Chinese
本体的觉性是自显现，因此不应成为衡量的对象。如果衡量，那是见到后衡量呢？还是未见到而衡量？如果见到，那本身就是分别念的宗派，因此不需要衡量。如果未见到，则无法衡量，因为不是行境。如同下文所说：‘他自在智慧二显现，不遮止，于境不观察故，欲亦不作常。’第二，如果衡量执著总体的体性，是在所观察的境上衡量呢？还是在能分别的心上衡量？如果如第一种情况，在境上妄加衡量，心识不会成为量，如同将木桩执为人的情况。如果如第二种情况，能分别的识是刹那性的，那么在过去、未来、现在三者中的哪一个上衡量？过去已灭，因为已坏灭，未来尚未产生，因为不存在，因此无法安立在这两者上。如果认为在现在上衡量，现在不住于一个自性中，因为是不稳固的。当各自分别的智慧稍微转变时，执著便会止息，因为没有境，因此没有现在的执著。而且，现在的执著本身没有可衡量的理由，特意去做也无法衡量。如果认为两者同时存在，则有众生同时具有两个心识流的过失的怀疑。关于这个道理，有些人认为现在的执著本身没有被衡量。如果这样，如何消除之前所说的两个过失呢？即使各自分别的智慧转变，由于没有生起从根本上清净执著的对治——见解的自性，因此执著没有止息，所以有执著的境。而且，也不会在那个基础上具有两个心识流，因为可衡量的执著显现真实地在经验中成立，并且，自证量能够理解可衡量之物的自性，这在相续中是可以显示的。当它与上师的教言和口诀相遇时，执著会自解脱。例如，当瓶子的形状形成时，瓶子的坏灭性已经存在于土中，当它与锤子相遇时，就会变成碎片。’这种观点也是不合理的。如果只衡量可衡量之物的差别——轮回总体的体性的执著，那么一般来说，轮回和涅槃两者都成为可衡量的
English
Since the nature of awareness is self-appearing, it is not appropriate to be measured. If you measure it, do you measure it after seeing it, or do you measure it without seeing it? If you see it, then it is the tenet of conceptual thought, so there is no need to measure it. If you do not see it, then it cannot be measured, because it is not an object of experience. As it is said: 'The two appearances of other-powered wisdom, do not obstruct, and do not examine the object, therefore, desire does not make it permanent.' Secondly, if you examine the general characteristics of attachment, do you measure it on the object being examined, or do you measure it on the mind that is examining? If it is like the first case, the mind will not become a valid cognition by measuring the object with superimposed ideas, just like mistaking a post for a person. If it is like the second case, since the consciousness of the examiner is momentary, which of the three times—past, future, or present—do you measure it on? The past has ceased and is gone, and the future has not yet arisen and does not exist, so it cannot be placed on those two. If you think you are measuring it in the present, the present does not remain in one nature, because it is unstable. As soon as the wisdom of individual discrimination changes, attachment ceases, because there is no object, so there is no present attachment. Moreover, the present attachment itself has no reason to be measured, and it cannot be measured even if you try to. If you think that both exist at the same time, there is a doubt that beings have the fault of holding two streams of consciousness at the same time. Regarding this point, some say that the present attachment itself is not measured. If so, how can the two faults mentioned earlier be eliminated? Even if the wisdom of individual discrimination changes, since the antidote that purifies attachment from the root—the nature of the view—has not arisen in the mind, attachment has not ceased, so there is an object of attachment. Moreover, one will not have two streams of consciousness on that basis, because the appearance of measurable attachment is truly established in experience, and the self-aware valid cognition is able to understand the nature of the measurable object, which can be shown in the mind. When it meets the instructions and oral teachings of the lama, attachment will be self-liberated. For example, when the shape of a vase is formed, the destructibility of the vase is already present in the earth, and when it meets a hammer, it will turn into fragments. This view is also unreasonable. If you only measure the difference of the measurable object—the attachment of the nature of the general samsara, then in general, both samsara and nirvana become measurable.
Chinese
因为与破斥相违的缘故。那么如何呢？轮回涅槃的显现，虽然不以自己的体性来衡量，但可以以轮回涅槃的执着显现来衡量。什么是执着的显现呢？有些人说，虽然执着于外境，但一切都是自显现的，这就是执着的显现。不以执着和显现单独衡量，而是以执着显现结合起来衡量。我是说，执着的意思是显现为执着显现是合理的。也就是说，一切法除了心之外没有外境，而心本身在一切法中自显现，由于迷惑的心的缘故，将轮回涅槃执着为与心不同的外境，在考察执着的面前，显现为执着的显现，即是遍计所执。那么，以虚构的对境来衡量，衡量它的心是量吗？虽然所取境虚构显现为迷惑，但就所入境断除虚构的角度而言，心与量并不相违。那么，可以依靠有法显现的执着来证悟法性，即是本来清净自显现吗？可以，因为法与有法本体无别。例如，国王本身在不认识其本体时显现为奴仆，依靠奴仆的显现方式来证悟国王的真实身份。那么，有法执着的显现是不可思议的，因此会有无法衡量的过失吗？有法执着的显现方式虽然各不相同，但法性自显现没有自性差别，执着显现的刹那的法性中，执着显现的一切刹那的法性都圆满的缘故。当证悟执着显现的刹那的自性法性时，这样一来，一切执着显现都会证悟法性，例如，一块冰如果知道是水，那么同类的冰都会知道是水一样。也像这样，三时轮回涅槃的执着习气，在一个刹那中全部圆满的缘故，了解它就了解了一切众生，现在因为没有成立执取色法，过去和未来也与之相同。以及，如果了解一个法性的真如，那么一切分别念都会自然而然地了解。这样一来，如果衡量执着的显现，那么执着所考察的执着境。
English
It is because it contradicts refutation. Well, how is it? Although the appearance of samsara and nirvana is not measured by its own nature, it can be measured by the appearance of attachment to samsara and nirvana. What is the appearance of attachment? Some say that although attachment is to external objects, everything is self-appearing, which is the appearance of attachment. It is not measured by attachment and appearance alone, but by the combination of attachment and appearance. I mean, the meaning of attachment is that it is reasonable for appearance to be the appearance of attachment. That is to say, all dharmas have no external objects other than the mind, and the mind itself appears in all dharmas, and because of the deluded mind, attachment to samsara and nirvana as external objects different from the mind, in the face of examining attachment, appears as the appearance of attachment, that is, the completely imputed. So, is the mind that measures it a valid cognition by measuring the fabricated object? Although the object to be grasped appears to be deluded by the appearance of fabrication, the mind does not contradict validity in terms of cutting off fabrication in the object to be entered. So, can one rely on the attachment of the appearance of the dharma to realize the dharmata, that is, the originally pure self-appearance? Yes, because the dharma and the dharma-possessor are inseparable in essence. For example, when the king himself appears as a servant without knowing his essence, he realizes the true identity of the king by relying on the appearance of the servant. So, is there a fault of immeasurability because the appearance of attachment to the dharma-possessor is inconceivable? Although the appearances of attachment to the dharma-possessor are different, the dharmata self-appearance has no self-nature difference, and in the dharmata of a moment of attachment appearance, the dharmata of all moments of attachment appearance is complete. When the self-nature dharmata of a moment of attachment appearance is realized, in this way, all attachment appearances will realize the dharmata, for example, if a piece of ice knows that it is water, then all ice of the same kind will know that it is water. Also like this, because the habitual tendencies of attachment to the three times of samsara and nirvana are all complete in one moment, understanding it is understanding all beings, and now because grasping form has not been established, the past and future are the same as it. And, if one understands the suchness of one dharmata, then all discriminations will be understood naturally. In this way, if one measures the appearance of attachment, then the object of attachment examined by attachment.
Chinese
是衡量遍计所执的无实有，还是衡量证悟者的自心？如果按照第一种说法，执著境遍计所执作为境的所依之心，遍计所执的知识，与上师的口诀教言相遇之时，执著之心是三慧之间的思所生慧吗？或者基、有法、成立之义三者之间的有法存在，例如没有身体就不会有影子一样。如果没有执著之心，那么由执著所安立的名言义，作为普遍显现的境就不存在，因此无法衡量。如果按照第二种说法，执著之心它自己无法衡量自己。例如，刀无法砍自己，手指的指尖无法触碰自己一样。如同所说，刀刃无法砍自己，指尖无法触碰自己，同样，心也无法看到心。因此，境和有境两者都需要衡量，为了消除这个，这里不是衡量证悟者的心，而是衡量所衡量的境。没有之前所说的过失，因为这样，执著之心的各个部分被证悟的智慧所转变。执著仍然存在，为什么呢？因为从根本上清净执著的对治，见解的自性没有在相续中生起，所以所断的执著仍然存在。那个执著的真实意义，显现的显现境，是通过思所生慧来了解，还是因为特别成为境或所依，所以安立为所依，名称和意义是相符的。例如，远处的人对木桩产生错觉，认为那就是人，智者们说那不是人，依靠这样的指示，那个错觉的心中，认为那是人的增益并没有从根本上断除，所以仍然显现为人，像是在想那是人还是木桩一样进行区分。因此，这里不是进行决断，而是进行决断的时候，因为不是执著，所以远离了之前的过失。有些人认为，从根本上断除执著的对治是修所生慧。像这样，仅仅有见解的证悟，但是因为从无始以来串习二取执著，所以没有作为它的对治的修所生慧，因此执著没有
English
Is it to measure the unreal that is the completely imputed, or to measure and examine the mind of the one who realizes? According to the first way, when the mind that is the basis for making the object of attachment the object of the completely imputed, the knowledge of the completely imputed, encounters the oral instructions and pith instructions of the lama, is that mind of attachment the wisdom arising from thinking, which is between the three wisdoms? Or does the subject exist as the middle term between the three: the basis, the reason, and the established meaning? For example, just as there is no shadow without a body, if there is no mind of attachment, then the object of general appearance, which is the meaning of the word established by attachment, does not exist, so it cannot be measured. According to the second way, the mind of attachment itself cannot measure itself. For example, a sword cannot cut itself, or the tip of a finger cannot touch itself. As it is said, the sword's own edge, how can the finger's own tip, not cut and not pierce? That is because the mind does not see the mind. Therefore, it is necessary to measure both the object and the subject. To eliminate that, here, it is not measuring the mind of the one who realizes, but measuring the object that is to be measured. There is no fault as previously stated, because in this way, the wisdom that realizes each part of the mind of attachment transforms. Attachment still exists, why is that? Because the antidote that purifies attachment from the root, the nature of the view, has not arisen in the continuum, so the attachment to be abandoned still exists. The actual meaning of that attachment, the appearing object of appearance, is it known through the wisdom arising from thinking? Or because it specifically becomes an object or basis, it is established as the basis for investigation, so the name and meaning are consistent. For example, those who are mistaken about a distant stump think it is a person, and relying on the fact that wise people say it is not a person, the imputation of grasping it as a person in the mind of that mistaken person is not completely severed, so it still appears as a person, like distinguishing whether it is a person or a stump. Therefore, here it is not making a determination, but it is the time for making a determination, so because it is not attachment, it is free from the previous faults. Some say that the antidote that completely abandons attachment is the wisdom arising from meditation. Like this, even if there is only the realization of the view, because of the habit of grasping at duality from beginningless time, there is no wisdom arising from meditation as its antidote, so there is no attachment.