English
As explained by these and others. In this Great Perfection that has been established in this way, by the power of practicing the wisdom of equality of view and conduct in the state of great oneness, at the time of the ground, because wisdom realizes that conventional truth is false, one does not expect virtuous roots of compounded things, so one does not add embellishments to wisdom. Because there is acceptance and rejection of the reversal of consciousness, one does not slander skillful means. At the time of the path, since all mental activity does not go beyond conceptualization, there is not even a particle to be meditated upon. At the time of the result, when all mind and mental factors are cut off, where will conventional truth appear? This is the ultimate profound essence of the intention of the two later turnings of the wheel of Dharma. In this sacred land and in the land of snow, those who have unerringly held the teachings of the Sugata have well explained this flawless approach. That is how it is, and this is how it is explained in the texts of all the learned reciters from Ngok Lotsawa Chenpo to Jowo Je, and all the unerring meditators. In general, our teacher, considering the face of consciousness, only showed the establishment of acceptance and rejection and cause and effect in the realm of dreams, where their cause and effect became valid. Therefore, they cling to the understanding that the wisdom of the Buddha is established as valid conventional truth. Because of that, attachment to the side of conduct has become very strong. Therefore, there has been a cutting off of the wisdom of the noble ones and the wisdom of the Buddha. Because of this, they do not trust even the profound, non-inverted philosophical tenets. Those who have wasted the great activity of the Sugata have become mere ornaments of consciousness. If one does not think of anything at the time of equipoise, then it becomes the meditation of Heshang. In the Madhyamaka Jewel Lamp by the teacher Bhāvaviveka, which you consider to be a great Madhyamaka treatise, it says: "Do not think about any knowledge, do not grasp anything, abandon all memory and mental activity," and so on, which is explained in detail. Similarly, it is also explained in the three stages of meditation by Kamalaśīla, so it is a well-known statement in the Svatantrika Madhyamaka school. It is also explained in this way in Jowo Je's Madhyamaka meditation stages. Whether it is in accordance with Heshang or not, it has already been promised to be in accordance. The self-arisen awareness of Dzogchen is primordially liberated.
Chinese
如果将脱离亲疏的胜观之自性，确定为各别自证之智慧，并将其作为修习之所依，那么通过安住于脱离分别思择执着的法性中，便能在无分别智慧的状态中，毫不颠倒地安住于本性解脱大圆满的实相。如《根本慧论》云：“自性圆满大圆满之边，诸法安住于自位。显现觉性法性双运故，原始解脱当下即成就。意念超越思维，有相亦于自位清净，空性与本体之边解脱，动念止息无分别，心念止息超越意识。”如是说。如果不如此理解，仅仅期望通过分别思择的散乱来获得胜观，那就无法期望获得真实的法性之义。在心与心所的流转未停止的情况下，仅仅执着于通过分别安立的空性，与不离缘相执着的分别心，就会变成产生不堪忍受之障碍的重大见解。如经中《贤护经》云：“于人想者，如须弥山而安住亦易，增上慢者于空性想，则不如是。何以故？贤护！一切见趣生起者，是空性。贤护！若唯空性见者，彼不可治。”因此，执着和耽着于有相的空性，如佛陀的教言所说，是自己所宣说的退失。即便如此，或许有人会说，龙树菩萨曾说：“不依世俗谛，不得第一义。”因此，必须依靠破立的分别来证悟。但并非如此，此经的含义是：首先必须依靠言说和能说的形式，就像用手指指月亮来向孩子展示一样，才能证悟胜义谛，这仅仅是说明了这一点而已。并非说必须完全通过推理来分析才能证悟。因此，正如以多种方式贬低推理者一样：“彼是推理者，如味而分别。”将自己置于分别思择的险境，在破立的悬崖峭壁上徘徊，从而将自生的智慧置于增益损减的道路上，用意识去衡量。
English
If the very nature of vipassanā, which is free from attachment and aversion, is ascertained as the wisdom of individual self-awareness, and if that is made the basis of meditation, then by abiding in the dharmatā that is free from the extremes of conceptual scrutiny and clinging, one will abide without inversion in the state of great, primordial liberation in the state of non-conceptual wisdom. As it says in the *Mūlamadhyamakakārikā*: “The limit of the Great Perfection of self-nature, all dharmas are placed in their own place. Because appearance and awareness are the union of dharmatā, primordial liberation is attained immediately. Intention transcends the mind, and the conditioned is purified in its own place. The limit of emptiness and essence is liberated, movement ceases, there is no thought, and the mind ceases, transcending consciousness.” So it is said. If one does not understand in this way and merely hopes for vipassanā through the distraction of conceptual scrutiny, then one will not hope for the meaning of true dharmatā. Without reversing the flow of mind and mental factors, merely clinging to the emptiness established by thought, and not separating from the mind of clinging to characteristics, one will become a great view that is the nature of generating unbearable obscurations. As it says in the sūtra *Kāśyapaparivarta*: “It is easy to abide in the thought of a person as Mount Meru, but it is not so for one who is arrogant with pride in emptiness. Why is that? Kāśyapa! All views that arise are emptiness. Kāśyapa! One who sees only emptiness is incurable.” Therefore, clinging and fixating on emptiness with characteristics, as the words of the Buddha show, is a decline proclaimed by oneself. Even so, one might say that Nāgārjuna said, “Without relying on conventional truth, the ultimate meaning cannot be realized.” Therefore, it is taught that one must realize through relying on the discrimination of refutation and establishment. But it is not so. The meaning of that statement is that one must first rely on the form of expression and what is expressed, just as one points to the moon with a finger to show it to a child, in order to realize the ultimate truth. It is merely explaining that. It is not said that one must realize it by examining it with the reasoning of logic. Therefore, just as one disparages logicians in many ways, “He is a logician, distinguishing like taste,” one places oneself on the dangerous path of conceptual scrutiny, wandering on the cliffs of refutation and establishment, thereby placing one's own innate wisdom on the path of addition and subtraction, measuring with the mind.
Chinese
自诩已经消除两种极端，就像虫子的口水束缚自己一样，要达到法性实相之上是极其困难的，因为法性是不可思议的。无法用言语来表达，言语存在于分别念的本质中。如《解深密经》所说：各自自证之体性，是行境，不可言说，言语完全断绝，无诤论，是胜义谛，那是超越一切思辨的体性。因此，这是自性大圆满的三种安住方式所固定的，三种观看方式所控制的，通过六灯的道路，法性脱离心识而被现量见到的缘故，道路的差别有天壤之别。如《声应成续》所说：殊胜之义离心识，诸根一时皆自解，以现量见之要诀，自之宗派尽破灭，于何无有贪执取，如实品尝真法性，三界轮回无所依，如虚空融入虚空，殊胜瑜伽亦如是。考虑到这些理由，萨迦班智达说道：阿底瑜伽之见，是智慧而非乘。虽然从不颠倒地证悟甚深见解的实相的角度，很好地阐述了智慧，但认为它不是乘是错误的。声闻、独觉、菩萨、佛陀的智慧本身，依赖于不圆满、稍微圆满和完全圆满，而安立为四圣。此外，《宝性论》中说：色之形相为劣，中等殊胜如虚空。就像容器好坏之内的虚空没有好坏一样，自性清净的法性没有变化，但有情众生，由于突如其来的污垢，这些遮蔽的去除力量的大小，智慧本身会根据情况显现出来，因此安立为乘没有任何矛盾之处。因为“以此运载”和“运载于此”这两种解释都适用于“乘”这个词。如果认为非佛的三圣相续中没有智慧，那就到此为止。从稍微见到到圆满见到的过程中，仅仅在智慧之上
English
To presume to have eliminated both extremes is like a worm binding itself with its own saliva. It is extremely difficult to arrive at the reality of Dharmata, because Dharmata is inconceivable. It cannot be expressed by words, and words exist in the nature of conceptualization. As stated in the *Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra*: "The object of individual self-awareness is the characteristic of individual self-awareness; it is inexpressible, all language ceases, it is free from dispute, it is the ultimate truth, and it is the characteristic that transcends all speculation." Therefore, this is fixed by the three ways of abiding of the Great Perfection of Naturalness, controlled by the three ways of seeing, and because Dharmata is seen directly, free from mental fabrication, through the path of the six lamps, the difference in the path is as vast as heaven and earth. As stated in the *Guhyagarbha Tantra*: "The meaning of the sacred is beyond mind, the senses are all simultaneously self-liberated, by the key of direct seeing, one's own established view is destroyed, without attachment or grasping to anything, truly tasting the true Dharmata, the three realms of samsara are without support, like space dissolving into space, so is the supreme yoga." Considering these reasons, Sakya Paṇḍita said: "The view of Atiyoga is wisdom, not a vehicle." However, although wisdom is well explained from the perspective of realizing the reality of the profound view without error, it is wrong to say that it is not a vehicle. The wisdom of the Śrāvakas, Pratyekabuddhas, Bodhisattvas, and Buddhas themselves, depending on being incomplete, slightly complete, and completely complete, are established as the Four Noble Ones. Furthermore, the *Uttaratantra* states: "The form of the body is inferior, intermediate, and superior, like space." Just as the space within good and bad containers is neither good nor bad, the Dharmata of self-nature purity does not change, but sentient beings, due to sudden defilements, the strength of removing these obscurations, the wisdom itself will manifest appropriately according to the situation, therefore there is no contradiction in establishing it as a vehicle. Because both explanations of "carrying by this" and "carrying here" apply to the word "vehicle." If it is believed that the three noble ones who are not Buddhas do not have wisdom in their continuum, then that is the end of it. From seeing a little to seeing completely, solely on the wisdom itself
Chinese
由于生起所有道地的形态，安立为乘，这是经续的甚深密意。如《华严经》云：“佛之智慧乃大乘。”因此。又有人如此说：您在根本位时发生了错误。对此，新派的观点是：龙树勇士等印度的大多数智者成就者，特别是法称的观点。对此，阿赖耶识是：“体性不隐蔽，无记。”正如镜子本身的体性在没有影像时是空性一样，阿赖耶本身的体性在没有七识和心所时是空性。正如影像可以显现任何事物，而其明性不会消失一样，它也不会失去能够储存轮回、涅槃和三道的习气的能力。正如未与外境相遇的镜子本身是无记的明性一样，阿赖耶在迷乱解脱的造作未动摇时，被认为是未落入轮回和涅槃之边的无记。但您却说，您的宗派认为基是本来清净和原始解脱的。阿赖耶和本来清净是一还是异？若是一，那么阿赖耶是轮回和涅槃二者的共同基础，因此具有俱生无明，而此无明是一切无明的根本，因此不具备本来清净和原始解脱的含义。如果阿赖耶和本来清净不是一，那么二者最初哪个在前？如果本来清净在前，那么首先本来清净存在，之后才产生阿赖耶的体性，这在理证上也是不合理的。因为阿赖耶是未落入轮回和涅槃之边的原始体性，并且在其之前没有其他。如果阿赖耶在前，那么就不会变成本来清净和原始解脱。因此，所谓本来清净只是改变了苯教的术语而已，最初认为没有原始解脱，而对于稍微存在着的原始存在，则命名为未证悟的轮回迷乱之基。对于这种说法，我这样回答：这个道理您只是听得少，并且没有区分阿赖耶的细微差别而已。一般来说，阿赖耶有三种：阿赖耶法界的体性部分，结合意义的阿赖耶，以及具有各种习气的阿赖耶。第一种是：法界如是性，即未区分轮回和涅槃的部分。