Chinese
不可能的。第二种情况是：如果原因停止而产生，那么无因就不会有结果，就像虚空中的莲花一样。如果不停顿而产生，那就会陷入从常法中产生的谬误。同时产生是不合理的，因为生者和能生者没有成立。即使从连续性中产生，由于相遇被阻止，也同样无法成立。 现在，为了阐述因明乘的顶峰，究竟的中观应成派的道理，首先，为了开启这部论典，说了“像这样”等。像这样，显现本身就是世俗，如同幻化的马和牛一样。以“空性是胜义谛”这样的名言，安立的任何戏论的边都已远离。六识的对境显现，从一开始就没有生、灭、去、来。其他自在者，以及认为实有的世俗法，也没有承认那是成立的边。那是谁呢？就是中观应成派的开创者，吉祥怙主龙自在。那么，他能够不依赖其他，以自己的力量解释诸佛的究竟密意吗？能够的。《楞伽经》中说：“南方吠陀的地方，有比丘名为吉祥者，其名为龙，能摧毁有无之边。我的教法在世间，广说无上大乘，证得极喜地，往生极乐世界。”以及《文殊根本续》中说：“如来我涅槃后，四百年后，有比丘名为龙，将出现。他对教法有信心和利益。获得极喜地，将活六百年。智慧大孔雀，也将由大士成就。各种论典的意义，以及无实有的意义，当他舍弃身体时，将往生极乐世界。他将是究竟的佛陀，必定能够真实获得。”因此，显示了远离有无二边的究竟大乘是由龙树解释的。此外，在《金光明经》中也说到：世尊在世时的离车族青年，名为一切世间乐见者，就是他。
English
That is impossible. Secondly, if arising occurs from a ceased cause, then there is no result for a causeless cause, like a lotus in the sky. If arising occurs without ceasing, it would entail arising from permanence. Simultaneous arising is not reasonable because the arising and the cause of arising are not established. Even if arising occurs from continuity, it is still not established because encounter is obstructed. Now, to explain the ultimate peak of the vehicle of reasoning, the way of the ultimate Madhyamaka-Prasaṅgika, first, to open this text, it is said, "Like this," and so on. Like this, appearance itself is conventional, like illusory horses and cattle. With the term "emptiness is ultimate truth," whatever is imputed is free from all extremes of elaboration. The objects of the six consciousnesses, from the very moment of appearance, have no arising, ceasing, going, or coming. Even the conventional phenomena that are other-dependent and considered real are not accepted as the ultimate reality. Who is that? It is the great founder of the Madhyamaka-Prasaṅgika tradition, the glorious protector, Lord Nāga. Can he, without relying on others, explain the ultimate intention of the Buddhas with his own power? Yes, he can. The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra says: "In the southern region of Vidarbha, there will be a monk named Śrīmān. His name will be Nāga, and he will destroy the extremes of existence and non-existence. My teaching in the world, he will extensively teach the unsurpassed Great Vehicle, attain the Joyful Ground, and go to Sukhāvatī." And the Mañjuśrīmūlatantra says: "After the Tathāgata passes away, after four hundred years, a monk named Nāga will appear. He will have faith in and benefit the teachings. He will attain the Joyful Ground and live for six hundred years. The great peacock of wisdom will also be accomplished by that great being. The meaning of various treatises, and the meaning of non-entity, when he abandons his body, he will be born in Sukhāvatī. He will be the ultimate Buddha, and will surely attain perfect enlightenment." Thus, it is shown that the ultimate Great Vehicle, free from the extremes of existence and non-existence, is explained by Nāgārjuna. Furthermore, it is said in the Suvarṇaprabhāsa Sūtra: The Licchavi youth who was present when the Teacher was alive, named Sarvasattvapriyadarśana, was he.
Chinese
现在讲到受生。如《大云经》所说：“这位年轻人，我涅槃后四百年，将转生为名为龙的比丘，弘扬我的教法，最终在名为极乐的光明刹土中，成为名为智慧生光之王。”因此，可以确定，他对实相的理解是完全没有错误的。这位令世间一切众生喜见的离车族青年，世尊涅槃八十年后，当教法衰败之时，将成为秉持世尊名号的比丘，弘扬教法，一百年后圆寂，往生极乐世界。经中还说他安住于七地。因此，如实解释导师的意趣，具有不可夺取的慈悲，这也是圣者月称的独特之处。在此处，对于所有较低宗派的观点，都以无偏中观的智慧利剑进行剖析，并非仅仅是片面的驳斥，而是通过辩论和考察，以归谬论证一一破斥执着的对象，因此不会将更高的观点误解为错误。此论中，有四个广为人知的重大理证：金刚屑、有无生灭、四句生灭、以及大缘起。首先是从所破的自性方面进行观察，从而破除所破。例如，一切显现之法，有法，应是无生。因为从自、他、二者、以及无因中产生是不可能的。具体来说，所谓自生是不合理的。从自性而生，有法。你认为是在已存在时产生，还是在不存在时产生呢？如果是前者，那是不合理的。因为能生和所生没有差别，已经存在的东西又产生，那么就永远不会停止产生，而且会陷入无止境的产生。如果是后者，那也是不合理的。因为从无因中产生太过分了，会导致虚空中生莲花的荒谬结论。从他者而生也是不合理的。为什么呢？因为会导致一切从一切中产生的荒谬结论。如果承认这一点，那么火焰中也会产生黑暗。这是不可能接受的。如果说是从二者而生，也是一样。如同常
English
Now, regarding taking birth. As stated in the Great Cloud Sutra: "This youth, four hundred years after my nirvana, will be reborn as a monk named Naga, and will propagate my teachings. Eventually, in the pure and radiant realm, he will become a king named Light Source of Wisdom." Therefore, it is established that his understanding of the definitive meaning is completely without error. This Licchavi youth, pleasing to the sight of all beings in the world, eighty years after the passing of the Teacher, when the teachings are in decline, will become a monk upholding the name of the Teacher, and will propagate the teachings. After one hundred years, he will pass away and be reborn in Sukhavati. It is also stated in the sutra that he abides on the seventh bhumi. Therefore, explaining the Teacher's intention as it is, possessing unseizable compassion, is also a unique characteristic of the noble Chandrakirti. In this approach, all aspects of lower tenets are dissected with the sharp wisdom of unbiased Madhyamaka, not merely refuting them partially, but by debating and examining, each object of attachment is refuted by consequentialism, so the higher view is not mistaken as wrong. In this treatise, there are four well-known great reasonings: the Vajra Splinter, Existence and Non-existence of Production and Cessation, the Four Extremes of Production and Cessation, and the Great Dependent Arising. First, examining from the nature of what is to be refuted, thereby refuting what is to be refuted. For example, all that appears, the subject, should be without production. Because it is impossible to arise from self, other, both, or without a cause. Specifically, the so-called self-production is unreasonable. Production from self, the subject. Do you assert that it arises when it already exists, or when it does not exist? If the former, it is unreasonable. Because the producer and the produced are not different, and since it arises while already existing, it will never cease to arise, and it will fall into endless production. If the latter, it is also unreasonable. Because arising from no cause is too extreme, it would lead to the absurd conclusion that lotuses arise in the sky. Production from other is also unreasonable. Why? Because it would lead to the absurd conclusion that everything arises from everything. If you accept this, then darkness would arise even from flames. This is impossible to accept. If you say it arises from both, it is the same. Like permanence.
Chinese
是想要从生而有，还是想要从无常中生出？首先，前者不合理，因为如果因不改变，果就不会产生。如果产生，那么因为改变，常性就会消失。后者不合理，因为刹那间停止，因没有成立，果不可能产生。因此，两者都被因所损害。因为阻断了相遇，因果没有相遇，所以从因产生没有成立。《根本慧论》中说：非从自生，非从他生，非从共生，非无因生。任何事物，无论在哪里，都不会有产生。这是第二种，通过观察所要否定的果来遮止。如此，显现为多种多样的法，是无实有的，因为从因产生果，无论是有、无、生三种都是空性的。如果柱子在柱子的实有存在时成立，那么柱子已经成立，这不合理。如果在没有的时候成立，那么不可能从没有变成有，就像兔子角里产生的事物永远不可能存在一样。就像之前的论典里说的：无论是有还是无，因都不是不合理的。如果没有，会成为什么的因？如果存在，因又有什么用？这是第三种，从因果两者来观察而遮止。所知仅仅是法，没有成立为实有，因为没有成立为有作用。如此显现，在胜义谛中，从一产生另一，从一产生多，从多产生多，从多产生一，这四种产生的可能性都是空性的。就像将虚空安立为实有一样。《入二谛论》中说：多不造一物，多不造多物，一不造多物，一亦不造一。第四种分为两种：将非是遮止的理由安立为正因，即以伟大的缘起作为自己的实有来观察而遮止；以及将不是存在的遮止理由安立为正因，即远离一和多。第一种是：仅仅是显现的事物，没有成立为实有，因为依赖和产生也是远离生灭等八边的，因此以真实而言，自性是空性的，就像水中的月亮一样。如是所说：凡是因缘所生，即非生，于彼无有生自性。以及《根本慧论》
English
Is it desired to arise from existence, or is it desired to arise from impermanence? Firstly, the former is unreasonable because if the cause does not change, the effect will not arise. If it arises, then because of change, permanence will be lost. The latter is unreasonable because, stopping in an instant, the cause is not established, so the effect cannot arise. Therefore, both are harmed by the cause. Because the encounter is blocked, the cause and effect do not meet, so arising from the cause is not established. In the Root Wisdom Treatise, it says: Not from self, not from other, not from both, not from no cause. Any thing, wherever it is, will never have arising. This is the second, to negate by examining the effect to be negated. Thus, the phenomena that appear in various ways are without substance because the arising of the effect from the cause, whether existent, non-existent, or arising, are all empty. If a pillar is established when the substance of the pillar exists, then the pillar is already established, which is unreasonable. If it is established when it does not exist, then it is impossible for non-existence to become existence, just as a substance produced from a rabbit's horn can never exist. As the previous scripture says: Whether it is existent or non-existent, the cause is not unreasonable. If it does not exist, what will it be the cause of? If it exists, what does the cause do? This is the third, to negate by examining both cause and effect. What is knowable is merely a phenomenon, not established as substantial, because it is not established as having function. Thus, what appears, in ultimate truth, the four possibilities of arising—from one arising another, from one arising many, from many arising many, and from many arising one—are all empty. It is like establishing space as substantial. In the Entering the Two Truths Treatise, it says: Many do not make one thing, many do not make many things, one does not make many things, one also does not make one. The fourth is divided into two: establishing the reason that is not a negation as a valid reason, that is, examining the great dependent arising as its own substance and negating it; and establishing the reason that is not existence as a valid reason, that is, being separate from one and many. The first is: what merely appears is not established as substantial, because dependence and arising are also separate from the eight extremes such as arising and ceasing, therefore, in truth, its nature is empty, like the moon in water. As it is said: Whatever arises from conditions is not born; it has no nature of arising. And the Root Wisdom Treatise.
Chinese
因此，除了缘起之外，没有其他的法。因此，除了空性之外，没有其他的法。这是第二点：显现为实有之法，应是无实有的，因为凡是离一或多的，都遍为空性，即遍为空性之真实事物。如圣天菩萨所说：犹如刹那有边际，最初由谁来安立？因为是三个刹那的自性，世界不住于刹那。又如《诤论回避论》中所说：因为没有任何应被驳斥的，所以我什么也不驳斥。因此，你才强加于我，说我在驳斥。那么，二谛的安立是怎样的呢？对于能见到此岸的人们来说，仅仅是依靠名言的施设而已。在真实的二谛中，不能认为是单一或二元，因为若是单一，就像舍弃世俗一样，胜义也同样会成为过失，并且世俗染污后，胜义也同样会成为过失。若是他体，也不合理，如《般若经》中所说：色即是空，空即是色，空性非异于色，色亦非异于空性。因此，导师是远离一切承诺的。他自己说：如果我有什么承诺，那时我就会有这个过失。因为我没有承诺，所以我才是无过失的。圣天也说：对于说有、无、有无，没有任何偏袒的人，即使是很长的时间，也不能对他说出诽谤。这样的智慧是区分法与非法，以及摧毁烦恼的方法，如“自性”等所说。无论在印度还是西藏，凡是以各自的执着所结合的，都是由低劣的智慧互相依赖而成立的。如果将这一切都彻底地判为空性，那么珍贵的佛法就会被扰乱，并且由于愤怒的辩论方式也很多，因此许多人会陷入宗派之中，从而踏上恶趣的悬崖。因此，应该将所有宗派的特征都置于衰败之下，并且从这些宗派中获得调整和保护这两种功德的真实事物。