English
As seen by those who have truly seen, all know it thus for the sake of understanding. Thus it is. Fourth, refuting arguments: Even so, is the wisdom of discernment itself unerring and stainless? Or is it erroneous and tainted? If it is the former, then it would follow that liberation occurs effortlessly, because the fault of error is exhausted. The sign is accepted. The pervasion is intrinsic. If it is the latter, then does it itself establish the truth of the unerring meaning or not? If it is the former, then it would follow that it can abandon the error of the illusion of seeing a yellow conch. The pervasion that the mind itself is erroneous is intrinsic. Why? If it is the latter, then the arising of mind would become meaningless. The answer is: It is considered unerring and stainless. If it follows that liberation occurs effortlessly, then it is asserted in reliance on those with sharp faculties. In reliance on those of middling or lesser faculties, there is no pervasion because, following the general sound of inference with a valid sign or the scriptures of reliable reasoning, it dispels the imputation of generality. Furthermore, does the consciousness that makes appearance the object measure it by making that appearance the object, or does it measure what is not made the object? If it is the former, then it would follow that the wisdom of discernment itself is erroneous, because it makes the false imputation the object, like the apprehension of a yellow conch. If it is the latter, then it would follow that the imputation on the object to be measured is not cut off, because it has not become the object, like eye disease. Thus, the answer is that it makes it the object. If it follows that it is erroneous, then it should be examined: Is it said because it is made the object in the intrinsic nature, or is it said for the sake of establishing no self-nature, or is it said because it makes the basis the object for the sake of establishing no self-nature? The first sign is not accepted. If it is the second, then the pervasion is not established. Thus, the object to be measured itself is transformed by the cause of the discriminating consciousness into a non-apprehending wisdom in the second moment. As it is said: Categories, even the state by its own nature, because it is cause and effect, therefore, to know one. That itself is explained by the five aspects of things and words. Second, there are two reasons for establishing it: meaning and division. The first is to place the method of accurately understanding the meaning to be proven in the place of argument. As it is said: Reasons, statements of reasons, etc., for the sake of knowing what is to be proven, essence, definition, characteristics.
Chinese
祈请等等。无论从何处降下，都请广为传播。如是说。分类有三种：先发五事之理，后随五法之理，五句之理。第一种分为二：正文和顺带破斥诤论。第一种是：在先发中，显示五身，在五种真实的眷属中，以法身在真实的眷属智慧海中，以无生义之语。报身在成熟海中，以上示之语。化身以胜者胜海中，以觉性加持之语，化身以信仰海中，以言说词之语，金刚身以无别金刚之眷属中，金刚身以无别金刚之眷属中，以金刚之语。以五语之门，真实确定法性之义是什么。如是说：真实圆满佛陀导师，以五身调伏的眷属们，示现五语，那才是，确定和衡量者。如是说。破斥诤论分为二，第一是：五种真实与因和所量有联系还是没有联系，请直说。如果按照第二种说法，那么理由将变得毫无意义，因为与所量没有联系，就像眼睛听不见声音一样。如果按照第一种说法，是相同一体，还是从中产生，还是作为所作法与能作法相关联。如果按照第一种说法，那么理由不会消除对所量的执着显现。因为本体无别。就像黄金和黄色普遍存在一样。如果按照第二种说法，那么所量中产生因，还是因中产生所量？如果按照第二种说法，那么五身将成为具有错觉的。因为五种真实的理由中，错觉的因没有穷尽。就像黄金和黄色一样。无论在哪里，因没有穷尽，结果都普遍存在，就像已净化的芝麻一样。如果按照第一种说法，那么因本身将成为不需要其他条件的能知，因为在所量本身中产生。如果承认，那么五语将变得没有必要。如果按照第三种说法，那么佛陀的执着显现将成为以真理本身为对境。因为对境与意义相符。就像认知蓝色不会从蓝色中产生错觉一样。如果承认，那么佛陀将变成具有错觉者，如果这样问。回答分为二：破斥他宗，陈述自宗。第一是某些智者那
English
Prayers, etc. Wherever it descends from, please spread it widely. Thus it is said. There are three divisions: the reason of the five pre-existing entities, the reason of the five subsequent methods, and the reason of the five sentences. The first has two parts: the main subject and, secondarily, refuting disputes. The first is: In the pre-existence, showing the five bodies, in the five real retinues, with the Dharmakaya in the real retinue, the ocean of wisdom, with the speech of unborn meaning. The Sambhogakaya in the ocean of maturation, with the speech of the upper sign. The Nirmanakaya in the victorious ocean of conquerors, with the speech of awareness and blessings, the Nirmanakaya in the ocean of faith, with the speech of expressive words, the Vajra body in the indivisible Vajra retinue, the Vajra body in the indivisible Vajra retinue, with the speech of Vajra. Through the gate of the five speeches, what is it that actually establishes the meaning of Dharmata? As it is said: The truly complete Buddha, the teacher, to the retinues tamed by the five bodies, showing the five speeches, that alone is, the one who establishes and measures. Thus it is said. Refuting disputes is divided into two, the first is: Are the five realities related to the cause and the object to be measured, or are they not? Please speak directly. If according to the second statement, then the reason will become meaningless, because there is no connection with the object to be measured, just as the eye cannot hear sound. If according to the first statement, are they the same, or do they arise from it, or are they related as the made phenomenon and the making phenomenon? If according to the first statement, then the reason will not eliminate the clinging appearance of the object to be measured. Because the essence is inseparable. Just like gold and yellow are universally present. If according to the second statement, does the cause arise in the object to be measured, or does the object to be measured arise in the cause? If according to the second statement, then the five bodies will become illusory. Because in the reason of the five realities, the cause of illusion is not exhausted. Just like gold and yellow. Wherever the cause is not exhausted, the result is universally capable of arising, just like purified sesame seeds. If according to the first statement, then the cause itself will become the knower without relying on other conditions, because it arises in the object to be measured itself. If admitted, then the five speeches will become unnecessary. If according to the third statement, then the clinging appearance of the Buddha will become the object of truth itself. Because the object and meaning are in accordance. Just as the perception of blue does not arise from illusion from blue. If admitted, then the Buddha will become one with illusion, if asked. The answer is divided into two: refuting the views of others, and stating one's own views. The first is some wise men
Chinese
如果说依赖是与存在之本体无别的，仅仅以其本身来衡量就不会变成执迷，这是不合理的。如果认识到那本身，那么推理又有什么用呢？在没有认识到之前，执迷的过失已经预先存在了。又有人争辩说：这不是考察的基础，因为它是推理产生的根源。难道与执着显现没有关联吗？这也是不合理的。实际上，五种真实语已经明确地表达了这一点。因为与所量没有关联的因是无意义的。又有些人说，鱼贩子在自相的定义中没有执着显现，只是为了让听众能够理解，才暂时地设定为可以考察，然后加以确定。这也是不合理的。是从导师的角度来考察，还是从听众的角度来考察呢？如果是前者，那么不要说由自续所包含的错觉的名称，就连大部分四身眷属也没有在自续中执着，因为即使在后得位，他们也像看待幻象一样看待一切事物。正如所说：意义简略，自性现量中，清晰显现的呼吸已尽。以及：三种烦恼，烦恼之类，于此皆无。自宗认为：从听众的角度来看，仅仅存在所量和衡量者的关系，但推理遍及所量，而所量不遍及推理，因此不会变成错觉，因为即使显现，也不会执着于自续。就像有神通的人知道他人错觉的梦境一样。正如所说：仅凭通达一切的智慧，周遍知所知的一切坛城。即使这样，您也会变成有执迷的佛，因为没有放弃对所遍的执着显现。如果这样说，那么仅仅这样出现，天空是遍及还是不遍及？如果是后者，那么也不适合作为法性的例子。如果是前者，那么天空就太真实了，因为没有放弃对所遍的真实事物。还有，对于先前出现的五身眷属，有执着显现还是没有执着显现？如果是后者，那么衡量者的推理就变得没有意义了，因为没有所量。就像堆满东西的秤一样。如果是前者，那么就不合理，因为能够成为五身眷属的，是见道以上才能使用的对象。
English
It is unreasonable to say that dependence is inseparable from the essence of existence, and that measuring it by itself will not turn into obsession. If that itself is realized, then what is the use of reasoning? Before it is realized, the fault of obsession already exists beforehand. Again, someone argues: this is not the basis for investigation, because it is the source from which reasoning arises. Is it not related to clinging appearances? This is also unreasonable. In reality, the five true statements have clearly expressed this. Because a reason that is not related to the object of measurement is meaningless. Again, some say that the fishmonger does not have clinging appearances in the definition of self-character, but only temporarily sets it as investigable for the sake of the audience's understanding, and then determines it. This is also unreasonable. Is the investigation from the perspective of the teacher, or from the perspective of the audience? If it is the former, then let alone the name of the illusion contained by the self-continuity, even most of the four-body retinue do not cling to the self-continuity, because even in the post-attainment, they see all things as illusions. As it is said: The meaning is brief, and the breath of clear manifestation in the self-nature of direct perception is exhausted. And: The three defilements, the kinds of defilements, are not here. The self-school believes that from the perspective of the audience, there is only the relationship between the object of measurement and the measurer, but the reasoning pervades the object of measurement, and the object of measurement does not pervade the reasoning, so it will not become an illusion, because even if it appears, it will not cling to the self-continuity. It is like a person with supernatural powers knowing the dreams of others' illusions. As it is said: Only by the wisdom of comprehending everything, pervading all the mandalas of what is to be known. Even so, you will become an obsessed Buddha, because you have not abandoned the clinging appearance to what is pervaded. If you say that, then just like that, does the sky pervade or not pervade? If it is the latter, then it is not suitable as an example of Dharma-nature. If it is the former, then the sky is too real, because the real thing that is pervaded has not been abandoned. Also, for the five-body retinue that appeared earlier, is there clinging appearance or no clinging appearance? If it is the latter, then the reasoning of the measurer becomes meaningless, because there is no object of measurement. It's like a scale full of things. If it is the former, then it is unreasonable, because the ability to become a five-body retinue is an object that can be used only above the path of seeing.
Chinese
因为在见道上遍布着对清净的执着，所以不能接受，如果说见道执着与实相相违，该如何避免呢？回答说，有些人认为，用五种事物的理证来说，有时说金刚手具有五种庄严也不合理。即使那样，金刚手有执着还是没有执着？如果像第一种情况那样，在因的乘中也说是十地自在，而且在密宗中说是诸佛之父，这与仍然没有执着相矛盾。如果对于没有执着本身设立理证的标志是没有意义的，因为自相没有被遍计所遮蔽。我的上师罗格说，四身眷属没有自续的执着。那样的话，因为没有所量，理证就成了无意义的过失。回答说，是说前生无意义的过失呢？还是说后生无意义的过失呢？第一种是承认的。如果像第二种情况那样，即使前生无意义，但为了后生开悟的眷属，像显示有执着一样来确定，就变成了有意义，这是什么呢？说周遍没有成立，也没有很好地理解。如果像第一种情况那样，见道以上的相续不可能有执着分别，因为理证是无意义的。不能接受，因为善分别的对治的执着境是清楚地存在着所知障。凡是稍微也没有执着的地方，衡量者都是无意义的，就像佛一样。第二种情况，如果像后生那样，对于安住在前生清净相续中的那些人，像显示有执着一样，就不会变成后生的意义，因为不能遮止必须要有无尽执着的邪分别。自宗是承认导师四身眷属也有微细的执着的，如果不是那样，做五身眷属就没有意义了。如果有的话，怎么样呢？一般来说，执着的根本所知是，用意识的垢染对如实的事物实相，加上好坏的标签，就像所说的那样：‘这也是遍计所依，根于境显现的一切，不在境中存在，只是阿赖耶识的显现，显现为各种事物，对轮回和涅槃产生执着。’就是这样。其中更坏的分