Chinese
的理。将理本身做到无垢而进行论证，就是成立正理之理。这四者的遣除是：对自性存在怀疑，对作用存在怀疑，对显现成立存在怀疑，以及对理存在怀疑，这些按照顺序来遣除。这些的对境和尺度是：法性的本体没有垢染并且本体没有颠倒，就可以安立为法性之理。同样，作用和显现成立以及理的本体等没有垢染并且本体没有颠倒，就可以安立为那些理。其中，法性的本体有垢染，比如火镜有热的触感一样。其中，本体颠倒，比如有鹿火清洁者，火热的本体颠倒一样。其他的也根据情况相应地结合。四种理的过失是：如果以自性之理论证太过分，一切事物都不会改变，最终会变成说自性为因。如果行为作用之理太过分，行为和努力都不会改变，最终会变成说作者为因。如果依赖之理太过分，一切能力都不会改变，最终会变成说自在天为因。如果成立正理之理太过分，理在一切情况下都会变得无垢，最终会变成显现的傲慢。其中，说有事物者在论证事物时，大多以法性之理和现量来论证，因此要说这二者的尺度和过失。其中，以智慧衡量意义时，如前所说，以分别念所区分的智慧来缘取，以感受所区分的智慧来显现，以无垢智慧所区分的智慧来证悟。其中，在感受的行境中显现虽然是体验，但是因为不能遣除错乱，所以仍然是可以衡量的，最终就像物质一样。以分别念来缘取，因为也不能遣除增益和诽谤，所以最终就像面具一样。其中，作为衡量的秤一样的是以无垢智慧来证悟。智慧也有两种，分别是各自
English
The reason of validity. Making the reason itself impeccable and proving it is the reason for establishing validity. The four eliminations of these are: doubting the essence, doubting the function, doubting the manifest accomplishment, and doubting the reason. These are eliminated in order. The objects and measures of these are: if the essence of the Dharma-nature is without impurity and the essence is not reversed, then it can be established as the reason of Dharma-nature. Similarly, if the essence of action, manifest accomplishment, and reason are without impurity and the essence is not reversed, then they can be established as those reasons. Among them, the essence of Dharma-nature has impurity, like a fire mirror having the touch of heat. Among them, the essence is reversed, like a deer fire purifier, the essence of fire heat is reversed. Others should also be combined accordingly. The faults of the four kinds of reasoning are: if the reasoning by the nature of things is too excessive, then all things will not be reversed, and ultimately it will become saying that nature is the cause. If the reasoning of action and function is too excessive, then all actions and efforts will not be reversed, and ultimately it will become saying that the agent is the cause. If the reasoning of dependence is too excessive, then all powers will not be reversed, and ultimately it will become saying that Ishvara is the cause. If the reasoning of establishing validity is too excessive, then the reason will become impeccable in all circumstances, and ultimately it will become manifest pride. Among them, when those who speak of things prove things, they mostly prove them by the reason of Dharma-nature and direct perception, therefore, the measure and fault of these two should be stated. Among them, when measuring meaning with intelligence, as mentioned above, it is to focus with the intelligence distinguished by conceptualization, to appear to the intelligence distinguished by feeling, and to realize with the intelligence distinguished by impeccable wisdom. Among them, appearing in the realm of experience is experience, but because it cannot eliminate delusion, it is still measurable, and ultimately it is like a substance. To focus with conceptualization, because it cannot eliminate addition and slander, it is ultimately like a mask. Among them, what is like a scale for measuring is realization with impeccable wisdom. Wisdom is also of two kinds, namely, individually
Chinese
智慧和无分别的智慧。其中，以个别分别的智慧衡量法性时，可以次第消除垢染。如前所示，对于所安立的体性，可以次第消除遍计所执的垢染，直至法性的本体未变异之间，垢染不会穷尽。以无分别的智慧证悟时，法性的本体会变异。因此，以法性的理证成立，也只是在法性未变异时，断除一部分垢染而已，只能安立为法性的理。如果超出这个范围，就会变成中观的正确的世俗谛。如同毒药致死的法性和药物救活的法性一样，如果事物是法性，那么瑜伽行者的心和智慧胜义谛也变成法性。就会变成声闻的能取所取，以及执着自性为常的因，会变成一切执着实有的守护者。现量成立也是如此。如前所示，从声闻的观点来看，外境以现量成立，这种观点还能被其他什么理证驳倒呢？从瑜伽行者的观点来看，你的观点是迷乱于法性的本体，因为无垢的法性只是显现为内外处而已。因此，自证不是任何的所取，也不是对任何的能取，以二取空性的体性，成立唯是自证的法性，才是无垢的法性。这既不需要以理证成立，也不能被理证损害。就像这样，一切心和心所不是自证的现量吗？这样，现量本身不是正确的知识吗？如果是这样，还需要其他理证来成立它吗？此外，还有什么比能驳倒那个正确知识的第二个正确知识，更有力量的呢？如果一切所知都是唯心，那么还需要寻找什么其他的义，来被那个正确的知识衡量和成立呢？ 这样执着无垢的法性和无垢的现量。否则，那些
English
Wisdom and non-conceptual wisdom. Among these, when measuring the nature of reality with the wisdom of individual discrimination, defilements can be gradually eliminated. As shown above, for all the characteristics that have been established, the defilements of complete imputation can be gradually eliminated, until the very essence of reality has not changed, the defilements will not be exhausted. When realized with non-conceptual wisdom, the very essence of reality will change. Therefore, this proof by the reasoning of reality is only a partial removal of defilements when reality has not changed. It can only be established as the reasoning of reality. If it goes beyond that, it will become the correct conventional truth of Madhyamaka. Just like the reality of dying from poison and the reality of living from medicine, if things are the reality, then the mind and wisdom of the Yogacara, the ultimate truth, will also become the reality. It will become the grasping and the grasped of the Hearers, and the view of self-nature as the cause, and will become the protector of all views of reality. This is also how direct perception is established. As mentioned above, from the perspective of the Hearers, what other reasoning can refute the establishment of external objects by direct perception? From the perspective of the Yogacara, your view is a delusion about the very essence of reality, because the immaculate reality is merely the appearance of the inner and outer sense bases. Therefore, self-awareness is neither the object of any grasping nor the subject of any grasping. The nature of emptiness of duality, established as the reality of mere self-awareness, is the immaculate reality. This does not need to be established by reasoning, nor can it be harmed by reasoning. Like this, are not all minds and mental events direct perceptions of self-awareness? In that case, is not direct perception itself correct knowledge? If so, what need is there to establish it with other reasoning? Furthermore, what other correct knowledge is more powerful than the second correct knowledge that refutes that correct knowledge? If all knowable things are only mind, then what other meaning needs to be sought to be measured and established by that correct knowledge? Thus, they grasp the immaculate reality and the immaculate direct perception. Otherwise, those
Chinese
也有人这样建立有垢性。像这样，按照共同的观点，现量的智慧是生起具有形象的，还是生起没有形象的？对此，如果生起没有形象的，那么如何对境成为现量？如果生起具有形象的，那么由什么来证明是不错乱的呢？因此，有人驳斥说现量不是量。按照瑜伽行派的观点，三界的所有的心和心所不是非真实的遍计吗？如果是遍计，那么现量的智慧如何离于分别？如果成立为非真实，那么现量的智慧如何不迷惑？如果成为具有分别并且具有迷惑，那么如何能成为量？另外，像这样，以“分别”和“不迷惑”这两个遮遣的词所表示的，是表示遮遣执著和远离遮遣，像这样，就像以“太阳的精华没有黑暗”这个词所表示的那样，如果显示连黑暗的基础也没有丝毫，那么根识的自性就不会散乱，而是会成为自性的智慧。如果是否定微小，就像否定微细的想为没有想一样，说微细的分别是没有分别，就像说小的色是没有色一样，如果说小的迷惑为不迷惑，那么自性是具有分别并且具有迷惑的，如何能成为量？另外，即使取消了能取所取的自性，如果了知和认识的自性生起本身是通过感受来体验的，由于感受的作用范围不能断除迷惑，因此自证是否能像那样成立还不确定，仍然是可以衡量的。像这样说：如果所有的理智都是有垢的，那么你有什么样的无垢理智呢？我们并不说有无垢的理智，但是，由于垢染有大小的区别，因此小的能够驳斥大的。如果有一种无垢的理性能够穷尽所知，那么诸佛为什么不在所有的教言中首先宣说它呢？也不是那样，理智
English
There are also those who establish impurity in this way. Like this, according to the common view, is the direct perception wisdom born with an image or born without an image? If it is born without an image, then how does it become a direct perception of the object? If it is born with an image, then what proves that it is not mistaken? Therefore, some refute that direct perception is not a valid cognition. According to the Yogacara school, aren't all the minds and mental factors of the three realms unreal conceptualizations? If they are conceptualizations, then how is the direct perception wisdom free from conceptualization? If it is established as unreal, then how is the direct perception wisdom not deluded? If it becomes with conceptualization and with delusion, then how can it be a valid cognition? Furthermore, like this, what is indicated by the two negating terms "conceptualization" and "non-delusion" is that it indicates negating attachment and being apart from negation. Like this, just as what is indicated by the term "the essence of the sun has no darkness," if it shows that there is not even the slightest basis of darkness, then the nature of the sense consciousness will not be distracted, but will become the wisdom of its own nature. If it is negating the subtle and small, just as negating subtle perception as no perception, saying subtle conceptualization is no conceptualization, just as saying a small form is no form, if saying a small delusion is non-delusion, then the nature itself is with conceptualization and with delusion, how can it be a valid cognition? Furthermore, even if the nature of the apprehended and the apprehender is removed, if the arising of the nature of knowing and understanding itself is experienced through feeling, since the scope of feeling cannot cut off delusion, it is uncertain whether self-awareness can be established as such, and it is still to be measured. Like this, it is said: If all reasoning is impure, then what kind of pure reasoning do you have? We do not say that there is pure reasoning, but since there are differences in the size of the impurities, the small can refute the large. If there is one pure reasoning that can exhaust the knowable, then why don't the Buddhas first teach it in all the teachings? It is not like that either, reasoning
Chinese
也不是依赖和不依赖，譬如，如果一个人想要走很长的路，也不是第一眼和第一步就能到达终点，也不是不依赖它。领路人也不是不依赖经典和灌顶，就像依赖它们才能到达终点一样，通过经典、口诀和自己智慧所生的道理，最终才能证悟。如是说：智者不稳固前一步，不会舍弃后一步。一旦稳固，就那样依次舍弃。就不会掉入危险的悬崖，而是到达安乐之地。同样，智者不稳固前一个道理，就不会修持其他的。一旦稳固，就那样依次修持。就不会掉入过失的悬崖，而是安乐地证悟诸法。就像这样说的。因此，对于那些执着于名相之教和理智之教的人来说，也应该这样想：自己的宗派是通过无垢的道理而成立的，所以应该接受；而大圆满的法门不是通过道理成立的，所以应该抛弃。不要这样想，而要以信心进入此道。如果不是这样，就会变成傲慢自大的人。大圆满的法门是不被理智所损害的场合，这是第四个。现在开始进入大圆满的法门本身。其中，所有宣说大圆满法门的经典，如果简要地归纳其意义，可以归纳为四种，即：宣说菩提心的自性，宣说菩提心的伟大，宣说菩提心的迷误和遮蔽，宣说安住菩提心的方法。其中，通过宣说伟大和迷误遮蔽，也能宣说自性。通过宣说自性，也能证悟伟大，断除迷误遮蔽。因此，在经典中也没有像这样特别分开宣说的，也没有超出这些的。其中，简要地说，菩提心的自性是：内外显有的一切法，都是无二的菩提心。心髓是菩提的自性，从原始以来就是成佛的，不是通过道路来改造，也不是通过对治来成就，而是无需造作，任运自成。
English
It is also not about relying and not relying. For example, if a person wants to travel a long road, they will not reach the end with just the first glance and the first step. Nor is it without relying on them. The guide is also not without relying on scriptures and empowerments, just as relying on them leads to the end. Similarly, through scriptures, instructions, and the wisdom generated by one's own intellect, one will eventually attain realization. As it is said: A wise person does not abandon the next step without stabilizing the previous one. Once it is stable, they abandon them in that order. They will not fall into the dangerous cliff, but will reach a place of ease. Similarly, a wise person does not practice other things without stabilizing the previous reasoning. Once it is stable, they practice them in that order. They will not fall into the cliff of faults, but will easily realize the meanings. It is like that. Therefore, even those who are attached to the teachings of words and the teachings of reason should think like this: "My own established view is established by immaculate reason, so it should be accepted; and the way of Dzogchen is not established by reason, so it should be abandoned." Do not think like that, but enter this path with faith. If it is not like that, one will become an arrogant person. The occasion when the way of Dzogchen is not harmed by reason is the fourth. Now, let us enter the teachings of Dzogchen itself. Among all the scriptures that explain the way of Dzogchen, if the meaning is briefly summarized, it can be summarized into four aspects: explaining the nature of bodhicitta, explaining the greatness of bodhicitta, explaining the obscurations and veils of bodhicitta, and explaining the method of settling in bodhicitta. Among these, by explaining the greatness and obscurations, the nature is also explained. By explaining the nature, the greatness is also realized, and the obscurations are cut off. Therefore, there is no separate explanation like this in the scriptures, nor is there anything beyond these. In short, the nature of bodhicitta is: all phenomena of outer and inner existence are the non-dual bodhicitta. The essence is the nature of bodhi, which is enlightened from the very beginning. It is not transformed by the path, nor is it accomplished by antidotes, but is spontaneously perfect without effort.