English
Because appearance and suchness are the subject and suchness. By establishing other appearances, suchness will come, just like analyzing the illusion of a snake, thereby recognizing the rope. Second, if that is the case, wouldn't clinging appearances be inconceivable, and therefore immeasurable? No, those do not need to be measured one by one, establishing one clinging appearance as suchness, everything will be established, because all clinging appearances are of the same kind. For example, if one reed is hollow, then all reeds are also hollow. As it is said, in the Mother Sutra: If one knows the suchness of form, then one will know the outline and extensive explanation of all phenomena. And in the Stages of the Path it says: Dualistic grasping, substantiality, three times' phenomena, all complete in a single instant, seeing that substantiality is truly, knowing everything as it should be. Fourth, the refutation of arguments is: Then, is the individual discriminating thought a delusion or not? The answer is, the wisdom of individual discrimination, is the subject, is not a delusion, if it were, the meaning would not be established, and the arising of discriminating thought would become meaningless. Therefore, here it is acknowledged as non-delusional wisdom. To this, someone says: Because it is non-delusional, it would follow that liberation is effortless, if it is non-delusional but not liberated, then what is the point? Just like the direct perception of the senses. Also, the individual discriminating wisdom that measures by taking clinging appearances as objects, is the subject, it should be a delusion, because it takes the fabricated falsehood itself as the object, just like grasping a yellow conch shell. It needs to be examined, is it said to be taking the Svātantrika school as the object, or taking the basis for establishing selflessness as the object? The first reason is not accepted, and if according to the second, then the pervasion is not established, because the measured itself, through the cause of individual discriminating consciousness, transforms into non-apprehending wisdom in the second instant, because it is cause and effect. That is also said in the "Opening the Eyes of Immaculate Wisdom": Although the nature of the two intervenes, because of cause and effect, on one another. Second, the reason of the measurer, has meaning and determination. The first is, it becomes the method of making the meaning of the subject understood, without establishing the basis of the dispute, but having the function of carrying out both refutation and establishment. As it says in the Stages of the Path: Therefore, the reason
Chinese
名为“事业”。如是说。所有关于理路、理路的陈述，为了理解什么是所要证成的，无论是从定义、本体、特征等方面中的哪一个方面入手，都要详细阐述。如是说。第二，从那之中，“彼之五事、方式与词语”。如是说，有三种：先前出现的五事的理路，随后的五种方式，以及五词的理路。第一，在先前，五身导师通过五语之门，将法性的意义真实地确定于各自的五眷属，这就是五事的理路。如彼处所说：真实的圆满正觉导师，以五身调伏的眷属们，仅仅是那所示现的五语，确定并衡量。如是说。即导师法身以无生义语对眷属智慧海，报身以意表诠释语对成熟海，化身以言说词语对信解海，金刚身以无别金刚眷属以金刚语，现证菩提以胜者海以觉性加持语，真实地进行表达。如彼处所说：如炼、切、磨的金子一般，以五事善加观察后确定。如是说。此处有些人说，在先前，五身的眷属有可衡量之执着显现，还是没有？如果按照第二种说法，那么衡量者理路将变得毫无意义，因为没有可衡量的，如同没有物质的秤一样。如果按照第一种说法，则不合理，因为导师五身的眷属是见道以上的行境，并且见道遍及清净的执着显现，因为见道与执着显现是直接相违的。对于那个回答，早期的人们说，化身的眷属是可以产生执着显现的，因为他是为了调伏清净与不清净二者的目的而行事的。其余四身的眷属没有执着显现，因为在后得时，他们也将一切境视如幻象。因此，五事是随后的证悟的理路的成就支分，而不是相对于先前出现本身而言的理路。有些人这样说。有些人认为，其余四身的眷属也有微细的执着显现，如果不是这样，那么其余四身的眷属就没有必要存在了。自己的宗派是，如果按照后一种说法来承认，则是合理的。
English
It is called "Activity." Thus it is said. All statements about reasoning and logic, in order to understand what is to be proven, whether starting from definition, essence, characteristic, etc., should be elaborated in detail. Thus it is said. Secondly, from that, "The five things, modes, and words of that itself." Thus, there are three: the reasoning of the five things that occurred previously, the five subsequent modes, and the reasoning of the five words. First, in the past, the five-bodied teacher, through the gate of the five speeches, truly established the meaning of the nature of reality for each of their five retinues, which is the reasoning of the five things. As it says there: The truly complete enlightened teacher, to the retinues tamed by the five bodies, only that which is shown by the five speeches, is what establishes and measures. Thus it is said. That is, the Teacher, the Dharmakaya, with the speech of unborn meaning to the retinue of the ocean of wisdom; the Sambhogakaya, with the speech of symbolic intention to the ocean of maturity; the Nirmanakaya, with the speech of words to the ocean of faith; the Vajrakaya, with the Vajra speech to the indivisible Vajra retinue; and Manifest Enlightenment, with the speech of awareness and blessing to the ocean of conquerors, truly communicate. As it says in the former: Like gold that has been refined, cut, and polished, determine it after thoroughly examining it with the five things. Thus it is said. Here, some say, in the past, do the retinues of the five bodies have measurable clinging appearances or not? If according to the second view, then the measuring reasoning becomes meaningless, because there is nothing to measure, like a scale without substance. If according to the first view, it is unreasonable, because the retinues of the five bodies of the teacher are the objects of experience beyond the path of seeing, and the path of seeing is pervaded by pure clinging appearances, because the path of seeing and clinging appearances are directly contradictory. In response to that, the ancients said, the retinue of the Nirmanakaya can have clinging appearances, because he acts for the purpose of taming both pure and impure beings. The retinues of the other four bodies do not have clinging appearances, because even in subsequent attainment, they see all phenomena as illusory. Therefore, the five things are a branch of the reasoning that accomplishes subsequent realization, but not reasoning in relation to the prior occurrence itself. Some say that. Some believe that the retinues of the other four bodies also have subtle clinging appearances, and if not, then the retinues of the other four bodies would be unnecessary. Our own system is that it is reasonable to accept the latter view.
Chinese
我认为是这样。这样做的理由是，执着显现的理解是，以心的污垢对法性的意义妄加分别好坏。从中，细微和粗大的恶分别通过见修行来断除。对于总是依赖于两者的好分别，或者说，对于极其细微的所知障，因为最终在道上也是存在的，所以还需要继续保持禅定，并且需要像金刚一样的对治禅定来摧毁它。就像《道次第》中所说的那样，“摧毁潜伏的习气”，这很明显。第二，对于根器极其敏锐的人来说，以这些显现和声音为代表，将先前通过五种事物确定的五身之语的方式理解为五种方式的论证。就像它本身所说的那样，“对于具有证悟的智慧，各种事物、心、秘密、咒语，因为是确定的教证，所以显示了法的规律。像说话一样传递信息，因为是自性所说，所以对于未来的意义是确定的论证。”也就是说，与导师法身、报身、现证菩提身、金刚身、化身之语和方式相符的论证依次是：无生意义的论证，象征无生的虚空；意旨表诠的论证，识别遮蔽的镜中影像；自证显现的论证，无分别自明的太阳精华；无别金刚的论证，声音和空性无别的岩石；所说之词的论证，一切皆悦耳的梵音。第三，先前五种方式本身以词语直接表达就是五词论证。也就是说，法身的词语是显示无生自显的词语和文字。同样，报身的委婉意旨表诠，化身的引导传承，金刚身的无别金刚，现证菩提的智慧，都是显示自显的词语和文字。就像《道次第》中所说的那样，“本体显现词语自显词，委婉意旨词语和引导词，欲求缘起词语和金刚词，自证显现以词语表示。”那么，这里出现了七种语，那么如何像语一样转变呢？
English
I think so. The reason for this is that the understanding of clinging appearance is that the meaning of Dharmata is falsely distinguished as good or bad by the defilements of the mind. From this, both subtle and coarse evil thoughts are abandoned through seeing, meditation, and practice. For the good thoughts that always rely on both, or for the extremely subtle obscurations of knowledge, because they ultimately exist on the path as well, it is still necessary to continue to maintain Samadhi, and it is necessary to destroy it with a Vajra-like antidote Samadhi. As it is said in the Lamrim, "Destroying the latent habits," this is clear. Secondly, for those with extremely sharp faculties, taking these appearances and sounds as examples, understanding the way of the speech of the five bodies, which were previously determined by the five objects, as the five ways of reasoning. As it says itself, "For the wisdom with realization, various objects, mind, secret, mantra, because it is a definite teaching, it shows the law of Dharma. Like speaking, it conveys information, because it is spoken by nature, so for the future meaning, it is a definite argument." That is, the arguments that are in accordance with the speech and manner of the Teacher Dharmakaya, Sambhogakaya, Abhisambodhikaya, Vajrakaya, and Nirmanakaya are, in order: the argument of the meaning of non-arising, the sky symbolizing non-arising; the argument of implied meaning, the image in the mirror identifying obscurations; the argument of self-awareness manifestation, the essence of the sun, self-illuminating without conceptualization; the argument of indivisible Vajra, the sound and emptiness indivisible rock; the argument of the spoken word, the Brahma sound pleasing to all. Thirdly, the five previous ways themselves being directly expressed in words are the five-word arguments. That is, the words of Dharmakaya are the words and letters that show the unborn self-appearance. Similarly, the implied meaning of Sambhogakaya, the guiding transmission of Nirmanakaya, the indivisible Vajra of Vajrakaya, the wisdom of Abhisambodhikaya, are all words and letters that show self-appearance. As it is said in the Lamrim, "The essence of appearance, words of self-appearance, implied meaning words and guiding words, desire-cause words and Vajra words, self-awareness manifestation is represented by words." So, here seven speeches have occurred, so how does it transform like speech?
Chinese
有些人将之归纳为自显法身之语，但此处如那塘派一般，将二者都归纳为表诠之语为好。如果将这些也归纳，则有无需观察而理解和需要观察而理解。第一种是四身之理，因为不依赖观察就能理解意义。第二种是化身之理，因为必须依赖观察才能理解意义。如《道次第》中所说：“如是虽多若摄为二，四随不观一则随观。”这二者的差别是：对于根器敏锐者，不隐晦之义不依赖观察而直接显示，这是无需观察；对于根器迟钝者，依赖观察而间接显示意义，这是需要观察之理。第一种，比如对于想看黄金的人，直接展示黄金一样。如《道次第》中所说：“是故观金如金般，自故作事不缘故，莫寻思择缘执着，说彼性故见彼性。”如果对于无需观察之理，该理的相违与所量相符还是不符？相符，否则不成立理的说法。那么，无需观察是否退失？没有过失，因为衡量方式理解迅速，所以此处被认为是无需观察。后者需要观察的，有词义相符和不相符之理。第一种也有含义和分类两种。第一种是，如共同乘一般，所立之义与理二者不相违背而确定，这是词义相符之理。第二种，有量论经文和字同义异之理。第一种也有含义和确定两种。第一种是，词义二者如经文中著名一般而确定。第二种，有四种证悟、三种清净、四种平等、大自在之理等四种。第一种是，如《此论》中所说：“因一与字句之理，加持与现量，以四种证悟，一切现证大王。”四种证悟中，因一是指：轮回涅槃二者，有法，因一，因为。