English
The pure Other-powered is: the pure realm and the vision of the Buddha, the realm that appears in the pure realm, and the appearances that arise in the palace of the seven jewels and joy and light. Some here argue from the treatises of the pure Yogacara school that the Other-powered is unreasonable, since everything is included in one's own appearance. But I do not see this argument as reasonable, for it is not reasonable to establish oneself as oneself from the aspect of habit from one's own knowledge, just as the image in a mirror, although formed by the cause of the form, is not the face. It is also necessary to examine whether everything is included in one's own appearance: is it included in the mind as mere appearance, or is appearance the mind? If it is the former, then at the time of mere appearance, there is no room for examining inclusion or non-inclusion, so saying inclusion is just a word, because the form of meaning remains outside. If it is the latter, then what is reasonable about this? If you say that because it arises from the mind, it is the mind, then the son born of a woman will also become a woman, because she is not a woman; and the impurity arising from the body will also become the body, because it is not the body, which is clear in appearance. Again, if you say that because it appears in the mind, it is the mind, then form will also become eye-consciousness, because it appears in eye-consciousness; and the Buddha who appears before the inverted sentient beings will also become the mind of that sentient being. If you admit this, then there will be the fault of the inverted sentient being's mind becoming a Buddha, or the sentient beings appearing before the Buddha, either the entire realm of sentient beings will become a Buddha, or the Buddha, who is free from all defilements, will also become a sentient being, and this fault can never be avoided. If you say that because it does not arise without the mind, it is considered the mind, then the cause of the thing and the result of the thing will also become one, because it does not arise without it; and the anger of the enemy and oneself will also become one, because without the enemy, the anger caused by him will not arise. Again, if you say that because it is made by the mind, it is the mind, this is also unreasonable, the form of the painting will also become the painter, because it is made by the painter. Therefore, how can it be reasonable to consider the outer earth, stones, mountains, and rocks as the mind? Let it be an illusion arising from the habits of the mind! If it is not so, then beings
Chinese
当众人观看同一个瓶子时，所见之瓶即成为彼等之识，故一切众生之识成为一体。若许此说，则一人成佛时，一切众生皆应成佛；一人堕入恶道时，一切众生皆应堕入恶道。依彼等之见，世间亦应仅有一如你我之有情，因所见之山皆非自心之外。又或不应有如释迦牟尼佛之外的佛，因其所见一切皆为其识。若许此说，则我等安住之处即为光明。如是执持宗义者，现今看来甚多，彼等全然不解大乘之义。身躯庞大莲网覆，花朵耳饰相辉映，黄金面具光灿灿，唯是大象之姿态。如是说。如此显现之诸法为何？纵可如唯识宗无垢派所许般安立，然于彼宗之论典中云：如是各自所显现者，虽为各自之心，然所显现之境并非心，如《瑜伽行派多品》所云：‘显现如何即是心，然显现之境非如是，无始时来具习气，如因错觉见乱发。’如是，未能区分显现与所显现。彼亦于所显现之山，如是思维‘是山’，如他人般以分别念执取，此乃心之显现，依眼根而生。彼亦于自身所往之处，自心所执取之分即为自身之显现，然于前往他处之时，所显现之境虽不随之，然先前面见眼识之习气则会执取。总义，无有意识之境，明朗之显现则于意根前清晰显现。是故，以意识衡量之显现，及执持彼者，与他人之显现，及执持彼者，一切皆是心，然意识所缘之生处，即是安立所显现之境者，而五根之境，一切皆如无始以来之习气所致，无而显现，如乱发飘落。若如是，则成二，因所显现之境与显现已成立为异体，是耶？
English
When many people look at the same pot, the pot they see becomes their consciousness, so the consciousness of all beings becomes one. If this is accepted, then when one person becomes a Buddha, all beings should become Buddhas, and when one person falls into a bad rebirth, all beings should fall into a bad rebirth. According to them, there should only be one sentient being like you or me in the world, because all that appears in the mountains is not other than one's own mind. Or, there should be no other Buddha than Shakyamuni, because all that he sees is his consciousness. If this is accepted, then the place where we are is light. It seems that there are many who hold such tenets these days, and they are completely ignorant of the meaning of the Great Vehicle. A large body covered with a lotus net, adorned with flower earrings, a golden mask shining brightly, it is just the posture of an elephant. So it is said. What are these appearances? Although it can be established as accepted by the Mind-Only School of Immaculate Appearance, in its treatises it says: Although what appears to each person is their own mind, the object of appearance is not the mind. As it says in the Many Sections of Yoga Practice: 'How it appears is the mind, but the object of appearance is not like that, with beginningless habits, like tangled hair seen through illusion.' Thus, there is no distinction between appearance and the object of appearance. Also, regarding the mountain that appears, thinking 'it is a mountain,' grasping with conceptual thought like others, this is the appearance of the mind, arising dependent on the eye sense. Also, the part of the place one goes to that is grasped by one's own mind is one's own appearance, but when going to another place, although the object of appearance does not follow, it grasps the habits of what previously appeared to the eye consciousness. The general meaning, the object of mind is absent, the clear appearance clearly appears to the mind sense. Therefore, the appearance measured by mind, and grasping it, and the appearance of others, and grasping it, all are mind, but the place of origin of what the mind focuses on is the establisher of the object of appearance, and all the objects of the five senses appear without being there due to beginningless habits, like tangled hair falling. If so, then it becomes two, because the object of appearance and appearance have been established as different entities, is it?
Chinese
对于您来说，也变成了二，显现的心在外，执持的心在内。如果说，即使这两者在心识上是一体的，被称为二，但在种类上是一致的，那么，在这里，也是由于习气错乱的缘故，显现的对境和执持它的决定的显现，明明是无二的，却在名言上不异于习气错乱的显现。这两者在实际上并不存在，因此成立为无二的自性。我们中观派认为，经过观察，显现的对境之事物不仅不是心，而且也不认为显现是心，因为内在的心不存在于外，而外在的显现则在各个根识中显现，这是通过心在内部进行观察的缘故。如果显现存在于外，那么就会出现具有第二意识的人同时存在，或者自己变成无情物等诸多过失。因此，虽然执持显现与不显现是心，但显现并不能成立为心，就像能听到鼓声是否是鼓声的听觉，但听觉并不能成立为鼓声一样。总之，自己的心虽然好像向外散发，但实际上并没有向外散发，而且外在的形象在内部显现。因此，外在的显现根本不是内在的心。如果存在，那么由于显现的原因，这些显现为白色、红色等各种各样的东西，就像白内障眼病患者看到毛发掉落一样，在外、内、中间任何地方都不存在却显现，因此是无自性，或者说是自性空。成立为心和成立为心之外的两者，都没有从执着自性真实中解脱出来，所以根本没有差别。如果说，因为承认外境之事物不是意识，所以与声闻部有部相同，那是不相同的，因为有部承认外境是实有的自相，而我们则说习气错乱的显现就像梦一样，明明不存在却在心中显现。这种方式即使是中观应成派也无法否认，并且是合理的。如果中观应成派否定所承认的一切，那么，像这样，并不是否定显现本身，而是如果存在对真实的执着，就会否定，正如论师龙树所说： 如此显现不遮遣，当遮真实之分别。 这样说了。唯识宗以真实存在的方式承认形象存在于心中，以及真实存在
English
For you, too, it becomes two, with the appearing mind being external and the grasping mind being internal. If it is said that even though these two are one in mind, they are called two, but are one in terms of category, then here, too, due to the cause of habitual confusion, the appearing object and the definite appearance that grasps it, although appearing as non-dual, are nominally not different from the appearance of habitual confusion. These two do not exist in reality, therefore they are established as the nature of non-duality. We Madhyamikas believe that, upon examination, the object of appearance is not only not mind, but also do not consider appearance to be mind, because the inner mind does not exist externally, and the external appearance appears in each sense consciousness, which is why the mind examines internally. If appearance exists externally, then there would be many faults such as the possibility of a person with a second consciousness existing simultaneously, or oneself becoming an inanimate object. Therefore, although grasping appearance and non-appearance is mind, appearance cannot be established as mind, just as the hearing that can hear whether the sound of a drum is the sound of a drum, but the hearing cannot be established as the sound of a drum. In short, although one's own mind seems to radiate outward, it does not actually radiate outward, and the external image appears internally. Therefore, the external appearance is definitely not the internal mind. If it exists, then because of the reason for appearance, these appearances of white, red, and various colors, like the appearance of hair falling out to a person with cataracts, do not exist in any of the outer, inner, or intermediate places, but appear, therefore it is without self-nature, or it is called emptiness of essence. Both being established as mind and being established as other than mind are not liberated from the attachment to self-existence, so there is absolutely no difference. If it is said that because it is admitted that external objects are not consciousness, it is the same as the Shravaka Vaibhashikas, it is not the same, because the Vaibhashikas admit that external objects are established as real self-characteristics, while we say that the appearance of habitual confusion is like a dream, appearing in the mind even though it does not exist. This method cannot be denied even by the Madhyamika Prasangikas, and it is reasonable. If the Madhyamika Prasangikas deny everything that is admitted, then, like this, it is not denying the appearance itself, but if there is attachment to reality, it will be denied, as the teacher Nagarjuna said: Thus, appearance itself is not rejected, but the discrimination of reality is to be reversed. So it was said. The Mind-Only school, in a truly existent way, admits that the image exists in the mind, and that it truly exists.
Chinese
通过名言和虚假二者，遮止了在胜义中成立自证的观点。然而，对于串习所致的错乱显现无有而生，以及成立的分别念在意义上起作用，又怎么会遮止呢？因为在进行世俗的分别念时，它们是相同的。因此，外在他者自在，以及心识后后从前前产生那样显现，也是因为依赖于其他先前的意义，而将“他者自在”用在内部，这也需要考察。如果因为显现为先后而安立，那只是名称而已，实际上因为是自性所以一致。如果认为在他性上是不同的，因为是觉性，所以没有成立他性的自性，因此违背了承认，这不是好的。如经中所说： 如此种种显现， 因为在他处种类相似的缘故， 取舍不净为他者自在， 清净也说是他者自在， 虽然不是自在所变， 但说显现为他者。 如此等等。在圆成实性方面，也有不变和不颠倒两种。其中不变的圆成实性是：无论在迷惑或不迷惑的时候，都具有自性清净的法性，自然具有的空性，安住于前后没有差别的状态，这被称为不变的圆成实性，是本性的实相。依此而安立，空性也分为三种：自性空、他性空和二者皆空。自性空是指无有而显现，如水中的月亮一般，舍弃了自己的体性，以及没有区分自他的部分，虽然不舍弃任运成就的法，但安立为自性空这二者。他性空也分为：不具有的他性空和名言的他性空。二者皆空也分为：具有二者的名言空和声义自相空。因此，心的法性光明，是心髓的自性，这远离了一切过失的事物，具有功德的体性，从本体清净的角度来说，是超越了过失和功德的成立与破除的。错乱显现的垢染，显现为白色、红色等各种各样的法，以及普遍的分别念或八识聚，这些在本性上是没有的，因此从自性上也是空性的，如同柱子和瓶子一样，从名言上也是空性的，并且具有过失的部分。本体自