English
It will accomplish a new ground. Even if it doesn't accomplish a new clear light, do you think it accomplishes a new illusory body? Because clear light is the emptiness that possesses all aspects, the supreme of all kinds, and not a mundane emptiness. Therefore, its appearance, the appearance of clear light, will also not be newly accomplished. If clear light has no appearance, then when ultimate clear light arises, if there must be nothing appearing and no awareness, that is impossible. If it were possible, it would become merely a state of mindlessness, which no one could know. If that mind is known by another mind, it contradicts the statement that all eight consciousnesses cease. Furthermore, for a yogi on the path, even when clear light arises, the signs do not need to cease, because they are accomplished during the path, so it is clear. Moreover, it is known that appearances do not cease for the Buddhas. Are clear light and appearance contradictory in all ways, or not? If they are contradictory, then it cannot be the nature of all phenomena. When it arises, no appearance arises. When there is appearance, it does not arise, so it becomes like hot and cold sensations. Then, when ultimate clear light arises, isn't it said that there is no conceptual thought of the eighty natures and their objects? Yes, it is said. However, there, both the appearance and the grasping created by impure wind-mind are absent. However, the pure self-appearance arising without grasping is present, because it is like the emptiness that possesses all aspects being revealed. During the experience of the path, various experiences of non-appearance and appearance arise, but that is not the meaning of illusory light union, but rather alternating. If it is not like that, and the self-aware wisdom of the nature of reality is not accepted, but the nature of reality must be taken as an object and known by another conditioned mind, then dualistic appearance will not subside. For the nature of reality, it will not become of one taste even in the state of Buddhahood. That mind that takes it as an object will never return, so it is impossible for dualistic appearance to subside. Furthermore, if that mind naturally realizes the nature of reality, then all sentient beings will become those who inherently possess the realization of emptiness. If one does not know oneself and must learn anew from others, then that one is newly enrolled in school. Therefore, in the past, it must be established that there is no reason to learn other conceptual thoughts such as grasping at self. In particular, if one can learn the grasping of non-affirming negation, which is the object of conceptual thought, then what else is there to learn?
Chinese
没有。如果像远离能取、所取、作用三者的虚空一样，什么也无法执著，那么即使学习空性也不会理解。如果那个和确定空性的粗大心识二者是同一个相续，那么即使八识停止，也会因此修习空性。如果不是一个相续，那么粗大意识的学修就无法应用到那个上面。获得禅定明相后，粗显的显现消失是细微意识，虽然那是意识的相续，但在显现穷尽的光明自性者那里，它不会存在。像远离能取、所取、作用三者的虚空那样，那是无知的虚空，还是具有知的？那是有质碍还是无质碍？是三种行，还是非为合和之法？是空性还是非空性？如果是空性，则不需要新修。如果不是，那么思考它有什么用，能成办什么等等。因此，无有条件的虚空，难以象征觉性空性的赤裸智慧，仅仅是象征细微和粗大分别念止息的例子。它象征着没有被显现、增长、获得三种所染污，但不能在它的上面将境和有境分开。如果它本身不是光明的自性，而是需要其他使之成为光明的条件，那么基础光明是什么样的，因为无法安立，所以会变成断灭，因此不能是俱生。如果说基础光明不是光明的自性，那么一切法融入何处，以及从何处显现的光明将彻底消失，并且也不能是俱生，而会变成新造作。如果是那样，因为已经认识了基础光明，所以不是修道，而是会新修一个名为光明的道，就像灭尽定一样。空性也和那个一样，在没有用意识造作之前，在密咒道的光明生起时，如果不能理解空性的修习，那么对于圣道等持也是一样。在没有用意识造作之前，不应承认空性与法俱生存在。如果认为即使存在，不用意识修习也没有用，那么即使没有所修和能修，当法性觉性空性双运生起时，也不需要用意识修习，因为它是自发显现的。在没有生起时，是用分别念修习。仅仅修习无遮，不能理解修习究竟空性
English
It is not. If, like the sky devoid of the three—agent, object, and action—nothing can be fixated upon, then even if emptiness is taught, it will not be understood. If that and the coarse mind that ascertains emptiness are one continuum, then even when the eight consciousnesses cease, one will still meditate on emptiness. If they are not one, then the study of the coarse mind cannot be applied to that. Although the reversal of coarse appearances upon gaining clear appearances in samadhi is a subtle mind, and although it is a continuum of mind, it will not exist in the ultimate luminosity. Is that sky devoid of the three—agent, object, and action—a sky without awareness or with awareness? Is it material or immaterial? Is it one of the three conditioned phenomena or unconditioned? Is it emptiness or not? If it is emptiness, then there is no need for new meditation. If not, then examine what benefit or accomplishment it has. Therefore, the sky devoid of conditions is merely an example that represents the nature of the difficult-to-represent naked wisdom of awareness and emptiness, where subtle and coarse conceptualizations cease. It represents without being tainted by the three—appearance, increase, and attainment. One should not differentiate between object and subject on top of that. If it is not the nature of luminosity itself, and another condition is needed to make it luminous, then what is the nature of the base luminosity? Because it cannot be established, it will become utterly nonexistent, and therefore cannot be coemergent. If you say that the base luminosity is not the nature of luminosity, then where do all phenomena dissolve, and the luminosity that appears from what will utterly cease? It also cannot be coemergent, but will become newly created. If that is the case, then because the base luminosity has been recognized, it is not the path to be cultivated. Rather, a path called luminosity will be newly cultivated, like the cessation attainment. Emptiness is also the same as that. Until it is not fabricated by the mind, when the luminosity of the mantra path arises, if the meditation on emptiness is not understood, then it is the same for the noble path of equipoise. Until it is not fabricated by the mind, it is not appropriate to assert that emptiness exists coemergently with phenomena. If you think that even if it exists, it is useless if not meditated upon by the mind, then even without an object of meditation or a meditator, when the union of the nature of reality, awareness, and emptiness arises, there is no need to meditate with the mind, because it is self-illuminating. When it has not arisen, one meditates with conceptual thought. Merely meditating on negation does not lead to understanding the ultimate meditation on emptiness.
Chinese
因此，对于有分别的行境来说，无分别二取灭除的行境是无法显现的。如果显现了非此的空性，即离戏论、无境与有境，那么也就不需要执着的分别念了。对于现量体验明空的分别念来说，即使加上断灭的补丁也是不需要的，而且也无法加上，就像在见到虚空空旷的同时，不需要执着虚空不存在一样。如果无分别二取灭除，那么也就不可能存在分别的 сети。此外，虽然世间存在“见到虚空”的说法和“无障碍体验”的意义，但实际上并不存在。例如，“见到虚空”等等。同样，空性的色等也显现为瑜伽士的行境，有增长和消减。虽然存在像用云的有无来区分虚空的情况，但虚空不会因此而变成无常或有为法。同样，未造作的自性光明显现也与此类似。空性的四种显现本身，从其自性来说，是没有生等的。如果执着实有，就需要分析空性的方式。但是，当瑜伽士像看到幻觉一样，知道一切皆空时，就不需要分析空性的方式了，因为他本来就见到了空性。同样，虽然空性是常，但由于所法的不同，以及在分别念中时而显现时而不显现，以及见解变得越来越好等等情况，空性也不会因此而变成无常。空性的影像，即光明的显现，由于其自性未成立，所以没有变化。虽然在有变化的分别念的对境上显现为生灭，但实际上没有生灭。如果有人问：普通人的显现实际上也没有生灭，但由于显现的缘故，没有生灭，难道不是因此而安立为无常吗？虽然是这样，但与空性的影像不同，因为在名言中，这些境从其自性来说，有生灭的显现，因为在名言中，它们不是空性的色。如果进行分析，则是一样的，因为一切法都成立为空色、无为法。光明的显现是从光明的状态中自然产生的，所以永远不会退转。而不清净的风心所产生的错乱显现则会退转。
English
Therefore, for the realm of conceptualization, the realm where non-conceptual dualistic appearance is extinguished cannot arise. And if emptiness, which is other than that, arises as free from elaboration, without object and subject, then there is no need for a mind that grasps. For the mind that directly experiences luminosity and emptiness, there is no need to apply the patch of negation, and it is not even possible to apply it. Just as while seeing the sky as empty, there is no need to grasp that the sky does not exist. If non-conceptual dualistic appearance is extinguished, then the net of conceptualization cannot exist. Furthermore, although both the expression "seeing the sky" and the meaning of "experiencing without obscuration" exist in the world, they do not truly exist. For example, "seeing the sky," and so on. Similarly, forms of emptiness are also seen as the realm of experience for yogis. Although there is increase and decrease, just as there are situations where the presence or absence of clouds in the sky is determined, the sky does not become impermanent or conditioned. Likewise, the appearances of unconditioned self-radiance luminosity are similar to that. The appearances of the four emptinesses themselves, by their own nature, do not have arising, and so on. If clinging to truth enters into that, then it is necessary to examine the manner of emptiness. But when a yogi knows everything as empty like a mirage, there is no need to examine the manner of emptiness, because he is seeing emptiness. Similarly, although emptiness is permanent, due to the differences in individual phenomena, and sometimes appearing and sometimes not appearing to the mind, and the view becoming better and better, it does not become impermanent. The images of emptiness, the appearances of luminosity, are unchanging because their own nature is not established. Although they appear as arising and ceasing in the context of changing minds, in reality there is no arising and ceasing. If someone asks, "Even the appearances of ordinary people do not have arising and ceasing in reality, but due to the power of appearance, they are not established as impermanent, are they?" Although that is so, they are not the same as the images of emptiness in terms of convention, because in convention, those objects appear to have arising and ceasing by their own nature, because in convention, they are not forms of emptiness. If analyzed, they are the same, because all phenomena are established as forms of emptiness, unconditioned. The appearances of luminosity arise naturally from the state of luminosity, so they never revert. But the deluded appearances that arise from impure wind-mind do revert.
Chinese
都是可以摧毁的，可以破坏的。光明的光显现是不可摧毁的，不可破坏的，因为像梦境的光显现一样，所以说是不可摧毁的。虽然有显现，但因为没有成立粗大的实体，所以也是这样。如果是这样，那么影像和梦境、模糊的法处所生的色等也会变成那样吗？那些是从有为法的因产生的，所以对因造成损害就可以摧毁。但在这里，不能损害光明的自性，因为是有为法。对其自性光明也无法造成任何损害。虽然显现增减，但也像虚空一样。等等，要进行彻底的分析。对于无为法来说，不可能有光和颜色等相，也不可能有觉知。如果那样存在，那就是有为法了。如果光等觉知成立为自相，或者成立为因缘，那倒是可以。但如果没有这两者，就有显现和觉知。因为时轮金刚中说，有超越微尘和刹那之法的显现和觉知。这是成立的。这不是一种设想。烟等空色并没有成立为微尘。瑜伽士通过体验，证明了不变的安乐超越了刹那之法。因此，即使是热，也不是火等，这是正确的。另外，佛陀不应将显空视为无别，因为有为法和无为法是不同的。因为不可能将不同的法视为无别。一切法并非自性不空，因为显现和无为法与空性相违。不应有具足一切殊胜的空性，因为只是空性和有为法的集合。如果是这样，那么空性也会不存在，因为其中没有任何显现等。显现也不会不空，因为无法证明其自性是空性或无为法。因此，无实无为法，一切显现的空性只是暂时的，如虚空等。超越有实无实之边的伟大无为法是不同的。因为前者都是法相，后者是法性。如龙树所说：有实和无实是有为法，涅槃是无为法。引用蕴的分析和空性等。像这样的