Chinese
什么作为基础而退转？如果说是从像驴子一样的东西退转，那么就将那个本身作为有法，为什么是驴子呢？如果说是由于迟钝才是驴子，那么所有迟钝的东西都会变成驴子。像这样对所有有法进行考察，与之前的理路相似。所谓“无灭”是指，有三或四种理路可以成立显现无灭，因为有这种虚假的显现存在。由于存在一个真实的智慧显现，所以成立无灭。如果不存在显现，就会有无法了解胜义谛的过失。由于存在一个真实的智慧显现，所以成立无灭。所有这些显现，甚至连遍知者的手也无法阻挡，因为它们是自显现而存在的。由于存在一个真实的智慧显现，所以成立无灭。因为在所有自证中，力量不会停止地自显现。由于存在一个真实的智慧显现，所以成立无灭，这是第四个。第一个例子是，比如在一条花色的绳子上，由于天空只有灰色的光芒而不清晰，突然产生的蛇的错觉，是因为存在由血肉之躯产生的众生蛇的错觉的基础。如果没有真实的蛇，就不会产生蛇的错觉。同样，在所知的自性中，存在着作为错觉基础的、真实的智慧显现，它无偏颇地显现。因此，也产生了这种虚假的显现。如果没有真实的智慧显现，就不会产生这种虚假的显现，因为两者都存在而显现。如果有人说，即使存在这种虚假的显现，如果没有真实的智慧显现会怎么样呢？那么闻思修的修持就会变得毫无意义。如果承认这一点，那么从这段话中就可以清楚地看出：通过闻思修的结合，自生的一切都会自然而然地成就。第二种情况是，如果没有显现，就会导致无法了解胜义谛。为什么呢？因为显现不会产生，因为它是单方面的空性。如果后面的理由不成立，那么胜义谛是通过名言的意识来了解，还是通过明智的意识来了解呢？如果通过名言来了解，那么普通人也会变成见到真谛的人。为什么呢？因为名言的错觉意识能够了解离戏论的缘故。如果承认这一点，那么
English
What is the basis for turning away? If it is said to turn away from something like a donkey, then take that itself as the subject. Why is it a donkey? If it is said to be a donkey because of dullness, then everything dull would become a donkey. Like that, examine all subjects; it is similar to the previous reasoning. As for "without cessation," there are three or four reasonings to establish that appearance is without cessation, because this mere deluded appearance exists. Because there is also one appearance of true wisdom, cessationlessness is established. If there were no appearance, there would be the fault of not being able to understand ultimate reality. Because there is also one appearance of true wisdom, cessationlessness is established. All these appearances cannot be blocked even by the hand of the all-knowing one, because they appear and exist by themselves. Because there is also one appearance of true wisdom, cessationlessness is established. Because in all self-awareness, the power appears by itself without ceasing. Because there is also one appearance of true wisdom, cessationlessness is established, and that is the fourth. The first is, for example, on a variegated rope, due to the sky being only a dim gray light and not clear, the knowledge of the illusion of a snake suddenly arises. Because there is a basis for the illusion of a snake, a sentient being produced from flesh and blood, the knowledge of the illusion of a snake arises. If there were no real snake, the knowledge of the illusion of a snake would not arise. Similarly, in the nature of knowable things, there is an appearance of true wisdom, which is the basis of illusion, appearing impartially. Therefore, this mere deluded appearance also arises. If there were no appearance of true wisdom, this deluded appearance would not arise either, because both exist and appear. If someone says, even though this mere deluded appearance exists, what if there were no appearance of true wisdom? Then the practice of familiarizing with the path of clinging would become meaningless. If you accept that, it is clear from this very passage: Through the combination of hearing, thinking, and meditating, everything self-born is spontaneously accomplished. The second case is that if there is no appearance, it follows that there is no means of understanding ultimate reality. Why? Because appearance does not arise, because it remains as one-sided emptiness. If the subsequent reason is not established, then is ultimate reality understood by conceptual consciousness or by clear consciousness? If it is understood by conceptual consciousness, then ordinary beings would also become seers of truth. Why? Because conceptual deluded consciousness understands freedom from elaboration. If you accept that, then
Chinese
从这里，“未证悟”一词就清楚了。如果说是通过觉识来了解，那么通过觉识来了解和与胜义谛的真理空性，这两者之间是有联系而了解，还是没有联系而了解？如果是有联系而了解，那么是自性一体，还是从它产生的联系？如果是自性一体的联系，那么以胜义谛的真理空性作为法，则应存在。因为通过觉识来了解和自性是一体的缘故。不是没有显现而消失，而是成为了存在。如果是有它产生的联系，那么是从显现产生空性，还是从空性产生显现？无论从哪个产生，都成为了因果之法，因此不是没有显现而消失，而是存在。如果又说是没有联系而了解，那么你的现在的眼识也应该听到声音。为什么呢？因为即使没有联系也能了解。如果承认，那么不了解这一点是显而易见的。还有一些学习名相的人说，即使没有直接的所知和能知，也有间接的所知和能知。因此，不能说直接的所知和能知没有联系，但可以说间接的所知和能知没有联系。例如，在看到兔子头的时候，就像间接地知道没有角一样，这个显现通过四个伟大的理由来确定，因为显现被遮止，所以间接地知道是空性。如果是这样，如果间接的所知和能知没有联系而了解，那么在看到鼓的时候，也应该听到铜号的声音。为什么呢？因为间接的所知和能知没有联系而了解的缘故。如果承认，那么不了解这一点是显而易见的。第三个是，因为一切显现即使是遍知者的手也无法遮止，而是自显现的缘故。如果说“因为”的理由不成立，那么是遮止了还是没有遮止呢？如果说六道众生的痛苦没有被遮止，那么就矛盾了。如果说是遮止了但没有阻碍，那么诸佛就不具备大悲心了。为什么呢？因为痛苦虽然被遮止了，但没有被阻碍的缘故。如果承认，那么从这里，“生起了大悲心的佛陀的智慧”就清楚了。那么，这个清晰的显现因为即使是遍知者的手也无法遮止的缘故，而成立为无灭的。如果作为第四点，那么自证识在一切时处力量都不停止而自显现
English
From this, the term "unrealized" is clear. If it is said that it is known through awareness, then is the knowing through awareness and the emptiness of ultimate truth known with or without a connection? If it is known with a connection, is the connection one of self-nature or one arising from it? If there is a connection of one self-nature, then the emptiness of ultimate truth, as a subject, should exist. Because knowing through awareness and self-nature are one. It has not disappeared into non-appearance, but has become existent. If there is a connection arising from it, does emptiness arise from appearance or does appearance arise from emptiness? Whichever arises, it has become a dharma of cause and effect, so it has not disappeared into non-appearance, but exists. If, again, it is known without a connection, then your present eye-consciousness should also hear sounds. Why? Because even without a connection, it knows. If you accept this, then the fact that it is not known is obvious. Furthermore, some who have studied characteristics say that even if there is no direct object of knowledge and knower, there is an indirect object of knowledge and knower. Therefore, it is not possible to know that there is no connection between the direct object of knowledge and knower, but it is possible to know that there is no connection between the indirect object of knowledge and knower. For example, when seeing a rabbit's head, just as one indirectly knows that it has no horns, this appearance is established by four great reasons, and because appearance is refuted, it is indirectly known as emptiness. If that is the case, if the indirect object of knowledge and knower are known without a connection, then when seeing a drum, the sound of a copper horn should also be known. Why? Because the indirect object of knowledge and knower are known without a connection. If you accept this, then the fact that it is not known is obvious. The third is that all appearances cannot be refuted even by the hand of the omniscient one, because they are self-appearing. If it is said that the reason of "because" is not established, then has it been refuted or not? If it is said that the suffering of the six realms has not been refuted, then it is contradictory. If it is said that it has been refuted but not prevented, then the Victorious Ones would not possess great compassion. Why? Because although suffering has been refuted, it has not been prevented. If you accept this, then from this very text, "the wisdom of the Buddha of great compassion has arisen" is clear. Therefore, this clear appearance is established as unceasing because it cannot be refuted even by the hand of the omniscient one. If it is taken as the fourth point, then self-awareness appears without the power ceasing at all times and places.
Chinese
因此，如果有人说“因为”这个理由不成立，那是否意味着自性智慧的力量不会停止？如果不是，那就会变得和空虚的物质一样。正如广论中所说：“一切的基础是识，显现为各种事物。”以及“法界万象，无所不知，显现为自性智慧之王。”因此，空性的自光不会停止，它在轮回和涅槃中显现。例如，海洋显现为波浪，太阳显现为光芒的中心。无住、无缘、无来去这三者，阐述了无别的论证：通过例子来否定非，通过例子来肯定是。首先，通过例子来否定非：就像缠绕的黑白线一样，因为显现和空性没有偏颇，所以是无别的。就像瓶子和毯子一样，因为没有不同的实体，所以是无别的。就像事物牛角和非事物兔角一样，因为显现和空性没有差别，所以是无别的。通过例子来肯定是：就像黄金和黄金的黄色一样，论证是无别的。因为玉和玉石的蓝色，以及海洋和波浪的例子，以及虚空和彩虹的方式，证明是无别的。如果将法置于事物之上，瓶子是事物，承诺是无别的。理由是显现和空性两者没有偏颇。如果有人说“因为”这个理由不成立，那么，是在显现上有所偏颇，还是在空性上有所偏颇？如果在显现上有所偏颇，那么，瓶子是事物，将成为常有，因为在显现上有所偏颇。如果承认，那么在《总经》中说：“一切有为法皆是无常。”因此，有为法通过毁灭来阐明。如果在空性上有所偏颇，那么，瓶子显现的可能性将不成立，因为在空性上有所偏颇。如果承认，那么瓶子的显现就阐明了这一点。因此，瓶子显现的可能性不会停止，但自性不会成立，因为这两者没有先后差别，所以证明是无别的。总之，所谓“无生”，是通过四种理智来论证胜义谛无生；所谓“无灭”，是通过四种理智来论证世俗谛无灭；所谓“无住、无缘、无来去”，是通过四种理智来论证无别。也就是
English
Therefore, if someone says "because" this reason is not established, does that mean the power of self-awareness wisdom does not cease? If not, then it would become the same as empty matter. As stated in the extensive text: "The basis of everything is consciousness, appearing as various things." And "The phenomena of the Dharma realm are all-knowing, appearing as the king of self-awareness wisdom." Therefore, the self-light of emptiness does not cease, it appears in all of samsara and nirvana. For example, the ocean appears as waves, and the sun appears as the center of light. The three, no abiding, no object, no coming and going, explain the proof of non-duality: negating the non-existent through examples, and affirming the existent through examples. First, negating the non-existent through examples: Just like intertwined black and white threads, because appearance and emptiness have no bias, they are non-dual. Just like a vase and a blanket, because there are no different substances, they are non-dual. Just like the thing of a bull's horn and the non-thing of a rabbit's horn, because appearance and emptiness are not different, they are non-dual. Affirming the existent through examples: Just like gold and the yellow of gold, the argument is non-dual. Because of the blue of jade and jadeite, and the example of the ocean and waves, and the way of space and rainbows, it is proven to be non-dual. If the Dharma is placed on top of things, the vase is a thing, the commitment is non-dual. The reason is that both appearance and emptiness have no bias. If someone says "because" this reason is not established, then, is there bias in appearance, or is there bias in emptiness? If there is bias in appearance, then, the vase is a thing, it will become permanent, because there is bias in appearance. If you admit it, then it is said in the General Sutra: "All conditioned phenomena are impermanent." Therefore, conditioned phenomena are clarified by destruction. If there is bias in emptiness, then the possibility of the vase appearing will not be established, because there is bias in emptiness. If you admit it, then the appearance of the vase clarifies this. Therefore, the possibility of the vase appearing does not cease, but self-nature is not established, because these two have no prior or subsequent difference, so it is proven to be non-dual. In short, the so-called "no birth" is to argue for ultimate truth no birth through four kinds of intelligence; the so-called "no cessation" is to argue for conventional truth no cessation through four kinds of intelligence; the so-called "no abiding, no object, no coming and going" is to argue for non-duality through four kinds of intelligence. That is