Chinese
关于量。例如，各个大地方，由成就者们所取的，法也从各个经卷中，没有翻译成圣地的语言。获得金刚萨埵显现的，结集经藏者自己，说用各个地方的语言，说是允许的。宁玛派的法，从圣地，确定要翻译的，不必成立。不确定的，作为论典，从成立而成就的这个，谁若获得这个分别自造之路，不会漂泊，在藏地以前的大德们，现在这样说。这样说，这是以前的智者成就者们没有见到将宁玛派的续部作为论典来解释，所以是不合理的。还有，总之，像金刚橛等有印度梵文原本的，由译师顿珠翻译的，被认为是符合智者的，一般是印度梵文原本，特别是续部已经成立为清净的，所以不必再次成立。从那延伸出来的那些论典，和那些不相违背的，无论是莲花生大师所造，还是弟子们提取他的话语的精华而写成的，通过修持它的意义，获得两种成就的很多，仅仅这样就成立为清净的法，那么用印度梵文原本和佛经论典的考察有什么用呢？这样说，即使承认这是论典，莲花生大师所造的，不考察是否是印度梵文原本，就太过分了。还有，在其他地方，在印度，获得成就的上师们，从邬金和香巴拉等其他地方取来经书，没有在圣地的时候翻译，只是领会了意义的精华，然后用圣地的语言写出来，那些也不成为怀疑之处吗？这样讲，是所有智者的观点，不是我自创的。这样说，成就者们领会了从邬金和香巴拉等地取来的续部的意义，但是在历史中，只看到迎请经书的方式，所以不符合实际。对此，策列仁增大师说，这个说法是旧密
English
Regarding validity. For example, in various great places, the Dharma taken by accomplished ones from various scriptures was not translated into the language of the holy land. The one who received the vision of Vajrasattva, the compiler of the teachings himself, said that it is permissible to explain in the languages of various regions. Nyingma teachings that are definitely to be translated from the holy land do not need to be established. Those that are uncertain, as treatises, this which becomes accomplished through establishment, whoever finds the path of self-fabrication of this conceptualization will not wander, but the great ones who came before in the land of Tibet are saying this now. It seems that this is said because the wise and accomplished ones of the past did not see the Nyingma tantras explained as treatises, so it is not reasonable. Also, in short, those like Vajrakila, etc., which have Indian originals, translated by the translator Dondrup, which are said to be in accordance with the wise, are generally Indian originals, and especially the tantras have already been established as pure, so there is no need to establish them again. Those texts that are derived from that and do not contradict those, whether they were made by Guru Rinpoche or written by direct disciples extracting the essence of his words, by practicing its meaning, many have attained the two siddhis, and if it is established as pure Dharma by this alone, then what is the use of examining the Indian originals and the scriptures and treatises? It is said that even if it is admitted that this is a treatise, it is too extreme not to examine whether what was made by Guru Padmasambhava is an Indian original. Also, elsewhere, in India, even the accomplished masters took books from other places such as Oddiyana and Shambhala, and did not translate them when they were in the holy land, but only understood the essence of the meaning and then wrote them in the language of the holy land, so are those not a place of doubt? This explanation is the view of all the wise, not something I have created myself. It is said that the accomplished ones understood the meaning of the tantras taken from Oddiyana and Shambhala, but in history, only the manner of inviting the scriptures is seen, so it does not conform to reality. Regarding this, the great Tsele Rigzin said, this statement is old secret
Chinese
对于不正确的论证，其论据和例证既简单又广泛，符合实际情况，且无法用言语挑剔，渴望者众多，贤哲是朋友，且能满足智者的心。像这样的论证，无论我们如何努力，连一部分都无法完成。他们这样说。其他人说，虽然这没有任何引证，但称之为论据是不恰当的。这些通过理性来论证的方式，也仅仅像是并非密续的知识。他们说，将《秘密藏续》说成不是密续，最后又引用了世尊的《秘密藏续》的口传传承，这也是自相矛盾的。关于嘉瓦法王格桑巴满意的答复偈颂，将在下文阐述。接下来，在《善说金蔓》中，帕珍引入疾病的论证是什么呢？帕珍说：“密咒的特点不是见解，有什么能胜过中观呢？”以及“玛哈、阿努、阿底三者，通过集合的生起次第和圆满次第的修持，仅仅通过次第来区分。”以及，对此，萨迦班智达的观点是：“为了证悟它，存在着乘的次第。”等等，这些已经在前面萨迦班智达的部分论证过了。还有，“金刚乘的特点，归纳为灌顶和次第二者。”以及“五种现证菩提。”以及“外道也进行生起次第，观修清净是佛陀的教法。”以及“即使在新密咒中，金刚怖畏金刚萨姆瓦拉法和时轮金刚的歌舞等。”从“怙主和女神的续部，一百五十多种等，不要出现自造的虚假续部。”这些也能体现出广博的智慧和闻思。据说，这还表明，如果喜金刚RaLu等嘎雅达Ra和卓弥的弃法怙主和女神的续部是虚假的，那么就没有办法展示其他正确的续部。从哪里寻找怙主和女神的修法？玛哈、阿努、阿底三者，通过秘密集合的生起次第和圆满次第来区分。说没有区分各个续部，这才是宁玛派的自宗没有错乱。生起次第是玛哈瑜伽，圆满次第是阿努瑜伽，大圆满是阿底瑜伽。保持宁玛派的原样，这就是在破斥宁玛派。
English
For incorrect arguments, the reasoning and examples are both simple and extensive, conforming to reality, and cannot be faulted with words. There are many who desire it, wise ones are friends, and it satisfies the minds of the discerning. Such arguments, no matter how much we strive, we cannot even complete a part of. They say this. Others say that although there is no citation for this, it is inappropriate to call it reasoning. These ways of arguing through reason also seem to be merely knowledge that is not tantric. They say that claiming the Guhyagarbha Tantra is not a tantra, and then finally quoting the oral transmission of the Guhyagarbha Tantra of the Bhagavan, is also self-contradictory. The verses of reply that pleased Kyabje Kelsangpa will be explained below. Next, in the "Golden Garland of Eloquence," what is the argument for Paljin introducing disease? Paljin said, "The characteristic of mantra is not view, what is superior to Madhyamaka?" And, "The three, Maha, Anu, and Ati, are distinguished merely by the stages of practice of the generation and completion stages of the union." And, regarding this, Sakya Pandita's view is, "In order to realize it, there is a sequence of vehicles." Etc., these have already been argued in the previous section on Sakya Pandita. Also, "The characteristic of Vajrayana is summarized into two: empowerment and sequence." And, "The five manifest enlightenments." And, "Outsiders also perform the generation stage, meditating on purity is the Buddha's teaching." And, "Even among the new secret mantras, the Vajrabhairava Samvara and the Kalachakra's dances, etc." From "The tantras of the Protector and the Goddess, more than one hundred and fifty, etc., do not appear as self-created false tantras." These can also demonstrate vast wisdom and learning. It is said that this also indicates that if the Hevajra RaLu etc., Gaya Dhara, and Drokmis' Dharma-abandoning Protector and Goddess tantras are false, then there is no way to show other correct tantras. Where to find the practices of the Protector and Goddess? The three, Maha, Anu, and Ati, are distinguished by the generation and completion stages of the secret union. Saying that the individual tantric sections are not distinguished, that is exactly the uncorrupted self-view of the Nyingma school. The generation stage is Maha Yoga, the completion stage is Anu Yoga, and the Great Perfection is Ati Yoga. Maintaining the original state of the Nyingma school, that is refuting the Nyingma school.
Chinese
此外，听闻不是迟钝的吗？在阻止心意修法秘密总集时，修法时自己观想为上师，说在自己之下观想马头金刚。这个说法在那部文献中根本没有。因为在近修时，上师出现在马头金刚的头顶，修法时自己观想为上师，却又认为马头金刚在自己之下，这实在是聪明过头了，暴露了自己的缺点。还有，国王达玛摧毁了佛教，之后各种邪法兴起。从“各种邪法全部衰落”这样的方式来看，与佛法术语相符。那些被说成是过失的地方，如果出现在被认为是宁玛派续部中的话，也应该被认为是可靠的。除此之外，如果用从那里引用的论据来证明要证明的东西，那么就可以使用“引用”这个词。但是，正如上面所说，如果自己的观点已经彻底完善，那么智者就不会使用“引用”这个词。因此，不精通术语的人口中流传的东西，不应该被精通术语的人引入到语言的道路中。第四，从那里引用的内容，应该如何取舍呢？这有两种情况：续部的来源，以及引用的意义。第一种情况分为一般和特殊两种。第一种是一般情况，对于在西藏创作的续部，无论是成就者还是未成就者所著，只要混入了杂质，我们就会称之为“有垢续部”。但是，从续部本身的角度出发，说它是邪法是不合适的。正如所说：“对于不像样的形象，如果认为不像样，那么对于令人怀疑的法，还用说什么呢？”因此，仅仅因为论著中混入了杂质，就不能证明该论著是邪法，因为其中包含着许多正确的法。例如，俄译师等人认为《秘密藏续》是玛仁钦秋所著，并说其中存在四种颠倒等过失。仅仅这样说，并不能确定它就是邪法，因为已经确定是译师本人所著。持明热罗也在《秘密藏续》的修法中这样说：向佛陀顶礼！
English
Furthermore, isn't hearing dull? When preventing the Mind Accomplishment Secret Assembly, during practice, one visualizes oneself as the Lama, and says to visualize Hayagriva below oneself. This saying is definitely not in that document. Because during the approach retreat, the Lama appears on the crown of Hayagriva's head, and during practice, one visualizes oneself as the Lama, yet thinks that Hayagriva comes below oneself. This is too clever and exposes one's own shortcomings. Also, King Darma destroyed the teachings, and after that, many false doctrines arose. From the way it says, "All false doctrines declined," it is consistent with Buddhist terminology. Those things said to be faults, if they appear in what is considered a Nyingma tantra, should also be considered reliable. Other than that, if one proves something to be proven by a sign said to be from there, then the term "citation" is used. However, if one's own system is thoroughly perfected, as stated above, the term "citation" is not used by the wise. Therefore, whatever flows in the mouths of those who are not skilled in terminology should not be introduced into the path of speech by those who are skilled in terminology. Fourth, regarding how to accept or reject what is said from there, there are two aspects: the source of the tantra and the meaning of the citation. The first has two aspects: general and specific. The first is general: In general, for tantras composed in Tibet, whether composed by an accomplished or unaccomplished person, if impurities are mixed in, we call it a "defiled tantra." However, to say that it is a false doctrine from the perspective of the tantra itself is not appropriate. As it is said, "If an unsuitable form is considered unsuitable, what need is there to speak of a doubtful dharma?" Therefore, merely because impurities are mixed into a treatise, one cannot prove that the treatise is a false doctrine, because many correct dharmas reside within it. For example, Gö Lotsawa and others explain that the Guhyagarbha Tantra was composed by Ma Rinchen Chok, and say that there are four inverted faults, etc. Merely saying this does not necessarily establish it as a false doctrine, because it has been established that it was composed by the Lotsawa himself. The Lord Relgyi also said this in the practice of the Guhyagarbha Tantra: Homage to the Buddha!
Chinese
对于甚深秘密的心髓，应当避免由俄·拉杰等所作的诽谤。此续是正确的，其理由是：在吉祥密集金刚的注释中，大学者比瓦米扎所著的《智慧有情何乐》中，对于《秘密心髓》说：“在色究竟天的处所，无边无际，作为无量之基的智慧坛城显现，智慧珍宝燃烧的宫殿，广大遍及十方。”以及“不可思议的一切，以身语意种种显现。”以及“一切佛塔的，宫殿住所即是。”的注释中说，顶端十方四时的佛陀坛城无余全部，也并非各自独立，而是同一体性的智慧周遍。以及“自性无自性的因。”的注释中说：“唉玛，稀有奇妙之法，圆满佛陀的一切秘密，从无生中生出一切，刚一生出即是无生。”以及，在解释秘密的意义时，《秘密心髓》中说：“自性，隐藏，遮蔽，不显示的秘密。”以及，《秘密心髓》中说生起五种灌顶。以及，从“蓝色白色黄色薄片老旧”到“无边无际任运成就”之间，以及《秘密心髓》中说生起三种真如。等等一切都引用了《秘密心髓》的名称。避免四种颠倒等过失是：如是我所说，佛陀的一切言教，即使是十地菩萨也无法全部收集，因此是佛陀自己收集的，这是被认可的观点。正如密集金刚的注释，大学者海生所著的《秘密成就》中所说：“大多数学者这样说，对于吉祥密集金刚，续部的收集者感到害怕，被称为勇士世间自在，依靠上师的足下恩德，吉祥密集金刚的讲述者，没有其他人，只有自己宣说。续部的作者是心金刚。”正如所说，这是由讲述者自己收集的观点。作为无量之基，即使在《法句经》中也