Chinese
我不赞同。如果说从他者产生，那么他者是从常还是无常产生？如果说从常产生，那么常不适宜作为产生者的因，因为因不变化，所以不可能产生果。如果产生，常就会坏灭。如《二谛论》所说：事物变为其他，智者称之为无常。如果说从无常产生，那么是从过去、未来、现在哪个时间产生？过去已经用完因果，所以不适宜产生。未来还没有产生，所以不适宜作为产生者。如果从现在产生，那么果是从与自己同时产生，还是不同时产生？同时产生不适宜作为所生和能生。如果不同时，因果没有相遇，所以不应产生。如果说从二者产生，也不赞同，因为因果二者如果是同一体性，或者异体二者相互是一，那么一和一是相违的。而且自他各自产生已经被否定，所以从二者产生也被否定。就像每一粒沙子没有产生酥油的能力，沙子堆积的集合体也没有这种能力一样。如果说从无因产生，那么在任何地方也没有用量度见到这样产生的，否则，天空也会产生莲花。因此，因为从四边产生都被否定，所以，虽然看起来像是产生，但产生并没有真实成立。如《根本慧论》所说：不是从自产生，不是从他产生，不是从二者产生，不是无因产生。在任何事物中，产生都从来没有存在过。再说，第二点不成立，如果说是时间突然出现，那么这个突然出现是有因缘而产生，还是没有因缘也产生？如果认为是有因缘而产生，那么因缘是从自还是从他产生，考察方法和之前一样。没有因缘不可能产生，因为能生之因的自性没有成立，他者能生的能力也空耗。凡是果出现的地方，都遍及先前存在的因，所以突然出现就被破坏了。就像《释量论》所说：因为无因不依赖于缘，所以恒常存在也应成为不存在。再说，第三点不成立，如果说是他者所作，那么作者是常还是无常？如果是常
English
I do not agree. If it is said to arise from other, then does that other arise from permanence or impermanence? If it is said to arise from permanence, then permanence is not suitable as the cause of production, because the cause does not change, so it is impossible to produce the effect. If it produces, permanence will be destroyed. As it is said in the Two Truths: When things change into other, the wise call it impermanence. If it is said to arise from impermanence, then from which of the three times does it arise? The past has already used up the cause and effect, so it is not suitable to produce. The future has not yet arisen, so it is not suitable as a producer. If it arises from the present, then does the effect arise simultaneously with itself, or not simultaneously? Simultaneous production is not suitable as what is produced and what produces. If not simultaneous, the cause and effect do not meet, so it should not arise. If it is said to arise from both, it is also not agreed, because if the two causes and effects are of the same nature, or if the two different entities are mutually one, then one and one are contradictory. Moreover, the arising from self and other separately has been negated, so the arising from both is also negated. Just as each grain of sand does not have the ability to produce butter, the aggregate of sand also does not have that ability. If it is said to arise from no cause, then nowhere has it been seen by valid cognition that it arises in this way, otherwise, lotuses would also arise from the sky. Therefore, because arising from the four extremes is negated, although it seems like arising, arising is not truly established. As it is said in the Root Wisdom: Not from self, not from other, not from both, not from no cause. In whatever things, arising has never existed. Furthermore, the second point is not established, if it is said that time suddenly appears, then does this sudden appearance arise from a cause and condition, or does it arise even without a cause and condition? If it is thought to arise from a cause and condition, then from self or other does the cause and condition arise? The method of investigation is the same as before. It is impossible to arise without a cause and condition, because the self-nature of the cause of production is not established, and the ability of the other to produce is also wasted. Wherever the effect is seen, it is pervaded by the previously existing cause, so the sudden appearance is destroyed. As it is said in the Commentary on Valid Cognition: Because without cause it does not depend on conditions, therefore, being eternally existent should also become non-existent. Furthermore, the third point is not established, if it is said that it is done by another agent, then is the agent permanent or impermanent? If it is permanent
Chinese
如果说是由某物所造，那么，这个事物，因为是常法，所以没有作用的能力。凡是没有作用能力的事物，就遍及不是作者，比如瓶子。如同兔子的角一样。如果说是由无常的事物所造，那么，因为它是刹那变化的，过去和未来二者都是非实有的，所以不适合作为作者。如果现在的事物在产生的同时与所生之物同时作用，则没有利益和帮助。如果时间不同步而作用，因为能作和所作没有相遇，所以不适合作为作者。又有人说，不是从因缘产生，也不是由作者所造，也不是偶然在某个时候产生，但是，这些事物产生后存在，是谁也无法阻止的。如果这样，第四个观点就不成立了。瓶子，没有真实的自性，因为远离了一和多。就像《中观光明论》中所说：自身和他者的这些事物，因为远离了真实的一和多的自性，所以没有自性，如同影像一般。如果说理由不成立，那么，瓶子本身是一个存在，还是多个存在？如果是一个存在，那么，是带有部分存在，还是没有部分存在？如果带有部分存在，就不能成立一个，如同星星的集合一样，会变成多个。如果认为没有部分，那也不成立，因为它具有六个方位的分。这个粗大的显现将会消失。正如《二十颂》中所说：六者同时结合时，极微尘会变成六个部分。如果这六个部分也是一个方向，那么，整体也会变成微尘。如是说。如果又是多个存在，那么多个是依赖于一个，还是不依赖？如果不依赖，因为周遍的一个不成立，所以被周遍的多个也不成立，如同数字的位置一样。如果依赖，就会变成一个，因为是依赖而成立的，就像执火者看到火是一个一样。因此，凡是远离一和多的戏论的事物，就遍及没有自性，如同虚空一样。第二，以不共的理证来成立远离戏论的本身，是显现自性的因，是任运成就的。上面的远离戏论的事物，是显现自性的因，是任运成就的，因为仅仅从显现的角度来观察，也不是真实成立的，仅仅是显现的程度没有停止。
English
If it is said to be made by something, then, that thing, because it is permanent, has no ability to function. Whatever has no ability to function is pervaded by not being a maker, like a pot. It is like a rabbit's horn. If it is said to be made by an impermanent thing, then, because it is momentary and changing, the past and future are both unreal, so it is not suitable as a maker. If the present thing acts simultaneously with the thing being produced, there is no benefit or help. If it acts at different times, because the agent and the object do not meet, it is not suitable as a maker. Again, someone says, it does not arise from causes and conditions, nor is it made by a maker, nor does it arise suddenly at some time, but these things arise and exist, and no one can prevent them. If so, the fourth point is not established. The pot does not have true nature, because it is separate from one and many. As it is said in the Madhyamaka Light: These things of self and other, because they are separate from the true nature of one and many, have no nature, like an image. If the reason is not established, then, does the pot itself exist as one, or does it exist as many? If it exists as one, does it exist with parts, or without parts? If it exists with parts, it cannot be established as one, like a collection of stars, it will become many. If it is considered without parts, it is not established, because it has six directional parts. This coarse appearance will disappear. As it is said in the Twentieth Stanza: When six are joined together at once, the finest particle will become six parts. If these six parts are also one direction, then the whole will also become fine particles. So it is said. If it is many, then do the many depend on one, or not depend? If they do not depend, because the pervasive one is not established, the pervaded many are also not established, like the position of numbers. If they depend, they will become one, because they are established by dependence, just as the fire appears as one to the fire-holder. Therefore, whatever is free from the elaboration of one and many is pervaded by being without nature, like space. Secondly, to establish that the freedom from elaboration itself is the cause of the nature of appearance, spontaneously accomplished, by uncommon reasoning. The above freedom from elaboration is the cause of the nature of appearance, spontaneously accomplished, because even if observed only from the perspective of appearance, it is not truly established, and the extent of appearance has not ceased.
Chinese
那么，显现和空性之间有关联吗？如果有关联，那就是成立的。如果没有关联的性质，那就是不产生的因果。如果说没有关联，那么，在基础时，就成了不是法和法性；在道时，就成了依止二资粮的相续是不同的；在果时，就成了二身自性互相舍弃，因为显现和空性没有关联。如果承认，那么，《广大》中说：“无有之中显现种种，一切皆从智慧界中生。”的教证就清楚了。凡是无关联的，都遍及事物互相舍弃，如柱子和瓶子一样。第二，从“པ་ར་མཱརྠ་སཏྱ་”这个词来说，“པ་ར་མ་”是殊胜，“ཨརྠ་”是意义，“སཏྱ་”是真实，殊胜是修所生的等持智慧，以及与之相应的明觉后得。意义是：成为它的行境的空性，以及与之相应的无遮遣的自性之空性。因为它不被其他明觉所损害，所以是真实的。或者，在《中观明句论》中说：“意义也是它，殊胜也是它，所以称为胜义。它本身是真实的，所以称为胜义谛。”因此，意义、殊胜和真实三者被认为是基础相同的集合。第三，共同者们将戏论部分断除的多种胜义，和戏论全部断除的非多种胜义分为两种。这里，《道次第》中说：“义胜五果智慧界，七和三故胜义谛。”因此，七是：本来明觉身语意功德事业界和智慧的自性任运成就。它本身说：“方便的见行大者，无上乘法之殊胜，胜义之中有七宝。”这七种如果归纳起来有三种：自性胜义，智慧胜义，果胜义。第一是：一切法的自性，远离戏论的实相，即是界。第二是：通达意义，远离对所知之障碍遮蔽，即是智慧。第三是：身语意功德事业五者。这些也是自性和果显现与未显现，以及果和智慧总别，和自性。
English
So, is there a connection between appearance and emptiness? If there is a connection, then it is established. If there is no characteristic of connection, then it is the cause and effect of non-arising. If you say there is no connection, then, at the time of the ground, it becomes not dharma and dharmata; at the time of the path, it becomes that the continuums relying on the two accumulations are different; at the time of the fruit, it becomes that the two kayas' natures mutually abandon each other, because appearance and emptiness have no connection. If you accept that, then the scripture in the Extensive [Sutra] clarifies: "Within non-existence, various appearances arise; all come from the realm of wisdom." Wherever there is no connection, it pervades that things mutually abandon each other, like a pillar and a pot. Second, from the term "paramārthasatya": "parama" means supreme, "artha" means meaning, "satya" means truth. Supreme is the meditative equipoise wisdom arising from meditation, and the subsequent awareness and subsequent inference that correspond to it. Meaning is: the emptiness that has become its object, and the emptiness with the characteristic of non-affirming negation that corresponds to it. Because it is not harmed by other awarenesses, it is truth. Or, in the Clear Words on the Middle Way, it says: "Meaning is also that, supreme is also that, therefore it is called ultimate meaning. That itself is truth, therefore it is called ultimate truth." Therefore, meaning, supreme, and truth are considered to be a collection with the same basis. Third, common ones divide ultimate truth into two: the manifold ultimate truth where elaboration is partially cut off, and the non-manifold ultimate truth where all elaboration is cut off. Here, in the Stages of the Path, it says: "The five supreme meanings, the fruit, the wisdom realm, are the ultimate truth because of seven and three." Therefore, the seven are: the spontaneously accomplished nature of primordial awareness, kaya, speech, mind, qualities, activity, realm, and wisdom. It itself says: "The great view and practice of skillful means are superior to the unsurpassable vehicle; in ultimate truth, there are seven treasures." These seven, when categorized, are three: the ultimate truth of nature, the ultimate truth of wisdom, and the ultimate truth of fruit. The first is: the nature of all dharmas, the reality free from elaboration, which is the realm. The second is: understanding the meaning, being devoid of obscurations and veils on the knowable, which is wisdom. The third is: the five of kaya, speech, mind, qualities, and activity. These are also nature and fruit, manifested and unmanifested, and fruit and wisdom, general and specific, and nature.