English
From the arising of wisdom, the wisdom of individual realization appears. From the entering consciousness, the wisdom of accomplishing activities appears. Thus it is said. It also appears in the common treatises in this way. In Candragomin's "Buddha-bhumi Sutra": "Whatever is the alaya-vijnana, that transforms into mirror-like wisdom. That also, in the very nature of the dharmadhatu, clearly manifests its essence. The afflicted mind being transformed, is considered pure equality wisdom. The mind's consciousness being transformed, is called individual discriminating. The five sense consciousnesses being transformed, that is the accomplishment of all purposes." Thus it is. Secondly, some say, does the wisdom of knowledge, in a single instant, perceive or not perceive the phenomena of the past and future? If it is like the second, then it contradicts the Two Truths, which says, "With a single instant of knowledge, pervading the entire sphere of knowable objects." If it is like the first, then because it directly knows the non-existent phenomena of the ceased and the unborn, it would be a mistaken consciousness confused about the object of apprehension. That is not so, because the past has already occurred, the future can occur, and the present is born but not ceased, it is known in a self-luminous, non-grasping way, so there is no fault. Again, if asked whether the wisdom of knowledge knows liberation without having practiced the path, it is said that it does not know. If that is the case, then it would be a fallacy of not being omniscient. Although it knows all that is appropriate or possible to know, liberation without having practiced the path is not appropriate or possible, so it does not know. Therefore, it does not become non-knowing, so what is contradictory? There is no pervasiveness. For example, although the divine craftsman Vishvakarman knows all crafts, he does not know crafts that are not created by conditions because they are impossible. Therefore, although he does not know liberation without having practiced the path, he knows liberation after having practiced the path, according to the order of the faculties, whether near or far. Secondly, the nature of inseparable spontaneous accomplishment is that those twenty-five fruits also arise from the reverse side of the qualities of the six victorious ones, the nature of the five bodies, and because they are included in its qualities, it is the nature of being liberated from one and many. Regarding this, the Gongdu Sutra says: "The Buddha is equally liberated in the sphere, it is spontaneously accomplished in greatness." Also, the Rimsum Sutra says: "The fruit of qualities is spontaneously accomplished, like a wish-fulfilling jewel."
Chinese
显现之故。如是说。第三，地的种类是：此中说：“地的差别有十三。”其中第十地以下是自性，因为是舍弃所舍和生起对治的地。三种是假立，因为最终的果位佛地的本体，从三身的角度而安立三种地的名称。对此，道次第中说：“究竟地从三部分说。”又，黑汝嘎续中说：“于法界智慧生起，普光明。如莲花之眼，无灭受用身。文字轮调伏所化而化现。名为如来地。”如是说。因此，本体上没有差别，但在表达方式上有差别。因为在任何时候，都未被法性边际所遮蔽而显明之义得以显现，所以是普光明，也称为智慧上师地。此时，以方便大悲利益他者，也以无缘智慧的把握，不被罪过的过失所染污而知晓，故为莲花者。此时，一切行境都显现为身和智慧的坛城，而不执着，故为文字轮，大集会地。此中说：“方便和智慧是地的殊胜。”因此是莲花者。一切相好圆满。一切行境都是坛城。二种大集会也圆满受用。如是说，是未共同称说之二地。那么，上师前辈们说普光明是波罗蜜多乘的佛地，莲花者是玛哈瑜伽的，文字轮是阿努瑜伽的地，这有相违吗？没有过失。因为那些是地的分类方式与此不同，不是此处所要说的。如果是这样，从“究竟地从三部分说”的时候所说的法身地智慧上师或普光明，与波罗蜜多乘的第十一普光明二者将成一体。如果那样，道次第中说：“以道的勤作所生之疲劳，为生喜悦故普光明。示现金刚持密集之庄严。究竟地从三部分说。”这样，作为因的乘的普光明，与究竟地三种之中的普光明将成一体，如果这样认为也是不可能的。
Chinese
前文的延续。因此，就像梯子一样，凭借这种巧妙的方法，让其他人依赖其他方法而生起信心，通过转化，依靠自己的方法成就，从获得自己的地位来说，说本体是唯一的，那是黑暗的幻化。如是说的是根续的普光。克里亚的金刚持地，瑜伽的浓厚布置，由于最终的大瑜伽的地的果位有很大的差别，所以认为其他没有差别，那是黑暗的幻化。因此，根的法门的普光咒语道上的任运成就持明者的地，因此也命名为道之法身。中观的堪布圣天说：以根行进的普光，是伟大的方便道之法身，对于圆满正等觉佛陀，如海浪般有力地显现，如水中月影般无有来去，完全依赖于愿力的力量。还有，《禅定明灯》的自释中也说：以中观在劫中修习成就的普光，以愿力慈悲的力量显现色身，无需寻找，自然圆满的伟大的方便二无之五身，安住于轮回和涅槃的法次第的自性中，如海浪般，化身自性化身在自身上显现，那会障碍什么呢？普光是安住之处。那是此处任运成就的真实持明者。如是说。第二，利他事业方面，对所化众生以慈悲观看的方式，观看后生起慈悲的方式，生起后行利他事业的方式。第一方面，有智慧之流断绝而不看的方式，供养而看的方式，远离二边而以无有对境自明的方式看。第一方面，有陈述观点和驳斥观点。第一方面是，一般来说，佛有自性者和假立者两种，自性者是法身，例如，可燃的木柴耗尽，能燃之火的相续不复存在一样，在断除所有粗细的障碍之后，断除对治的智慧也在法界中寂灭，因为所依和能依的智慧之流断绝，所以从能见所见的名称中解脱，因此不看，假立的色身二者是：
English
From the continuation of the previous text: Therefore, it is like a ladder. Through this skillful method, others are made to have faith by relying on other methods. Through transformation, one achieves through one's own method. From the perspective of attaining one's own ground, to say that the essence is the same is a delusion of darkness. It is said that the root luminosity of Kriya, the Vajra Holder's ground, the dense arrangement of Yoga, and the ultimate Maha Yoga grounds have great differences in their fruits. To say that others have no difference is a delusion of darkness. Therefore, the spontaneously accomplished Vidyadhara ground of the mantra path of the root vehicle's all-illuminating light is also named the Dharmakaya of the Path. The Madhyamaka master, Arya Deva, said: 'The all-illuminating light traversed by the root is the Dharmakaya of the great skillful path. For the perfectly complete Buddha, it arises forcefully like ocean waves, without coming or going like a reflection of the moon in water, completely dependent on the power of aspiration.' Also, in the auto-commentary of the 'Lamp for Contemplation,' it says: 'The all-illuminating light, accomplished through eons of practice by Madhyamaka, manifests the Rupakaya through the power of aspiration and compassion. The great skillful non-duality of the five Kayas, complete without searching, abides in the nature of the order of Dharma of Samsara and Nirvana. Like ocean waves, the Nirmanakaya and Svabhavikakaya manifest in themselves. What could obstruct that? The all-illuminating light is the place of abiding. That is the actual spontaneously accomplished Vidyadhara here.' Thus it is said. Secondly, in terms of performing the benefit of others: how one looks at disciples with compassion, how compassion arises after looking, and how one performs the benefit of beings after arising. Firstly, there is the view that one does not see because the stream of wisdom is cut off, the view that one sees through offering, and the view that one sees as self-illuminating without an object, being free from the two extremes. In the first aspect, there is the expression of the view and the refutation of it. The first aspect is that, in general, Buddhas have two aspects: the essential and the imputed. The essential is the Dharmakaya. For example, just as when combustible firewood is exhausted, the stream of the burning fire ceases to exist, similarly, in the space where all subtle and coarse obscurations have been abandoned, the wisdom that is the antidote to abandonment also dissolves into the Dharmadhatu. Because the stream of wisdom of the basis and the based is cut off, one is liberated from the terms of the seen and the seer, therefore one does not see. The two imputed Rupakayas are:
Chinese
据说，仅仅是先前功德之聚不灭的果报，或者愿力的牵引，才会在所化众生前显现。第二种观点是：如果这样，那么，这个智慧本身是从自身中断绝，还是被其他对治中断绝？如果是从自身中断绝，那是不合理的，因为断除了障碍的仅仅是觉性的智慧也是无有穷尽的。如果说在佛地连觉性也不存在，那么，佛就成了无情物。如果说被其他对治中断绝，那也是不合理的，因为不可能存在像金刚喻定一样的对治之法。如果理由不成立，那么对治就成了无有穷尽，那就太过分了。就像《摄类学》中所说：如果无有智慧，菩提就不会增长也不会减退。如同大海一样的佛法也会变得不存在。等等许多经文都对此有妨害。第二部分包括：陈述观点和驳斥观点。第一种观点是：在佛地，以金刚喻定断除了障碍之后，作为遗迹，智慧是连绵不断的。而且，以世俗谛的智慧，能见到境和有境，因此，先前中断的说法被经文所驳斥。第二种观点是：如果这样，那么佛地的智慧就成了错乱识，因为它是以世俗谛为对境的。就像凡夫的意识一样。有人反驳说：这种说法不遍及，虽然显现是境，但并不执着为所执境。那么，佛的智慧就成了只断除了一部分。虽然断除了对所执境的错乱邪见，但没有断除对显现境的错乱邪见。如果承认，那么就与经中所说相违背：殊胜智慧无我性，因为无有显现故不见。第三部分包括：正文和消除诤论。第一点是：我们既不诽谤智慧中断，也不增益说它没有中断。而是以远离这两种边见的自性方式，以无分别自明的方式来观察。就像这里所说：空性无我，原始智慧自性心。无有能取所取，转变忆念之自在。以及《三摩地王经》中所说：涅槃之法中无法，因为彼无故，永无亦不变。有分别者则说有和无
English
It is said that it is only through the fruit of the inexhaustible accumulation of previous merit, or through the force of aspiration, that it appears to those to be tamed. The second point is: If so, does that wisdom itself cease from itself, or does it cease by another antidote? If it ceases from itself, it is unreasonable, because even the wisdom of mere awareness that has abandoned obscurations is endlessly present. If you say that even mere awareness does not exist in the Buddha-land, then the Buddha becomes an inanimate object. If you say that it is cut off by another antidote, that is also not the case, because there is no other Dharma that is an antidote like the Vajra-like Samadhi. If the sign is not established, then the antidote becomes endless, which is too extreme. As it is said in the Compendium: If there is no wisdom, there is no increase or decrease in enlightenment. The Buddha Dharma, like the ocean, will also become non-existent. And so on, many scriptures are harmed by this. The second part includes: stating the position and refuting it. The first view is: In the Buddha-land, after the Vajra-like Samadhi has abandoned the obscurations, as a trace, wisdom is continuous. Moreover, with the wisdom of conventional truth, one sees the object and the subject, therefore, the statement that it was previously interrupted is refuted by the scriptures. The second view is: If so, then the wisdom of the Buddha-land becomes a mistaken consciousness, because it takes conventional truth as its object. It is like the consciousness of an ordinary person. Someone objects: This statement is not pervasive, although the appearance is the object, it is not grasped as the object of attachment. Then, the Buddha's wisdom becomes only partially abandoned. Although the wrong view that is confused about the object of attachment has been abandoned, the wrong view that is confused about the object of appearance has not been abandoned. If you admit it, then it contradicts what is said in the sutra: Supreme wisdom is selfless, because it does not see because there is no appearance. The third part includes: the main text and the elimination of disputes. The first point is: We neither slander that wisdom is interrupted, nor do we add that it is not interrupted. Rather, we observe in a non-conceptual, self-luminous way, in a way that is free from both extremes. As it is said here: Emptiness, selflessness, primordial wisdom, self-awareness mind. Without object and subject, transform the power of memory. And as it is said in the Samadhiraja Sutra: In the Dharma of Nirvana, there is no Dharma, because it is not there, it will never be and will not change. Those with concepts say there is and is not.