English
These are the five valid cognitions. The appearance of one moon as two due to sensory delusion is a pseudo-perception, not a valid cognition. The non-conceptual, non-erroneous consciousness that arises in dependence on the mind-faculty as its dominant condition is the valid cognition of mental direct perception. The non-conceptual mind that follows sensory delusion and dream appearances are not valid cognitions. The non-conceptual, non-erroneous consciousness that arises in dependence on the yoga of calm abiding and special insight as its dominant condition is the valid cognition of yogic direct perception. The clear appearance of a skeleton when accustomed to ugliness is considered erroneous and not a valid cognition. Yogic direct perception understands the meaning of obscuring and severing conventional objects, which is appearance-endowed, and seeing selflessness, which is appearance-free, as yogic direct perception. All minds and mental factors, knowing themselves with their own clear nature, without conceptualization or error, is self-awareness direct perception. Whatever consciousness arises, whether erroneous or non-erroneous, it is not mistaken and is free from conceptualization, merely experiencing itself as self-illuminating. The objects of these four direct perceptions are such that objects, times, and aspects appear as their own characteristics without being mixed, so there is no conceptualization of mixing sound and meaning. In general, if these worldly direct perceptions did not exist, then the signs, which are the basis of cognition that are not mistaken, would also not exist. Because the establishment of these appearances, such as arising from causes and their cessation, would not exist. If the emptiness of the nature of those appearances is not realized, liberation will not be attained. As it is said: Without relying on conventions, the ultimate truth cannot be realized. If the ultimate truth is not realized, nirvana cannot be attained. Specifically, if there is no sense direct perception, then the objects of form, etc., will not be seen. If there is no mental direct perception, then there will be no consciousness that knows all internal and external objects in common. If there is no yogic direct perception, then there is no possibility of knowledge that realizes objects beyond the ordinary. Therefore, these three are established. Having understood all of these, each directly experiences its own object. The end of all experience culminates in self-awareness, which is the meaning of direct experience.
Chinese
不需要其他能成立的理由是：不迷乱的自心在自明中体验，由此断除怀疑，因此自证是所有量最终的归宿。而且，推论最终是以现量为根本。现量的终点由自证来确定，即不迷乱之心的体验，无需寻找其他能成立的理由，如同体验安乐等一样。第二，对于推论，也是以具有分别的意识来进行推论，而不是其他的。什么是分别呢？对于任何一个对境，其总相显现在意念中，并将其与名称混合而执持，例如分别或意念柱子和瓶子，这被称为具有分别的意。不识名言的幼儿以及马等牲畜，虽然意念中也显现食物等总相，但并未与名称混合。然而，通过可以混合的总相分别，它们也能对境取舍。例如，即使没有亲眼见到水，听到水流潺潺的声音，口渴难耐的牲畜也会在意念中浮现水的形象，发出渴望的叫声，并且知道追逐远方的水源。因此，具有分别的意以对境、时间、形象混合的方式执持诸法的总相，并通过对该总相进行各种肯定和否定的言说，从而成就一切名言。否则，就无法指示推论和学习之处。因为现量只是显现自身时间、自身对境的各个部分以及刹那的自相，这些细微之处互不混杂地存在，而这些是无法与名称混合的，因此无法将名言的意义附加于其上。分别不仅能对现在所见的对境附加名称和种类等进行执持，即进行世俗的分别或依赖符号的分别，还能以回忆的方式分别过去，以希求的方式分别未来，以及作为推论的依据。
English
The reason why no other proof is needed is that the non-confused mind itself experiences self-clarity, thereby dispelling doubt. Therefore, self-awareness is the ultimate destination of all valid cognitions. Moreover, inference ultimately has its root in direct perception. The limit of direct perception is determined by self-awareness, that is, the experience of a non-confused mind, and there is no need to seek other proofs, just like experiencing happiness and so on. Secondly, even for inference, it is the mind with conceptualization that infers, not others. What is conceptualization? It is when the general appearance of any object appears in the mind, and it is grasped by mixing it with its name. For example, conceptualizing or mentally uttering "pillar" and "pot" is called mind with conceptualization. Even young children who do not know how to use symbols, and animals such as horses, have a general idea of food and drink appearing in their minds, although it is not mixed with names. However, through the conceptualization of general meanings that can be mixed, they can still engage with objects. For example, even if they have not actually seen water, when they hear the sound of water flowing, thirsty animals will have an image of water appearing in their minds, and they will make sounds expressing their desire for it, and they will know to chase after distant water sources. Therefore, this mind with conceptualization grasps the general appearance of things in a way that mixes objects, times, and appearances, and through making various affirmative and negative statements about it, all statements are accomplished. Otherwise, it would not be possible to indicate inference and the place of learning. Because direct perception only shows the parts of its own time and its own object, and the momentary self-characteristics exist separately without being mixed with each other, and these cannot be mixed with names, so the meaning of statements cannot be attached to them alone. Conceptualization not only holds onto objects that are currently seen by attaching names and types, etc., which is called conventional conceptualization or symbol-dependent conceptualization, but also conceptualizes the past in the form of memory, conceptualizes the future in the form of desire, and serves as the basis for inference.
Chinese
通过对标志的理解，以及通过标志对可推断的具标志者的理解，即使是那些未显现的隐蔽事物，也能被衡量。如果缺乏伴随理解的推论，就像刚被寻回的幼儿不了解火等事物的危险一样，将不会有任何的取舍和进退。对于这种伴随理解的意识，也有两种情况：一种是对绳子理解为绳子，对海市蜃楼理解为海市蜃楼，没有错乱；另一种是像把绳子误认为蛇，把海市蜃楼误认为水一样，产生了错乱。依靠不错误的理解，可以毫无错误地区分过去、现在、未来三时的一切所知事物的名相。因此，正如之前所展示的四种事物力量的推理和三种正确标志的基础分类一样，精通推理的论理学家们，依靠衡量极度隐蔽事物的经典，即三种检验的清净，通过两种量，如理作意地考察两种真理的状态，从而很好地获得不依赖他者的确信。通过在难以理解的深奥法理之处增长智慧之光，具备无畏的勇气，以行持作为引导之门，完成宗义的论证，最终达到推理的极致。并且，对于他人，也能以丰富的言辞来宣说，从而具备说法的传统，最终圆满实现二利。第二部分分为两部分：概要的指示和详细的解释。第一部分，从“楞伽”到“不确定性”之间进行了指示。通过称呼“楞伽之主”，展示了不正确的、看似正确的论证，就像这样：与所要证明的有为法的特征不同，与无为法的特征相符，这是相违的；与相似方和不相似方两者都不一致，这是非共同的，因而是不确定的。这两者是对看似所要证明的概要指示。与相似方和不相似方全部一致，因此进入双方，这是真实的非确定性；在相似方中不存在，只存在于不相似方，这是相违的。这两者是看似论证
English
Through the understanding of signs, and through the understanding of the sign-possessor to be inferred from those signs, even hidden things that have not manifested can be measured. If there is no inference accompanied by understanding, just as a newly found child does not know the danger of fire and so on, there will be no acceptance or rejection, no entering or withdrawing. For this mind accompanied by understanding, there are two situations: one is like understanding a rope as a rope, and understanding a mirage as a mirage, without confusion; the other is like mistaking a rope for a snake and a mirage for water, resulting in confusion. Relying on non-erroneous understanding, all the terms of knowable things of the three times can be distinguished without error. Therefore, just as the four reasonings of the power of things and the three divisions of the basis of valid signs were shown above, those skilled in reasoning and logic rely on the scriptures that show how to measure extremely hidden things, the purity of the three examinations, and through the two valid cognitions, properly examine the state of the two truths, thereby well obtaining unwavering conviction that does not rely on others. By increasing the light of wisdom in places where profound Dharma principles are difficult to understand, possessing fearless courage, with conduct as the gateway to guidance, completing the reasoning that establishes the tenets, ultimately reaching the limit of reasoning. And, for others, one can also proclaim with abundant words, thereby possessing the tradition of teaching, and ultimately perfectly accomplishing the two benefits. The second part has two parts: a summary indication and a detailed explanation. The first part, from "Lanka" to "uncertainties," is indicated. By addressing "Lord of Lanka," the presentation of impure, seemingly valid arguments is shown, like this: differing from the characteristic of the thing to be proven, which is conditioned, and conforming to the characteristic of the unconditioned, this is contradictory; not being consistent with both similar and dissimilar sides, this is non-common, and therefore uncertain. These two are a summary indication of what appears to be the thing to be proven. Being consistent with all similar and dissimilar sides, therefore entering both sides, this is actual uncertainty; not existing on the similar side and only existing on the dissimilar side, this is contradictory. These two are seemingly arguments.
Chinese
是为不净喻之略示。争论之有法，与他者自性相符，成为相似之喻，是为近取相似之喻，是不净喻之略示；争论之有法，于共同不著名，如常或无常之声，不成立相似，是不净有法之略示；虽于教典中著名，然非真实决定，是为量所害之似现。是为不净果之略示，与上述五者次第相违。总的来说，凡立为因者，即是因之相，若地成立，则遍于是因。就差别而言，知已应舍者，是为似因；知已应取者，是为正因，后者已说依赖于正量。此处说前者，凡立为因者，若不具足三相，即是似因之相。分则有未成、不定、相违三种。第一之相，凡因于所欲知而立，然如所立不成立者。分则有，于义不成立，及虽成立然就心识而言不成立二种。初者有，有法不存在、因不存在、二者皆不存在、虽有然无关联四种。初者，遍一切之我为有法。或，胜义谛之声为有法，如是等。于彼，无论立何因，皆无方分，故方分法不成立。二者，为缘我之功德之故。或，以是兔角之故，如是等。彼无论立于何处，皆非有法之法，故方分法不成立。三者，胜义谛之声为有法。是常，以是兔角之故，如是方分与法二者皆不成立。四者，因于所欲知，有不可能、不遍、遍与不遍二者皆有之三种。初者，声为有法。是无常，以非所作之故，如是等。或，以是眼所取之故，如是等。二者，声为有法。以心识先行为遍，以是士夫功用所生之故，如是等。三者，二月显现之增益识为有法。是现量，以是离分别、无错乱之故，如是等。虽成立离分别，然不成立无错乱。此处受到因不成立之责难。过于周遍者，是不定，故因不