English
It should be considered in this way. Otherwise, such a view would have to be admitted as a wrong view that holds the reality in a reversed manner. Generally, it is impossible to separate the appearance aspect as the dharma aspect and the emptiness aspect as the nature of reality on top of the six or eight consciousnesses. This is because all dharmas do not change from the realm of the union of dharma nature. Even if it can be separated, it is not established separately in reality, but is established as one taste of equality. This self-cognizance is the actual reality of the dharmadhatu. Conversely, the dharma nature that is separated is not the ultimate dharma nature. If the dharma aspect and the dharma nature are not mixed, then it is not permissible to admit that the two truths are the same in essence but different in aspect. If both the essence and the aspect of the two truths are different, then it must be assumed that the lower self-sufficient two truths are like the horns of a bull. If so, the realization of the dharma nature will not overwhelm the dharma aspect, and so on. The four faults of speaking of the two truths as different will harm it. If the two truths are inseparable union, then such a union is beyond the limits of conditioned and unconditioned. That itself should be given the name of the great unconditioned free from extremes. Such a union of awareness and emptiness is acknowledged in our own system as the co-emergent of the meaning of self-arisen wisdom and the original luminosity. Manjushri he! Furthermore, the exemplary wisdom that represents, represents the co-emergent of meaning through similar aspects. It is the cause of manifestation, but not the proximate cause. If it were, then before the exemplary wisdom arises, the co-emergent of meaning would not exist. Because without the proximate cause, there cannot be the proximate result, just as there is no sprout before the seed. If you accept that, then it will not become the co-emergent of meaning, because it will become temporary and impermanent. The reality of the meaning to be represented, whether it can be realized or not, exists as the nature of reality. This is a general statement of scripture, and in particular, the scriptures of the Noble Wheel, such as the Five Stages, are infallible and upright. Therefore, the wisdom of meaning is a detached result, that is, unconditioned. If it is a ripening result, then it is not the basis of Vajrayana, because there will be no union and so on. In particular, the luminosity of meaning is a ripening result, and
Chinese
如果它的近取因是细微意，那么，在此之前的光明等等，以及虚空是什么？是细微意吗？是它的境。如果是境，是有为还是无为？若是有为，是色、受、想、行、识五蕴中的哪一个？若是无为，是择灭等三者，还是空性？这样提问。如果说这些都不是，仅仅是意的显现，那么，观察这个显现，这个比一还细微的意，是否执持其他的显现等等。幻身也是光明自显本有，如果不是这样，而是从五气五光中新造，那么，光明不是具有一切相的自显，就成了断灭空。如果这样，那么三有也不能从此转变，也要引证所说的经文。如果是五气的近取因的果，双运的本尊身，那么，基就不能是双运，会变成断灭空。像这样是被经文所破斥的。另外，如果不是能显现真实本尊身显现的本初气，那么，它的近取因就是业气，因为普通人没有本初气，只有业气。如果用方法修持，也只是本初气的因，像没有水肥的种子一样，现在是本初气的因还没有成熟的时候。如果这样认为，那么你认为普通人也有中脉中的本初气，因为气进入中脉，住留，融入这三者是金刚乘的快速道，被盛赞，而且续部中说，无论是否入道，一切众生都本自具有心要智慧气的坛城，以及本自具有不坏明点，具有不变的安乐和殊胜空性双运，遍虚空虚空金刚。如果不是这样，那么无论在身上按什么要害，都不能生起真实的智慧，因为一切都是不净的气心。如果气心收入脉中，只能成就止观，不能证悟法界，因为没有证悟它的理由。如果认为，如果与中脉道的空性没有关联，就不能通过金刚乘道获得解脱和一切智智，那么，中脉道的空性
English
If its immediate cause is subtle mind, then, what is prior to that, like luminosity, and what is like space? Is it subtle mind? Is it its object? If it is an object, is it conditioned or unconditioned? If it is conditioned, which of the three—matter, consciousness, or neither? If it is unconditioned, is it cessation through analysis, etc., or emptiness? Thus one asks. If one says that none of these, but merely an appearance of mind, then examine whether that appearance, that mind more subtle than one, grasps other appearances or not, and so on. The illusory body is also the self-display of luminosity, primordially existent. If it is not that, but newly created from the five winds and lights, then luminosity, not being the self-display of all forms, would entail nihilistic emptiness. If so, then the three realms could not transform from it, and one should cite the scriptures that say it does. If the deity body of union is the result of the immediate cause of the five winds, then the basis cannot be union, as it would become nihilistic emptiness. Such a view is refuted by scripture. Furthermore, if the primordial wind is not what causes the appearance of the pure deity body to arise, then its immediate cause is karma wind, because ordinary beings do not have primordial wind, only karma wind. If one accomplishes it through methods, it is only the cause of primordial wind, like a seed without water and fertilizer, it is now a time when the cause of primordial wind has not yet become potent. If you assert this, then you assert that ordinary beings also have primordial wind in the central channel, because entering, abiding, and dissolving into the central channel is praised as the swift path of Vajrayana, and the tantras say that all beings, whether they have entered the path or not, inherently possess the mandala of essential wisdom wind, and inherently possess the indestructible bindu, possessing unchanging bliss and supreme emptiness union, all-pervading space vajra. If it were not so, then no matter what vital point one presses on the body, actual wisdom could not arise, because everything would be merely impure wind-mind. If wind-mind is gathered into the channels, one might achieve calm abiding, but one would not realize the sphere of reality, because there would be no reason to realize it. If one asserts that if it is not connected with the realization of emptiness of the central channel path, one cannot attain liberation and omniscience through the Vajrayana path, then the emptiness of the central channel path
Chinese
那么，这是否就是那超越数量的法界，显空双运，具备一切殊胜特性的空性，本来就作为法性存在于一切法之中呢？或者仅仅是名言上的无遮止呢？如果不是名言上的，那么 যেহেতু 承认只有圣者才能了解，又如何引导凡夫呢？如果是名言上的，那么空性就不是自相，而仅仅是意识分别的对境，当八十自性的分别念止息时，又如何忆念那分别念的对境呢？如果忆念，那么八十自性等也会被忆念。此外，如果不依赖于断除实有成立，那么独立自主的无实有自性是不可能显现的。如果显现，就会损害实有成立和自相见等。如果不显现，那么分别念的对境，仅仅是通过分别念假立的，又如何与无分别的明光相混合呢？对无分别念施加分别念的污垢，如果变得更好，那就太可笑了。同样，虽然凡夫修习空性的所有心都是有为法，但是通过将空性生起为无为、不可言说的状态，以空性总相的方式证悟，并且被称为后得光明。但这并不是以它作为近取因来新成立空性的自相，因为空性本来就存在。光明和空性实际上并非不同，如果光明的近取因是微细的心，那么修习空性总相的心，如果不是空性的近取因，不是那无生无灭、如虚空般的近取因，那么空性就会变成有为法。因此，空性不应该有近取因。如果说光明是能取，空性是所取，那么，这是否本来就证悟了空性呢？如果没有证悟，那么就不是能取的自性；如果已经证悟，又何必重新忆念空性见呢？本觉心光明和空性本来就是不可分离的，是自生智慧，这也是法界和一切法的法性，除此之外别无他物。此外，如果光明是有为法的能取，并且与所取空性是不同的，那么它就不能成为一切法的法性，即使引用圣教等经文，也只是说光明是法性。解脱三门和光明的四门
English
So, is this the emptiness that transcends number, the union of appearance and emptiness of the Dharmadhatu, possessing all supreme qualities, which inherently exists as the Dharma-nature in all phenomena? Or is it merely a nominal negation? If it is not nominal, then since it is admitted that only noble ones can understand, how can ordinary beings be guided? If it is nominal, then emptiness is not a characteristic, but merely the object of mental imputation. When the eighty self-natures' conceptualizations cease, how can that object of conceptualization be remembered? If remembered, then the eighty self-natures, etc., will also be remembered. Furthermore, without relying on the severance of true establishment, the independent nature of non-true existence cannot possibly arise. If it arises, it will harm true establishment and the seeing of self-characteristics, etc. If it does not arise, then how can the object of conceptual thought, which is merely imputed by conceptual thought, be mixed with the non-conceptual clear light? If adding the defilement of conceptual thought to non-conceptual thought makes it better, that is ridiculous. Similarly, although all the minds of ordinary beings that meditate on emptiness are conditioned, through generating emptiness as an unconditioned, inexpressible state, it is said to realize emptiness in the manner of a general meaning, and it is called subsequent clear light. But this is not to newly establish the self-characteristic of emptiness by making it the immediate cause, because emptiness inherently exists. Although clear light and emptiness are not different in essence, if the immediate cause of clear light is a subtle mind, then if the mind that meditates on the general meaning of emptiness is not the immediate cause of emptiness, not the immediate cause of that unborn, unceasing, sky-like state, then emptiness will become conditioned. Therefore, emptiness should not have an immediate cause. If it is said that clear light is the subject and emptiness is the object, then has it originally realized emptiness or not? If it has not realized it, then it is not the nature of the subject; if it has realized it, then why is it necessary to newly remember the view of emptiness? The innate mind, clear light, and emptiness are inherently inseparable, being self-born wisdom, and that is also the Dharma-nature of the Dharmadhatu and all phenomena, and there is nothing other than that. Furthermore, if clear light is the subject of conditioned phenomena, and if the object, emptiness, exists separately, then it cannot be the Dharma-nature of all phenomena, even if scriptures such as the Noble Discourses are cited, it is only said that clear light is the Dharma-nature. The three doors of liberation and the four doors of clear light.
Chinese
引用说，将（万法）阐释为空性且无差别等等，考察“意之光明”的含义是什么。心的自性光明是什么等等。以及，自性光明圆满菩提心等等，请如实阐述。它不能被烦恼所染污，因为它是非复合的，所以像虚空一样不会改变吗？或者，即使是复合的，又是什么不能被烦恼所染污？如果像第一种情况那样，则符合所愿。如果像第二种情况那样，它总是专注于一个目标而不动摇，那么就不能新修空性。也不会变成遍知的近取因。等等，请考察。因此，遍知必须是如来藏，具有十力，本来就存在的自生智慧。那是密宗中要阐述的主要内容，请引用（经文）。不仅如此，大乘的经和《宝性论》中也这样认为，更何况是密宗呢？ 根本心是常有的。心的法性像虚空一样，必须存在于一切众生心中。像微细意、离缘、虚空观等等，如果它不是常有的，那就不是根本心。如果它是常有的，那么它知道自己的对境之外的其他事物吗？如果知道，那就成了遍计所执。如果不知道，那就不能修习空性。如果遍知是可以改变的，那么像修习无边虚空等等，也是由那个根本心来修习的吗？如果是，那就不是密宗的特点。如果不是，那么它是什么？是粗意还是阿赖耶识等等？如果根本心、微细意是复合的，那么它就可以被因缘所改变，也可以中断，因为它是复合的。因为它能被改变成各种各样的东西，就像可以学习善等习气一样，被烦恼熏习后，也会积累轮回的种子，因为它能产生一切。五气明点是显现身相的因，但是，它不仅能显现佛的身相，还能显现瓶子、毯子等等各种各样的东西。因此，自生大印等等，能显现多少对境和有境，那个因怎么会仅仅是佛的身相之因呢？它粗显时也能产生轮回的显现。它微细时也能产生它自己的各种空色，但是，仅仅如此还不是法性基础的无染显现，因为它与业气相伴。与业气分离的本初音声、本初气是非复合的，它不会成为轮回之因，也不会成为习气的所依。