English
Although everyone agrees that appearances are the union of emptiness and dependent arising, in our own system, the so-called 'imputation' does not mean that there is an unreal entity on top of a real fabrication. Rather, it is held that the manifestation of the unoriginated mind is purely an empty image. The so-called 'emptiness and dependent arising are inseparable' does not mean that the appearance of an inseparable cause from emptiness is established by valid cognition, but rather that all appearances are without basis or root, and there is no way to establish them, but the appearances of dependent arising arise unhindered, and that is all. Therefore, when recognizing the two selves that are established by their own nature as objects to be refuted, it is not that after refuting the two selves, there is a person and a dharma that are the objects to be refuted. Rather, it is said that persons and dharmas are each empty, and on top of them, they are empty of being established as true or by their own nature. It is not like saying that the basis of emptiness is not empty in its own nature in name only. For example, 'form is empty,' and so on. Therefore, since no dharma has its own nature, there is no object to be refuted with its own characteristics, but it is only the refutation of fabricating something that does not exist as existing. In the Refutation of Disputes, it says: 'Since there is nothing to be refuted, I do not refute anything. Therefore, what you do becomes a reproach.' So, is it not contradictory to have previously distinguished the two selves by their true establishment, and to say that only persons and dharmas exist in name only? That refers only to the uninterrupted arising of nominal appearances during the period when the habitual patterns of delusion have not been exhausted, and it does not mean that it has its own essence. Second, there are four ways to explain the specific reasoning: the Vajra Splinter that examines the cause; the examination of the existence or non-existence of arising and ceasing in the result; the fourfold arising and ceasing that examines both; and the Great Dependent Arising and the absence of one or many that examine the essence. First, like this, all phenomena that appear are without origination, because it is impossible to arise from self, other, both, or without a cause. Among them, it is unreasonable to arise from self. A phenomenon that arises from self, does it arise when it exists or when it does not exist? If it is the former, it is unreasonable, because the produced and the producer are not different.
Chinese
并且，因为存在而生，所以永远不会不生，也不会变成没有生，因为生是无尽的。如果按照后者，则不合理，因为如果没有生起者本身，就不会有自己的名称，并且与无因生相同。说从他者而生也不合理，这样从他者而生，有法，不合理，因为如果所生之物本身没有成立，则生起者他者也不会成立，并且会成为从一切生一切的过失。说从二者而生也不合理，因为在一个基上既是自己又是他者没有成立，并且阻断了各自的生。说从无因而生也不合理，因为与从因生果的显现相违背，并且会成为从虚空生莲花等太过分的过失，并且一切造作都将变成无意义。如是说，在《根本慧论》中说：非从自生亦非从他生，非从二生亦非无因生，任何事物无论在哪里，都永远没有生。第二，对果的考察，有无生之遮破：如此，显现为多种多样的果，有法，没有生，因为果的实有和非实有二者都空无生。也就是说，对于实有的果没有生，因为已经成立了；对于非实有的果没有生，因为基没有成立，如同石女儿。如彼论云：有或无之义，缘非适宜，若无，成为何之缘？若有，缘何所为？第三，对因果二者的考察，四句生之遮破：因生果显现，有法，实际上没有成立，如此，一个因不能生一个果，多个因不能生多个果，一个因不能生多个果，多个因不能生一个果，因为因果二者都远离一和多，所以安立生如同在虚空中安立事物一样。如是说，在《入二谛论》中说：多不作一物，多不作多物，一不作多物，一亦不作一。第四，对法自身体性的考察
English
And, because it arises while existing, it will never not arise, nor will it become without arising, because arising is endless. If according to the latter, it is not reasonable, because if the producer itself does not exist, it will not have its own name, and it is the same as arising from no cause. Saying that it arises from another is also not reasonable, thus, arising from another, the subject, is not reasonable, because if the object to be produced itself is not established, then the producer, the other, will not be established, and it will become the fault of everything arising from everything. Saying that it arises from both is also not reasonable, because it is not established that on one basis it is both self and other, and it obstructs the individual arising. Saying that it arises from no cause is also not reasonable, because it contradicts the manifest appearance of the effect arising from the cause, and it will become the excessive fault of lotuses arising from the sky, and all actions will become meaningless. Thus it is said, in the Root Wisdom, it says: Not from self, not from other, not from both, not from no cause, whatever things, wherever, there is never any arising. Second, the examination of the fruit, the negation of arising with existence or non-existence: Thus, the fruit appearing in various ways, the subject, has no arising, because both the real and unreal nature of the fruit are empty of arising. That is, for the real fruit there is no arising, because it is already established; for the unreal fruit there is no arising, because the basis is not established, like the horns of a rabbit. As that itself says: For the meaning of existence or non-existence, conditions are not suitable, if there is nothing, what will become the condition? If there is something, what will the condition do? Third, the examination of both cause and effect, the negation of arising in four possibilities: The appearance of the cause producing the effect, the subject, is not actually established, thus, one cause does not produce one effect, many causes do not produce many effects, one cause does not produce many effects, many causes do not produce one effect, because both cause and effect are separated from one and many, so establishing arising is like establishing things in the sky. As it is said, in the Entering the Two Truths, it says: Many do not make one thing, many do not make many things, one does not make many things, one does not make one itself. Fourth, the examination of the nature of the dharma itself
Chinese
有两种。第一种，以非遮破式论证方式建立的大缘起是： 显现的这些事物，作为所立宗，不成立为实有，因为它们是依缘而生起的，并且远离生灭等八边，因此在真实的自性上是空性的。例如水中的月亮。 如经中所说： 凡是因缘所生的，即非生。 对它来说，没有生的自性。 还有，《中论》中说： 除了依缘而生起之外， 没有其他的法。 因此，除了空性之外， 没有其他的法。 第二种，以无遮破式论证方式建立的离一异性是： 所有内外显现的事物，作为所立宗，不成立为实有，因为凡是远离一和多的，都遍及于空性，因为它们遍及于真实的实有空性。 如圣天论师所说： 就像刹那有边际一样， 应当考察初始和中间。 因为是三个刹那的自性， 世界不住于刹那。 像这样的论证方式，进行观察的时机有两种：互相辩论宗派的时候，以及以智慧之道获得解脱的时候。 在辩论宗派的时候，因为自己一方没有承诺，所以不需要立宗和破斥过失，而是要揭示主张实有者自身理论中的矛盾，从而驳倒一切实有执着。 在以智慧之道获得解脱的时候，对于外在显现的各种对境，内在的分别和无分别的心，禅定和修持等经验，以及行住等一切状态，无论何时何地，对于我他、轮回涅槃、有无、苦乐、取舍、法与非法等，只要产生执着和想法，都要进行观察，一一粉碎成微尘，从而在任何事物上都不存在名相执着和依赖，在无所依傍的如虚空般的境界中获得自在。 因此，虽然经中说要以七相车的理证来确定人无我，但通过这些论证，也能确定二种无我。 第二，说明此论胜于其他论的原因是：中观应成
English
There are two types. The first, the great dependent arising established as a non-affirming negation argument, is: These appearing phenomena, as the subject, are not established as real, because they arise dependently and are free from the eight extremes such as arising and ceasing, therefore they are empty of true nature. For example, like a moon in water. As it is said in the sutra: Whatever arises from conditions is unborn. For it, there is no nature of arising. Also, in the Root Wisdom it says: Apart from dependent arising, there are no other phenomena. Therefore, apart from emptiness, there are no other phenomena. The second, the one established as an affirming negation argument, is the freedom from one and many: All internal and external appearances, as the subject, are not established as real, because whatever is free from one and many is pervaded by emptiness, because they are pervaded by the emptiness of true reality. As the teacher Āryadeva said: Just as a moment has an end, so examine the beginning and the middle. Because it is the nature of three moments, the world does not abide in a moment. The times for examining with such arguments are two: the time of mutually debating philosophical tenets, and the time of liberating through the wisdom of the path. In the time of debating philosophical tenets, since there is no acceptance from one's own side, there is no need to establish a thesis or refute faults, but it is necessary to expose the contradictions within the doctrine of those who assert reality, thereby refuting all clinging to reality. Also, in the time of liberating through the wisdom of the path, regarding the various objects that appear externally, the internal conceptual and non-conceptual mind, experiences such as samādhi and meditation, and all states such as conduct, going and staying, at any time and in any place, regarding self and other, saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, existence and non-existence, happiness and suffering, acceptance and rejection, dharma and non-dharma, etc., whatever clinging and thoughts arise, examine them, shatter each one into dust, so that there is no clinging to names and no reliance on anything, and attain mastery in a state like the unelaborated sky. Therefore, although it is said that the selflessness of persons is established by the reasoning of the sevenfold chariot, these arguments also establish both selflessnesses. Second, the reason for showing that it is superior to others is: Madhyamaka Prasangika
Chinese
在归谬论证派的宗义中，没有任何实在执着的承认，因此没有过失且完全清净，所以下部的三个宗义论者以各自的智慧将诸法的体性安立为无我、无生、空性、离边等，虽然通过分析而稍微断除了戏论，但仍然具有实在执着的形态。此外，自续派承认名言中成立等一切，都经过辩论和考察，虽然以归谬论证驳斥了每一个实执，但自身却不受任何反驳的损害，因此在一切宗义中是至高无上或顶峰，这是不会错的。像这样，四种道理在自性上得以确定，这被认为是中观的见解。如果将确定之境的空性、离边认为是中观的见解，那么这四边本身就会变成执边的见解，因为没有区分边和执边，所以必须达到连“远离边”的说法也不成立的境界。如圣天所说：非有非无，非有非无，亦非二者之自性，解脱四边之中观，是智者之唯一。如是宣说。第三，如是确定之后的修持要义的认定：总的来说，在圣地印度，持有内外宗义者有非常多的内部差别。在藏地，也出现了许多由各自的意愿和执着所混合的不同宗义。即使是持有中观和密咒道统的人们，在理解和解释上的方式也变得非常不同。然而，所有这些都是相对于各自的立场，认为自己以智慧所安立的方式是最终的意义。如果仔细分析，就会发现其中有许多颠倒和看似正确的观点。有些是由于善巧方便，为了适应所化众生而如此安立。大多数是与各自的智慧能力相符的，以佛陀的事业利益众生，因此必须对一切都生起恭敬心。即使没有任何意义地诽谤外道宗义，也被认为是密咒的根本堕罪，因此要避免贪嗔和偏袒。