Chinese
因为不能反驳其他的观点。如果说生命等是那个我的自性，或者从那个我产生，因此我和生命的关系成立。如果我被量识所认识，那么生命等也被量识所认识，即使没有我被量识所认识，生命等不存在的关系成立。生命等，有法。如果看到我，就看到你；如果没看到我，就没看到你，那么随行和相违的关系不成立。因为我是非常隐蔽的，在任何地方都不可能显现。此外，没有生命等所遍及的无我，那是什么呢？说是瓶子等。瓶子等，有法。你没有我，量识对什么进行认识或不认识呢？因为我是任何其他所依都不能被量识见到的自性。如果承认，那么周遍上，因为我反驳，所以生命等反驳的周遍，又怎么不是量识所认识的呢？因为你没有量识知道我反驳。其中的理由是，生命等在某些所依上被量识见到，因此可以认识到在活着的身体上有，在瓶子等上没有。如果我被量识见到，那么可以认识到在活着的身体上有，在瓶子等上没有，因为我在任何地方都没有被量识见到，所以有和没有的区别是不合理的。此外，因为活着的身体上没有我，所以生命等不存在，像瓶子等一样，这也是不确定的。瓶子等，有法。你没有我的理由，所以没有见到生命等是不成立的。因为生命等的因，智慧和身体等非常殊胜，因为缺少这些原因，所以没有见到生命等。同样，对于活着的身体也是一样，有法。身体你，如果缺少智慧和身体等非常殊胜的原因，那么生命等不存在是有道理的，但因为没有我的理由，所以生命等不存在是没有道理的。因为我和生命没有关系，是其他事物。如果瓶子等和没有我的已死身体，仅仅在没有生命上稍微相似，因此认为和已死身体不同的瓶子等也是没有我的。瓶子等，有法。为什么不能用量识来衡量具有我的存在呢？应该衡量。
English
Because other views cannot be refuted. If it is said that life and so on are the nature of that self, or arise from that self, therefore the relationship between self and life is established. If the self is perceived by valid cognition, then life and so on are also perceived by valid cognition, even if the relationship of the absence of life and so on without the self being cognized by valid cognition is established. Life and so on, the subject. If you see the self, you see you; if you don't see the self, you don't see you, then the relationship of following and contradiction is not established. Because the self is very hidden and cannot appear anywhere. Furthermore, what is the absence of self that pervades the absence of life and so on? It is said to be a vase and so on. Vase and so on, the subject. You do not have a self, what does valid cognition recognize or not recognize? Because the self is of a nature that cannot be seen by valid cognition on any other basis. If you admit it, then in terms of pervasion, because the self is refuted, how can the pervasion of the refutation of life and so on not be recognized by valid cognition? Because you do not have valid cognition knowing that the self is refuted. The reason for this is that life and so on are seen by valid cognition on some bases, so it can be recognized that they exist in a living body but not in a vase and so on. If the self is seen by valid cognition, then it can be recognized that it exists in a living body but not in a vase and so on, because the self is not seen by valid cognition anywhere, so the difference between existence and non-existence is unreasonable. Furthermore, because there is no self in a living body, life and so on do not exist, like a vase and so on, which is also uncertain. Vase and so on, the subject. The reason you do not have a self is not the reason why life and so on are not seen. Because the cause of life and so on, intelligence and body, etc., are very special, because of the lack of these causes, life and so on are not seen. Similarly, for a living body, the subject. Body, you, if you lack the special causes of intelligence and body, etc., then it is reasonable that life and so on do not exist, but it is not reasonable that life and so on do not exist because of the absence of self. Because the self and life are unrelated and are other things. If a vase and so on are slightly similar to a dead body without a self, only in the absence of life, therefore, if one thinks that a vase and so on, which are different from a dead body, are also without a self. Vase and so on, the subject. Why can't valid cognition measure the existence of having a self? It should measure.