English
Therefore, the path becomes three fruits. Also, some Yamshud people say that relying and abiding is the basis, entering and traversing is the path, and wishing and ultimately completing is the fruit, which is also unreasonable. Ru Na says, if that is the case, does the path rely and abide? If it does not rely and does not abide, then where does it abide? If it abides, then it becomes the basis. Some Gyatsalwa people also say that abiding is the basis, entering is the path, and maturing is the fruit, considering this as a single reversal is also unreasonable, because the fault lies in the previous one. The definition of the path also does not pervade Lhaba, because it is only a tool of knowledge and not a tool of entry. As it is said: Essence, the collection of knowledge entering definitions. Fruit is the cause and condition of maturation. Some also say that establishing delusion as the basis of self-appearance, the path of practicing gradually and simultaneously, and the impossibility of generating the ultimate completion of non-outflow is the fruit, which is also unreasonable. Because the fruit of transforming into a vidyadhara on the path does not pervade the latter definition, and the meaning of the basis's definition will transform into something else, that is, it pervades the path. Some Kyi people also say that the place where the path is established is the basis, that which establishes the basis and obtains the fruit is the path, and the ultimate meaning of the path is manifested, thus liberation from effort is the fruit, which is also unreasonable, because it creates the fault of mixing expressions. Furthermore, does the fruit need to be established by the path or not? If it is like the first case, it will become the basis; if it is like the second case, then it will be inferred that effortless liberation precedes it. The lamas, following the ancient scholars of Roong and Zur Shakya Senge, believe that what has always existed, along with what is to be examined, is the basis; what is traversed, along with what is to be contemplated, is the path; and the ultimate meaning is manifested in advance, thus liberation from effort is the fruit, but I do not think this is good. If according to the system of Secret Mantra, then is the wisdom that realizes the separate existence of the path and the fruit, which have always existed, examinable or not? If it is like the first case, then all three objects of knowledge can be represented by one definition, because the dharma is the same, so the sign is established by acceptance. If it is accepted, then why are the latter two definitions of path and fruit needed? Because the self-characteristics are not the same, there is no other to be analyzed on either side, and the same definition pervades similar things, the vase of three different objects.
Chinese
也如是。如同第二种情况，如是“道次第智慧自住，道与果皆为体性”之说，也不能舍弃所说的以二谛为观察对象的法轮和寂灭的教证，并且会变成无因之果，而且果的殊胜性也必定不能涵盖成为道的果。果的体性也必定不能涵盖成为道的果。还有些米娘人说，基的共同体性一般不相同，是因为所指的处所不同而迷惑，这种说法也不合理，因为迷惑的显现和体性、法性、体性会变成他体。如果承认，则第八识非无明智慧他体之说已被破除，并且周遍也已经在自续中成立。心的体性也是进入完全清净之义，成为获得的一种特殊方法，这种说法也不能周遍于见，因为是进入者之母，是知者之田。果的体性是通过道而显现的，这种说法也是不行的，因为是所作的，所以会变成无常，因为是周遍和被周遍，就像瓶子一样。自宗认为，成为一切法之来源的是基，具有知和入之作用的是道，法性显现为不可创造的种子是果，第一种情况是涵盖体性和观察对象二者，并且将道和果分开；第二种情况是涵盖如和定二者，并且将基和果分开；第三种情况是涵盖暂时和究竟二者，并且将基和道分开，因为从一切过失中解脱出来，所以值得智者赞叹。在分别抉择时，分别显示基、道、果三者，其中第一者也有安住之实相体性之基和迷惑之观察之基二者。如是所说，在金刚三句中说：第一者有两种，即体性之基和观察之基。如是。首先是安住之实相体性之基。在显示时有四种：确定自己的体性，详细阐述本来清净和任运自成的差别，宗派三谛之实相，以及思维能确定之词。第一者是确定体性，即成立
English
It is also like that. Similar to the second case, the saying "The wisdom of the path stages dwells in itself, the essence of all paths and fruits" also cannot abandon the teachings that speak of the Dharma wheel and Nirvana as objects of observation in two truths, and it will become a causeless result, and the supreme nature of the result will certainly not cover the result that has become the path. The nature of the result is also certain not to cover the result that becomes the path. Also, some Minyak people say that the general nature of the base is generally not the same, because the place indicated is different and confusing. This statement is also unreasonable, because the appearance of confusion and the nature, the Dharma nature, and the nature will become otherness. If you admit it, then the statement that the eighth consciousness is not other than ignorance and wisdom has been refuted, and the pervasiveness has also been established in its own continuum. The nature of the mind is also entering the meaning of complete purity, becoming a special method of obtaining, this statement also cannot pervade the view, because it is the mother of the enterer and the field of the knower. The nature of the result is manifested through the path, this statement is also not valid, because it is made, so it will become impermanent, because it is pervasive and pervaded, just like a vase. The self-tradition believes that the base is the source of all dharmas, the path is the action of knowing and entering, and the seed that manifests the Dharma nature as uncreatable is the fruit. The first case covers both the nature and the object of observation, and separates the path and the fruit; the second case covers both suchness and samadhi, and separates the base and the fruit; the third case covers both temporary and ultimate, and separates the base and the path, because it is liberated from all faults, it is worthy of praise by the wise. In the separate determination, the base, path, and fruit are shown separately, among which the first also has the base of the reality of abiding, the nature of the base, and the base of the observation of confusion. As it is said, in the Three Vajras it is said: The first has two types, namely the base of nature and the base of observation. Like that. First is the base of the reality of abiding, the nature of the base. There are four ways to show it: determining one's own nature, elaborating on the difference between original purity and spontaneous accomplishment, the reality of the three truths of the tenets, and thinking about the words that can determine. The first is to determine the nature, that is, to establish
Chinese
关于穿插讨论的三种衡量标准，第一个是自证智菩提心，仅仅是安住于所知事物之自性远离边际。如是说：三次第，自性远离一切边，无有任何可执持。如是说。理证。第二个是成立它，通过《道次第差别摄略》中的“三遍”来说，应当以三种周遍的理证来成立。教证是：一切皆为自证菩提心，此乃教证之量。如是说。口诀是：天鬘一切法皆安住于心。如是说。理路是，若于一共同显现之法上成立，９例如瓶子，有法。９遣除之所立是心，９显现乃心之基础，是权力稳固之时。因为除了心之外没有其他法。广说，因为没有具有质碍之法，唯有觉性尔。如是说。若说理证不成，９反驳，具有损害之量，除了心之外，是否知晓其他法，或者不知晓也存在？若如第二种情况，则应成为眼睛的对境中也有声音。若承认，则已破除。周遍９事物力量加入之量，于自相续中成立。若如第一种情况，则是有联系而知晓，还是没有也知晓？第二种情况，则应成为眼睛也能听到声音。如果说，虽然双运眼识不听声音，但若见到无联系之色，为何周遍不成？对于无联系的同等情况，为何不了解声音而了解色？这是因为眼根生为执持色，而非生为执持声音，是自主因的行事各异。如果说，联系的自性不是依赖而知晓，也不是从业法中产生吗？即使那样，识的生起是依赖于外境色，还是不依赖？若如第二种情况，则应成为顽石也能见到色。若承认，则已破除。立宗已承认，周遍是量。若如第一种情况，则违背了无联系而知晓的誓言。又说是有联系而知晓，若说以本体无分别之方式不舍弃其他法，我们说，是本体唯一，或者以依赖之方式不舍弃其他法，由此而联系。若如第二种情况，是心中生起外境之义，还是外境之义中生起心？若如第二种情况，
English
Among the three measures of incidental discussion, the first is the self-aware Bodhicitta, merely abiding in the nature of knowable things, free from extremes. As it is said: Three stages, the characteristic is free from all extremes, nothing can be grasped. So it is said. Valid reason. The second is to prove it, by the "Three Pervasives" of the condensed Lamrim distinctions. It should be proven by the three aspects of pervasive reasoning. The scripture is: All is self-aware Bodhicitta, this is said to be the measure of scripture. So it is said. The instruction is: The garland of deities, all dharmas abide in the mind. So it is said. The reasoning is, if one proves on one common appearing phenomenon, 9 for example, a vase, subject. 9 The eliminative to be proven is mind, 9 appearance is the basis of mind, the time when power is strong. Because there is no other dharma other than mind. Expanded, because there is no dharma with obstruction, it is only knowing. So it is said. If it is said that the reason is not established, 9 if refuted, the measure with harm, other than mind, is there another dharma known or unknown? According to the second case, it follows that there is sound in the object of the eye. If accepted, it is refuted. The pervasion 9 the measure of the power of things entering is established in one's own continuum. According to the first case, is it known with connection or known without? In the second case, it follows that the eye also hears sound. If it is said that although the conjunct eye consciousness does not hear sound, if one sees a form without connection, why is the pervasion not established? For the unconnected equal situation, why is form not known when sound is not known? This is because the eye sense is born to grasp form, not born to grasp sound, the actions of the self-cause are different. If it is said that the characteristic of connection is not known by dependence, and does not arise from the law of karma? Even so, does the arising of consciousness depend on the external object form or not? According to the second case, it follows that even inanimate objects see form. If accepted, it is refuted. The sign is accepted, the pervasion is measure. According to the first case, the vow of knowing without connection is broken. Again, if it is said to know with connection, if it is said that other dharmas are not abandoned in the manner of inseparable essence, we say, it is the same essence, or other dharmas are not abandoned in the manner of dependence, it is connected from that. According to the second case, does the meaning of the external arise in the mind, or does the mind arise from the meaning of the external? According to the second case,
Chinese
因此，可以得出结论，无情之物也能产生智慧。 承认这个理由。 如果你说这个前提不成立，那么，认识外境的事物必然是有效的。 因为在事物中，无情和有情两者不可能同时存在。 如果是前者，那么它就由此产生，并且显现出它本身。 因此，所有的事物都必然是由心所产生的。 如果知道第一个是具有同一性的关系，那么，心是否在外境中具有同一性？ 或者外境是否在心中具有同一性？ 如果是后者，那么，心本身必然是与智慧相反的无情之物。 如果这个理由不成立，那么承诺就会失效。 凡是在外境中具有同一性的，都必然是无情之物，就像粗大的东西和微尘一样。 如果是前者，那么就可以成立一个论点，即除了心之外，没有其他的法，因为本质上是同一的。 凡是除了心之外没有其他的法，那么瓶子就是心，就像去了金洲一样。 以非共同的理由来证明没有边际，这将在后面展示。 第三个是关于附带问题的衡量标准： 即使如此，保持各自显现的原样，这是否是实相的本质或自性的基础？ 如果是前者，那也是不行的。 经文中说：“聚集是怎样的？ 如果对显现的事物进行秘密赞颂，那么佛陀的意念和众生的意识就没有区别了。” 此外，道次第的口诀中也说：“如果不是真实的，就无法解脱束缚；时间的声音会摧毁虚假的无常；远离圣道，必须进入监狱；痛苦不会消失，因为它是错误的根源。” 这与经文相违背，而且在理证上也有损害。 凡夫的意识，是具有法性的。 它必然是正确的量。 因为它所认识的对象没有错误。 如果承认，那么错误就会永远消失。 如果这个理由不成立，那么承诺就会失效。 凡是所认识的对象没有错误的，都必然是不错误的，就像圣者的现量一样。 如果是后者，那么，经文中说：“聚集是怎样的？ 如果对不显现的事物进行秘密赞颂，那么其他的外道也会变成佛陀。” 此外，道次第的口诀中也说：“在无上的大乘中，清净和痛苦，在世俗谛中也没有区别，观点的高低是……