English
Therefore, merely seeing is liberation. The moment the eye sees form, it is liberated. If liberation comes from knowing it, is it knowing existence or non-existence, etc., similar to the previous. Furthermore, refuting the system that accepts the Great Perfection as baseless and desires original liberation. Is that original liberation achieved through correction or without correction? According to the former, it is flawed by the term "unliberated." According to the latter, liberation is not established because if it is originally liberated, how is it different from animals? If there is no term for correction or non-correction, then it implies that in the reality of things, there is no term for liberation or non-liberation, which is self-contradictory. Furthermore, refuting the system of the Great Perfection that speaks of samsara as beginningless and endless and desires existent liberation. In this way, are all appearances liberated, or just a portion? If all appearances are liberated, then it is refuted by direct perception. If only a portion is liberated, then it is flawed by the term "totality." If the elements dissolve into their own essence and are liberated, then it is annihilation. If it is not so, how is it liberated like this? This is refuted by direct perception. If it is said that this itself is self-liberation, then the teachings of the Great and Small Vehicles are unnecessary. Therefore, is this acceptance of any basis whatsoever not a knowable dharma? When asked this, the teacher replied that it is the same as before, thus cutting off elaboration, and it is not a dharma to be practiced. Thus, the seventh, the refutation of the Great Vehicle's self-arisen desire, in which anything can be accepted, is explained through questions and answers. Now, the eighth, the Great Perfection's self-arisen desire, the questions and answers on abandoning other faults in the desire for original purity, are explained. From then on, the Bodhisattva also. And so on, nine words are clear in the text. From then on, it is "from then on," refuting others' views. The teacher, considering the way things exist in their nature, strives to have the compiler establish his own view. He says, "O great Bodhisattva, listen!" After calling out in this way, because the words I have explained are without error, he instructs the compiler to remember these words well. Because the elaboration of words is not the scope of usage of various terms, this is the key point that cannot be determined by words. Because the elaboration of characteristics is not existence or non-existence, permanence or annihilation, whatever appears, no nature of anything is established. Because the elaboration of mind has no various movements, this is the key point that the nature does not change. The established edge
Chinese
因为没有不同乘的意愿，所以没有法。那也超越了言辞和表达。如此这般，远离戏论的法性，本来清净，不是由因缘所生，所以没有生灭。如果给它命名，就叫做自性完全清净的精华基。因为它远离言辞和文字，所以叫做超越表达。因为它无法用言辞的表达来确定，所以谁也不知道它的体性和自性。它的自性远离一切虚构和名相，本来就是空明无二的。它的悲悯没有能取和所取的分别念，所以没有境法性，没有有境的觉性智慧。因此，从那个基上没有法，所以基上连法的概念都没有。如此这般，在自性、自性和悲悯上，所显现的一切都是无境的，并且没有境和觉性智慧。因为没有任何心和心所，所以叫做远离一切承诺。因此，经文里也说：有和没有，这二者是没有的法。如此这般，在没有的精华自性上，虽然什么都没有，但是为了众生的缘故，暂时用言辞来确定，在自性本初清净上，从它的显现不灭的角度来说，认为是自性任运成就。暂时言辞的表达就是如此，但从实相的层面来说，是无法用任何方式来触及的。对于“本初清净”的基的辩驳是：菩萨日藏请问：导师普贤王如来，那个基的自性是本初清净的，从没有无明的角度来说，是本初清净，或者自性自圆满。如果按照前者，众生就不应该产生；如果按照后者，轮回和涅槃的对境差别就不应该存在。回答：因为无明并不存在，所以从原始清净大界中没有重新建立的基础。如果问：那么这个心的错乱是从哪里产生的呢？回答：从安住的方式上来说，没有众生的存在。如果问：这是用现量来破除的吗？回答：你看到心安住了吗？因为没有实证，所以说你错乱了。如果问：因为是错乱的，所以不是本初清净吗？回答：谁说本初清净是错乱的？因为本初清净本来就是清净的。那也是自性本初清净，仅仅是这样说而已，实际上并不存在。
English
Because there is no desire for different vehicles, there is no dharma. That also transcends words and expressions. Thus, the nature of reality, which is free from elaboration and primordially pure, is not produced by causes and conditions, so it has no birth or death. If we give it a name, it is called the essence-ground, whose own being is completely pure. Because it is free from words and letters, it is called beyond expression. Because it cannot be definitively established by verbal expression, no one knows its characteristics or essence. Its nature is free from all imputation and terminology, and is primordially indivisible emptiness and clarity. Its compassion has no conceptualization of grasping or being grasped, so there is no object-dharmata, and no subject-awareness-wisdom. Therefore, since there is no dharma from that ground, there is not even a concept of dharma on the ground. Thus, in essence, nature, and compassion, whatever appears is without an object, and there is no object or awareness-wisdom. Since there is no mind or mental events whatsoever, it is called free from all assertions. Therefore, the scriptures also say: "These two, existence and non-existence, are dharmas without." Thus, in the essence of non-existence, although there is nothing, yet for the sake of sentient beings, if we temporarily establish it with words, then in the very essence of primordial purity, from the aspect of its unceasing manifestation, it is considered to be spontaneously accomplished by nature. The temporary verbal representation is just like that, but from the perspective of reality itself, it cannot be touched by anything. The refutation of the ground called "primordial purity" is: Bodhisattva Nyima Dungdü asked: "Teacher, Samantabhadra, the essence of that ground is primordially pure. From the perspective of the absence of ignorance, is it primordially pure, or is it self-perfected by nature? If it is according to the former, sentient beings should not arise; if it is according to the latter, the difference between samsara and nirvana should not exist." Answer: "Because ignorance does not exist, there is no re-establishment of the ground from the great expanse of primordial purity." If you ask: "Then where does this delusion of mind come from?" Answer: "From the way of abiding, there is no existence of sentient beings." If you ask: "Is this refuted by direct perception?" Answer: "Do you see the mind abiding? Because there is no realization, it is said that you are deluded." If you ask: "Because it is delusion, is it not primordially pure?" Answer: "Who says that primordial purity is delusion? Because primordial purity is primordially pure." That is also the self-nature of primordial purity, just saying that, in reality, it does not exist.
Chinese
啊！仅仅不净的行为也没有成立。如果没有净与不净，如果说是以教理和比喻来开示的觉知，那么你所说的净是什么呢？如果说是法性，因为法性的净化在你心中没有成立，心识会流向各种各样的方向。那么什么是不净呢？如果说是错乱，是相对于不错乱的错乱吗？或者说是分离？因为不以不错乱为参照，就无法了解不错乱的体性。这样的话，如果说众生轮回是不可理喻的，如果众生在所知境上成立，那么个人努力就没有必要了。即使不努力，也是不费力气自然解脱的关键。如果问如何知道显现为众生，回答说因为有错乱的觉知。即使错乱在你心中成立，也不可能在所知境上成立。因为无明的垢染本来就已耗尽。如果又说不是本来清净的宗派，那么这有净化的因或净化的缘吗？不是像有净与不净的对立。因为“ཀ་（ka）”字在最初的ཀ་ལི་（kali）等之前出现，所以本来清净，从改造中解脱。自性清净，从努力中解脱。自然清净，从所证中解脱。未曾经历错乱，从本体中解脱。不住于错乱，从自性中解脱。不可能有错乱，从大悲中解脱。如果说轮回的法不净，那么仅仅是错乱的行为吗？或者仅仅是不错乱的行为也没有成立，所以无明和清净没有名称。因为显现和不显现没有成立，所以能取和所取自性清净，烦恼的根源空尽。如果说因为无明不净而错乱，所以众生的错乱之基会产生各种各样的现象，这样来阻断，那么对此，导师回答说，称呼为大菩萨，因为仅仅是本体本来清净的功德，其自性自然成就。即使说无明本身是本来清净，也没有意义。因为本体从本来就清净的功用或功德，或者说不间断的法性之游舞中显现。对此进行辩论，菩萨自己又请问：啊！导师，因为本体本来清净的自性是自然成就的，所以三界的这些众生理应自然解脱成佛，因为从一开始就在本体上自然成就。首先，立宗没有成立，因为不是本体而是自性。其次，理由没有成立。
English
Ah! Even merely impure actions are not established. If there is no pure and impure, if it is said to be the knowledge shown by scripture and analogy, then what do you call pure? If you say it is the nature of reality, because the purification of the nature of reality is not established in your mind, the mind flows in various directions. Then what is impure? If you say it is delusion, is it delusion relative to non-delusion? Or is it separation? Because without referring to non-delusion, the characteristic of non-delusion cannot be understood. In that case, if it is said that the samsara of sentient beings is unreasonable, if sentient beings are established in the knowable, then personal effort is not necessary. Even without effort, it is the key to effortless self-liberation. If you ask how to know that it appears as sentient beings, the answer is because there is deluded awareness. Even if delusion is established in your mind, it is impossible to establish it in the knowable. Because the stain of ignorance has been exhausted from the beginning. If you say it is not the school of original purity, then is there a cause of purification or a condition of purification for this? It is not like there is an opposition of pure and impure. Because the letter “ཀ་（ka）” appears before the initial ཀ་ལི་（kali） etc., it is originally pure, liberated from modification. Self-pure, liberated from effort. Spontaneously pure, liberated from what is to be accomplished. Never having experienced delusion, liberated from essence. Not abiding in delusion, liberated from nature. Delusion is impossible, liberated from compassion. If you say that the dharma of samsara is impure, then is it merely deluded action? Or even merely non-deluded action is not established, so ignorance and purity have no name. Because appearance and non-appearance are not established, the object to be grasped and the grasper are self-pure, the root of affliction is exhausted. If you say that because ignorance is impure, there is delusion, so the basis of delusion of sentient beings will produce various phenomena, thus blocking it, then in response to this, the teacher said, calling him a great bodhisattva, because it is merely the quality of the essence being originally pure, its nature is naturally accomplished. Even if you say that ignorance itself is originally pure, it is meaningless. Because the function or quality of the essence being pure from the beginning, or the play of the uninterrupted nature of reality, appears. Arguing about this, the bodhisattva himself again asked: Ah! Teacher, because the nature of the essence being originally pure is naturally accomplished, these sentient beings of the three realms should naturally be liberated into buddhahood, because it is naturally accomplished in the essence from the beginning. First, the proposition is not established, because it is not the essence but the nature. Second, the reason is not established.