputation of grasping at the two selves cannot be severed; if it is not wisdom, then it will not be the antidote to the seeds of what is to be abandoned, because the cause of liberation from the two obscurations is the two wisdoms: non-conceptual and subsequent. Because "other than wisdom, there is no other cause for abandoning these, therefore" it is said to negate. Similarly, the classifications of the single moment of knowledge and forbearance and the sixteen moments, etc., are not reasonable. If there is no agent, then all the classifications of the Great Vehicle path, such as newly realizing the nature of reality manifestly, familiarizing oneself with what has been realized, and clearly realizing objects by its power, will become meaningless. Alas, which unfortunate person will this great demon of wrong view befall? Therefore, those who cherish the supreme vehicle path should abandon it far away like a foul-smelling swamp. Therefore, the reality is this: on the path of accumulation, the wisdom of hearing and thinking
Chinese
萨绕以所有法皆空且无我的体性，善为了解二谛之义，于世间胜法以下，依于禅定的心而修习，于见道中，串习之境明显证悟之瑜伽现前。 导师吉祥隐说： 某些串习禅修者， 以其威力诸法皆无我， 如是见彼即自性， 转变如见事物般。 如是。 此外，此缘起的显现，如虚假幻化般真实证悟，故法界离戏如虚空般间接证悟，为遣除以戏论执持相之增益故。《辨别论》中说： 经历自性特殊者， 他者显现非他者， 是故彼不缘亦然， 较彼特殊者乃缘。 如是。 其中，对于实境显现虚假者，知晓有多少，以及间接断除戏论增益之分，是如所有智之智慧。此二者皆依于止观，心一境性安住是止观与三摩地所摄持，未摄持而散乱于境是后得。 其中，如所有与如所有之现量二者，体性是一，因彼之实证与间接证悟故。 止观与后得二者，体性非一，因有先后故。 此中说： 智慧、智、解脱等， 因明、散、净之故， 无有差别故，如光与芒， 如日之轮等。 如是说。 无分别及其， 后得彼即是智。 如是。 某些将止观之义，作为如所有与如所有之证悟，其他则认为此二者体性非一，此乃以智慧背离经论之义。若将不净与胜者之身一缘安住等，变成非止观，则《学集论》中说： 当勤修止观， 当修不净等。 如是说。 经中说： 如金黄色之身， 世间怙主一切皆美妙， 缘彼境者谁之心入
English
Sarawa well understood the meaning of the two truths, the nature of all phenomena being empty and selfless, and from the supreme mundane dharma downwards, he cultivated based on the mind of meditative concentration, and the yoga of clearly realizing the familiar realm on the path of seeing became manifest. The teacher Pal Sbas said: Some who are accustomed to meditation, By the power of all phenomena being selfless, Seeing it as their own nature, It transforms like seeing things. Thus it is. Moreover, this appearance of dependent origination is actually realized as false like an illusion, so the realm of phenomena, free from elaboration, is indirectly realized like the sky, in order to clarify the imputation of grasping at characteristics with elaboration. In the Discrimination, it says: Experiencing a special nature, The other appearing is not other, Therefore, not focusing on it, Focusing on what is more special than it. Like that. Therein, knowing how much the appearance of the real object is false, and the aspect of indirectly cutting off the imputations of elaboration, is the wisdom of knowing as it is. Both of these, based on calm abiding, the mind abiding in one-pointedness is held by calm abiding and samadhi, and not being held and scattering to objects is subsequent attainment. Therein, the two manifest cognitions of as it is and how many are of one essence, because they are its direct realization and indirect realization. The two, calm abiding and subsequent attainment, are not of one essence, because they are sequential. In this very one, it says: Wisdom, knowledge, liberation, Because of clarity, scattering, and purity, And because there is no difference, like light and rays, Like the circles of the sun. It says. Non-conceptual and its, Subsequent attainment is called knowledge. Thus it is. Some who take the meaning of calm abiding and subsequent attainment as the realization of as it is and how many, and others who think that these two are not of one essence, are simply turning their intelligence away from the meaning of the scriptures. If focusing single-pointedly on the unattractive and the body of the Victorious One, etc., becomes not calm abiding, then in the Compendium of Trainings, it says: One should strive in calm abiding, One should meditate on the unattractive, etc. It says. In the sutra, it says: With a body like the color of gold, The protector of the world is beautiful in every way, Whoever's mind enters that object
Chinese
那么，这与“菩萨即是等持”之说有何矛盾？《现观庄严论》中也说：“白法皆为散乱性，等持二者应了知，此二及二波罗蜜，二者摄尽诸法门。”这说明，禅定和从禅定中生起的智慧，都被包含在等持之中。此外，如果通达无我的闻思智慧也成了等持，那么，了知如所有性和尽所有性的现量本体若不相同，也会被先前的理证所破。如果说，大乘圣者的见道和修道等持，以世俗假象为对境，就会变成错乱，因为它是虚假的对境。就像梦中的意识一样。如果这样说，那也不会有错乱，因为认识到虚假就是虚假，所以意识与实义相符。就像佛陀的尽所有性智一样。如果不是这样，那么缘起的显现就不是世俗中的虚假了，因为认识到世俗中的虚假是错乱的。如果承认这一点，那么经中说：“一切行皆是虚假，具有欺骗的自性。”以及《中观根本慧论》中说：“世尊所说诸法中，凡是能欺诳者即虚妄，一切诸行皆欺诳，是故彼等皆虚妄。”因此，执著虚假为真实，是因为把非彼执为彼，所以是错乱的。但是，认识到虚假就是虚假，就不会变成错乱，因为对境没有损害，而且意识与实义相符。经中说：“世俗分别所安立，断彼即是圣者境。”如果说，这与经中所说的不应以世俗为对境相矛盾，那么，这指的是认识到世俗的自性没有真实，从而以真实来增益，而圣者的等持则是指证悟到这一点。在《摄类学》中说：“诸色不可见，诸受亦不见，想亦无可见，有情不可见，于彼识与心，意亦无可见，是乃见法性，善逝如是说。”如果说，这与经中所说的五蕴不可得相矛盾，那么，这样说也是指无色，也就是色的
English
Then, how does this contradict the saying that "Bodhisattva is Samadhi"? The Ornament also says, "All white dharmas are of a scattered nature, Samadhi and the two should be known, these two and the two Paramitas, the two completely gather all dharmas." This shows that both meditation and the wisdom arising from meditation are included in Samadhi. Furthermore, if the wisdom of hearing and thinking that realizes selflessness also becomes Samadhi, then, if the manifest entities that know the suchness and the extent of suchness are not the same, they will also be refuted by the previous reasoning. If it is said that the Samadhi of the seeing and cultivation of the Mahayana noble ones takes conventional falsehood as its object, it will become confused, because it is a false object. Like the consciousness in a dream. If you say so, it will not be confused, because recognizing falsehood as falsehood, the consciousness is in accordance with the real meaning. Like the Buddha's omniscience. If this is not the case, then the appearance of dependent origination will not be false in the conventional, because recognizing the false in the conventional is confused. If you admit this, then the sutra says, "All actions are false, with the nature of deception." And the Root Wisdom Treatise says, "Among the dharmas spoken by the Blessed One, whatever is deceptive is false, all actions are deceptive, therefore they are all false." Therefore, clinging to falsehood as truth is confused because it takes what is not that as that. However, recognizing falsehood as falsehood will not become confused, because there is no harm to the object and the consciousness is in accordance with the real meaning. The sutra says, "What is established by conventional discrimination, cutting it off is the realm of the noble ones." If you say that this contradicts the sutra which says that one should not take the conventional as the object, then this refers to recognizing that the nature of the conventional does not have truth, thereby increasing it with truth, while the Samadhi of the noble ones refers to realizing this point. In the Compendium of Categories it says, "Forms are invisible, feelings are also invisible, thoughts are invisible, sentient beings are invisible, in them consciousness and mind, intention is also invisible, this is seeing the Dharma nature, the Sugata said so." If you say that this contradicts the sutra which says that the five aggregates are unattainable, then saying so also refers to formlessness, which is the form of