Chinese
殊胜者的体性是，远离一切戏论。如杰达日论师所著的《辨别善逝之教》中说：非有非无亦非有无，亦非二者之自性。从四边中解脱。如是说。分类而言，有远离部分戏论的，是名言谛；有远离一切戏论的，是非名言谛。如《重要论》中说：分类有，名言谛，以及非名言，远离八边。如是说。那么，这两个谛是一还是异呢？在名言中，如水与水月，体性一而反体异。如《菩提心释》中说：如蔗糖自性甜，如火自性热，如是诸法之自性，安住于空性中。如是说。在胜义中，不可说是异或非异。如《慈氏所问经》中说：非是造作相，不可言说之法界，彼亦非异亦非他。如是说。全知大士则说：应如是解释《续自显》之意趣，即包含显有轮回涅槃的一切法，都包含在二谛的自性中。其中，显现为法相，能为心识所缘的，是世俗谛。分类而言，有虚妄和真实的世俗谛两种。前者是：包含显有世间器情，心识所造的一切法，都是虚妄的世俗谛。因为境是错乱显现，心识是虚假的体性。这些未经观察的显现，在错乱的心识面前似乎一致，具有作用，但经过观察，则自性空寂，如幻术的八喻。无有而仅显现光明，如《中观根本慧论》中说：如梦如幻，如乾闼婆城，如是生如是住，如是亦灭。如是说。真实世俗谛是：虽显现为错乱，却能作为善趣和解脱之因，如十善业等清净之业，布施等福德资粮，以及集资粮道、加行道、见道、修道四者的心之等持，能作为智慧之因的心识所缘，或为真谛所摄持者。如《宝性论》的
English
The characteristic of the noble one is being free from all elaborations. As it says in Je Tāri's "Distinguishing the Teachings of the Sugatas": Neither existent, nor nonexistent, nor both existent and nonexistent, nor is it the nature of both. Released from the four extremes. So it is said. In terms of classification, there is the conventional truth that is free from some elaborations, and the ultimate truth that is free from all elaborations. As it says in "Important Treatise": The classification is the conventional ultimate truth, and the non-conventional, free from eight extremes. So it is said. Now, are these two truths one or different? In conventional terms, like water and the moon in water, the nature is the same but the aspects are different. As it says in "Commentary on the Bodhicitta": Just as the nature of sugarcane is sweet, and the nature of fire is hot, so the nature of all phenomena abides in emptiness. So it is said. In ultimate terms, it cannot be said to be either one or different. As it says in "Questions of Maitreya": That realm which is beyond expression by conceptual characteristics is neither the same nor different. So it is said. The Omniscient Great One said: Interpret the meaning of the "Self-Arisen Tantra" in this way: all phenomena included in appearance and existence, samsara and nirvana, are contained within the nature of the two truths. Among them, those phenomena that appear as characteristics and can be perceived by the mind are the conventional truth. In terms of classification, there are two types of conventional truth: false and true. The former is: all phenomena of appearance and existence, the environment and beings, and all that is fabricated by the mind, are false conventional truths, because the object is a mistaken appearance and the mind is of a false nature. These appearances, which appear without investigation, seem consistent in the face of a deluded mind, have functionality, but when investigated, are devoid of inherent existence, like the eight similes of illusion. The arising of mere clear appearance from non-existence is as it says in the "Root Wisdom": Like a dream, like an illusion, like a city of gandharvas, so is birth, so is abiding, so is destruction. So it is said. The true conventional truth is: although it appears as delusion, it causes happiness and liberation, such as the ten virtuous actions, the accumulation of merit such as generosity, and the samadhi of the mind of the four paths of accumulation, application, seeing, and cultivation, which can be the cause of wisdom, the object of the mind, or those included in the truth. As it says in the "Uttaratantra's"
Chinese
释文中说：所有道谛都是有为法，所有有为法都是世俗谛。法性自然存在的空性之本体和随之度量的智慧，以及寂灭戏论之相，是胜义谛。如果区分，有能诠名言相的胜义谛和所诠非名言的真实自性胜义谛两种。第一种是：以理智区分和剖析时，所有事物都不能成立，从而了悟一切事物原本就存在于法性中的智慧，是与自性相符而生起的智慧。《二谛论》中说：遮止生等是胜义，因为相符也是所希望的。从无生寂灭一切戏论中，作了名为胜义的表示。第二种是：诸法从原始以来就存在，但却是超越戏论的自性清净之界。如《中观根本慧论》中说：不是从他处知，是寂静，没有分别，意义不相异，诸戏论的不戏论，那就是它的体性。总的来说，在此区分二谛的场合，各大论典中，有显现是世俗谛，空性是胜义谛的一种说法；还有安立凡是安住处和显现相符的对境和有境二者都是胜义谛，不相符的对境和有境安立为世俗谛的两种不同的安立方式。因此，不混淆这两种情况，分别区分是至关重要的，这是额外的内容。见解是：如实无谬地了悟二种无我。其中，在世俗谛中，一切法如水中月般显现，而在胜义谛中，则了悟一切戏论寂灭之相，从而了悟二谛的实相。《见鬘》中说：所有染污和清净之法，在胜义谛中都是无自性的，而在世俗谛中，则如幻化般，各自的体性不相混杂地存在。《道次第》中说：如果不了知平等之义，并且区分世俗谛和胜义谛，以及法和补特伽罗的无我，这就是菩提道次第。此处，一切智智大士在《胜乘宝藏论》中如此说道：大乘中观和唯识二者，对于唯识宗来说，显现的各种白色、红色等，以及所知的一切，都是自己心识的显现而真实存在。
English
In the commentary, it says: All truths of the path are conditioned. All conditioned things are conventional truths. The wisdom that abides as the nature of reality, the essence of emptiness, and the wisdom that measures it, along with the aspect of pacifying elaborations, is the ultimate truth. If divided, there are two types: the ultimate truth of characteristics and words that are enumerable, and the ultimate truth of the true nature that is not enumerable. The first is: the wisdom that realizes that all things abide from the beginning in the nature of reality, which is not established anywhere when divided and analyzed by reason, and that arises in accordance with the nature. In the Two Truths, it says: The negation of arising, etc., is the ultimate, and it is also desired because it is in accordance. From the unborn, the pacification of all elaborations, the designation of ultimate is made. The second is: although phenomena exist from the beginning, they are the naturally pure realm that is beyond elaborations. As it says in the Root Wisdom: Not known from another, it is peaceful, without conceptualization, meanings are not different, the non-elaboration of all elaborations, that is its characteristic. In general, in this context of distinguishing the two truths, in the great treatises, there is one way of stating that appearance is conventional truth and emptiness is ultimate truth. And there are two different ways of establishing it: both the object and the subject that are the abiding place and in accordance with appearance are ultimate truth, and the object and subject that are not in accordance are established as conventional truth. Therefore, it is crucial not to confuse these two situations and to distinguish them separately, which is an important point. The view is: to realize both selflessnesses without error. In that, in conventional truth, all phenomena appear like a moon in water, and in ultimate truth, one realizes the aspect of the pacification of all elaborations, thereby realizing the state of the two truths. In the Garland of Views, it says: All defiled and purified phenomena are without inherent existence in ultimate truth, but in conventional truth, they exist like illusions, with their respective characteristics not mixed. And in the Stages of the Path, it says: If one does not understand the meaning of equality, and distinguishes between conventional and ultimate truths, and the selflessness of phenomena and persons, this is the Bodhi path. In this context, the Omniscient Great One said in the Supreme Vehicle Treasury: In the Great Vehicle, both Madhyamaka and Cittamatra, for the Mind-Only school, all these appearances of various white, red, etc., along with what is known, are truly existent as aspects of one's own mind.
Chinese
认为唯识宗的相分是真，识是假，以及认为唯识宗的相分是假这两种观点中，第一种观点认为，显现为外境的只是自识的相分向外显现而已。比如，池塘边的珍宝树的枝条上挂着的珍宝kekeru的影像显现在水中时，珍宝的相分也向外显现一样。他们这样认为。对此进行分类，有认为有多少相分就有多少识，有认为相分和识如同剥开的鸡蛋，还有认为相分和识是多种多样的无二。其中，第一种观点是，听到声音的时候，只产生执着声音的识，而不产生执着色等其他的识。进入哪个对境就产生哪个识，不产生其他的识，因此认为有多少相分就有多少识。第二种观点是，外境显现为多种多样也是从识中产生的，执着它的识也是从心中产生的，因此如同剥开的鸡蛋一样，相分和识，境和有境是从一个心中显现的。现在执着对境的时候，外相分的识是一个，内在执着能执的识是一个，这样显现为二，也是因为无始以来的习气导致显现为二，但除了自证之外没有其他的成立，如同剥开的鸡蛋一样。如果这样，外相分的识是一个，在那时产生一个执着的识，岂不是同时产生两个分别念吗？不会的，因为相分的识是无分别的。他们这样认为。第三种观点是，外境的相分显现为多种多样，但内在执着的识只有一个能知晓。比如，城堡里的一只猴子进入得很快，就像四颗星星出现时脖子昏花地观看一样，一个识进入五根门而了知对境。在了知的时候，相分和识都是一个心的自性，没有差别。就像梦中的显现和能执显现为自己，两者与一个睡眠的识没有差别一样。他们这样认为。第二种观点认为相分是假，即在外境的相分上，显现为迷惑的习气是虚假的，但识不是真实的。衡量它的识也是虚假的衡量，没有用体验真实来衡量的，因为境和识都是虚假的显现。
English
Among the two views of the Mind-Only school, which hold that the aspect (rnam pa) is true and consciousness is false, and that the aspect is false, the first view holds that what appears as an object is merely the outward manifestation of one's own consciousness. For example, when the image of a jewel kekeru hanging on the branch of a jewel tree by a pond appears in the water, the aspect of the jewel also appears outwardly. This is what they believe. This can be divided into three: those who believe that there are as many consciousnesses as there are aspects; those who believe that aspects and consciousness are like a cracked egg; and those who believe that aspects and consciousness are diverse and non-dual. The first view is that when a sound is heard, only the consciousness that grasps the sound arises, and the consciousness that grasps forms and so on does not arise. Whichever object is engaged, that consciousness arises, and others do not. Therefore, they believe that there are as many consciousnesses as there are aspects. The second view is that the diverse appearances of external objects also arise from consciousness, and the consciousness that grasps them also arises from mind. Therefore, like a cracked egg, aspects and consciousness, object and subject, arise from one mind. Now, when grasping an object, there is one consciousness of the external aspect and one consciousness of the internal grasping, but this dual appearance is due to beginningless habit. However, there is no establishment other than self-awareness, like a cracked egg. If that is the case, if there is one consciousness of the external aspect, and at that time one grasping consciousness arises, wouldn't two concepts arise simultaneously? No, because the consciousness of the aspect is non-conceptual. This is what they believe. The third view is that although the aspects of external objects appear in various ways, they are known by one internal grasping consciousness. For example, a monkey quickly enters a castle, like looking with blurred vision when four stars appear. One consciousness enters the five sense doors and knows the object. At the time of knowing, both aspect and consciousness are of the same nature of one mind and are not different. Just as the appearance in a dream and the grasping that appears as oneself are not different from the consciousness of one sleep. This is what they believe. The second view holds that the aspect is false, that is, the habit of appearing as delusion in the aspect of external objects is false, but the consciousness is not true. The consciousness that measures it is also a false measurement, and there is no measurement by experiencing truth, because both object and consciousness are false appearances.