Chinese
如果从他产生他，那么就会导致从蜡烛也产生黑暗等等，一切都从一切产生。因为作为他者没有差别。如果说，作为他者并不一定是因果，因为存在助益者和被助益者的关联，并且后者从前者产生，所以没有那个过失。那么，就像青稞、花朵、石头等等不属于果的因和相续一样，青稞自身的土地和嫩芽二者作为他者在意义上是相同的。即使这样，也会导致不能作为生起者和相续一体，然而，能够安立生起者和相续一体，这是因为自性上没有成立为他者，而是以缘起的自性成立为不可思议的关键。此外，土地和嫩芽二者在一个时间里一个不存在，怎么能成为助益者和被助益者呢？那只是假立而已。如果说，那二者虽然不同时存在，但就像秤杆的高低一样产生和灭亡，所以没有过失。那么，正在灭亡的和正在产生的相遇是不成立的，所以用秤杆的比喻来表示是没有意义的。心和心所与同时存在的四大种一样，也只是假立为因果，如果自性上是他生，那么过失如前。因此，就像从种子产生嫩芽一样，缘起的显现是不可思议的，如果观察，就稍微也观察不到所谓的产生，但不观察时，仅仅是感到愉快，种子显现为产生嫩芽，并且仅仅是那样进行称说。同样，安立为存在和灭亡，就意义而言，是远离生灭住三者的，并且那两个谛是无违的显现，就像幻术、梦境、乾闼婆城市等等一样。这样，如果以理智进行观察，由于一切法都没有自性的关键，像土地和嫩芽一样，在自和他的任何体性上都不成立。有些人说，即使遮止了其他三种生，如果不承认他生，难道不会与世间名言的安立相违背吗？不会相违背的。如果在胜义中进行观察，名言中所谓的产生什么也观察不到，如果观察到，就会导致名言谛可以被理智观察，并且会导致胜义的产生没有被遮止，并且会导致圣者的等持成为事物毁灭的因，也就是说，会变成诽谤事物的自性。
English
If other arises from other, then it would follow that darkness also arises from a candle, and everything arises from everything else, because there is no difference in being other. If it is said that being other is not necessarily cause and effect, because there is a connection between the helper and the helped, and the latter arises from the former, then there is no such fault. Then, just as barley, flowers, stones, etc., do not belong to the cause and continuum of the fruit, the land and sprout of the barley itself are the same in meaning as being other. Even so, it would follow that it is not permissible to be the producer and the same continuum, but the establishment of the producer and the same continuum is permissible because it is not established as other by its own nature, but by the key that the nature of dependent arising is established as inconceivable. Furthermore, the land and the sprout, when one exists, the other does not, so how can they be the helper and the helped? That is just a designation. If it is said that although the two do not exist at the same time, they arise and cease like the high and low of a balance beam, so there is no fault. Then, it is not established that what is ceasing and what is arising meet, so the example of the balance beam is meaningless. Mind and mental factors, like the four elements that exist at the same time, are also just designated as cause and effect, and if it is other-arising by its own nature, then the fault is as before. Therefore, like a sprout arising from a seed, the appearance of dependent arising is inconceivable, and if examined, the so-called arising is not observed at all, but if not examined, it is merely pleasant, and the seed appears to give rise to a sprout, and it is merely named as such. Similarly, existence and cessation are designated, but in terms of meaning, they are free from the three: arising, ceasing, and abiding, and the appearance of those two truths is non-contradictory, just like illusions, dreams, cities of gandharvas, and so on. Thus, if examined with reason, due to the key that all phenomena are without own nature, like land and sprouts, they are not established in either self or other. Some say that even if the other three kinds of arising are refuted, if other-arising is not accepted, will it not contradict the establishment of worldly conventions? It will not contradict. If examined in the ultimate, nothing is observed in the so-called arising in conventions, and if observed, it would follow that conventional truth can be examined by reason, and it would follow that ultimate arising is not refuted, and it would follow that the samadhi of the noble ones becomes the cause of the destruction of things, that is, it would become the nature of slandering things.