English
All illusions accompanied by conceptual thoughts are like the eight similes of illusion, appearing but not existing. Realizing these is said to be grasping the path to liberation from the monastery of existence. If analyzed by the mind, that which cannot be analyzed is the conventional truth, and that which can be analyzed is the ultimate truth. These are also mental constructs, merely appearances of the conventional. How is it? That which can be analyzed by the mind, does it rely on mental imputation or not? If it does not rely, it cannot be established as a term for that which can be analyzed. If it relies, since it is merely mind, the two, analyzable and unanalyzable, although different in form, are the same in being analyzed by the mind. Therefore, since they are merely objects of the mind, they are conventional. As it is said in the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra: "The ultimate is not the domain of the mind; The mind is considered to be conventional." This is clearly explained. In short, the elaborations of the mind and the appearances in those elaborations are conventional in their own terms. When elaborations cease and grasping and fixation dissolve, such mind and mental appearances are known to yogis as the ultimate truth. Because the two truths are inseparable, there are times when the conventional truth becomes the ultimate truth. This is due to the key point that although the aspects are different, the essence is the same. Here, as promised, although the essence is neither the same nor different, according to worldly conventions, it is merely said to be the same essence. According to the tenets accepted by philosophical schools, just as the conventional truth appears, if the ultimate truth also appears, or just as the ultimate truth does not appear, if the conventional truth also does not appear, there would be such a fault. As it is said in the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra: "The realm of phenomena and the nature of the ultimate are the nature of being free from one and different. Those who conceive of one and different, they have entered incorrectly." Therefore, the sutra shows inseparability by not differentiating between one and different, which in reality means that the nature is non-dual. These are stated in the Māyājāla Tantra: "In the great maṇḍala of truth, where conventional and ultimate are inseparable." This is what is being expressed. Furthermore, the difference that distinguishes the two truths, is it a difference where the essence is the same but the aspects are different, or is it a difference where the essence is different, or is it a difference that merely negates sameness, or is it merely different names for the same meaning? It is not merely different names in terminology, because the characteristics and forms are different. It is not that the essence is different, because the essence does not exist, and because it is nominally inseparable.
Chinese
。 仅仅是遮止一，也不是异体，因为没有各自的自性，并且需要在同一个基础上进行区分。因此，仅仅在名言上，就像水和水中月一样，自性相同而反体不同。如《菩提心释》中说： 就像蔗糖的自性是甜的， 火的自性是热的一样， 同样的，一切诸法的 自性都安住在空性中。 又说： 世俗谛宣说为空性， 空性本身就是世俗谛， 就像有为和无常一样， 如果没有，就不会产生。 又如《次第五论》中说： 世俗谛和胜义谛， 如果能分别了解， 那么在任何地方都能真正融合， 这就被称为双运。 如此等等。 胜义谛中，无论是一还是异，都无法区分。如《慈氏请问经》中说： 无法用行相来表达的法界，既不是它本身，也不是其他的。 关于数量的确定，有遮止其他边、安住于事物、依赖于需要的数量确定三种。这里是第一种，因为从戏论中解脱与否被确定为直接相违。通过排除能立和能破的三个范畴，确定为二。或者，因为境的相状是依赖于有境而安立的，所以境不会超出两种：未达到究竟的错乱之识和达到究竟的未错乱之识。其中，轮回和涅槃的诸法是错乱，而法性是未错乱的境，因此依靠识的力量，境被确定为二，就像依靠地的力量而有凸有凹一样。如《入行论》中也说： 以见诸法皆为虚妄故， 将执持诸法之二种自性， 何为真实所见即胜义， 所见虚妄则说为世俗。 如此等等。 从宗派的角度来区分，声闻部认为，以智慧分析的胜义，以及以斧头砍伐的事物胜义等，是无法损害的。他们认为，相续的智慧和粗大的事物是世俗谛，而智慧的刹那和事物的无分微尘是胜义谛。如《俱舍论》中说： 若被摧毁及以智， 另行分析则智不入， 如瓶水是世俗有， 胜义有异于此者。 如此等等。 一些经部师认为，ྲེལ་ལས། 作用的能力是什么？ 那个在这里胜义中是不存在的。 其他的是世俗存在的， 那些解释了自共相的特征。 这样认为，所有正理派安住于一致。 唯识宗认为，能取所取二现的境和有境是世俗谛，二取的无分别智是胜义谛。如《集学论》中说： 所谓有分，是不存在的， 微细的极微也是不存在的， 各自分别显现而无所缘， 体验如同梦境一般。 从能取和所取中解脱的， 识是胜义谛。 宣说智慧海的波罗蜜多， 瑜伽行派的宗义。 这样说。 中观自续派认为， 如何显现的一切都是世俗中成立的，如同幻化等， 胜义中不成立的如同虚空一般。 如《摧毁》中说： 有所缘是世俗，胜义中， 所缘和能缘都从中解脱。 这样说。 应成派认为， 如何显现的本身就是世俗，空性是胜义， 称作与此没有差别，因为超越了一切一和异的法性，远离了一切戏论的边。因此，显现之时即是无生， 无灭， 无来， 无去。 因此，甚至否定了承认的世俗。 如《入中论》中说： 如何你认为他性实有， 我也不承认世俗。 这样说。 那么，显现的这些成立为生等吗？ 生不生，成立不成立，是心识安立在显现上， 哪里有成立呢？ 你所承认的宗派是被遮破的， 并非遮破了显现本身。 如圣天说： 如何显现本身不是被否定的， 因为是依缘而生起的缘故。 在这里，是作为痛苦之因的， 对实有的执着应当遮止。 这样说。 显现是本无所有的， 如《中论》中说： 色声香味和触， 香和法仅仅是， 如同乾闼婆城一般， 如同阳焰和梦境一般。 如同幻化的人一般， 如同影像一般， 对于那些， 喜欢和不喜欢， 又怎么会生起呢？ 这样说。 在这里应当取舍什么呢？ 那些一切的好的方面，显现而无自性，
English
. It is not different just by negating one, because there is no separate nature, and it needs to be distinguished on the same basis. Therefore, only in terms of terminology, like water and the moon in water, the nature is the same but the opposite is different. As it is said in the Commentary on the Bodhicitta: Just as the nature of sugarcane is sweet, And the nature of fire is hot, Similarly, the nature of all phenomena Abides in emptiness. And it says: Conventional truth is explained as emptiness, Emptiness itself is conventional truth, Like conditioned and impermanent things, If it doesn't exist, it will not arise. And as it is said in the Five Stages: Conventional and ultimate, If you understand them separately, Then wherever they are truly mixed, That is explained as union. And so on. In ultimate truth, there is no distinction between one or different. As it is said in the Questions of Maitreya: That realm which cannot be expressed by the characteristics of phenomena, is neither itself nor other. Regarding the determination of number, there are three types of numerical determination: negating other extremes, abiding in things, and relying on needs. This is the first type, because liberation or non-liberation from elaboration is determined as direct contradiction. By excluding the three categories of affirmation and negation, it is determined as two. Or, because the aspect of the object is established in dependence on the subject, the object does not go beyond two: the deluded mind that has not reached the ultimate, and the non-deluded mind that has reached the ultimate. Among them, the phenomena of samsara and nirvana are delusion, and the nature of reality is the non-deluded object, so by the power of mind, the object is determined as two, just like the convex and concave depending on the power of the ground. As it is also said in the Entering: By seeing all things as truly false, One will grasp the two natures of things, Whatever is seen as true is ultimate, What is seen as false is said to be conventional truth. And so on. Distinguishing from the perspective of philosophical schools, the Hearer School believes that the ultimate truth analyzed by wisdom, and the ultimate truth of things destroyed by an axe, etc., cannot be harmed. They believe that the continuum of consciousness and gross matter are conventional truth, while the moment of consciousness and the indivisible particles of matter are ultimate truth. As it is said in the Treasury: Whatever is destroyed and analyzed by wisdom, That which the mind does not enter, Like a pot of water, is conventionally existent, Ultimate existence is different from this. And so on. Some Sutra Masters believe that,ྲེལ་ལས། Whatever is the function of doing, That is not ultimately existent here. Others are conventionally existent, Those explain the characteristics of self and general. Thus they agree, and the logicians abide in harmony. The Mind-Only school believes that the objects and subjects of dualistic appearance are conventionally true, and the knowledge of non-duality is ultimately true. As it is said in the Essence of Wisdom, Collected from All: "There is no such thing as having parts, And there are no subtle particles, Appearing separately but without an object, The experience is like a dream. The consciousness that is liberated from grasping and holding Is the ultimate meaning of the noble. The teachings of the Yoga practice, Which is the perfection of the ocean of intelligence, are proclaimed." So it is. The Svātantrika-Madhyamaka believes that all that appears is established as conventional, like illusion, and that which is not established as ultimate is like the sky. As it is said in the Destruction of Error: "Conventional with an object, in the ultimate, The object and the subject are liberated from all." So it is. The Prāsaṅgika believes that what appears itself is conventional, and emptiness is ultimate, and there is no difference from what is called ultimate, because the nature of reality is beyond all one and different, and is free from all extremes of elaboration. Therefore, from the very moment of appearance, it is believed that there is no birth, no cessation, no coming, and no going. Therefore, even the mere conventionality of acceptance is denied. As it is said in the Entering: "As you desire the other-powered entity, I do not accept even the conventional." So it is. If one thinks that this appearance is established as birth and so on, then birth and non-birth, establishment and non-establishment, are mentally imputed to appearance. Where is there establishment? What you have accepted as a philosophical system is refuted, but the mere appearance is not refuted. As Āryadeva said: "How can appearance itself not be denied? Because it arises in dependence. Here, that which is the cause of suffering, The thought of truth should be reversed." So it is. Appearance is like non-existence, As it is said in the Root Wisdom: "Form, sound, taste, and touch, Smell and dharma are merely, Like a city of gandharvas, Like a mirage, like a dream. Like a magical person, Like a reflection, For those, Pleasant and unpleasant, How can they arise?" So it is. What should be taken here? The good aspects of all those, appearance without inherent existence,