Chinese
驳斥他人的回答，确立自己的回答，以及消除他人对此的争论。首先，有些人说：这部《总集》不是续部的意义，因为它是历史的总结。即使是总结者所说，也不能算是宣说续部，所以也不需要提问。这是对续部意义的无知。因为“从身语意功德事业金刚中提取”所以是续部的意义。谁说的呢？是导师说的。那么，不需要提问吗？有些人说：理由不成立，因为是对不共的眷属，不是以他人的意愿来提问而宣说的。那么，第二品就没有必要了，因为既提问又宣说了续部的意义。这样说是不周遍的，因为对共同的眷属天人等，在第二品中是提问后宣说的。这样说也是非常错误的，因为天人等共同的眷属不是导师真正的眷属。第二灌顶秘密灌顶只授予不共的俱生眷属。第二是杰塔巴说：在色究竟天聚集了讨论的基础，提问后详细宣说了续部的意义，总结者在色究竟天显示意义，听闻者听闻，所以没有导师不必要的过失。听闻者在马拉雅山顶以历史的方式总结成文字，对五种具种姓者，由总结者宣说，所以也不需要提问。又是佛 কীর底说：这部《总集》是应该完全了解的事物，是续部的意义吗？如果不是，那就不是。对此有两个理由：因为总结了讨论的基础，所以不会变成续部的意义。以及“金刚秘密的词语”这些词语是总结者所说的。作为象征的文字是续部的续部意义吗？如果是，那就是。在色究竟天聚集了讨论的基础，提问后宣说了续部的意义，这与金刚手菩萨的总结没有矛盾。第三是消除争论：争论和消除争论。首先，如果是这样，那么作为象征的文字续部和作为象征应该完全了解的事物这两者，没有关系，因为续部意义的是与不是两者具有相违的性质，就像黑暗和光明一样。第二
English
Refuting others' answers, establishing one's own answers, and eliminating others' disputes about it. First, some say: This compilation is not the meaning of the tantra, because it is a summary of history. Even if the compiler speaks, it is not considered expounding the tantra, so there is no need to question. This is ignorance of the meaning of the tantra. Because it is "extracted from body, speech, mind, qualities, activity, and vajra," it is the meaning of the tantra. Who said it? The teacher said it. So, is there no need to question? Some say: The reason is not established, because it is to the uncommon retinue, not questioning according to others' wishes but declaring it. Then, the second chapter would be unnecessary, because it both questions and declares the meaning of the tantra. Saying this is not pervasive, because to the common retinue of gods and humans, etc., it is declared after questioning in the second chapter. Saying this is also very wrong, because the common retinue of gods and humans, etc., are not the teacher's actual retinue. The second empowerment, the secret empowerment, is only conferred on the uncommon, co-emergent retinue. Second, Je Takpa said: In Akanishta, the basis of discussion is gathered, and after questioning, the meaning of the tantra is extensively declared. The compiler shows the meaning in Akanishta, and the listener hears it, so there is no fault of the teacher being unnecessary. The listener summarizes it into words in the manner of history on the summit of Malaya, and to the five with lineage, it is spoken by the compiler, so there is no need to question. Again, Buddha Kirti said: This compilation is the object to be fully understood, is it the meaning of the tantra? If not, then it is not. There are two reasons for this: because the basis of discussion is summarized, it will not become the meaning of the tantra. And the words "vajra secret words" are spoken by the compiler. Is the symbolic letter the tantra's tantra meaning? If so, then it is. In Akanishta, the basis of discussion is gathered, and after questioning, the meaning of the tantra is declared, which is not contradictory to Vajrapani's summary. Third is eliminating disputes: disputes and eliminating them. First, if this is the case, then the symbolic letter tantra and the object to be fully understood as a symbol, these two have no relation, because the meaning of the tantra being or not being are two contradictory qualities, like darkness and light. Second
Chinese
也概括了这些观点。父母的业和体验，以及这些词语，虽然文字有先后，但同时被宣说。这是因为这个缘故。因此，如果先进入的两种解释在前，而排列的两种解释在后，会更容易理解。这里有些人说，对于同时存在者，虽然不需要灌顶，但为了区分意义而给予灌顶。但事实并非如此，可以通过秘密灌顶的定义来理解。因为，通过说“那”，如来亲自知道一切本来就是佛。因此，秘密灌顶被认为是日月物质的特殊性，即使无分别的智慧升起，因为尚未体验到导师无别的智慧，所以称为秘密灌顶。对此，有些人认为智慧和知识的灌顶也应包括在内，因为二元对立的智慧在这里也是秘密的。一般来说，在建立定义时，过于宽泛、过于狭窄以及在定义对象上不存在的情况都是缺陷。但在这里，对于定义来说，这些不是缺陷。如果用不了解的誓言来指责，那是不普遍的，因为智慧和知识不是通过日月物质来区分的，所以集合在理由上的部分缺陷不会造成损害。还有，这里有些人认为导师父母给予秘密灌顶是不合理的，因为特殊的作用法，即灌顶的物质不存在。当被告知那是不存在的，无法成立时，他们辩称灌顶的物质不存在，因为导师父母不存在于粗糙的身体中。依赖于此的日月也不存在，就像没有墙壁就没有依赖于它的图画一样。这是不普遍的，即使粗糙的身体不存在，导师父母仍然存在于智慧幻化身中，因此依赖于此的日月给予灌顶。正如在《灌顶决定》中所说：从所依处脉和明点中，显现为智慧幻化身。因此宣说了。第二，智慧和知识，第三，大乐，这两者共同宣说，或者，从宣说生起之因的秘密灌顶开始，直接展示两种灌顶的作用，即生起菩提心。正如《交合经》中所说：通过引发五种心的讨论的作用。因此宣说了。其中，将三者作为历史来讲述，是结集者的连接。
English
It also summarizes these views. The deeds and experiences of the parents, and these words, although the letters are in sequence, were spoken simultaneously. This is because of this reason. Therefore, it would be easier to understand if the two explanations that enter first are in the front, and the two explanations that are arranged are in the back. Here, some say that although empowerment is not necessary for those who are co-existent, it is given to distinguish the meaning. But this is not the case, it can be understood by the definition of secret empowerment. Because, by saying "that", the Tathagata himself knows that everything is originally Buddha. Therefore, secret empowerment is considered a special characteristic of the substance of the sun and moon, even if non-conceptual wisdom arises, it is called secret empowerment because the teacher's non-dual wisdom has not yet been experienced. To this, some argue that the empowerment of wisdom and knowledge should also be included there, because dualistic wisdom is also secret here. In general, when establishing a definition, being too broad, too narrow, and not existing on the defined object are all defects. But here, for the definition, these are not defects. If it is blamed with an unknown vow, it is not universal, because wisdom and knowledge are not distinguished by the substance of the sun and moon, so the partial defect of the collection on the reason does not cause harm. Also, here some argue that it is unreasonable for the teacher parents to give secret empowerment, because the special action, the substance of empowerment, does not exist. When told that it does not exist and cannot be established, they argue that the substance of empowerment does not exist, because the teacher parents do not exist in a coarse body. The sun and moon that depend on it also do not exist, just as there is no picture depending on it if there is no wall. This is not universal, even if the coarse body does not exist, the teacher parents still exist in the wisdom illusory body, so the sun and moon depending on it give empowerment. As it is said in the Empowerment Determination: From the abiding place, the channels and bindus, it appears as a wisdom illusory body. Therefore it was proclaimed. Second, wisdom and knowledge, and third, great bliss, these two are proclaimed together, or, starting from the secret empowerment that shows the cause of generation, directly show the action of the two empowerments, which is the generation of Bodhicitta. As it is said in the Conjunction Sutra: Through the action of initiating the discussion of the five minds. Therefore it was proclaimed. Among them, telling the three as history is the connection of the compilers.
Chinese
哦！关于生起心或实际灌顶，由于注释师的不同，有三种观点：如《眼释》所说，自性基的心生起；如“斯帕卡布”所说，行道的心生起；如《广大释》所说，究竟果的心生起。第一种有五种：基义的阿赖耶识于空性之智慧中生起；阿赖耶识于如镜之智慧中生起；染污意于平等性之智慧中生起；意之识于个别分别之智慧中生起；五根门于成所作智之智慧中生起。第一种是：“唉玛霍”，意思是作为基义的阿赖耶识是空性智慧的基，或者说是对如此证悟后，将它的意义付诸实践的道，或者说是那究竟的果。像这样，基、道、果三者结合，下面的四种也应如此理解。“圆满正觉一切之秘密”，意思是智慧普遍扩展，脱离束缚，功德自然成就的胜者们的意念，不是凡夫的境界，下面的四种也是如此。“无生之中”是指为了确定基心本身是无二的，需要渐进的智慧，首先确定一切法自性无生，有三种：确立能立因的法相之体性；确立该因的法相，即周遍的法性；确定所诠释的因属于哪一类。第一种是，心性，是法，是无生的，为什么呢？《眼释》中说：因为不是从其他因缘所生；也不是由其他作者所作；也不是无因缘而突然产生；也不是说如果寻找像这样已生的事物是找不到的，例如如同虚空。第二种是，如果自性宗派说那些因不成立，那么确立那些道理是：那也是，外道数论师说：一切事物都是从因缘所生，所以第一个道理不成立。那么事物是从自身产生，还是从他者产生，还是从二者产生，还是无因而生？如果像第一种那样，生者，因已成立
English
Oh! Regarding the actual generation of mind or empowerment, there are three views due to different commentators: As stated in the "Eye Commentary," the mind generation of the self-nature base; as stated in "Sparkhab," the mind generation of the path of progression; and as stated in the "Extensive Commentary," the mind generation of the ultimate result. The first has five aspects: the foundational meaning of the Alaya consciousness arising in the wisdom of emptiness; the Alaya consciousness arising in the wisdom like a mirror; the afflicted mind arising in the wisdom of equality; the mind's consciousness arising in the wisdom of individual discernment; and the five sense faculties arising in the wisdom of accomplishing activities. The first is: "Emaho," meaning that the Alaya consciousness as the foundational meaning is the base of the wisdom of emptiness, or it refers to the path of putting its meaning into practice after realizing it in this way, or it refers to that ultimate result. In this way, the combination of base, path, and result should also be understood in the following four. "The secret of all perfect Buddhas," means that the thought of the victorious ones, whose wisdom is universally expansive, free from bondage, and whose qualities are naturally accomplished with great results, is not the realm of ordinary people, and the following four are also like this. "From the unborn" refers to the need for gradual wisdom to establish that the base mind itself is non-dual, and first, to establish that all phenomena are naturally unborn, there are three aspects: establishing the nature of the sign of the establishing cause; establishing the characteristic of that sign, which is the pervasive dharma nature; and determining which category the signified sign belongs to. The first is, mind-nature, is dharma, is unborn, why? The "Eye Commentary" says: Because it is not born from other causes and conditions; nor is it made by other authors; nor does it arise suddenly without cause and condition; nor is it that if one searches for such a born thing, it cannot be found, for example, like the sky. The second is, if the self-nature school says that those signs are not established, then establishing those reasons is: that is also, the non-Buddhist Samkhya says: all things are born from causes and conditions, so the first reason is not established. Then, does the thing arise from itself, or from others, or from both, or without cause? If it is like the first, the producer, the cause is established
Chinese
那么，所要产生的果是已经成立的产生，还是未成立的产生？如果按照第一种情况，像幼苗一样的法，就不需要产生，因为在种子中已经成立了。如果这个理由不成立，那么在因成立的时候，果成立的说法就会崩溃。如果已经成立了，那么产生有什么妨碍呢？如果这样，就会太过分了，因本身会产生为因本身。如果承认第一个推论，那么自生就会崩溃。如果是第二种情况，未成立的产生，那么幼苗这个法，就会不是种子的自性，因为具有与未成立和产生相违背的法。这已经被量成立，并且未成立的就遍及不是种子。如果承认，那么自生，也就是认为因果是一个本体的说法就会崩溃。另外，幼苗这个法，在一个意识的对境中，就不会有显现和不显现的两个部分，因为因果是一个本体的缘故。如果是第二种情况，从他产生，那么幼苗这个法，就会从火和煤炭中产生，因为幼苗依赖于火和煤炭，所以是他。有人会说，这个遍及不成立，因为是从转变为因果的他产生他，因为种子产生幼苗是显现的，并且它具有从它产生的能力，并且从它产生它是法性。不是转变为因果的他不会产生他，因为没有人见过从火和煤炭中产生幼苗，并且它没有产生它的能力，并且因果不混淆是法性。如果是这样，那么就像没有见过从火和煤炭中产生幼苗一样，如果遮止了果的产生，那么此生的善恶法，就不会成熟为来世的安乐和痛苦，因为没有见过它的缘故。如果那个遍及不成立，那么在这里，火和幼苗也是一样的。还有，像地和幼苗一样，因为显现了从它产生它，所以成立了果的产生。如果这样，梦中的地和幼苗这个法，就会成立从它产生它，因为在梦中显现了从它产生它的缘故。有人会说，这个遍及不成立，因为在梦中显现了从它产生它，但那是错乱的，所以是虚假的。在醒觉的意识对境中，从它产生它的显现不是错乱的，所以是真实的。如果是这样，意识错乱和不