Chinese
如果这样，根本的生起能生起生起的生起等等，也能生起与自己相异的十四法。同样，对于具有和安住等也应类推，这样就没有第二个过失，也不会变成无边际。如果这样说，如果按照你的观点，生起的生起，即生起能生起根本的生起。即使允许这样，你的根本，即根本的生起，先前没有生起的生起的生起，如何生起那个根本的生起呢？不能生起，因为自己没有生起。总之，生起果的因依赖于什么，如果那个因已经成立，那么那个果暂时可以存在。但是，那个因本身会变成无因，所以不存在。如果没有因，那么那个果也不可能存在。因此，如果互相依赖来成立什么，那么能成立者本身不成立。因此，如果考察这两者在本体上是否成立，那是不可能的。在生起的生起没有生起之前，根本的生起永远不会成立。而且，因的生起已经存在，再次生起是不合理的。如果你的想法是，根本所生起的那个小生起，能生起根本的生起，那么那个小生起，如何生起在自己之前没有生起的根本的生起呢？不能生起，因为自己没有生起。又有人说，那两者不是一个先出生，然后互相生起，而是那两者正在生起，所以互相生起。如果你的没有生起的正在生起，能够生起自己的果，那么你的正在生起，想要生起那个果，虽然可以允许，但是那是不可能的。因为正在生起是指未来，对于已经成立的，根本没有必要再次生起，所以不是正在生起，因为生起的活动已经结束。对于那个未来，如果现在不存在，那么它生起果是不可能的。例如，明年的庄稼不能解除现在的饥饿。对于安住等也应类推。第二部分分为两部分：驳斥过失的回答和驳斥那个回答。第一部分是：又有人说，生、住、灭是和合的特征，没有其他的生、住、灭，所以不是无边际或者和合
English
If so, the fundamental arising can generate the arising of arising, etc., and can also generate the fourteen dharmas that are different from itself. Similarly, it should be applied to having and abiding, etc., so that there is no second fault and it will not become infinite. If you say so, if according to your view, the arising of arising, that is, arising can generate the fundamental arising. Even if it is allowed, your root, that is, the fundamental arising, the arising of arising that has not arisen before, how does it generate that fundamental arising? It cannot arise, because it has not arisen itself. In short, the cause that generates the fruit depends on what, if that cause has already been established, then that fruit can temporarily exist. However, that cause itself will become causeless, so it does not exist. If there is no cause, then that fruit cannot exist either. Therefore, if they rely on each other to establish something, then the establisher itself is not established. Therefore, if we examine whether these two are established in essence, it is impossible. Before the arising of arising has arisen, the fundamental arising will never be established. Moreover, the arising of the cause already exists, and it is unreasonable to arise again. If your idea is that the small arising generated by the root can generate the fundamental arising, then how does that small arising generate the fundamental arising that has not arisen before itself? It cannot arise, because it has not arisen itself. Again, someone says that the two are not one born first, and then arise each other, but the two are arising, so they arise each other. If your unarisen arising can generate its own fruit, then your arising, wanting to generate that fruit, although it can be allowed, it is impossible. Because arising refers to the future, for what has already been established, there is no need to arise again, so it is not arising, because the activity of arising has ended. For that future, if it does not exist now, then it is impossible for it to generate fruit. For example, next year's crops cannot relieve the current hunger. It should be applied to abiding, etc. The second part is divided into two parts: refuting the answer of fault and refuting that answer. The first part is: Again, someone says that birth, dwelling, and destruction are the characteristics of combination, there are no other birth, dwelling, and destruction, so it is not infinite or combination.