English
Regarding the profound and secret Essence, one should avoid the slanders made by Ngok Lhajé and others. The reason why this tantra is authentic is: In the commentary on the Glorious Guhyasamaja, in the commentary by the great scholar Vishwamitra called "What Joy is Wisdom Being," regarding the Guhyagarbha Tantra, it says: "In the realm of Akanishta, the mandala of wisdom, which is the basis of immeasurability, appears without limit. The palace of blazing wisdom jewels is completely unbroken in the ten directions." And, "All that is inconceivable appears in various ways as body, speech, and mind." And, in the commentary on "The palace dwelling is called the stupa of all Buddhas," it says that the mandalas of the Buddhas of the ten directions and four times, without exception, are not separate but are the same essence of wisdom pervading everywhere. And, in the commentary on "The cause of self-naturelessness," it says: "Ema, wondrous and amazing Dharma! The secret of all perfect Buddhas! From the unborn, all is born! As soon as it is born, it is unborn!" And, when explaining the meaning of secret, the Guhyagarbha Tantra says: "The secret of self-nature, hidden, concealed, and unmanifested." And, the Guhyagarbha Tantra says that the five empowerments arise. And, from "blue, white, yellow, thin, old" to "spontaneously accomplished without beginning or end," and the Guhyagarbha Tantra says that the three suchnesses arise. All of these quote the name of the Guhyagarbha Tantra. Avoiding the four perversions and other faults is: As I have said, all the teachings of the Buddha cannot be collected even by a tenth-level Bodhisattva, so it is the view that the Buddha himself collected them. As it says in the commentary on the Guhyasamaja, "The Accomplishment of Secrets" by the scholar Ocean-Born: "Most scholars say this: Regarding the Glorious Guhyasamaja, the collector of the tantra is afraid, called the Hero Lord of the World. By the kindness of the Guru's feet, the narrator of the Glorious Guhyasamaja, there is no other, only himself speaks. The author of the tantra is Mind Vajra." As it is said, this is the view that the speaker himself collected it. As for the immeasurable basis, even in the Abhidharma,
Chinese
关于从洛扎开始的阐述，清净法是否强制并没有区别。又有些人说，如果不以巴珍的教证为依据，那么这种和那种邪法增长的方式，以及精简扼要的赞颂是不恰当的。所谓邪法增长，根本上是确定为“此后多种邪法增长”。所谓依据确凿，是因为他们说“他的传承中有这个”，而解释为“那里没有那个”的情况并不明显。这不是没有道理的，萨迦班智达认为，所谓的邪法是指新派中盛行的猪母加持的法门开启等，而不是指宁玛派。巴珍仅仅是驳斥了宁玛派，并没有驳斥三律仪中所说的邪法。对此，依据确凿的理由是，巴珍说宁玛派的传承中“那里有那个”，而没有说“没有”。他还说：“在普作金刚的修持中，金刚身的行为束缚和身体要穴的观察方式都被禁止。”等等。班禅自己也认为普作法是正确的，并通过教证和理证来证明其成立与否。否则，对于宁玛派传承的意图所说的那些，仅仅是用憎恨的言语来驳斥，而不是理解传承的意义后进行驳斥。最好的理解方式就是说与新派不一致。如果这样，那么与唯识不一致，难道就要说中观不是佛法吗？等等，对于成佛来说，各自道路的引导方式不同，不理解这一点，而执着于一方，这是愚昧的言论。如果仔细研究原因，就会明白巴珍的辩论。因此，这里哪里有什么依据确凿和宁玛派的法统呢？比如分开噶举派和集密意等就有很多。即使是新派自己所了解的，也有很多严重的错误，比如认为大手印是方便道等等。那些表面上看起来很正确的说法，实际上都是邪见。班禅又说：“那么，那些就一定是有过失的吗？”对于修持清净来说，大部分都来源于《秘密藏续》的根本。而果位的金刚持和五种现证菩提等等，有些人说，果
English
Regarding the explanations beginning with Lochen, there is no difference whether a pure Dharma is forced or not. Also, some say that if one does not rely on Palchen's scriptural authority, then these and those ways of increasing wrong Dharma, and the praise of being concise and succinct, are inappropriate. The so-called increase of wrong Dharma is fundamentally defined as "after that, many wrong Dharmas increase." The so-called reliable source is because they say, "His lineage has this," and the explanation that "there is not that there" is not obvious. This is not without reason, Sakya Pandita believes that the so-called wrong Dharma refers to the opening of the Dharma gate of the blessing of the sow mother, which is prevalent in the New School, etc., and not to the Nyingma School. Palchen only refuted the Nyingma School, and did not refute the wrong Dharmas mentioned in the Three Vows. The reason for this reliable source is that Palchen said that in the Nyingma School's lineage, "there is that there," but did not say "no." He also said, "In the practice of Kunjed Gyalwa, the actions and restraints of the Vajra body and the ways of observing the key points of the body are all prohibited." etc. Panchen himself also believes that the Puja Dharma is correct, and proves its validity with scripture and reason. Otherwise, those spoken with the intention of the Nyingma School's lineage are only refuted with hateful words, and not refuted after understanding the meaning of the lineage. The best way to understand is to say that it is inconsistent with the New School. If so, then it is inconsistent with Cittamātra, so should we say that Madhyamaka is not Dharma? Etc., for attaining Buddhahood, the ways of guiding each path are different, and not understanding this, but clinging to one side, is ignorant talk. If the reason is carefully studied, the debate of Palchen will be understood. Therefore, where is there any reliable source and the Dharma lineage of the Nyingma School here? For example, separating the Kagyu School and the Guhyasamaja, etc., there are many. Even what the New School itself knows, there are many serious mistakes, such as thinking that Mahamudra is a skillful means, etc. Those statements that seem correct on the surface are actually wrong views. Panchen also said, "Then, are those necessarily faulty?" For the practice of purity, most of it comes from the root of the Guhyagarbha Tantra. And the Vajradhara of the result and the five manifest enlightenments, etc., some say, the result
Chinese
现在这到了最后的分界。因为是行事，所以结合大小分界的根本续和解释续。如果结合注释和空类，就能产生结果。这样说。镇压五部如来等，处于大圆满乘的时候，是处于极瑜伽的支配之下。如果这样说，就符合那个宗规，处于那个宗规的时候，观修瑜伽母三尊的本尊瑜伽等，因为依赖于极瑜伽而没有见到心髓的意义。并且这个乘决定彻底镇压所有下层。这样说，如果有其他有想法的密意，那就不一定了。如果按照字面意思，那就不合理。因为从《秘密藏续》中产生的寂怒坛城，有导师佛密所造的广、中、略三种修法仪轨。如果那个宗规需要观修清净等，那位导师为什么不做？如果不需要，为什么要在那个宗规强大之外，还要从其他宗规进行比较？例如，以母续为主要修持的，也需要以父续为主修的风吗？如果那样，父续和母续的差别就难以区分。镇压五部如来等是密意之语，不是直接表示。处于那个宗规的时候，观修上三瑜伽的瑜伽等，因为依赖于极瑜伽而见到心髓的意义，这个乘镇压下层。这样说也不符合这里，因为极瑜伽就是大圆满。本尊观修等的生起次第不叫大圆满。如果叫，镇压佛的生起次第就是邪法。如果直接表示那样可以，那么以前的结合解脱按照字面意思运用，为什么会变成邪法？名为极瑜伽的续部中出现的那些本尊也是五部如来。他们怎么镇压他们？那些本尊本来就安住于任运自成，所以不做观修的努力。因为是超越分别念的乘，所以观修本尊等的分别观修的宗规，在这个宗规中不为人知。阿底瑜伽的词语解释为极瑜伽是大圆满。
English
Now this has reached the final boundary. Because it is an action, it combines the root tantras and explanatory tantras of major and minor distinctions. If combined with commentaries and empty categories, results can be produced. Thus it is said. Subduing the Five Tathagatas and so on, when abiding in the vehicle of the Great Perfection, is under the influence of Ati Yoga. If it is said that way, it conforms to that system, and when abiding in that system, meditating on the deity yoga of the three higher yogas, etc., because it relies on Ati Yoga, the meaning of the heart essence is not seen. And this vehicle is determined to completely suppress all lower levels. This is said, if there is another intention with a hidden meaning, then it is not certain. If according to the literal meaning, then it is not reasonable. Because the peaceful and wrathful mandalas arising from the Guhyagarbha Tantra have three kinds of sadhana manuals, extensive, medium, and concise, composed by the master Buddhaguhya. If that system needs to meditate on purity, etc., why didn't that master do it? If it is not needed, why is it necessary to compare from other systems besides the strength of that system? For example, does the one who mainly practices the Mother Tantra also need the wind that is mainly practiced in the Father Tantra? If so, the distinction between Father Tantra and Mother Tantra is difficult to distinguish. Subduing the Five Tathagatas and so on is a word of hidden meaning, not a direct statement. When abiding in that system, meditating on the yoga of the three higher yogas, etc., because it relies on Ati Yoga, the meaning of the heart essence is seen, and this vehicle suppresses the lower levels. Saying this also does not apply here, because Ati Yoga is the Great Perfection. The generation stage of deity meditation, etc., is not called the Great Perfection. If it is called that, the generation stage of suppressing the Buddha is a false dharma. If that direct statement is acceptable, then why would the previous union and liberation, used according to the literal meaning, become a false dharma? The deities that appear in the tantra system called Ati Yoga are also the Five Tathagatas. How do they suppress them? Those deities naturally abide in spontaneous perfection, so they do not make the effort of meditation. Because it is a vehicle beyond conceptual thought, the system of conceptual meditation of meditating on deities, etc., is not known in this system. The explanation of the word Ati Yoga as Ati Yoga is the Great Perfection.
Chinese
虽然心方面的说法非常多，但实际上，“阿底”是原始的词汇。旧译用古语写作“阿谛”。实际翻译是“原始瑜伽”。还有，说听闻了法的究竟大圆满，会完全成就。这里所说的许多听闻方式，并不是说听闻的所有都会成就清净。那么是什么呢？这里在区分法与非法时，其他人说，为了消除作者自己怀疑是否会说，听到的那些，没听到的就是不纯净的。因此说，法类大多都听闻了，因此我没有偏袒。即使这样，按照这里的观点，虽然不认为大圆满、息解、断法和修心等的意义有错谬，但不认为这些术语在印度广为人知。因为要突出说：现在西藏流行的，息解、大圆满、断法等等。按照法派自己的观点，用印度语说，“摩诃寂静”（藏文，梵文天城体，梵文罗马拟音，汉语字面意思），认为这个术语也来自圣地。认为阿底瑜伽和大圆满意义相同。但在这部论著中，不认为四瑜伽中的极瑜伽和大圆满的见解意义相同。即使这样，说大圆满阿底瑜伽，也是就前者自己广为人知而言的。这样说，萨迦班智达的观点稍有不同，因为阿底瑜伽的见解，是智慧而不是乘。这句话认为极瑜伽和大圆满意义相同。大圆满这个术语在印度并非没有，导师佛智足就创造了“大圆满智慧之身”这个术语。息解是尊者当巴从印度带回来的法。断法也是息解的一部分，从当巴和杰索南喇嘛传承下来的叫男断，从玛吉传承下来的叫女断，但那也必须从当巴传承下来。当巴亲口说：在雅隆若巴擦玛觉处，对玛拉立下心、誓言、根本三条誓言，因此那个女的解脱了。修心是无著兄弟，大小库萨里，达摩拉吉达，金洲，觉沃杰等。
Chinese
是……的法。萨迦班智达并不认为这些在印度没有。虽然如此，从《普贤王如来根本续》中所说的见解，从见解的对立面来说是正确的。但是，如果将该法的传承者的行为方面不结合，并且舍弃行为就足够，而作为宗派和实践，那就成了汉地和尚的宗教。这肯定是这部论著的观点。如果那样讲解大圆满的宗教，巴丹仁波切会说：“特别是和尚的宗派，与口诀见解之鬘混合。”以及“国王玉扎宁波的意修口诀见解之鬘，后来也被其传承者转变为大圆满的法。”不能确定不会犯下那些过失。正如所说：“汉地方式的大圆满。”也是为了思考那个意义。关于“汉地方式的大圆满”是和尚的法，所有的注释者都没有彻底查明，这确实是真的。巴丹仁波切说口诀见解之鬘混合了和尚的宗派。而《普贤王如来根本续》不称为口诀见解之鬘。如果《普贤王如来根本续》的见解从见解的对立面来说是正确的，那么宣说见行分离就不是佛教的宗派，所以是不作勤作而修持的。又，如果那样，那么《普贤王如来根本续》的见解没有错谬的理由是什么？如果《普贤王如来根本续》的见解需要福德资粮作为助伴是《普贤王如来根本续》的规矩，那么这与续本身直接相违。如果那不是它的规矩，那么不是成了汉地和尚的宗教，以及被称为见解高举和道路一蹴而就的那个规矩了吗？答：这有二，显示见解没有错谬，以及因为宣说没有世俗的法，所以不能成立为诽谤因果。第一，世俗的能取所取之法是无二的，并且承认无二的智慧本身是自性法身、法界智慧、心之金刚、喜悦金刚等等，这是最后法轮的究竟意义，以及后来的密宗也认为是究竟意义，以及见解的对境和胜义谛