English
In India, three fire disasters occurred, as if charred. They said, "There are many exemplars here that are not found in India," and then searched. After copying, they were sent to India. Master Padmasambhava went to the sky and invited all the tantras from gods, nagas, and Nalanda, etc., to Samye. Therefore, Atisha said that Indians were more numerous than Tibetans, which is evident in Atisha's great biography. If the earlier tantras were false, then the great being should have said, "This is not in India; the Tibetan one is false." Later, he was the main figure in revitalizing the Buddhist teachings, unparalleled by others. Therefore, those great translators and panditas of the past were undoubtedly incarnations of the three-family protectors, etc. How is this known? Through scriptural and logical proofs. The scriptural proof is: In the Great Commentary on the Kalachakra, the Stainless Light, it says, "All the royal decrees are written in the Tibetan language in Tibet." This proves that the great Tibetan translators were the compilers of the decrees. Because before them, the royal decrees had not been written in Tibetan script, as scholars such as Buton consider. From the perspective of logical proof, just as when Dharma was propagated in Tibet, the abbot, acharya, and Dharma king made vows. The abbot waited for the Dharma king for nine hundred years, and Padmasambhava is widely known in both China and Tibet. Furthermore, panditas such as Vimalamitra, and incarnate translators such as Thonmi Sambhota and Vairochana, when they initially translated these profound sutras and tantras into Tibetan, if they did not correctly understand the meaning of each term, they could not translate accurately and without error. Because before that, there were no terms for translating scriptures in Tibetan, so it was necessary to create new methods. Moreover, one word in Sanskrit can have multiple meanings, and if one directly translates the literal meaning, it is difficult to accurately express its meaning. In particular, the words of the tantras are mostly expanded in six ways, and if one is not clairvoyant, one cannot translate directly, as stated in the Stainless Light. Just as in India, Saraha, Luna, Drilsum, etc., Vajradharas and compilers of the decrees, the great accomplished ones prophesied by the heroes and dakinis, explained and determined the meaning. These are not objects of speculation, but rather sutras and tantras.
Chinese
如今的一切佛法，由于您作了意义的翻译，所以在意义上没有丝毫的错误。词句精炼，容易理解，悦耳动听，即使与汉文经典相比，也没有遗漏任何词语。后来的翻译家在考察汉藏文本时，特别信赖您的译本，认为完全不需要修改。后来的译师中，最杰出的仁钦桑波也说：《现观庄严论》中只出现了“阿惹嘎惹嘎”的声音，不知道怎么翻译。看到以前的译本，惊讶于翻译成“无贪、无染”等词语。 贝若扎纳与虚空等同， 嘉觉师徒如同日月双悬， 仁钦桑波如同清晨的大星， 我在他们面前如同萤火虫。 这样大大赞扬了前译的译师们。精通声音和意义的萨迦班智达也说： 从梵文翻译成藏文， 凡是智者所翻译的一切都很好。 由于不懂声音而翻译的， 词句意义的错误随处可见。 那些我修改后才讲述。 嘉觉等翻译的， 有些与声音不太一致， 有些做了意义的翻译， 有些古语难以理解， 有些坚持使用旧的翻译， 有些用新的术语修改， 有些似乎保留了汉语音， 有些因为地域的差异， 对同一个汉语音有不同的解释， 导致藏语的翻译也不同。 这些词句意义相同或不同， 那些彻底研究清楚的， 愚笨的人就不用说了， 即使是智者也很难知道。 那些我通过学习词语的力量， 才能很好地理解。 然而，由于人们的贪嗔和愚痴， 我被轻视了。 我是否知道这些， 怙主及其眷属都知道。 这样说道。这能证明获得通达每个确切词语的真实智慧，因为这样翻译之后，如果以后不这样翻译，就不能很好地表达词句和意义。在《声论二品》等中，像这样梵藏结合翻译的方式，是像圣旨一样确定的关键。后来的所有翻译家都遵循这个方式进行翻译。极其广博、意义深远的显密经典，其意义的伟大注释是由印度的班智达们所著。
English
Now, all the Dharma is meaningful because you have translated the meaning, so there is not even a speck of error in the meaning. The words are concise, easy to understand, and pleasant to hear. Even compared to Chinese texts, no words are missed. Later translators, when examining both Chinese and Tibetan texts, especially trust your translations and find that they do not need to be corrected at all. Among the later translators, the most excellent Rinchen Zangpo also said: In the Ornament of Clear Realization, only the sound of "Ara Gara Ga" appears, so I did not know how to translate it. When I saw the earlier translation, I was amazed that it was translated as "without attachment, without defilement," etc. Vairotsana is equal to the extent of space. Ka and Chok, the two, are like a pair of sun and moon. Rinchen Zangpo is like a great star at dawn. I am like a firefly in their presence. Thus, he greatly praised the translators of the early translation. The wise Sakya Pandita, who was skilled in the meaning of sound and meaning, also said: From Sanskrit to Tibetan, all that is translated by the wise is good. Because of translating without knowing the sound, errors in words and meanings are seen in various ways. I explain those after correcting them. In the translations of Ka, Chok, etc., some are not quite in harmony with the sound, some have made accurate translations of the meaning, some ancient words are difficult to understand, some insist on using the old translation, some are corrected with new terms, some seem to retain the Chinese sound, some, because of regional differences, have different explanations for the same Chinese sound, resulting in different Tibetan translations. Whether these words and meanings are the same or different, not to mention the foolish, even the wise find it difficult to know those that have been thoroughly researched. I can understand those well through the power of studying words. However, because of people's attachment, aversion, and foolishness, I am despised. Whether I know these or not, the Protector and his retinue know. Thus he spoke. This can prove that one has obtained the true wisdom of understanding each exact word, because after translating in this way, if one does not translate in this way in the future, one will not be able to express the words and meanings well. In the Second Chapter of Sound Combination and so on, the key to translating in this way, combining Sanskrit and Tibetan, is like a decree. All later translators followed this method to translate. The great commentaries on the extremely vast and profound Sutras and Tantras were written by Indian Panditas.
Chinese
对于那些（早期译师）来说，无论从词语还是意义上，都保持原样不变，无需修改，这在智者看来是极其罕见和令人惊叹的事情。有些人认为所谓的“意义翻译”仅仅是表达了所要表达的意义，而词语的形式是否与汉语完全一致呢？并非如此。而是在完全理解了所要表达的意义之后，即使藏汉语言不同，意义相同，从而在词语和意义上都毫无损失地进行翻译。例如，一个“go”字，就有土地、牛、金刚等九种意义。如果不了解当时“go”字所指的具体意义，就容易出现翻译错误。因此，后来的许多翻译都出现了意义错误和文句不通顺的情况。以前，许多译师和班智达一起将（经典）翻译成藏语，然后又毫无错误地进行校对。这是通过讲授和研习来确定的，因此，如果说是早期的无伪翻译，就非常值得信赖，就像所有的律藏和经藏一样。有些人因为爱憎之心，认为后来的翻译比早期的翻译更重要，这是一种没有理由的偏见。例如，像《中观根本慧论》等，帕擦瓦说，依据的是“不能修改的翻译也进行修改”之类的论典，似乎表明存在与圣天父子（圣天和龙树）的观点不符的翻译错误。即使不是翻译错误，如果只是改正了类似笔误的错误，也是可以接受的。但如果考察实际上修改了哪些不可修改的内容，就会发现，所有被称为“自性”的都被翻译成了“自性”，这仅仅是翻译上的差异，意义上并没有任何不同。帕擦瓦所修改的《中观根本慧论》的根本颂，以及《中观光明释论》中对《辨中边论》的解释的根本颂，都与早期翻译相符，请对照查看，就会明白。由此可见，考察新旧译本，早期翻译在意义的深刻和稳固、词语的易懂和宏大方面都是无与伦比的。而那些被认为是早期就存在的内外密续，大多是依据梵文原本进行了一些校对，但早期翻译的译者署名要么没有，要么没有保留，而是由仁钦桑布等后来的译师以偏见署上了新的译者署名，错误大概就是这样产生的。后来的智者翻译
English
For those (early translators), it is an extremely rare and amazing thing, in the eyes of scholars, that everything remains as it was, without needing any modification, in terms of both words and meaning. Some people think that the so-called "meaning translation" only expresses the meaning to be conveyed, and wonder if the form of the words is exactly the same as in Chinese. That is not the case. Rather, it is after fully understanding the meaning to be conveyed, that even though the Tibetan and Chinese languages are different, the meaning is the same, so that the translation is carried out without any loss in both words and meaning. For example, even for one word "go," there are nine meanings, such as earth, cow, and vajra. If one does not understand the specific meaning to which the word "go" refers in that context, it is easy to make translation errors. Therefore, many later translations have resulted in errors in meaning and awkward sentences. In the past, many translators and pandits together translated (the scriptures) into Tibetan, and then proofread them without any errors. This was determined through teaching and study, so if it is said to be an early, unadulterated translation, it is very trustworthy, just like all the Vinaya and Sutra texts. Some people, out of attachment and aversion, consider later translations to be more important than earlier translations, which is an unreasonable prejudice. For example, in texts such as the *Mūlamadhyamakakārikā* (Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way), Patsab says that he relies on texts that state, "Even translations that should not be modified are modified," which seems to indicate that there are translation errors that are inconsistent with the views of the father and son Āryadeva (Āryadeva and Nāgārjuna). Even if it is not a translation error, it is acceptable if only errors resembling typos have been corrected. But if one examines what immutable things have actually been modified, one will find that everything called "svabhāva" has been translated as "rangbzhin (nature)," which is only a difference in translation, and there is not a single aspect in which the meaning is different from before. The root verses of the *Mūlamadhyamakakārikā* that Patsab modified, and the root verses in the commentary on the *Madhyāntavibhāga* in the *Madhyamakālaṃkāra*, are consistent with the earlier translations. Please compare them and it will become clear. From this, it can be seen that when examining the old and new translations, the early translations are unparalleled in terms of the depth and solidity of meaning, the ease of understanding of the words, and the greatness. And those inner and outer tantras that are considered to have existed from the beginning, most of them have been slightly proofread according to the Sanskrit originals, but the translator's name of the early translations either did not exist or was not retained. Instead, later translators such as Rinchen Zangpo, out of bias, added new translator's names, and errors probably arose from this. Later scholars translated
Chinese
虽然可能有错误，但由于早期翻译家们的共同努力，翻译是无与伦比的。仁钦桑布、俄译师、萨迦班智达、布顿等后来的所有翻译家都将其视为标准，并以此为依据，将以前未翻译的内容也翻译成与此类似的方式。后来的翻译就没有那么容易了。就像后来的智者布顿等的翻译，后来也需要喜图·衮钦·达玛嘎拉等人进行多次修改一样。现在，即使只是一些汉语的连接词和名称，也深信不疑，并不彻底了解，所以评判翻译的好坏，就像不能渡过小溪却自以为能游过大海一样。因此，伟大的仁钦桑布和帕擦等并没有贬低早期翻译的想法，而是有感恩之心，但后来的偏执者们却增加了各种抬高自己的言辞。同样，在《邦塘目录》等中，即使翻译了《量释论》等著作，但由于没有校对，大部分没有署名的译本都被署上了后来的译名。虽然智者们通过比较注释等来确定讲授的内容有很多，但如果不知道这一切都源于早期翻译的恩德，反而认为早期翻译者低劣，那就是忘恩负义的无耻之徒。因此，早期翻译时期翻译的这些经续，虽然对佛陀的教言是无限的，但其中包含深刻而广阔的意义，以及圆满道路之精华，如同精炼的黄金，这些都是化身译师们的恩德，所有人都应该知道这是西藏的福分。如果这样好好分析，是否是佛陀的教言，凡夫俗子谁也无法确定。如何能用现量来确定不是佛陀的教言呢？如果亲眼看到那部著作是伪造的，那就另当别论。否则，因为没有神通，所以不知道是否是佛陀的教言。认为这些是佛陀教言，也是因为信任有传承的上师，而不是后来的任何译师直接从佛陀那里接受的。如果用理智来分析，