Chinese
如果密咒没有确切的定义，并且自性变成生灭之类，就会出现过失。首先，如果六道轮回的显现是自性，那么就应该事先见到六道轮回的真相。这样一来，就根本不需要道之法了。如果承认，就会出现六道轮回不迷乱，不费力气就解脱等过失。为什么呢？因为是自性。第二，如果显现是自性，那么错乱的显现就会断绝。如果承认这一点，就会出现轮回被彻底清除等过失。为什么呢？和上面一样。第三，经中说：所谓“秘密”，是指不可说、离戏论、不改变。所谓“咒”，是指说是功德之源。因此，显现是言说和离戏论，并且没有功德，所以没有密咒的定义。第四，在错乱显现的时候也详细地解释了，所以很清楚。第二种被认为是偏执的是：认为在未证悟的时候不是自性，在证悟的时候是自性；从不混合的角度来说不是，在圆满的时候是；从本体的自性是同一个角度来说是，从表达方式不同的角度来说不是。这些也不合理，首先，未证悟的时候不是，证悟的时候是，这两个哪个是真实的？如果前者是真实的，那么后者就矛盾；如果后者是真实的，那么前者就矛盾。两者都真实是不合理的，因为一个基础上，是与非两种矛盾是不合理的。而且，如果未证悟的时候不是自性，那么证悟的时候是自性就矛盾了，因为那不是证悟，会变成邪见的过失。第二，无明是圆满还是不圆满？如果不是，就没有圆满的定义，会变成不圆满。如果是，就像从无明的角度来说不是一样，从圆满的角度来说也是。如果是，就像从圆满的角度来说是，从无明的角度来说也是。为什么呢？因为无明本身就是圆满。第三，表达方式是本体的表达方式吗？如果不是，就和本体唯一的誓言相违背。
English
If mantras do not have a precise definition, and if the nature of reality becomes subject to arising and ceasing, then faults will occur. Firstly, if the appearances of the six realms are the nature of reality, then the truth of the six realms should be seen beforehand. In that case, there would be no need for the path at all. If you accept that, then the fault of the six realms being liberated without confusion or effort will occur. Why? Because it is the nature of reality. Secondly, if appearances are the nature of reality, then deluded appearances will cease. If you accept that, then the fault of samsara being completely emptied will occur. Why? For the same reason as above. Thirdly, the sutra says: "The term 'secret' refers to that which is unspeakable, free from elaboration, and unchanging. The term 'mantra' refers to that which is spoken of as the source of all qualities." Therefore, appearances are speech and free from elaboration, and there are no qualities, so there is no definition of mantra. Fourthly, it is also explained in detail in the context of deluded appearances, so it is clear. The second thing that is considered biased is: believing that it is not the nature of reality when not realized, but it is when realized; believing that it is not from the perspective of not being mixed, but it is at the time of completion; believing that it is from the perspective of the essence being the same, but it is not from the perspective of different expressions. These are also unreasonable. Firstly, which of the two is true: not being true when not realized, and being true when realized? If the former is true, then the latter is contradictory; if the latter is true, then the former is contradictory. It is unreasonable for both to be true, because it is unreasonable for two contradictory things, being and not being, to exist on the same basis. Also, if it is not the nature of reality when not realized, then it is contradictory that it is the nature of reality when realized, because that is not realization, and the fault of becoming a wrong view will occur. Secondly, is ignorance complete or incomplete? If it is not, then there is no definition of complete, and it will become incomplete. If it is, then just as it is not from the perspective of ignorance, it is also from the perspective of complete. If it is, then just as it is from the perspective of complete, it is also from the perspective of ignorance. Why? Because ignorance itself is complete. Thirdly, is the expression the expression of the essence or not? If not, it contradicts the vow that the essence is one.
Chinese
因为，不是本体的表达方式的缘故。即使本体唯一，表达方式却多种多样。如果不是法性，那怎么能说周遍没有成立呢？如果本体周遍于表达方式，就像用黄金制作的各种饰品，黄金并没有周遍所有的饰品，并且会出现不是黄金的情况等过失。第三种是认为“是”的两种观点：一是认为“是”的观点，二是消除对此的怀疑。第一种观点是：拉杰·卓普巴（Lha rje sgro phug pa）说：“六道轮回的显现，如果从没有断除的角度来说，不是法性；如果从不具备的角度来说，是法性。”也就是说，无论六道轮回的显现如何显现，都是法性自显，所以说是没有断除。因为这种错误的显现并不真实存在于自相续中，所以说是不具备。这只是从表达意义的角度来区分的。”据说。莲花生大师说：“法性就是心性吗？因为自显为自生的智慧，所以没有一个不是法性的法。六道轮回的显现，没有丝毫改变，这本身就是法性。”这就像前面所说的基的本体和分类等。第二，消除怀疑的过失有三种：驳斥不是法性的过失，如果不是法性则再次提出过失，以及确定是法性。第一，不会出现与经文和口诀相违背的过失。说“不是”是指不执着于显现的边，并且是考虑到没有证悟的迷惑而说的。因此，显现一定是法性。在《广大母经》中说：“色是法性，由住贤善逝所说，故无有相违。”从不相违的角度来说，不相违就是由住贤善逝所说，故无有相违。从这里一直到一切种智之间都有说到。在《量理决定论》中说：“意义的自证本体一，自性现量即是彼，正量所应观察者，未见余分复有何？”并且，在经中说：“如果说显现不是密咒之后，除此之外也没有其他的密咒。如果除此之外有一个密咒，那么一切就不会包含在法性之中了。一切的自性不显现也是”， "english_translation": "Because, it is not the way of expressing the essence. Even though the essence is one, the ways of expressing it are diverse. If it is not the nature of reality, then how can it be said that pervasiveness is not established? If the essence pervades the way of expression, like various ornaments made of gold, the gold does not pervade all the ornaments, and there will be faults such as the appearance of things that are not gold. The third is the two views that consider it to be "is": the view that it "is," and eliminating the fault of doubt about it. The first view is: Lha rje sgro phug pa said, "The appearance of the six realms, if viewed from the aspect of not abandoning it, is not the nature of reality; if viewed from the aspect of not possessing it, it is the nature of reality." That is to say, no matter how the appearance of the six realms appears, it is the self-appearance of the nature of reality, so it is said to be not abandoned. Because this mistaken appearance does not truly exist in one's own mindstream, it is said to be not possessed. This is just a distinction made from the perspective of expressing meaning." It is said. Guru Rinpoche said, "Is the nature of reality the same as mind-nature? Because it self-appears as self-born wisdom, there is not a single dharma that is not the nature of reality. The appearance of the six realms, without the slightest change, is itself the nature of reality." This is like the essence and categories of the ground mentioned above. Second, there are three ways to eliminate the fault of doubt: refuting the fault of not being the nature of reality, raising the fault again if it is not the nature of reality, and establishing that it is the nature of reality. First, there will be no fault of contradicting the scriptures and oral instructions. Saying "is not" refers to not clinging to the extreme of appearance, and it is said considering the delusion of not having realized it. Therefore, appearance must be the nature of reality. In the Extensive Mother Sutra, it says, "Form is the nature of reality, taught by the Stable Subhuti, therefore there is no contradiction." From the perspective of non-contradiction, non-contradiction is taught by the Stable Subhuti, therefore there is no contradiction. It is spoken from here all the way to omniscience. In the Treatise on Valid Cognition, it says, "The self-awareness of meaning is one essence, self-nature is directly perceived, what should be examined by valid cognitions? What other unseen part is there?" Furthermore, in the sutra it says, "If it is said that appearance is not mantra, then there is no other mantra besides that. If there is another mantra besides that, then everything will not be included in the nature of reality. The non-appearance of the self-nature of everything is also"
English
Because, it is not the way of expressing the essence. Even though the essence is one, the ways of expressing it are diverse. If it is not the nature of reality, then how can it be said that pervasiveness is not established? If the essence pervades the way of expression, like various ornaments made of gold, the gold does not pervade all the ornaments, and there will be faults such as the appearance of things that are not gold. The third is the two views that consider it to be "is": the view that it "is," and eliminating the fault of doubt about it. The first view is: Lha rje sgro phug pa said, "The appearance of the six realms, if viewed from the aspect of not abandoning it, is not the nature of reality; if viewed from the aspect of not possessing it, it is the nature of reality." That is to say, no matter how the appearance of the six realms appears, it is the self-appearance of the nature of reality, so it is said to be not abandoned. Because this mistaken appearance does not truly exist in one's own mindstream, it is said to be not possessed. This is just a distinction made from the perspective of expressing meaning." It is said. Guru Rinpoche said, "Is the nature of reality the same as mind-nature? Because it self-appears as self-born wisdom, there is not a single dharma that is not the nature of reality. The appearance of the six realms, without the slightest change, is itself the nature of reality." This is like the essence and categories of the ground mentioned above. Second, there are three ways to eliminate the fault of doubt: refuting the fault of not being the nature of reality, raising the fault again if it is not the nature of reality, and establishing that it is the nature of reality. First, there will be no fault of contradicting the scriptures and oral instructions. Saying "is not" refers to not clinging to the extreme of appearance, and it is said considering the delusion of not having realized it. Therefore, appearance must be the nature of reality. In the Extensive Mother Sutra, it says, "Form is the nature of reality, taught by the Stable Subhuti, therefore there is no contradiction." From the perspective of non-contradiction, non-contradiction is taught by the Stable Subhuti, therefore there is no contradiction. It is spoken from here all the way to omniscience. In the Treatise on Valid Cognition, it says, "The self-awareness of meaning is one essence, self-nature is directly perceived, what should be examined by valid cognitions? What other unseen part is there?" Furthermore, in the sutra it says, "If it is said that appearance is not mantra, then there is no other mantra besides that. If there is another mantra besides that, then everything will not be included in the nature of reality. The non-appearance of the self-nature of everything is also"
Chinese
不是秘密真言。如果说不显现是秘密真言，那么，其他断灭之见本身也会变成圆满正等觉。如是说。因此，秘密真言不是显现和不显现二者，如《秘密藏续》所说：从邪分别本身而行持，于他处无有任何动摇。邪分别之因，缘本身也是，无有根本，刹那法界。清净法界之自性。如是说。口诀是，如《道次第》所说：境与识所显现者，自生智慧自显现而尽。如是说。如《拉善》所说：非因缘业所造作，金块所造之物皆是。如是说。与理相违的过失也不会有，首先说六道众生见到真谛，这指的是，是从本性的角度见到吗？还是指带着决定的认识而见到？如果是前者，则认可，如经部所说：自生智慧现前显现之时，称见自生智慧本身。如是说。如《龙钦》所说：根识直见法性明，显现广大智慧之界。如是说。如果见到，那么一切众生都会解脱吗？仅仅是见到，但没有生起决定的认识，所以不会解脱，就像显现而没有决定的认识一样。如果这样说，那么见到需要自己的决定之识吗？如果见到生起自己的决定之识，那么，就会有邪分别错乱断绝的过失。如果是后者，则因不成，仅仅是见到，但没有确定。如《遮难险》所说：阿赖耶识显现二取空，恒时现量见自相，然于他者未显现，如眼不见眼一般。如是说。如《经道次第》所说：三城众生诸有情，不与方便俱安住，虽见真谛未决定，见亦如不见无异。如是说。如果是第二种，法性，六道众生认识后安住的行境，这指的是，是不迷惑的行境吗？还是指不认识的行境不迷惑？如果是前者，则因不成，如上文所示。如果是后者，则不认识是迷惑，不会有断绝迷惑的过失。那么