Chinese
稍微具体地说，众生的时候，被突如其来的习气所蒙蔽，不明显地体验。圣者的时候，明显地体验。他们这样说。总而言之，一切都与以两种无分别智慧为空性的真如相应，在胜义谛中是实有的。他们这样说。关于这一点，从中观的观点来看，瑜伽行者们认为在胜义谛中存在和是真实的那些，都是遍计所执，是完全不存在的，这样来否定不存在。中观派不建立需要通过否定非本来面目来建立的胜义谛。仅仅在世俗如幻的显现中，由真实的世俗因和缘所生，能够起作用，未经观察时令人愉悦，经过观察则无法忍受理智的分析，这种自性空性，正如其所显现的那样存在和是真实的，与现量不相违背。他们这样说。从密宗的观点来看，在胜义谛中不是实有的，仅仅是世俗迷惑的知识的显现上，执着于正如其所显现的那样存在和是真实的性质，这是遍计所执，是完全不存在的。因为是迷惑的知识的显现，所以不能按照显现来执着其性质。例如，在梦中显现由因和缘所生，比如耕田产生收成，喝毒药产生疾病，吃药产生痊愈，这些都显现为由因和缘所生。显现的行为也是如此。此外，梦中的瓶子的形状能够起到盛水的作用，而瓶子的影像则不能起到盛水的作用。这样看来，即使仅仅在梦境中，这样的显现也不需要建立，性质上的差别也丝毫没有。同样，内外的事物显现为由因和缘所生，以及显现为能够起作用和不能起作用的这些差别，仅仅是显现，无论是从博学的班智达到愚笨的牧牛女，任何人都对业的分配使用感到一致，以及完全清净和不完全清净等等。
English
To be a bit more specific, in the state of sentient beings, one experiences unclearly, obscured by sudden habitual tendencies. In the state of noble ones, one experiences clearly. So they say. In conclusion, everything is accompanied by suchness, which is empty of the two non-conceptual wisdoms, and is substantially existent in the ultimate sense. So they say. Regarding this, from the perspective of Madhyamaka, those things that Yogacharas view as existing and being real in terms of ultimate characteristics are thoroughly conceptualized and utterly non-existent, thus negating their existence. The Madhyamikas do not establish an ultimate reality that needs to be established by negating what it is not. Merely in the conventional, illusory appearance, arising from true conventional causes and conditions, capable of performing a function, delightful when unexamined, but unbearable to a heap of reasoning when examined, this emptiness of self-nature is established as existing and being real just as it appears, and does not contradict direct perception. So they say. From the perspective of Secret Mantra, the grasping of characteristics as existing and being real just as they appear, in the mere appearance of deluded knowledge that is not established as a real entity in the ultimate sense, is thoroughly conceptualized and utterly non-existent. Because it is the appearance of deluded knowledge, one should not grasp its characteristics according to the appearance. For example, in a dream, it appears to arise from causes and conditions, such as plowing a field producing a harvest, drinking poison producing illness, and taking medicine producing recovery; these all appear to arise from causes and conditions. The appearance of performing actions is also the same. Furthermore, the shape of a pot in a dream appears capable of performing the function of holding water, while the image of a pot appears incapable of performing the function of holding water. Thus, even in the mere state of a dream, such appearances do not need to be established, and there is not even a slight difference in characteristics. Similarly, these differences in external and internal phenomena appearing to arise from causes and conditions, and appearing to be capable and incapable of performing a function, are merely appearances, and anyone, from learned panditas to foolish cowherdesses, perceives a consistent use of karmic allocations, as well as complete purity and impurity, and so on.
Chinese
对于显现的各种相似之处，它们才会显现。因此，不需要证明这一点，因为它是确立各种特征的基础。特征就是如其所显现的那样去证明，即使是微尘也不存在。因此，所有被确立为事物自身特征的事物，最终没有一个不是遍计所执的特征。因此，对于所知事物，没有任何事物能够作为空性的自性，或者能够被证明为存在和是，通过否定来显示的基础，没有留下任何剩余。仅仅是显现，对于那些在业力方面使用不同的人来说，被确立为特征的事物也不会显现。即使是那些被确立为遍计所执的事物，对于那些稍微增长了分别念的人来说也会显现。这些关于从真实的世俗因和缘中产生，具有实现作用的特征的说法。从密宗的角度来看，以前的堪布们所说的遍计所执的特征，现在稍微说一下。其中，从中观的角度来看，这些内外的事物，因为是相互依赖而产生的，所以在胜义谛中是没有产生的。在世俗谛中，它们从因和缘的力量中产生和灭亡，是无常和变化的法。从这个观点出发，他们说：这些都是相互依赖的产生方式，是产生和灭亡的。就像芥菜籽一样，无中不会生有，没有因果。那么，显现为因果的这个特征是什么呢？执着于事物，并且将心识理解为因和果，心识就会显现为因和缘。等等，广说了。因此，从密宗的角度来看，一切法都只是遍计所执。任何是遍计所执的事物，那也只是遍计分别。任何遍计分别的自性，都是遍计所执的特征。圆成实的特征是完全不存在的。这个遍计所执本身也是所知法的特征。也是道。也是果。因此，安住于密宗之道的瑜伽士，应该依靠遍计所执的智慧来观察所知。果显
English
They appear to those who have similar appearances. Therefore, there is no need to prove this, as it is the basis for establishing various characteristics. The characteristic is to prove it as it appears, and there is not even a tiny particle. Therefore, all things that are established as the characteristics of objects themselves, in the end, none of them are not the characteristics of being completely imputed. Therefore, for knowable things, there is nothing that can be the self-characteristic of emptiness by complete imputation, or that can be proven to exist and be, and there is nothing left as a basis shown by negation. Merely appearing, for those who use different karmic opportunities, those established as characteristics do not appear. Even those established as completely imputed appear to those who have slightly increased conceptualization. These statements about the characteristics of being able to achieve results, arising from true conventional causes and conditions. From the perspective of the Secret Mantra, let us say a little about the characteristics of complete imputation that were previously explained by the Khenpos. Among them, from the perspective of Madhyamaka, these internal and external objects, because they arise interdependently, there is no arising in the ultimate truth. In the conventional truth, they arise and cease from the power of causes and conditions, and are impermanent and changing dharmas. Starting from this view, they said: All of these are interdependent arising, which is arising and ceasing. Just like a mustard seed, nothing comes from nothing, there is no cause and effect. So, what is the characteristic of this appearance as cause and effect? The mind that clings to objects and understands consciousness as cause and effect, consciousness appears as cause and condition. And so on, it is widely said. Therefore, from the perspective of Secret Mantra, all dharmas are merely completely imputed. Whatever is completely imputed is merely complete conceptualization. Whatever is the self-nature of complete conceptualization is the characteristic of complete imputation. The characteristic of the perfectly established is completely non-existent. This completely imputed itself is also the characteristic of knowable dharmas. It is also the path. It is also the result. Therefore, a yogi who abides in the path of Secret Mantra should rely on the wisdom of complete imputation to observe the knowable. Manifest result.
Chinese
应当这样做。那么，如果法的体性是这样真实的，为什么诸位胜者最初不这样开示呢？这是智慧和信解深广者的行境。如果对那些充满烦恼和被烦恼所染的人开示，就与断见者没有差别了。众生的相续会被断绝，一切清净的努力都会被阻碍。因此，这不是要向所有人开示的，而且因为难以理解，所以称为密咒之法。因此，对于执着事物的人，必须逐渐引导他们的心。例如，一个被水冲走的人寻找依靠之处，抓住了一棵倒在水中的树的顶端。他心想，这个顶端很不稳固，不能依靠，应该赶快放弃它，抓住根部，才能上岸。于是逐渐靠近根部，结果根部被水冲走了。然后他看到根部沉入水中，顶端浮出水面，又逃向顶端。他心想，以前认为稳固的根部，现在成了束缚的沉石。认为不稳固的顶端，现在却可以依靠和救护。我应该尽快砍断它，依靠顶端。也砍断其他的枝条。有些作为住所，有些在顺风时作为风帆，有些在逆风时作为沉石，有些被当作船桨来划动。像这样做了之后，就像他从水中脱险一样。那些想要解脱之道的人，如果首先从世俗的道路进入观察，就会发现一切都只是遍计所执。如果想要一个远离遍计所执，自性不颠倒地圆满成就的，具有体性和果实的道路，并依次进行观察和寻找，就会发现一切如实的观察都无法成立。然后，如果观察应该如何行进，如果执着于“真实”这个概念，那么执着于胜义谛就太过分了。即使执着于世俗谛中真实的体性，也会发现它本身就是束缚的沉石。真实地。
English
It should be done like that. Now, if the nature of Dharma is true in this way, why didn't all the Victors teach it that way from the very beginning? This is the realm of those with deep and vast wisdom and faith. If it were taught to those who are filled with and afflicted by disturbing emotions, there would be no difference from those who speak of annihilation. The continuum of beings would be cut off, and all pure efforts would be reversed. Therefore, it is not to be taught to everyone, and because it is difficult to understand, it is called the way of Secret Mantra. Therefore, the minds of those who are attached to things must be gradually guided. For example, a person carried away by water looks for a place to rely on and grabs the top of a tree that has fallen into the water. He thinks, 'This top is very unstable and cannot be relied upon. I should quickly abandon it and grab the root to get ashore.' So he gradually approaches the root, but the root is carried away by the water. Then he sees that the root has sunk into the water, and the top has emerged. He flees back to the top. He thinks, 'The root, which I previously thought was stable, is now a sinking stone of bondage. The top, which I thought was unstable, is now a refuge and a protector. I should cut it off as soon as possible and rely on the top.' He also cuts off the other branches. Some are used as dwellings, some as sails when the wind is favorable, some as sinking stones when the wind is unfavorable, and some are used as oars to row. Having done this, just as he escapes from the water, so too, those who desire the path of liberation, if they first enter and observe from the worldly path, will see that everything is merely conceptual imputation. If they desire a path and its fruit that is free from conceptual imputation, perfectly accomplished by its own nature without inversion, and then gradually examine and search, they will see that all accurate examinations cannot be established. Then, if they look at how to proceed, if they grasp at the term 'true,' then grasping at the ultimate truth is too much. Even if they grasp at the nature of truth in the conventional truth, they will see that it itself is a sinking stone of bondage. Truly.
Chinese
以智慧之剑斩断一切见解，心安住于唯遍计所执，以善巧方便之行，不执着、不住留于任何事物，且无有束缚，如其所愿地嬉戏游乐，精勤修持，便能如鸟翱翔于空般成就。那么瑜伽行者所说的遍计所执，并非是所遍计，这又是怎么回事呢？这是因为，没有人会执着于自己的宗派是遍计所执。稍稍依照其自性来说，有能作和所作，自主和依他两种说法，在成立其中任何一种时，另一种就会被遮止。例如，用斧头砍树，树被砍成两段时，这是依他而说的，不能说斧头自己砍自己。又如成立灯能照明时，如果依他而成立，那么，能照亮的是灯，所照亮的是黑暗的地方，照亮的结果是该地方脱离了黑暗。如果自主而成立，那么，能照亮的也是灯，所照亮的也是灯，照亮的结果也是灯自身持续脱离黑暗而生起。这样来成立。无论成立自主还是依他，如果不是遮止其中一种，那么有能作而无所作，这是不能否定的。例如，有砍树的行为，但没有树被砍断的结果。或者说，有照亮黑暗的行为，但没有照亮的结果。这样是不能成立的。同样，有遍计，但没有所遍计，这样也是不能成立的。然而，该论典只是遮止了能作和所作是依他之说法。例如，所遍计也是依他，能遍计也是依他的一部分，即能安立名言，具有与分别念相关的智慧之作用。如果安立所遍计为所取和能取的体性，那么，除此之外，就没有这样的所遍计了。这样是可以否定的。依照自主之说法，灯能照明
English
Having cut off all views with the sword of wisdom, and with the mind abiding solely in complete imputation, through skillful means of conduct, without attachment, without dwelling, and without being bound to anything, one can play and frolic as one wishes with skillful means of conduct, and by diligently practicing, one will achieve it just as a bird soars in the sky. Now, how is it that what is imputed by practitioners of yoga is not said to be what is completely imputed? It is because no one holds their own established tenets to be completely imputed. Briefly, according to its own nature, there are two ways of speaking about action and object: independently and dependently. When one of these is established, the other is precluded. For example, when a tree is cut into two pieces by an axe, it is spoken of as dependent, and it cannot be said that the axe cuts itself. Similarly, when establishing that a lamp illuminates, if it is established dependently, then the illuminator is the lamp, the illuminated is the dark place, and the result of the illumination is that the place is freed from darkness. If it is established independently, then the illuminator is also the lamp, the illuminated is also the lamp, and the result of the illumination is that the lamp itself continuously arises free from darkness. This is how it is established. Whether one establishes it independently or dependently, if one does not preclude one of them, then there is the act but no object, which cannot be denied. For example, there is the act of cutting a tree, but there is no result of the tree being cut. Or, there is the act of illuminating darkness, but there is no result of illumination. This cannot be established. Similarly, there is imputation, but there is no imputed object, which also cannot be established. However, that treatise merely refutes the assertion that the agent and the object are dependent. For example, what is to be imputed is also dependent, and the act of imputing is also one aspect of dependence, namely, the function of intelligence associated with conceptualization that can establish terminology. If what is completely imputed is established as the nature of the apprehended and the apprehender, then there is no such thing as what is completely imputed otherwise. This can be denied. According to the independent way, a lamp illuminates