English
Since it has already been explained there, one should not strive to refute it again. If it is asked why it is said so, it is not seen as contradictory. Because the learned and virtuous master believes that the Hearers and Solitary Realizers realize the aggregates in an instant, thereby causing the mind that grasps the complete and unified person to cease. However, viewing the aggregates that are subject to arising and ceasing merely as dharmas still does not cease, so it is said that they do not realize selflessness. In this system, however, realizing the aggregates in an instant in this way, thereby knowing that the object of clinging solely to the aggregates is merely imputed based on the continuum of moments and is not established by its own nature, when one realizes the emptiness of permanence based on the aggregates as the basis for imputation of a person, the mind that grasps the complete and unified aggregates themselves ceases, thereby realizing the selflessness of phenomena. Because that is what they believe. Regarding this, some wise individuals say that in the system of the Consequentialists, the basis of imputation and the imputed dharma are unreasonable, because it is said (in the scriptures) that it is the cause for the imputation of a person. But this is merely a matter of phrasing. The difference in the realization of the Hearers and Solitary Realizers is that the basis for the Hearers' realization of the selflessness of phenomena is merely the aggregates included in their own continuum. Although the Solitary Realizers do not realize that what is grasped is without inherent existence, they realize that all objects included internally and externally appear merely due to the power of the mind's imprints and are not established as if they do not waver in reality. As it is said in the Ornament for Clear Realization: "In order to abandon the conceptualization of the object of grasping, and because the grasping is not abandoned," and so on. However, the difference in the realization of the Bodhisattvas is as previously explained. In short, it is said that (the Bodhisattvas' realization) surpasses the Hearers and Solitary Realizers through the three aspects of clarity, vastness, and completeness. The difference in how ordinary beings' consciousness, mistaken consciousness, and analytical consciousness are considered valid cognitions. The meaning of this is that the Autonomists and others believe that direct perception is valid cognition of its own characteristic even during the time of ordinary beings. But this system does not accept its own characteristic, therefore, all minds of ordinary beings are possessive of grasper and grasped that deviate from the nature of reality, so generally speaking they are mistaken consciousness. But specifically, the analytical consciousness that relies on reasoning such as being separate from one and many, which examines the ultimate truth, measures the general characteristic of the nature of reality by means of inference, and therefore realizes it without being deceived by reality.
Chinese
萨巴的量论。所谓“意识显现中，有共同基础”，一般来说，按照量论，所有显现都没有夹杂声音意义的分别，这是普遍的观点。但这里是按照世俗共称的说法来安立的，因为世俗之人认为显现是可见的、可知的、可体验的等等，所以才安立了显现的名称。因此，像意识直接了解夹杂声音意义的事物，可以被认为是二者的共同基础。细微的无常有凡夫能现量证得，也是如此。如前所述，从认识蕴的无常，可以证悟人无我，所以现量证悟人无我只有在见道上才有。但是，作为其基础的现量证悟无常，我认为凡夫时期就必须存在。所谓的三时存在，三时指的是生、住、灭三者。生和住的事物，虽然胜义中不存在，但在名言中，自续派等宗派认为是自相成立的，但灭则被认为是无实有的。其原因是，在名言中，他们认为生和住有成立的基础，而灭没有，所以这样安立。而在这里，《明句论》中说：如果有人认为灭是无因的，并声称诸有为法是刹那性的，那么按照他的观点，就像虚空中的花朵一样，因为无因而没有灭，所以事物都是刹那性的。并且，远离灭的事物怎么能成立为有为法呢？因此，他的一切都将变得不合理。经中说，生是老死的因，有为法的特征也包含在有为法的蕴中，这难道不是世尊清楚地表明了灭是有因的吗？等等。因此，仅仅安立事物这个名称，并不需要自相成立的关键，所以将这三者同等地安立为事物。即使如此，业和业的果报也仅仅是依靠缘起不虚而产生的，不需要通过那样的实物和常有来证实。粗大的...
English
Sapa's epistemology. The so-called "having a common basis for conceptualization in manifest consciousness." Generally, according to epistemology, it is widely accepted that all manifest consciousnesses do not have conceptualizations that mix sound and meaning. However, here it is established according to what is known as worldly convention, because worldly people consider manifest consciousness to be visible, knowable, experienceable, and so on, so the name of manifest consciousness is applied. Therefore, like consciousness directly knowing things mixed with sound and meaning, it can be considered the common basis of the two. It is also said that ordinary beings can manifestly realize subtle impermanence. As mentioned before, from realizing the impermanence of the aggregates, one can realize the selflessness of the person, so manifestly realizing the selflessness of the person only exists on the path of seeing. However, I think that just manifestly realizing impermanence, which is the basis for it, must exist from the time of ordinary beings. The three times said to exist as entities, the three times are birth, duration, and cessation. Although a thing that is born and dwells does not exist ultimately, in name only, the Svātantrika school and others consider it to be self-characterized, but cessation is considered to be non-existent. The reason for this is that, in name, they think that birth and duration have a basis for establishment, while cessation does not, so they establish it in this way. But here, in the Clear Words, it says: If someone asserts that cessation is without cause and claims that all conditioned things are momentary, then according to his view, like flowers in the sky, because there is no cause, there is no cessation, so all things are momentary. And how can things that are separated from cessation be established as conditioned things? Therefore, everything of his will become unreasonable. The sutra says that birth is the cause of aging and death, and the characteristics of conditioned things are also included in the aggregates of conditioned things. Isn't this the Blessed One clearly showing that cessation has a cause? And so on. Therefore, merely establishing the name of a thing does not require the key of being self-characterized, so these three are equally established as things. Even so, karma and the results of karma only arise by virtue of the unfailing dependent origination, and there is no need to prove it with such an entity and permanence. Coarse...
Chinese
意思是说，仅仅了悟常等十六种颠倒见，也不能进入三乘中任何一乘的加行道。要获得三乘中任何一乘的加行道，必须以总义的方式了悟俱生我执的无我，因此，即使了悟了粗大的十六种颠倒见之首——常我执的无我，也不能做到这一点。第三，讲述如何用破斥的理证进行分析的方法：用四大或五大理证来确定一切法无自性。这有两方面：总的讲述衡量的方法，以及分别讲述理证。第一方面是：不像自续派那样，遮破世俗谛的真实，然后成立虚假；或者遮破胜义谛的戏论，然后成立离戏论。而是直接遮破执着之处，但实际上什么也不成立，从而遣除对方的邪分别念。因此，要破斥实执，必须驳倒执着的对象，所以必须像前面所说的那样，确定所破的二我的体性，然后进行分析，否则就像没有看到目标就射箭一样，无法破斥自续派的实执。现在我们用中观的理证来寻求真如的意义时，仅仅用“对方的邪分别念”这个词就转移了视线，好像从一开始就在破斥别人的观点一样，从无始以来，在没有分析的情况下，就颠倒地理解了真如，并且将俱生的分别念，以及通过分析而产生的增益，即内外道各宗派的执着分别念，都从自己的相续中像拔草一样拔除，然后在外面修习时，因为对什么都不执着，所以即使什么都不修，也不是像愚人一样盲修瞎炼，而是具有由了悟无自性所引发的殊胜胜观，能够安住于止观双运的意义中，并且没有怀疑，这就是分析达到要害的标志。也就是说，一般来说，现在持有中观宗见的圣士们认为，轮回和涅槃的一切法的显现，都只是由分别念假立的，而不是由自己的体性成立的，并且空性的自性显现为缘起。
English
The meaning is that merely realizing the sixteen aspects of permanence, etc., one cannot even enter the path of joining of any of the three vehicles. To attain the path of joining of any of the three vehicles, one must realize the selflessness of innate self-grasping in the manner of a general meaning. Therefore, even if one realizes the selflessness of the chief of the sixteen coarse aspects, the self of permanence, one cannot do so. Third, explaining how to analyze with refuting reasoning: The four or five great reasonings establish that all phenomena are without inherent existence. This has two aspects: generally explaining the method of measuring, and specifically explaining the reasoning. The first is: It is not like the Svatantrika, who negate the truth in conventional truth and then establish falsehood; or negate the elaboration in ultimate truth and then establish non-elaboration. Rather, although the object of attachment is directly negated, nothing is actually established, thereby reversing the opponent's wrong conceptions. Therefore, to refute the attachment to reality, the object of attachment must be refuted. Therefore, as explained earlier, the nature of the two selves to be refuted must be determined and then analyzed, otherwise, like shooting an arrow without seeing the target, one cannot refute the Svatantrika's attachment to reality. Now, when we seek the meaning of suchness with the reasoning of Madhyamaka, we are diverted by the mere word "the opponent's wrong conceptions," as if we were refuting the views of others from the beginning. From beginningless time, without analysis, we have perversely understood suchness, and we have uprooted all the clinging conceptions of the innate conceptions and the superimpositions produced through analysis, that is, the clinging conceptions of the internal and external schools, from our own minds, and then when we meditate externally, because we do not cling to anything, even if we do not meditate on anything, it is not just like a fool blindly meditating, but we have the special insight brought about by the realization of no self-existence, and we are able to abide in the meaning of the union of calm and insight without doubt. This, it is said, is the sign that analysis has reached the essential point. That is, in general, the holy beings who now hold the view of Madhyamaka believe that the appearance of all phenomena of samsara and nirvana is merely imputed by conceptual thought, and is not established by its own nature, and that the nature of emptiness arises as dependent origination.
Chinese
虽然大家都认为，显现为空性和缘起双运，但在自宗看来，所谓的“假立”并不意味着在真实的虚构之上，存在一个不真实的实体。而是认为，无生之心的妙用显现，纯粹是空性的形象。所谓“空与缘起无别”，也不是指空性与无别的因的显现被量所成立，而是指一切显现都无基无根，没有任何成立的方式，但缘起的显现却无碍地生起，仅此而已。因此，所破的自性成立的二我，在认识的时候，也不是说在破除二我之后，存在一个所破的补特伽罗和法。而是说，补特伽罗和法各自为空，在它们之上，是空于真实或自性成立的。而不是说，空性之基在各自的自性上，在名言中不空。比如“色即是空”等等。因此，任何法都没有自性，所以没有可破的自相，但只是破除了将不存在的事物虚构为存在，仅此而已。《诤论回遮论》中说：“以无少可破，故我亦不遮，是故汝所作，反成是呵责。” 那么，之前将二我以真实成立来区分，说只有补特伽罗和法在名言中存在，这难道不矛盾吗？那是指在迷乱的显现中，串习未尽期间，名言的显现持续不断地无碍生起，仅此而已，并不是说它有自己的体性。第二，详细解释理证，共有四种：观察因的金刚屑；观察果的有无生灭；观察二者的四句生灭；观察自性的缘起大和一异性。第一，就像这样，一切显现之法，是无生的，因为不可能从自、他、二者和无因而生。其中，从自而生是不合理的。从自而生之法，是在有的时候生，还是在没有的时候生呢？如果是前者，那是不合理的，因为所生和能生没有差别。