Chinese
因此。 不离此，一切二元之法皆能于其中显现，是为开悟之境。显现亦不离其本性。 于此，具自续之人，对其自性有证悟与未证悟之分，如云："地一而道二"。纵使显现，亦无丝毫前所未有之新证悟。虽不离先前之状态，然具自续之人若未能识认，则如未被指认之基，亦不知其存在，因缘和合，初由意识之智慧所识认时，自此光明便如是显现。于白日八识未断之时，仅因识认，夜间之光明亦由此而得。识认之时，八识亦于其体性中见为一味，而非各别。若未能识认，则因无明之作用，唯见错觉。若能识认，则一切皆为智慧之作用，唯显现清净之相。此乃自性等等，引用《释量论》。无需依赖将气脉明点逼入要害之法，当下即可识认，此乃大圆满之独特之处。虽词句灌顶中亦有相似之处，然因无口诀，故不能如实证悟。以气脉明点逼入要害之口诀而修持，乃心性寂止等续部之有相圆满次第。二者最终皆达至所诠释之俱生义，然有快慢之别。气入中脉等难以成就，此法简易故。有无歧途之别甚大。故一切乘之顶巅，犹如金刚心之无上密咒，实无他途可令实义智慧显现。今若执此为道，以脉点为道，执有相之譬喻智慧为捷径，则如经云："既得象已寻象迹，舍弃宝珠而求系绳。"等等，如是之理。纵生起少许乐明无念之体验亦可，若仅是譬喻智慧而不正直，则是俱生乐，或将大圆满视为造作之定解，实乃本觉心性。
English
Therefore. Without moving from this, all dualistic phenomena can arise within it, which is the state of awakening. Even when arising, it does not move from its nature. In this, a person with self-continuity either realizes or does not realize their own nature. As it is said, "The ground is one, but the paths are two." Even when it manifests, there is no new realization that was not there before. Although it does not move from the previous state, if the person with self-continuity does not recognize it, it remains as an unindicated basis, and one does not even know that it exists. When, through the power of circumstances, it is first recognized by the wisdom of the mind-consciousness, then the luminosity manifests in that way. During the day, when the eight consciousnesses are not interrupted, merely recognizing it will cause the luminosity of the night to be grasped by that same recognition. When recognized, the eight consciousnesses are seen as one taste in its essence, and not as separate. If not recognized, only illusions are seen due to the activity of the consciousnesses, without the wisdom being apparent. If recognized, everything arises as pure appearances due to the activity of wisdom. This is the nature, etc., quoting from the Pramāṇavārttika. The special characteristic of Dzogchen is that one can recognize it right now without relying on methods of forcing the winds and mind into the essential points. Although there are similar things in the word empowerments, one does not realize it as it is because there are no instructions. Experiencing it through the instructions of forcing the winds and mind into the essential points is the completion stage with signs of the tantras, such as practicing mind isolation. Although both ultimately reach the coemergent meaning of the object to be signified, there is a great difference in speed. It is difficult to accomplish things like the winds entering the central channel, but this is easy. There is a great difference in whether or not there is a possibility of straying onto the wrong path. Therefore, there is no other path to manifest the wisdom of the meaning of the unsurpassable mantra, which is like the vajra heart, the pinnacle of all vehicles. If one takes this as the path today, taking the channels and drops as the path, and grasping the wisdom of example with signs as a quick path, it is like the sutra says, "Having found the elephant, one seeks the elephant's tracks; having left the jewel, one hopes for a rope." The principle is similar to that. Even if an experience of bliss, clarity, and non-thought arises, if only the wisdom of example is not straight, then it is coemergent bliss, or the definite understanding of considering Dzogchen as something fabricated, which is the actual innate mind.
Chinese
执着于有实，因为无法证悟无实。如果未曾观照到有实，又如何安立为有为法？即使未曾观照到少许有实，但觉性不灭，显现为空性自光，则没有必要承认为有为法。如果认为，即使未曾观照到瓶子，也承认为瓶子是有为法，这是否一样？不一样，因为对于未曾观照到胜义谛中的瓶子，仅仅是空无，而在世俗中观照到并执着为有为法，对于未曾体验到二谛一味无别的人来说，是这样的。觉性与觉空无别，因此未曾观照到胜义谛。在世俗中说观照到，也是无别的，对于现证实相的人来说，就是那样显现的。在二谛中无别，那是超越有实与无实的边，各自是自证的法性，虽然如此，但从后得的角度，必须安立为常等，不能安立为无常。无常唯有从名言的观察才能观照到，从胜义的观察则不可能观照到。这是以究竟的观察才能观照到，而以名言的观察则永远无法观照到。以胜义谛观照到时，必须以名言安立为存在和常等，如同空性一样。虽然空性无法以名言观照，但在名言中也承认其存在等。如果从瓶子之上的二谛无别双运、而非名相的胜义谛的角度来说，则是显空无别，在其上，显现分的不常也不存在，空分无遮也不存在，因为二者无别，是各自自证的对境，是二谛观察的成果，那是法性常、无为法，而非有为法，对其来说，没有有为和无为的二分，是无分周遍，超越显空任何一边的。因此，法性唯是双运，而非仅仅是空无，以反体说双运的显现和觉性，那只是在分别念面前执着反体而已，与空性没有差别。在意义上，如果存在差别和分别，则不可能无别，即使说双运，也会变成不混合的双重，那样无法理解双运，二谛就像牛角一样不同。
English
It is held as substantial because of the inability to realize non-substantiality. If substantiality is not perceived, how can it be designated as conditioned? Even if a little substantiality is not perceived, if awareness itself, without ceasing, dawns as the self-radiance of emptiness, there is no need to accept it as conditioned. If one thinks that it is similar to accepting a pot as conditioned even when the pot is not perceived, it is not similar. This is because, for those who have not experienced the inseparability of the two truths as one taste, it is like that when the pot is not perceived in the ultimate sense, it is merely emptiness, and in the conventional sense, it is perceived and held as conditioned. Awareness and emptiness of awareness are inseparable, therefore the ultimate is not perceived. In the conventional, it is said to be perceived, but it is inseparable. For those who recognize the nature of reality, it appears that way. It is inseparable in the two truths. That is beyond the extremes of existence and non-existence, each being the nature of self-cognizance. Although it is so, from the perspective of subsequent cognition, it is necessary to label it as permanent, etc., but it is not permissible to label it as impermanent. Impermanence is only perceived through conventional analysis, but it is impossible to perceive it through ultimate analysis. This is perceived through ultimate analysis, but never perceived through conventional analysis. When perceived by the ultimate, it must be established as existent and permanent, etc., by convention, just like emptiness. Although emptiness cannot be perceived by convention, it is accepted as existent, etc., in convention. If, from the perspective of the ultimate truth on top of the pot, which is the indivisible union, not a mere concept, it is the inseparability of appearance and emptiness. On top of that, the impermanence of the appearance aspect is also not separate. The emptiness aspect, the negation, is also not separate, because the two are inseparable, the object of self-cognizance, the result of the analysis of the two truths. That is the nature of reality, permanent, unconditioned, not conditioned, and for that, there is no division of conditioned and unconditioned. It is indivisible, all-pervasive, and beyond the extremes of either appearance or emptiness. Therefore, the nature of reality is only union, not merely emptiness. When the appearance and awareness of union are expressed as opposites, it is merely grasping the opposite in the face of conceptualization, and there is no difference from emptiness. If there is difference and separation in meaning, inseparability is impossible, and even if it is called union, it will become an unmixed duality, and that will not understand the meaning of union, the two truths being as different as the horns of a cow.
Chinese
已经变成那样了。如果那样，就像法与法性各不相同一样，法性也同样各不相同。一切法在实相的境界中味等同等是不可能的。所以，平等性以及叫做法界的东西，变成一切法的自性，这一个是不可能的。而且，以证悟空性的智慧也不能遮破一切戏论。在见道上，一下子证悟一切法的空性也是不可能的。法与法性的执着永远不能遮破。因为执着没有遮破，所以无能取所取的等持永远不可能等等，这样一来，大乘的意趣全部都会被浪费掉，有非常大的过失。空性中二取如何泯灭呢？在法界的层面上，如果一切法没有分别，二取才能泯灭。在认为那样的法界不可能的宗派里，法界和智慧无别是不可能的。能取所取泯灭是不可能的等等。除了法界以外，还有一些法，一切法都不是法界，因为是各不相同的。无所得，无道等等，一切都不可能，因为道和所得的实有永远不能遮破。因此，即使承认空性，也把实有论的究竟法安放在原来的位置上，执着断空之上的任意，执着两种法并存的戏论很大。一般人执着法为实有，而你所谓的无我空法性，对于法来说，每一个都是意义各不相同的戏论，所以，那条道路不能断除轮回的根本，只是徒增戏论而已。༈ 那个法界是一个还是多个？如果是一个，那么柱子的空性不是瓶子的空性等等，多种多样的空性就成立不是法界。如果仅仅因为相似就安立为一，那么法也同样可以安立为一，因为所知仅仅是相似的。因此，多种多样的空性也是法，不是法性，因为只是假立的多种多样而已。也不是究竟的实相，因为只是显现为二谛的方式而已。无二真谛的实相是无多种多样的，是胜义的法性，具有法性的特征。那是远离一切承认，远离戏论，是各自自己所能证知的，因为那上面没有各不相同的分。那个见解不是这个，这样没有界限地去执着。
English
It has become like that. If so, just as phenomena and the nature of phenomena are different, the nature of phenomena is also different in that way. It is impossible for all phenomena to be equal in taste in the realm of reality. Therefore, equality and what is called the realm of phenomena, becoming the nature of all phenomena, is impossible as one. Moreover, even with the wisdom that realizes emptiness, all elaborations cannot be refuted. On the path of seeing, it is also impossible to realize the emptiness of all phenomena all at once. The grasping of phenomena and the nature of phenomena can never be refuted. Because grasping is not refuted, the equipoise without grasper and grasped is never possible, etc. In this way, all the intentions of the Great Vehicle will be wasted, and there will be a great fault. How can dualistic appearance be extinguished in emptiness? On the level of the realm of phenomena, if all phenomena are without distinction, then dualistic appearance can be extinguished. In the system that believes that such a realm of phenomena is impossible, the realm of phenomena and wisdom being inseparable is impossible. The extinction of grasper and grasped is impossible, etc. There are some phenomena other than the realm of phenomena. All phenomena are not the realm of phenomena because they are different. Without attainment, without path, etc., everything is impossible, because the reality of path and attainment can never be refuted. Therefore, even if emptiness is acknowledged, the ultimate phenomena of substantialism are placed in their original positions, and the elaboration of holding the arbitrary above nihilism, holding the two phenomena side by side, is great. Ordinary people grasp phenomena as real, and your so-called selflessness, emptiness, and nature of phenomena, for phenomena, each one is an elaboration with different meanings, so that path cannot cut off the root of samsara, but only increases elaboration. ༈ Is that realm of phenomena one or many? If it is one, then the emptiness of the pillar is not the emptiness of the vase, etc., and the various emptinesses are established as not being the realm of phenomena. If it is established as one merely because of similarity, then phenomena can also be established as one, because what is knowable is merely similar. Therefore, the various emptinesses are also phenomena, not the nature of phenomena, because they are merely imputed variousnesses. Nor is it the ultimate reality, because it is merely the way it appears as two truths. The reality of the two truths being inseparable is without variousnesses, it is the ultimate nature of phenomena, possessing the characteristics of the nature of phenomena. That is devoid of all acknowledgments, devoid of elaboration, and is to be known by each individual oneself, because there are no different parts on it. That view is not this, and there is no demarcation to be fixated upon.