English
Even though it exists at the time of having..., it does not have even a small part of the five aggregates of compounded phenomena, so it is profound and peaceful, and ordinary beings can never understand it on their own, because it is the clear light of the emptiness of mind. As a phenomenon, when that subtle mind expands into a coarse one, it abandons the subtle state and becomes coarse, and when it is withdrawn inward, the coarse ceases and the subtle arises, so these two do not exist simultaneously, because both of them are the nature of mind consciousness, and because they are established in the state of withdrawing inward and expanding outward, they do not exist at the same time. If that subtle mind always exists continuously, then when there is a coarse mind in the continuum of beings, there will be two different kinds of mind consciousness, and if so, then it is the nature of mind and mental factors, and it is not like the alaya-vijñana where the object and image are not interrupted, because mind consciousness has its own specific object and image. Just as one can distinguish between conceptual and non-conceptual ways of grasping, how can such a mind consciousness that is different from the coarse mind not be experienced by the self-awareness of beings? If so, is this subtle mind stained by afflictions such as attachment, or is it unstained? If it is stained, then meditating on this will not be an antidote to the two obscurations of afflictions, etc. Haven't all the sutras and tantras said that whatever the nature of mind is, it can never be afflicted by sudden stains? Furthermore, the subtle mind is the characteristic of not having a coarse mind, and the coarse mind is the characteristic of not having a subtle mind, so they are completely incompatible. If one admits that these two are one, then the subtle mind will also become coarse, and the coarse mind will also become subtle, because these two will exist without difference in one object. The distinction that the coarse mind is not the original mind and the subtle mind is the original mind will also become meaningless. In the five states of mindlessness, is the subtle mind interrupted or uninterrupted? If it is interrupted, then what is the original mind? If it is not interrupted, then there will be conceptual thinking, etc. even in the state of mindlessness, just as your subtle mind can debate emptiness, why can't others engage in conceptual thinking? Inference and valid cognition do not go beyond the wisdom of conceptualization, ordinary beings emptiness med
Chinese
你不认为，从观修远离独处等征象，可以推断出无实有，而不是现量见到吗？如果这种思辨的分别念永远不停止，那么在深度睡眠等时候，为什么不进行思辨呢？如果进行思辨，为什么不是粗大的意识呢？另外，你认为阿赖耶识从轮回无始至终持续存在，因此可以作为假立“我”的基础吗？既然唯识宗的经和圣者无著所承认的阿赖耶识，连名言中也被遮止了，那么，从经部和密宗任何地方都没有阐述的，微细意识刹那相续不断存在，它作为安立人我的基础，有什么差别呢？这需要说明成立它的教证是什么，理证是什么。密宗的本觉心是超越八识聚的自生智慧，如《智慧精髓总集》中所说。经部和释论中也有无数的教证说，光明心是心的法性，是自生智慧，而不是有法的心。简而言之，《八千颂》中说：“心非心，心之自性光明。”《经庄严论》中说：“法性之外的他心，不是光明自性。”《宝性论》中说：“心之自性光明，犹如虚空般不变。由非真实分别念所生的贪欲等，无法染污它。”仅仅这些就足以理解，所以不再赘述。这样，对于经续中任何地方都没有阐述的本觉心，如果这样认为，那么，这被认为是如来藏吗？如果认为是，那么，如来藏是法界，龙树菩萨在《法界赞》中说，这一个局部的法，如何能成为一切法的法界呢？弥勒菩萨说，如来藏是不变的，并且随顺一切法，那么，微细的有为法，如何是不变的，又如何随顺一切法呢？请说一说。另外，阿赖耶识
English
Don't you think that from signs such as meditating in solitude, one can infer emptiness, rather than seeing it directly? If such speculative thoughts never cease, then why don't you speculate during deep sleep and other times? If you do speculate, why isn't it a coarse consciousness? Furthermore, do you believe that the alaya-vijnana exists continuously from the beginningless to the end of samsara, and therefore it can become the basis for imputing "I"? Since the alaya-vijnana, which is accepted by the sutras of the Mind-Only school and the great chariot Thokme (Asanga), is even negated in name, then what is the difference between that and the subtle mind, which is said to exist with a continuous stream of moments, but is not mentioned in either sutra or tantra, and which is not the basis for imputing the self of a person? What scripture establishes that, and what reasoning? The innate mind of tantra is self-arisen, transcending the eight aggregates of consciousness, as stated in the Yeshe Nyingpo Kunle Dütpa (Essence of Wisdom, Collected from All). There are also countless scriptures in the sutras and commentaries that say that the mind of clear light is the nature of mind, self-arisen wisdom, and not a mind that is a subject. In short, the Ashtasahasrika Prajnaparamita Sutra says, "Mind is not mind; the nature of mind is clear light." The Ornament of the Sutras says, "Another mind other than the nature of reality is said to be not clear light by nature." The Uttaratantra Shastra says, "Whatever is the nature of the mind, clear light, is unchanging like the sky. Desires and so on, arising from untrue thoughts, do not defile it with adventitious stains." Just this much is enough to understand, so I won't elaborate further. Thus, according to this way of thinking about the innate mind, which is not explained in any sutra or tantra, is this considered to be the Tathagatagarbha or not? If it is, then since the Tathagatagarbha is the Dharmadhatu, and Nagarjuna says in the Dharmadhatu Stotra, how can this limited dharma be the Dharmadhatu of all dharmas? Maitreya says that the Tathagatagarbha is unchanging and follows all dharmas, so how can the subtle conditioned dharma be unchanging and follow all dharmas? Please explain. Furthermore, the alaya-vijnana
Chinese
如果说，识蕴是执持显现为处所、事物之身的一切习气，那么即使说是一切习气。但因为你认为没有阿赖耶识。那么，这个细微意是否执持显现为处所、事物之身的一切习气，并且那一切是显现之因，或者不是？如果是，那么也必须说明，此细微意所缘缘于广大器情世界等，是否具有那样的差别？此细微意不是如来藏，如果认为是此如来藏的真性空性之分，那么，一般而言，仅仅是真性空性的无遮分，不能成为如来藏。因为那没有知分，所以如来藏没有意义，并且与《时轮摄续》中“非愚者的空性”所说的咒语之空性光明相违。即使不是细微意，但因为一切识也是真性空性，如果承认一切心自性光明，有什么不可？在修道时，粗大比细微意更重要，因为以粗大意通过闻思修之门，可以修持任何显密之道。因为不依赖粗大，细微意不能修持空性。因此，即使口头上说以细微意修持空性更为甚深，但因为没有认识到由于从方便道生起智慧之力的缘故是快速道，而认为以细微意修持空性最终是法身之心的遍知之因。因为八识转依的五种智慧与遍知之智慧无有差别，所以细微意如何是唯一的、不共的意金刚之因？因为意识是妙观察智之因，阿赖耶是如镜智之因。如果是那样，你们为何不说本觉心是阿赖耶识？因此，本觉光明，不是有法八识的任何差别，而是一切心的法性，是空性和无二的智慧光明。即使八识止息，但自生光明的智慧不会止息。因为那没有任何以我、我所和相续所摄持的局限所缘，如《菩提心释》中所说，没有我、蕴和名言之戏论。因此，圆
English
If it is said that consciousness holds all the habitual imprints of what appears as the body of place and things, then even if it is said to be all habitual imprints. But because you think there is no Alaya consciousness. So, does this subtle mind hold all the habitual imprints of what appears as the body of place and things, and is all that the cause of appearance, or not? If so, then it must also be stated whether this subtle mind's object, such as the vast container and sentient world, has such differences or not? This is not the Tathagatagarbha, if it is thought to be the true emptiness part of this Tathagatagarbha, then, in general, merely the non-affirming aspect of true emptiness cannot be the Tathagatagarbha. Because there is no knowing part in that, the Tathagatagarbha is meaningless, and it contradicts the emptiness luminosity of mantra spoken in the Kalachakra Condensed Tantra as "the emptiness of the non-foolish." Even if it is not the subtle mind, but because all consciousness is also true emptiness, if it is admitted that all minds are naturally luminous, what is wrong with that? When practicing the path, the gross is more important than the subtle mind, because with the gross mind, through the door of hearing, thinking, and meditating, one can practice any Sutra and Tantra path. Because without relying on the gross, the subtle cannot meditate on emptiness. Therefore, even if one verbally says that meditating on emptiness with the subtle mind is particularly profound, but because one has not realized that it is a quick path due to the power of wisdom arising from the path of means, and thinks that meditating on emptiness with the subtle mind is ultimately the cause of the omniscient mind of the Dharmakaya. Because the five wisdoms of the transformation of the eight consciousnesses are no different from the wisdom of omniscience, how is the subtle mind alone the unique cause of the Vajra mind? Because consciousness is the cause of discriminating wisdom, and Alaya is the cause of mirror-like wisdom. If that is the case, why don't you say that the innate mind is the Alaya consciousness? Therefore, the innate mind luminosity is not any difference of the consciousness of the eight aggregates, but the nature of all minds, the wisdom luminosity that is emptiness and non-dual. Even if the eight aggregates cease, the self-arisen wisdom of luminosity does not cease. Because there is no limited object of focus held by I, mine, and continuum, as stated in the Bodhicitta Explanation, there is no elaboration of I, aggregates, and names. Therefore, the perfect
Chinese
在广阔的领域中，虽然有诸如自生智慧的原始觉性等，以“意”和“识”命名的存在，但这里的“意”并非仅仅指通常的、具有能取所取的六识之一。而是指当自心证悟到无生且通透，无能取所取的智慧显现时，所作的描述。在未证悟心性时，显现为具有能取所取的心；在证悟时，则显现为无能取所取的智慧。心与智慧在本体上并无不同。因此，在证悟本体时，八识也显现为自生智慧的游舞，彼此不分。因此，当“意”自身直接证悟其自性时，无论自显是否止息，光明都会显现。并非因为存在粗大的“意”就能遮蔽它，相反，一切的力用显现都会成为它的庄严。因此，没有必要执着于粗大是过失，微细是功德。微细的“意”是大圆满，粗大的“意”不是大圆满，这种区分又有什么意义呢？如果证悟到事物本体的二元对立的消融，那么即使以粗大的“意”来修持，也会变成修持真正的意义。如果不能领会二元对立的法性，即使修持者以微细的“意”来修持作为修持对象的空性，这种带有能取所取的努力修持，也无法对二元对立的本体产生丝毫的定解。这种情况非常普遍，他们没有逐渐熟悉法性，反而傲慢的树木日益增长，这真是可悲。例如，有些人获得了稳固的止观，如果让他们什么都不想地安住，他们的心会体验到与虚空融合般的无分别状态；有些人修持微细脉，体验到快乐，从而使粗大的分别念止息；有些人通过间断的明觉体验，认识到隐蔽的知识；有些人对显现的三种体验略有所得，如果能将这些体验妥善地转化为道用，并认识到这些仅仅是引导证悟本体意义的智慧的体验，那么就有可能逐渐引导出范例意义的智慧。然而，有些人终其一生都未能理解本体的无二双运、离概念的境界，却将断除戏论的空性执为究竟的本体，并认为自己道路上的点滴体验就是具足证相的密咒圆满次第。他们自诩为大圆满的