Chinese
仅仅是将智慧和本体，从基础和结果的角度区分开来。虽然前辈们这样说，但又担心基础和结果二者会混淆。因此，我自己的观点是：本体离戏本身，从其自明、无遮蔽的方面来说，是胜义智慧；而这本体上，五种果法原本就任运成就地存在，这就是胜义果。这样说才合适。如果是这样，那么与最终的果位有区别吗？因为“除此之外没有其他可获得的”，所以本体上没有区别。但在显现方式上，存在是否通过道而显现的差别。第四，本体和特征是：自性分为三种方式。第一种是：因的乘的胜义谛被认为是空性离戏的。而这里，因为从空边解脱，显现任运成就地成为本体的因，所以更为殊胜。如《道次第》中所说：“如意树和珍宝一样，这一切都作为本体的因存在。”第二种是：因的胜义谛落入空的一边。而这里，因为没有舍弃显现法，并且不执着于它，所以更为殊胜。如其中所说：“什么也没有舍弃，不执着，因为没有分离，所以称为分离。”第三种是：因的胜义谛如字面意义般地消失，因此加持和觉性不会显现为自显。而这里，因为加持和觉性显现为自显，如天神和宫殿等，所以更为殊胜。如其中所说：“如是性即是法界智慧，是方便手印一切的因。”顺便说一下，关于穿插的辩论的消除是：你们认为离戏的显现成就为本体的因，那么这是生因还是安置因？如果是前者，因为成就为生因，所以会陷入胜义实有，从而失去离戏。如果是后者，因为是胜义所安置的果，所以世俗本身会成为不欺骗的对境。回答是：不舍弃事物，并且不执着于对立面，这就是本体的因，就像水晶与火一样。那么，因为没有舍弃世俗，所以胜义的戏论没有被消除，这是否太过分了？仅仅如此，冷的冰晶会成就为火的本体的因吗？如果不能成就，那么太阳没有过失，天空没有遮蔽的缘
English
It is merely distinguishing between wisdom and essence from the perspective of the ground and the result. Although the earlier scholars said this, there is concern that the ground and result might become confused. Therefore, according to my own system: the very expanse that is free from elaboration, from the aspect of being self-luminous and free from obscurations, is ultimate wisdom; and the five qualities of the result being spontaneously present within that very expanse is the ultimate result. It is appropriate to explain it in this way. If that is the case, is there a difference from the ultimate result? Since "there is nothing else to be obtained beyond that," there is no difference in essence. However, there is a difference in the way it manifests, whether or not it has been made manifest through the path. Fourth, regarding the essence and characteristics: the three ways of naturally abandoning. The first is: the ultimate truth of the vehicle of cause is considered to be emptiness free from elaboration. Here, it is superior because it is liberated from the extreme of emptiness, and appearance spontaneously becomes the cause of the essence. As it says in the Stages of the Path: "Like the wish-fulfilling tree and jewels, all of these exist as the cause of the essence." The second is: the ultimate truth of the cause falls into the extreme of emptiness. Here, it is superior because it does not abandon the phenomena of appearance and is not attached to it. As it says there: "Because it does not abandon anything and is not attached, it is called separation because it is not separate." The third is: the ultimate truth of the cause disappears just like the sound of unborn, so blessings and awareness do not arise as self-appearance. Here, it is superior because blessings and awareness arise as self-appearance, such as deities and palaces. As it says in this very text: "Suchness is the wisdom of the sphere of reality, the cause of all mudras of skillful means." Incidentally, the refutation of incidental debates is: you believe that the appearance of freedom from elaboration is established as the cause of the essence, is this the generating cause or the establishing cause? If it is the former, because it is established as the generating cause, it would be an ultimate entity, and freedom from elaboration would be lost. If it is the latter, because it is the result established by the ultimate, the conventional itself would become the object of non-deceptive engagement. The answer is: not abandoning the substance and not dwelling on the opposite is the cause of the essence, like crystal with fire. Then, since the conventional has not been abandoned, is it not too much that the elaboration of the ultimate has not been eliminated? Just so, does cold crystal become established as the cause of the essence of fire? If it is not established, then the sun has no fault, and the sky has no obscuring condition.
Chinese
那么给予和接受就变得没有意义了，因为没有原因就不依赖于条件。如是说。如果成立，因为没有放弃火的性质，所以冷的玻璃无法阻止燃烧的显现作用，这是错误的。第三，在真谛无别中，有体性、词义、差别、建立四种。第一，不触及任何边际的心性，本来就自然成就为七宝体性的因，这是胜义谛；以及它自身的力量显现为器情、身和智慧的坛城，这是世俗谛。虽然表示的词有先后，但所表示的意义本质是相同的，因此真谛无别，超离了心的作用范围。为了证明这一点，有三种方法。从圣教量来说，就是这部经中说的：两种真谛无别，幻化的喜悦不是不同的。以及在广释中说：胜义和世俗无别，无为显现为有为，有为显现即是金刚。从口诀来说，道次第中说：不作国王的姿态，不做任何改造，自性自然无别。从理证来说，《度母释》中说：否定不是依靠例子，肯定依靠例子，有两种说法。第一种是：就像黑白线缠绕一样，显现和空性没有偏颇；就像瓶子和毯子一样，没有差别；就像实物牛角和非实物兔角一样，显现和空性没有差别，因此成立无别。第二种是：用黄金和黄金的黄色，翡翠和翡翠的蓝色，海洋和海洋的波浪，虚空和彩虹这四个例子来证明无别。嘉瓦永等上师大多认为，有四种理证可以证明无别：两种真谛没有好坏的自性，本质无法区分，居住地不相同，时间没有先后，因此成立无别。如果在这里在同一个共同显现的法上进行证明，那么瓶子作为法，是真谛无别的，因为没有偏向显现和空性的任何一边。如果说理由不成立，那么瓶子是偏向显现的一边吗？还是空性的一边呢？
English
Then giving and receiving become meaningless, because without a cause, one does not rely on conditions. So it is said. If it is established, because the nature of fire is not abandoned, it is wrong that the manifestation of burning cannot be prevented on cold glass. Third, in the inseparability of the two truths, there are four aspects: essence, meaning of words, difference, and establishment. First, the nature of mind that does not touch any extreme, which is naturally accomplished as the cause of the seven treasures, is the ultimate truth; and its own power manifests as the mandala of the vessel and essence, body and wisdom, which is the conventional truth. Although the words that represent them appear in sequence, the meaning of what they represent is the same in essence, so the inseparability of the two truths is beyond the scope of the mind. To prove this, there are three methods. From the scriptures, it is said in this very text: Because the two truths are inseparable, the nature of magical joy is not different. And in the extensive commentary, it says: Ultimate and conventional are inseparable, the unconditioned appears as the conditioned, the appearance of the conditioned is itself vajra. From the oral instructions, the Lamrim says: Without acting like a king, without making any alterations, the nature is naturally inseparable. From reasoning, the Tara commentary says: Negating is not based on examples, and affirming is based on examples, there are two ways of saying it. The first is: Just like black and white threads are intertwined, appearance and emptiness are without preference; just like a vase and a blanket, there is no difference; just like the real horn of a cow and the unreal horn of a rabbit, appearance and emptiness are not different, therefore inseparability is established. The second is: Using the four examples of gold and the yellowness of gold, jade and the blueness of jade, the ocean and the waves of the ocean, the sky and the rainbow, to prove inseparability. Gyalwa Yung and most of the previous masters believe that there are four reasons to prove inseparability: the two truths do not have good or bad nature, their essence is indistinguishable, their dwelling place is not different, and there is no before or after in time, therefore inseparability is established. If here we prove it on the same common appearing phenomenon, then the vase as the subject, is inseparable from the two truths, because it does not fall to either side of appearance or emptiness. If you say that the reason is not established, then does the vase fall to the side of appearance? Or to the side of emptiness?
Chinese
如果堕入哪一边呢？ 如果像第一种情况那样，显现的法如果真实不空，如果空，则会失去显现的面向；如果不空，则显现变成常有实物。如果承认，如《总经》所说：“一切有为法皆无常。” 这样，有为法因坏灭而显现，如瓶子被其他事物破坏时，会放弃自身的状态而变得无常。 就像《总集经》所说：“例如金刚之物，被磨成粉末之后，在风中飘动，它就没有任何自性了。” 此外，如果堕入空性的一边，则瓶子的显现功能无法成立。如果承认，则会累积瓶子的显现。如果显现和空性都没有堕入任何一边，那么如果真谛无别，又有什么可空的呢？无论显现和空性都没有堕入任何一边，都普遍是无别的，就像幻化的马和牛一样。因此，不舍弃显现而从显现的边解脱，不舍弃空性而不执着于空性的边，不舍弃两者而从执着于两者的边解脱。总之，说无别本身也只是为了遣除执着于显现和空性的差别，实际上，也远离了执着于无别，因此称为远离心的行境。就像这里所说：“阿既非空亦非不空，中观亦无所缘。” 以及《道次第》所说：“为了遣除对名称的执着，第二种说法是超越思维和言说的。” 第二，从“毗婆陀”这个词来说，“婆陀”是差别，“毗”是否定词，因为显现和空性都没有堕入任何一边，所以没有差别的意思，不是像互相结合那样，而是两种法不互相舍弃的具有特征的无别。第三，一中无二的无别，遮止二边的无别，本体无别三种。第一，是唯识宗的胜义谛，能取所取无二的自证自明之识。第二，是中观宗的非名言的胜义谛。第三，是密宗的显空双运的宗义。第四，本体、体性，自性如何安立三种。第一，是因乘的二谛成为互相安立，本体堕入诽谤，而在这里
English
If it falls into which side? As in the first case, if the appearing phenomena are truly not empty, if they are empty, then the aspect of appearance is lost; if they are not empty, then the appearance becomes permanent and substantial. If you admit that, as the General Sutra says, "All conditioned things are impermanent." Thus, conditioned things are revealed by destruction, such as when a vase is destroyed by other things, it abandons its own state and becomes impermanent. Likewise, the Sarvasamucchaya says, "For example, if a vajra object is ground into powder and moved in the wind, it has no inherent nature." Furthermore, if it falls into the side of emptiness, then the ability of the vase to appear cannot be established. If you admit that, then the appearance of the vase will accumulate. If neither appearance nor emptiness falls into any side, then if the truth is inseparable, what is empty? Wherever appearance and emptiness do not fall into any side, it is universally inseparable, like illusory horses and cows. Therefore, without abandoning appearance, one is liberated from the extreme of appearance; without abandoning emptiness, one does not cling to the extreme of emptiness; without abandoning both, one is liberated from the extreme of clinging to both. In short, the very statement of inseparability is only to dispel the clinging to the difference between appearance and emptiness, but in reality, it is also free from clinging to inseparability, and is therefore called being beyond the realm of the mind. Just as it says here, "A is neither empty nor not empty, and the Middle Way has no object of focus." And as the Lamrim says, "To dispel clinging to names, the second expression is beyond thought and expression." Second, from the word "Vibheda," "Bheda" means difference, and "Vi" is a negative particle, because neither appearance nor emptiness falls into any side, so there is no meaning of difference, not like combining with each other, but the two dharmas are inseparable with the characteristic of not abandoning each other. Third, the inseparability of one without two, the inseparability of negating the two extremes, and the three inseparabilities of essence. First, it is the ultimate truth of the Mind-Only school, the self-aware and self-illuminating consciousness that is inseparable from the apprehended and the apprehender. Second, it is the non-conceptual ultimate truth of the Madhyamaka school. Third, it is the tenet of the union of appearance and emptiness of the Secret Mantra school. Fourth, essence, characteristic, and how to establish self-nature in three ways. First, the two truths of the causal vehicle become mutually established, and the essence falls into defamation, but here