English
In Akaniṣṭha (Tibetan: འོག་མིན་), the basis for discussion gathered. After initiating the discussion, the meaning of the tantra was explained, so there is no fault of not needing to initiate the basis for discussion. In the human realm, when Vajrapāṇi (Tibetan: གསང་བདག་) recorded it in words and letters, considering the three types of intelligence—superior, middling, and inferior—he mentioned the name at the beginning. Although the name is the meaning of the tantra, it does not become unnecessary to initiate the basis for discussion, he said. To this, Je Khonton said: Then, the Teacher did not speak this tantra as expressive language in Akaniṣṭha (Tibetan: འོག་མིན་), because that commitment is reasonable. If you admit it, then saying "At this time, he said" is unreasonable, because of admitting it. Even if he said it because of admitting it, that fault does not occur, because when Vajrapāṇi (Tibetan: གསང་བདག་) compiles the explanation of the intended meaning into words, he commits to being the same as the Teacher in intention, so he thinks that he has compiled "At this time," etc. As it says in the commentary Nyiseng: Now, in order to be in accordance with the words of the Bhagavan, the compiler will explain the basis for discussion of the tantra with the oral instructions of the lama, that is, "At this time," etc. The second part also has two: refutation and answer. The first is: Does the name contain the meaning of the tantra or not? If it contains it, then the name and the ten objects of the tantra should be able to be joined together like chest to chest. If it does not contain it, then those with superior faculties will not be able to understand the meaning of the tantra by relying on the name. If you say that, the second is: Although the ten objects of the tantra and the meaning of the name cannot be applied separately, the meaning of the name exists in the three: basis, path, and result. Therefore, there is no fault of not containing the meaning of the tantra there, he said. Also, that it is said that seeing the name allows one to understand the meaning of the tantra from beginning to end, that is because the name was given based on seeing the meaning, so the Nyang commentary thinks that it is the way of realization of the retinue that appeared earlier, I think that is good. That is to say, Vajrapāṇi (Tibetan: གསང་བདག་) himself understood the meaning of the tantra, and when explaining it to the retinue, he named it based on the meaning. Therefore, for those who appeared earlier, the name contains all the words and meanings, and it is not contradictory to realize it in an instant. As it says in the Ocean: Abandoning all obscurations, for the beings to be tamed, he makes it appear in an instant. Afterwards, understanding the meaning by relying on the name, there it is only understood as the hint of the three: basis, path, and result, because the name is only a name that is able to represent the meaning. For example, a vase
Chinese
如是说，仅仅理解为能支撑腹部、弯曲双腿、汲水的事物，就像不理解金瓶等特点一样。第三，关于此续，续部的名称是《金刚萨埵幻化网》，经部的名称是经部总义，诀窍部的名称是《秘密藏》，既然如此，为何在书本的开头只提到诀窍部的名称呢？答：玛哈瑜伽也分为内部的续、经、诀窍三部分，因为这是玛哈的阿底，所以只提到了诀窍部的名称。第四也有辩驳和回答两种。第一种是，有些愚昧之人说，这部续不是从印度翻译过来的，因为开头没有提到梵语。第二种分为破斥和立论两种。第一种是，有些上师说，如果完全没有梵语，翻译成藏语是不合理的，所以“藏语”一词暗示着有梵语。这种说法是不对的，因为藏语可以和汉语等语言混合使用，所以不能因此就断定它是印度语。而且，在藏地创作的论著中也可以隐含地使用梵语，所以也会被误认为是印度语。第二种是，这里没有梵语，所以不能断定它是藏语，因为在藏地创作的许多论著中，开头也使用了梵语，但这并不能说明它们是印度语。此外，如果说因为开头没有提到梵语就断定它是藏语，那么从汉地翻译过来的佛经也会被认为是藏语，如果说因为没有提到两种语言就断定它是藏语，那么印度的书籍也会不可避免地被认为是藏语。即使如此，为什么开头只提到藏语呢？因为早期翻译的印度版本中似乎有“印度语”的说法，这是因为《日藏论》中对此进行了阐释。那么，这样说有什么必要呢？因为密宗的续部不一定只有印度语的四种语言，如《时轮大疏》等对此有详细的阐述。因此，必须确定这指的是印度语的四种语言中的梵语。如《日藏论》中说，印度指的是容器和内容两种，即金刚座等。
English
As it is said, merely understanding something as capable of supporting the abdomen, bending the legs, and drawing water is like not understanding the characteristics of a golden vase, etc. Third, regarding this tantra, the name of the tantra is Vajrasattva Mayajala Tantra, the name of the agama is the General Meaning of the Agamas, and the name of the Upadesha is known as the Secret Essence. Since this is the case, why is only the name of the Upadesha mentioned at the beginning of the book? The answer is that Maha Yoga is also divided into three parts: inner tantra, agama, and upadesha. Since this is Maha Ati, only the name of the Upadesha is mentioned. Fourth, there are also two aspects: refutation and answer. The first is that some ignorant people say that this tantra was not translated from India because Sanskrit is not mentioned at the beginning. The second is divided into two: refutation and establishment. The first is that some superiors say that if there is no Sanskrit at all, it is unreasonable to translate it into Tibetan, so the word "Tibetan" implicitly implies that there is Sanskrit. This statement is incorrect because Tibetan can be mixed with Chinese and other languages, so it cannot be concluded that it is Indian. Moreover, Sanskrit can also be implicitly used in treatises composed in Tibet, so it will also be mistaken for Indian. The second is that the absence of Sanskrit here does not necessarily mean that it is Tibetan, because many treatises composed in Tibet also use Sanskrit at the beginning, but this does not mean that they are Indian. Furthermore, if it is said that because Sanskrit is not mentioned at the beginning, it is concluded that it is Tibetan, then the Buddhist scriptures translated from China will also be considered Tibetan, and if it is said that because two languages are not mentioned, it is concluded that it is Tibetan, then Indian books will inevitably be considered Tibetan. Even so, why is only Tibetan mentioned at the beginning? Because the early translated Indian versions seem to have the phrase "Indian language," which is because the Commentary of the Sun Essence explains it. So, what is the need to say this? Because the tantras of Secret Mantra are not necessarily limited to the four languages of India, as explained in detail in the Great Commentary of the Kalachakra and others. Therefore, it must be determined that this refers to Sanskrit among the four languages of India. As the Commentary of the Sun Essence says, India refers to both the container and the contents, such as Vajrasana, etc.
Chinese
哦！所谓“语言”，是指四种语言等等。这里，应当理解为梵语。 如是说，译师也随之在开头说“藏语”是显而易见的。古代的人们，为了减少文字而没有说汉语，为了迅速理解意义而只说了藏语。说这些都只是说说而已。总之，这部续部是广为人知的，印度的班智达们也多有阐释。密集金刚的注释，毗沙弥扎所著中也引用了很多这部续部的教证。后来也因为找到了汉文版本，塔洛和果洛等大译师们也进行了翻译，因此没有变成藏文的错误。第二，关于具名续部的意义，为了不侵犯本师的权利，开头是顶礼，为了容易理解教言的意义，确定正文的意义。第一，有语言的意义，文字的意义，遣除争论。第一是，如果与能作的四句相结合，谁顶礼呢？是结集者。顶礼谁呢？是续部的本师。什么时候顶礼呢？是结集者在色究竟天首先了知续部并结集，然后到人间用语言结集的时候。如何寻求呢？最好的方式是见到，中等的方式是习惯于禅修，最差的方式是恭敬的顶礼。因为这是结集者的顶礼，所以是第一种。第二是，在小释中说：在平等性的法界中，四魔自然被摧毁。手印的自性，具足二资粮。超越有无边，自他一切的光荣。一切自性证悟和殊胜的慈悲。遍照如来，天中之天，您无有分别。以证悟和恭敬，完全地顶礼。 也就是说，在法性平等性的法界中，四魔自然清净而被摧毁。如何摧毁呢？原因，烦恼的相状在自身解脱。结果，不取近取的蕴，不取蕴，就不会有生死，天子魔会从中阻断， 因此四魔被摧毁。广释中说：烦恼自身完全清净。五蕴自身现前成佛。自身是天神的坛城。是无有生死的永恒之地。
English
O! The so-called "language" refers to the four languages, etc. Here, it should be understood as Sanskrit. As it is said, the translator also followed this by saying "Tibetan" at the beginning, which is obvious. The ancients, in order to reduce the text, did not mention Chinese, and in order to quickly understand the meaning, they only said Tibetan. Saying these things is just saying them. In short, this tantra is widely known, and the Indian paṇḍitas have also explained it a lot. In the commentary on Guhyasamāja, written by Biśāmitra, many quotes from this tantra are also cited. Later, because Chinese versions were found, great translators such as Tharlo and Golo also translated it, so there is no error of becoming Tibetan. Second, regarding the meaning of the named tantra, in order not to infringe upon the rights of the teacher, the beginning is prostration, and in order to easily understand the meaning of the teachings, the meaning of the text is determined. First, there is the meaning of language, the meaning of words, and the removal of disputes. The first is, if combined with the four modes of action, who prostrates? It is the compiler. Who is prostrated to? It is the teacher of the tantra. When is the prostration done? It is when the compiler first knows and compiles the tantra in Akanishtha, and then compiles it into language in the human realm. How to seek it? The best way is to see, the middle way is to be accustomed to meditation, and the worst way is to prostrate with reverence. Because this is the prostration of the compiler, it is the first. Second, in the small commentary it says: In the realm of equality, the four maras are naturally destroyed. The nature of the mudrā, possessing the two accumulations completely. Transcending existence and non-existence, the glory of self and others. All nature, realization and excellent compassion. Samantabhadra, god of gods, you are inseparable. With realization and reverence, I prostrate completely. That is to say, in the realm of the equality of dharmatā, the four maras are naturally purified and destroyed. How are they destroyed? The cause, the characteristics of afflictions are liberated in themselves. The result, not taking the aggregates of clinging, not taking the aggregates, there will be no birth and death, and the māra of the son of the gods will interrupt from it, Therefore, the four maras are destroyed. The extensive commentary says: Afflictions themselves are completely purified. The five aggregates themselves manifest as enlightenment. Oneself is the mandala of the gods. It is the eternal place without birth and death.