English
For the spontaneously arisen, many anointings were done; for the spontaneously arisen, many rubbings were done; for the body color, many of the five families were done; for the mandala, it was stirred with desires. In short, the main emphasis is on something that is different from others. (Padmasambhava) said, "It is certain that such wise ones will come," and then laughed. As it was said, for the profound Dharma of the Nyingma school, those oral instructions that can be used are regarded as the controversial Dharma of the Nyingma school. Relying on these, they make modifications, cite names and Indian sources, just wanting to elevate themselves. They do some things that seem unfounded, saying that what is not is, and saying that what is is not. They desire to be more superior than others, and those Tibetan Khenpos and Acharyas who follow, as well as those who have become monks, have no clairvoyance and do not know Sanskrit. Following Kha Dag Zangpo, they elevate their own translators, and it seems that there are many lineages of vehicles. Furthermore, the great translators of the early period, such as Vairochana, for the entry of sounds, there is the Kalapa grammar; for the correction of translation, there is the Chandra grammar; for the subsequent phonetics, there are the arising sounds; for the translation of sentient beings' languages, there are the translating sounds; for the translation of meaning, there are the harmonizing sounds; for the purification of distinctions, there are the sounds of mantras; for the entry of Kali, there are the sounds of means; for the translation of Ali, there are the sounds of wisdom; for the necessity of purifying sounds, there are the sounds of meaning; and so on, relying entirely on the understanding of nature. The root of translation also relies on Sanskrit (藏文：སྃ་སྐྲྀ་ཏ，梵文天城体：संस्कृत，梵文罗马拟音：saṃskṛta，汉语字面意思：梵文), relying on the sounds of places, etc. Vairochana knows twenty-five sounds and one hundred and eight sounds. Even if translating Chinese and Tibetan mutually, or translating into one's own language, there is no need to rely on Indians, he is more knowledgeable than ordinary Panditas. Padmasambhava said that Panditas like Vimalamitra coming to Tibet, and translators like Vairochana, can make the teachings of both Sutra and Tantra rise in Tibet like the sun. When asked about Vairochana being exiled to Tsawa Rong, he said, "If so, what am I doing coming to Tibet? Someone like Vairochana is not a Tibetan translator, he is more knowledgeable than Indian Panditas." Ngok Lodan Sherab is known as the most learned Tibetan translator of later times.
Chinese
尽管如此，他说：“贝若扎那（藏文：བཱཻ་རོ་ཙ་ན）与虚空同等，卡焦（藏文：ཀ་ཅོག）师徒二人如同日月双悬。仁钦桑布（藏文：རིན་ཆེན་བཟང་པོ）如同黎明时分的大星，而我们这些人则如同萤火虫。”因此，新旧译之间的翻译和来源的差别，大家都一致认为是这样的。此外，新译也借鉴了很多旧译的内容。比如，金刚界（梵文：वज्रधातु，vajradhātu，金刚界）也是旧译宁玛派的法类。瑜伽部（梵文：योग，yoga，结合）也属于宁玛派的法类。昆瑞（藏文：ཀུན་རིག་）也属于宁玛派的法类。在伏藏法方面，根据古汝曲旺（藏文：གུ་རུ་ཆོས་དབང་）的观点，嘉敦巴香琼（藏文：རྒྱ་དུམ་པ་ཞང་ཁྲོཾ）从阎魔法类的黄纸和陶罐中，只抄录了他自己的寿命自在心髓法类等一半的内容。其余的大威德金刚等阎魔法类，很多都落入了Ra译师的手中，并根据印度的来源进行了修改。Ra派的人说这些都是伏藏法。此外，很多门隅布姆塘的伏藏纸也落入了Ra译师手中，他说威力回遮、三色、多闻天子（梵文：वैश्रवण，vaiśravaṇa，多闻）、象头王财神（梵文：जम्भल，jambhala，财神）和 Ganapati（梵文：गणपति，gaṇapati， गणपति）等很多法类，都是在伏藏法的基础上进行了新译。这些内容的意思是，宁玛派中有很多有争议的人将这些法作为正法，并将不纯净的伪装成纯净的。瑞哲的堪布尊胜（藏文：བརྩོན་སེང་）和曼隆巴弥觉多吉（藏文：སྨན་ལུང་བ་མི་སྤྱོད་རྡོ་རྗེ）等人也说过很多类似的话。因此，新旧译之间存在差异，即使现在新译的导师们条件再好，如果仔细考察研究，也会发现存在不纯净的错误。指出这一点，并不是出于自私、嫉妒和嗔恨，而是根据前辈大师们的言论、论证和历史，以公正的态度进行仔细观察后得出的结论。༈ 第五个问题是驳斥名相学者的争论。后来的译师和藏族论师、名相学者等人说，宁玛派是不纯净的，是邪见，并且有和尚的观点，是断见。这些都是非常不理解的情况。和尚的法混入，是
English
Even so, he said, "Vairotsana (Tibetan: བཱཻ་རོ་ཙ་ན) is equal to the expanse of the sky. Ka Jok (Tibetan: ཀ་ཅོག), the two teacher and disciple, are like the sun and moon paired. Rinchen Zangpo (Tibetan: རིན་ཆེན་བཟང་པོ) is like a great star at dawn. We ourselves are like fireflies." Therefore, the difference in translation and source between the new and old translations is agreed upon by everyone to be like that. Furthermore, there are many instances where the new translations have taken ownership of the old translations' teachings. For example, the Vajradhatu (Sanskrit: वज्रधातु, vajradhātu, Diamond Realm) is also a Dharma category of the early translation Nyingma school. The Yogas (Sanskrit: योग, yoga, union) are also Dharma categories of the Nyingma school. Kunrig (Tibetan: ཀུན་རིག་) is also a Dharma category of the Nyingma school. Regarding the treasure teachings, according to Guru Chöwang's (Tibetan: གུ་རུ་ཆོས་དབང་) view, Gya Dumba Zhangtröm (Tibetan: རྒྱ་དུམ་པ་ཞང་ཁྲོཾ) only copied about half of his own Life Empowerment Heart Essence Dharma category from the Yamantaka category's yellow scrolls and clay pots. Many of the other Yamantaka categories, such as the Vajrabhairava, fell into the hands of Ra Lotsawa, who modified them based on Indian sources. The Ra school says that these are treasure teachings. Furthermore, many treasure scrolls from Mön Bumthang fell into the hands of Ra Lotsawa, and he said that many Dharma categories such as Power Return, Ser Sum, Vaishravana (Sanskrit: वैश्रवण, vaiśravaṇa, All-Hearing), Jambhala (Sanskrit: जम्भल, jambhala, Wealth God), and Ganapati (Sanskrit: गणपति, gaṇapati, Ganapati) were newly translated based on treasure teachings. The meaning of these is that many controversial people in the Nyingma school have made these teachings into Dharma, and have pretended that the impure is pure. Many scholars from hermitages, such as Tsen Seng (Tibetan: བརྩོན་སེང་) and Menlungpa Miyö Dorje (Tibetan: སྨན་ལུང་བ་མི་སྤྱོད་རྡོ་རྗེ), have also said many similar things. Therefore, there is a difference between the new and old translations, and even if the conditions of the new translation masters are good now, if carefully examined and researched, it will be found that there are impure errors. Pointing this out is not a result of selfishness, jealousy, and hatred, but a conclusion reached after carefully observing the words, arguments, and history of the previous masters with an unbiased attitude. ༈ The fifth point is to refute the arguments of the term scholars. Some later translators and Tibetan scholars, logicians, term scholars, and others say that the Nyingma school is impure, has wrong views, has the views of Heshang, and is nihilistic. These are very misunderstood situations. The mixing of Heshang's teachings is
Chinese
在任何早译、晚译的经教和伏藏中都没有这种说法。到藏地的班智达，莲花生大师、毗玛拉米扎这两位尊者不是和尚华桑的弟子。华桑精通汉地的历算，所以国王邀请他到桑耶寺计算历算，历算的翻译似乎很多。在任何大圆满的经教和伏藏中，都没有请教华桑，华桑给予的法本。译师贝若扎纳、噶觉等等也没有说过到印度翻译经典时，请教过华桑这样的话。只是在大圆满的续部中，为了确定清净的词语，各自的发音是这样的：为了说明各自确定发音和意义时是这样的，所以在印度的语言中，在邬金的语言中，在达那郭夏洲的语言中，在斯林扎切的语言中，在勃律夏的语言中，在华桑巴尔纳的语言中，在克什米尔的语言中，在吐火罗地区的语言中，在扎霍尔的语言中，应该这样说。这样讲述续部的共同特点后，为了说明可靠性而站在自己这一方，在那些词语的最后说：在印度梵语（梵文天城体：saṃskṛta）中，这样说。在藏语中，这样说。这样说，只是在两部续中引用来作为争论的来源。不是华桑说了这些，藏地的译师翻译了这些，包括灌顶、续部、传承、口诀等等。这样的理由和来源是不可能有的。现在有些人说的话，要知道就像羊喝水或者狗吃粪便一样的论证。还有人说大圆满的见解有错误，那么见解有什么错误呢？我们大圆满，无论是早译、晚译，心部、界部，所有的经教和伏藏，虽然有划分乘次第的见、修、道的次第，但是，真正的大圆满的见解是什么呢？基的事物的安住方式，自生智慧的精华，界如来藏的精华，实相本来的意义，不堕入四句的边见，从常断二边中解脱，显空双运，自生任运，从原始以来就圆满于自性清净，聚集
English
There is no such thing in any early or late translation of scriptures and treasures. The panditas who came to Tibet, Guru Padmasambhava and Vimalamitra, were not disciples of the monk Heshang. Heshang was proficient in Chinese astrology, so the king invited him to Samye Monastery to calculate astrology, and it seems that there were many translations of astrology. In any Dzogchen scripture or treasure, there is no Dharma text that was requested from Heshang and given by Heshang. Translators such as Vairotsana and Kakyog have never said that they consulted Heshang when they went to India to translate scriptures. Only in the tantras of Dzogchen, in order to determine the pure words, the pronunciation of each is like this: In order to explain that the pronunciation and meaning are determined by each, in the language of India, in the language of Oddiyana, in the language of Dhanakosha Island, in the language of Srinzu Tsei, in the language of Brusha, in the language of Heshang Barna, in the language of Kashmir, in the language of Tokharistan, in the language of Zahor, it should be said like this. After explaining the common characteristics of the tantras, in order to show reliability and stand on one's own side, at the end of those words, it is said: In the Indian Sanskrit language (Sanskrit Devanagari: saṃskṛta), it is said like this. In Tibetan, it is said like this. It is said that only in two tantras, it is cited as a source of controversy. It is not that Heshang said these things, and the Tibetan translators translated these things, including empowerment, tantra, transmission, oral instructions, etc. Such reasons and sources are impossible. What some people say now should be understood as an argument like a sheep drinking water or a dog eating feces. Some people also say that there is a fault in the view of Dzogchen, so what is the fault in the view? In our Dzogchen, whether it is early or late translation, Mind Division, Space Division, all scriptures and treasures, although there are stages of view, meditation, and path that divide the vehicle stages, what is the true Dzogchen view? The way the basis of things abides, the essence of self-arisen wisdom, the essence of the Sugata-garbha, the meaning of the original state of reality, without falling into the extremes of the four negations, liberated from the extremes of eternalism and nihilism, appearance and emptiness inseparable, self-arisen and spontaneously accomplished, complete in self-nature purity from the very beginning, gathered
Chinese
未造作之法性，自性空性，自性光明，大悲生起之门不间断，离言思议，非可指此之词，非常恒坚固，欲求离取舍对境之物。然对彼大圆满诋毁者而言，于彼见解之外，以言词表达，以理解领受，于释迦牟尼佛之教法中，实无有之。若欲求非此之见解，则外而言之，释迦牟尼佛，内而言之，金刚持所说之诸法，皆成非有。又若云新旧二派不合，则极相合，因旧派亦以不变之基，不误解实相之义而立基。不误谬之道，见、修、行三者，二资粮双运，不违背缘起法而修持。果为五身五智之自性，于无舍无得之状态中，视为本初圆满任运成就。见为离边之空性，修为空明无执，行与乘之次第相符，入门无谬。初皈依发心，二资粮生起次第念诵，空性大悲双运，空性见清净，圆满次第明空双运，后回向发愿。总而言之，汇集于此入道之门。除此以外之入法之门，新派亦无有过之者。此外，新旧二派于生圆次第之实修方面，虽名异而义同。初四灌顶亦然，瓶灌顶乃为成熟相续之本尊灌顶，秘密灌顶乃为成熟语之菩提心明点灌顶，智慧智慧灌顶乃为以乐为道，依凭明妃手印，修持四喜之次第，智慧智慧之灌顶，自明智慧之力量于自身开显，使心性认识法身。新旧二派相合也。旧派之结界，与新派之守护轮修持相同。旧派之忏悔，与新派之七支净法相同。旧派之如是之定，与新派之智慧资粮