English
Then, your own basis would also necessarily become knowable, because it is the basis of classification and the pervaded. If you accept that, then, for example, a valid cognition or a reason, cannot be understood by subsequent inferential wisdom, like a blind person looking up at the sky. As it says in the Quintessential Stages of the Path: "To dispel attachment, in the second expression, it is beyond thought and speech." This eliminates the possibility of it not being an object of knowledge. If the pervasion and classification are not established on the basis of the dharma, then on the pervaded, it is also the same as the basis of the essence, just like mere trees, deer, and arura. If you say that, then there are two answers to this: refuting the views of others and establishing one's own view. First, some say that although the essence itself is not an object of knowledge, it transforms into knowledge on the path and is ultimately established, which is unreasonable, because transformation is impossible without a basis, just as ground charcoal will not turn white. The Lama himself said that this reality itself must become knowable, or that determination and negation must become knowable. First, the reason is not established, and second, even if accepted, it is unreasonable to distinguish and express it in this way, because only what needs to be determined is the reality. The self-view only acknowledges that reality exists in reality. The previous quotation also clearly indicates that the understanding of reality is not through the wisdom of reasoning, but rather doubts whether it can be understood through the universal three-aspect reasoning. The Quintessence also only expresses the difference from reality, not the way of determining it. However, regarding the knowable, can it be clearly divided into things and non-things? Just as all paths here are included in view and meditation? If you say they are not included, then it cannot be determined here either. If the valid cognition that determines the knowable is continuous, then there may also be a third skandha in the knowable. This contradicts the statement that all paths are included in view and meditation. There may also be a third main factor of the path to liberation. If you admit inclusion, then it can also be determined here. Then, does this reality fall into the extreme of things or non-things? Just as the path can also be represented by either view or meditation, this will cause confusion. Therefore, even if all paths are included in view and meditation, it is only a path.
Chinese
如同普遍存在一样。虽然一切所知可以明确地分为事物和非事物两种，但作为存在之基础的普遍存在，是应该确定或应该了解的。意义概括如是说：内外差别有多少，一切诸法菩提心，如实于内本自具，是为应知之续义。如是说。所区分之法为基础、道、果三者。为何区分之必要呢？因为依靠法性之基础，对果产生渴望，因此不需要道的努力也能进入道。譬如，依靠因种子自身存在，对果实庄稼产生渴望，因此不需要农业的努力也能进入。思维必须区分之量：如此区分之门，基础、道、果决定为三者，此以量成立，或以非量成立？若如后者，则尽是增益之念，不可信赖。若如前者，则以现量成立，或以比量成立？这些是自诩为理智者的推理。我不认为以这些能理解法性之义，因为超出了世俗的认知范围。如是说：意合譬喻量或理或因，以随念之智慧，不能够思，如盲人欲见虚空。如是说。因此，此处以普遍的三种量来了解，光明释：以圣教、口诀和道理来决断。如是说。因此，如来无垢之教是圣教之量，先前智者所造是口诀之量，与彼等相符而生者是道理之量，此三者对于极其隐蔽之义，无增无减地衡量，除此之外别无他法。第一，圣教是：心要中说：于圆满智慧之坛城中，以闻思修之结合，自生五身任运成。如是说。第二，口诀是：明释中说：基础、道、果诸所知，为知意义一致之词，总摄为三种续之义。如是说。第三，道理是：区分之基础
English
Just as it is universally present. Although all knowable things can be clearly divided into two categories, things and non-things, the universal existence that is the basis of existence is something that should be ascertained or known. The meaning is summarized as follows: "However many differences there are, internal and external, all phenomena, the mind of enlightenment, are truly and inherently present within. This is the meaning of the tantra to be known." Thus it is said. The dharmas to be distinguished are the three: the ground, the path, and the fruit. What is the need for distinguishing them? Because by relying on the ground of dharmata, one generates longing for the fruit, therefore one can enter the path without relying on the effort of the path. For example, by relying on the cause, the seed itself, one generates longing for the fruit, the harvest, therefore one can enter without relying on the effort of agriculture. Considering the valid cognition that must distinguish the divisions: That the gate of such divisions, the ground, path, and fruit, are definitely only three, is this known by valid cognition or by non-valid cognition? If it is the latter, then it is exhausted by minds of superimposition and cannot be trusted. If it is the former, then is it known by direct perception or by inference? These are the reasonings of those who pride themselves on logic. I do not think that the meaning of dharmata can be understood by such means, because it is beyond the scope of conventional knowledge. As it is said: "By the wisdom of inference, which combines examples, valid cognitions, or reasons, conceptualization is not possible, like a blind man trying to see the sky." Thus it is said. Therefore, here, it is understood by the three universal valid cognitions, the Clear Lamp: "It is decided by scripture, instructions, and reasoning." Thus, the stainless words of the Sugata are the valid cognition of scripture, what was composed by the previous scholars is the valid cognition of instructions, and what arises in accordance with them is the valid cognition of reasoning, these three measure the extremely hidden meaning without adding or subtracting, and there is no other way besides them. First, scripture is: From the Essence: "In the mandala of perfect wisdom, through the union of hearing, thinking, and meditating, the five self-born kayas are spontaneously accomplished." Thus it is said. Second, instructions are: From the Commentary on the Eye: "The ground, path, and fruit, all that is to be known, in order to know the meaning of consistent words, are summarized as the meaning of the three tantras." Thus it is said. Third, reasoning is: The basis of distinction
Chinese
仅仅是所知法，从分类上确定为基、道、果三者。如果这些不具备，就不会产生一切智智。因为在那里，没有不包含所知或一切法的缘故。如果说理由不成立，那么第二个理由是，我们各自的生类虽然实际上看不见，但却是通过以前的教证而成立的。第二，显示本体有三方面，第一是基。这也有三方面。基的共同本体是自证菩提心。如云：金刚三句，本体一切皆是心，如金子的比喻一样，无有二。如是。安住方式的本体是，没有作者，力量不间断地显现。如云：心性自显现。如是。所依的本体是，器情颠倒之故，与显现对境一起。如云：金刚三句，本体器情世间之，显现和执着的诸法。如是。道的本体是通过三种智慧之门，次第生起五种心基道。如云：金刚三句，本体三种智慧之，四心生起而宣说。如是。果的本体是五种：身、语、意、功德、事业。如云：科判，果的本体是身语意，功德事业五种。如是。第三，词义解释是：因为成为一切法的生起处，所以称为基。三次第、二名言的一切法，无余生起故，称为基。如是。因为成为其前行，所以称为道。如云：行和彼法具备。如是。以成就或究竟之义，所以说是果。如是。第四，总义的定义有二：破他宗和他宗成立。第一是观点不同，以前的一些宗派说：基是所知，道是能知，果是已知。或者说，基是能显，道是能显现，果是已经显现。这样说也不合理。道是需要了解和显现，还是不需要？如果需要，则成为基，如果不需要，则成为果的过失。另外，有境眼识、对境蓝色、认知蓝色三者也是幻化的基。
English
That which is merely knowable is, in terms of classification, definitely threefold: ground, path, and fruit. Without these being complete, omniscience will not arise. Because there, there is nothing that does not include knowable things or all phenomena. If it is said that the reason is not established, then the second reason is that our respective birth lineages, although not actually visible, are established through previous scriptural proofs. Second, there are three aspects to showing the essence, the first is the ground. There are also three aspects to this. The common essence of the ground is self-awareness, the mind of enlightenment. As it is said: Three vajra verses, the essence of all is mind, like the example of gold, there is no duality. Thus. The essence of the mode of abiding is the unobstructed appearance of power without an agent. As it is said: The essence is self-appearance. Thus. The essence of the basis for examination is, because of the reversal of container and contents, together with the object of appearance. As it is said: Three vajra verses, the essence of the container and contents of the world, the phenomena of appearance and attachment. Thus. The essence of the path is the gradual arising of the five mind-ground paths through the three doors of wisdom. As it is said: Three vajra verses, the essence of the three wisdoms, the four minds are taught to arise. Thus. The essence of the fruit is fivefold: body, speech, mind, qualities, and activity. As it is said: Outline, the essence of the fruit is body, speech, mind, qualities, and activity, five aspects. Thus. Third, the etymology is: because it becomes the source of all phenomena, it is called the ground. All phenomena of the three orders and two expressions, because they arise without remainder, it is called the ground. Thus. Because it becomes what is to be traversed before it, it is called the path. Chapter heading. Possessing traversing and its qualities. Thus. It is explained as the fruit because of the meaning of accomplishment or completion. Thus. Fourth, the definition of the general meaning has two aspects: refuting other systems and establishing one's own system. The first is that the views differ, some previous schools say: the ground is what is to be known, the path is what knows, the fruit is what has been known. Or, the ground is what illuminates, the path is what illuminates, the fruit is what has already been illuminated. Saying this is also unreasonable. Does the path need to be known and illuminated, or not? If it needs to be, then it becomes the ground, if it does not need to be, then it is the fault of being the fruit. Furthermore, the subject, the eye consciousness, the object blue, the three cognitions of blue are also the basis of illusion.
Chinese
因此，道路会变成三个果。另外，一些严虚的人说，依赖和存在是基础，进入和行走是道路，期望和最终完成是果，这也是不合理的。如那说，如果那样，道路是依赖和存在的吗？如果不依赖和不存在，那么存在于何处？如果存在，那就变成了基础。还有一些嘉擦瓦的人说，存在是基础，进入是道路，成熟是果，认为这是单一的颠倒也是不合理的，因为过失存在于先前。道路的定义也不遍及拉巴，因为它只是知识的工具而不是进入的工具。正如所说：心要，知识进入定义的集合。果是成熟的原因和条件。还有些人说，将迷乱显现确定为依赖的基础，次第和同时修持的道路，以及无法产生无漏的最终完成是果，这也是不合理的。因为道路上转变为持明的果不遍及后者的定义，并且基础的定义含义会转变为其他，即遍及道路。还有些吉的人说，道路的确定之处是基础，确定基础并获得果的是道路，道路的最终意义显现，从而从努力中解脱出来是果，这也是不合理的，因为会产生混淆表达的过失。另外，果是否需要通过道路来确定？如果像第一种情况那样，它会变成基础；如果像第二种情况那样，就会变成毫不费力地提前解脱。上师们追随罗琼的古代学者和祖尔释迦僧格等人的观点，认为本来就存在，具有可考察性的是基础，行走，具有能考察性的是道路，最终的意义提前显现，从而从努力中解脱出来是果，但我不认为这是好的。如果按照密宗的体系，那么道路和果这两个本来就存在的各自所证悟的智慧是可考察的还是不可考察的？如果像第一种情况那样，那么三种所知都可以用一个定义来表示，因为法相同，所以标志被承认而成立。如果承认，那么后者的道路和果两种定义为什么需要？因为自相不相同，在任何一方都没有其他可分析的，相同的定义遍及相似的事物，三个不同对象的瓶子。