English
Regarding grammar, although Tibetans believe that the Chandra (Tibetan: ཙནྡྲ་, Sanskrit Devanagari: चन्द्र, Sanskrit Roman transliteration: candra, literal Chinese meaning: moon) grammar appeared earlier, it is also possible that it appeared earlier in the heavenly realm. However, it is not the case that it appeared earlier in India, which will be explained below. The Chandra grammar translated into Tibetan is in accordance with Pāṇini (Tibetan: པཱ་ཎི་པ་, Sanskrit Devanagari: पाणिनि, Sanskrit Roman transliteration: pāṇini, literal Chinese meaning: Pāṇini), while the Kalāpa (Tibetan: ཀཱ་ལཱ་པ་, Sanskrit Devanagari: कलाप, Sanskrit Roman transliteration: kalāpa, literal Chinese meaning: Kalāpa) grammar is in accordance with the system of Indra (Tibetan: ཨིནྡྲ, Sanskrit Devanagari: इन्द्र, Sanskrit Roman transliteration: indra, literal Chinese meaning: Indra), according to the paṇḍitas. In particular, the Pāṇini grammar, because its meaning is more extensive, it is said to be very rare to fully understand it and all its components. The story of the time of the venerable Great Hair and others is the story of Chupa. In the northern borderland of the forest, there arose a king named Mejin (Tibetan: མེ་བྱིན་). He offered to the Arhat Dharma Merchant (Tibetan: ཆོས་ཀྱི་ཚོང་དཔོན་) and about three thousand other venerable ones for more than thirty years. In the central region, the venerable Great Giver (Tibetan: གཏོང་བ་ཆེན་པོ་) maintained the Dharma. In the city of Metok (Tibetan: མེ་ཏོག་), the son of King Gawa (Tibetan: དགའ་བོ་), Padma Chenpo (Tibetan: པདྨ་ཆེན་པོ་), made offerings to all the sangha. However, the monk Yidtenpa (Tibetan: ཡིད་བརྟན་པ་), who followed the abbot Naga (Tibetan: ཀླུ), publicly proclaimed the Five Points, widely spreading controversy, which led to the gradual division of the sangha into eighteen schools. King Padma Chenpo's friends were the Brahmin Zangpo (Tibetan: བཟང་པོ་) and the Brahmin Choksé (Tibetan: མཆོག་སྲེད་). Both of them made great offerings to the sangha. The Brahmin Zangpo, through the power of mantra, was able to obtain all necessities from the non-humans of whatever different place he went to. He was able to fully satisfy eight thousand eight hundred Brahmins, two thousand monks, and countless wanderers and beggars every day. Choksé had a pair of leaf shoes accomplished through mantra. Wearing these shoes, he would take various good items from the abodes of gods and nagas, satisfying the beggars. However, once, he fell out of favor with the king, who suspected him of casting evil spells on him, so he sent messengers to kill him. Wearing the shoes, he fled to the city of Phakgyal (Tibetan: འཕགས་རྒྱལ་). Eventually, the king set a trap, and a woman stole his shoes, preventing him from escaping, and he was killed by the executioner. The king, to atone for the sin of killing the Brahmin, greatly valued...
Chinese
建造了二十四座修习室，所有这些都成为了具备完备资具的佛法之基础。有些人认为此时发生了第三次结集，但似乎并非如此。据说名为“乔色”的人写了许多《分别论》并赠予了说法者们。各种各样的佛语经典，从导师住世之时就已存在。据说这是最早被记录成书的注释性论著。其中，“分别”的意思是详细解释。也就是说，以前导师亲自宣讲的佛语，在讲述其诀窍的同时，也解释佛语的含义。除此之外，没有另外制作比经部更容易理解的论著。后来，为了未来众生的利益，制作了《分别论》。有些人说，在近隐时期，阿罗汉们共同创作了它；有些人则认为是由具称和一切有部等所作。而藏人则认为一切有部和曲身等五百阿罗汉在北方破山部的乐人寺所作，这似乎是把前两种说法混合在一起的说法。无论如何，那些阿罗汉的口头传承被汇集在一起，由长老们口耳相传，后来才被记录下来。按照分别说者的观点，他们认为《阿毗达摩七论》是佛语，因此认为最早的注释性论著是《分别论》。而按照经部的观点，在《分别论》之前出现的《阿毗达摩七论》也是由声闻凡夫所作，他们认为导师的教言是由舍利弗等编辑的，因此认为最早的注释性论著是七论。有些论师认为，七论最初是佛语，但后来也可能混入了声闻凡夫所作的文字，就像不同部派的一些经部一样。因此，凡是与三量相违背的错误，都应该被认为是后来混入的文字。大乘的阿毗达摩
English
Twenty-four practice rooms were built, and all of these became the foundation of the Dharma, possessing complete resources. Some believe that the third council occurred at this time, but it does not seem to be the case. It is said that a person named "Chokse" wrote many Vibhajyavada texts and gave them to the Dharma speakers. Various kinds of scriptural texts have existed since the time of the Teacher. It is said that this was the first commentary treatise to be recorded in books. The meaning of "Vibhajya" is to explain in detail. That is, in the past, the Teacher himself spoke the Buddha's words, and while teaching its key points, he also explained the meaning of the Buddha's words. Apart from this, there were no separate treatises made easier to understand than the Sutras. Later, for the benefit of future sentient beings, the Vibhajyavada treatises were made. Some say that during the time of near concealment, the Arhats jointly composed it; others believe that it was made by Grakpa and the Sarvastivadins, etc. The Tibetans believe that the Sarvastivadins and Kubja, etc., five hundred Arhats, made it in the Gandhara Vihara of the Uttara Saila Vibhajya. This seems to be a mixture of the first two statements. In any case, the oral tradition of those Arhats was collected together, passed down from ear to ear by the elders, and later recorded in writing. According to the view of the Vibhajyavadins, they consider the seven Abhidhamma texts to be the words of the Buddha, so they believe that the earliest commentary treatise is the Vibhajyavada. According to the view of the Sutrantikas, the seven Abhidhamma texts that appeared before the Vibhajyavada were also made by Sravaka Prithagjanas. They believe that the Teacher's teachings were compiled by Sariputra, etc., so they believe that the earliest commentary treatise is the seven texts. Some teachers believe that the seven texts were initially the words of the Buddha, but later it may have been mixed with the words made by Sravaka Prithagjanas, just like some Sutras of different schools. Therefore, any errors that contradict the three valid cognitions should be considered as words that were later mixed in. The Abhidhamma of the Mahayana
Chinese
如同部类各异，声闻乘也应如此。三藏义理确有关联，然其他二藏有各自的经卷，而母续不应没有理由不如此。如是认为。后一种观点似乎合理，然大学者世亲似乎赞同经部的观点，暂且如此承认。有人说这不是佛语，因为有很多错误，是舍利子等人所作，此言实为愚蠢之语。因为殊胜二圣之一已于导师之前涅槃，导师住世之时，也没有作释经论典之事。导师亲身住世，若出现对佛语的错误解释，则太过分。以佛陀的教法为基础，佛语和释经论典的区别也只能在于导师亲自住世时出现，以及涅槃之后出现。若殊胜二圣等对佛语作错误解释，则“证人几乎都已逝去”，因为无法找到可作为证人的人。若阿罗汉们也未曾见过，则声闻乘中不可能有人见过，这太过分了。因此，对于导师的化身所显现的伟大阿罗汉们，从内心深处诽谤，这应被视为是魔的加持。稍晚于莲花王（莲花生大师）时期，在邬荼毗舍国，出现了一位名为月护的国王。据说，圣者文殊以比丘的形象出现在他的家中，宣讲了各种大乘佛法，并留下了一部经卷。经部学者认为那是八千颂般若波罗蜜多，而密咒师们则说是《大集经》（梵文：Tattvasaṃgraha，梵文罗马转写：Tattvasamgraha，汉语字面意思：真实摄），即《真实摄要》。无论如何，这并不矛盾，但我认为前者更合理。这指的是导师涅槃后，大乘法在人间出现。
English
Just as the collections are separate, so too should it be for the Shravakas. Although it is true that the three collections are interconnected in meaning, the other two collections have separate texts, and there is no reason why the Mother Tantras should not be the same. This is the view. Although this latter view seems reasonable, the great scholar Vasubandhu seems to agree with the views of the Sutra School, so for the time being, we will accept it as such. Some say that it is not the word of the Buddha, because there are many errors, and that it was made by Shariputra and others, but this is a very foolish statement. For one of the two supreme ones had already passed into nirvana before the Teacher, and there was no writing of commentaries on the scriptures when the Teacher was alive. If there were erroneous interpretations of the Buddha's words while the Teacher was still manifestly present, it would be too extreme. Based on the Buddha's teachings, the difference between the Buddha's words and the commentaries on the scriptures lies only in whether they appeared when the Teacher was manifestly present, or after his nirvana. If the two supreme ones and others were to give erroneous interpretations of the Buddha's words, then "most of the witnesses have passed away," because there would be no one to identify as a witness. If even the Arhats have not seen it, then it would be too extreme to say that there is no one in the Shravaka Vehicle who has seen it. Therefore, to slander from the bottom of one's heart the great Arhats who appeared as emanations of the Teacher himself should be recognized as the blessings of Mara. Slightly later than the time of King Padma the Great (Padmasambhava), in the land of Oḍiviśa, there appeared a king named Chandravarman. It is said that the noble Manjushri appeared in his house in the form of a monk, taught various Mahayana teachings, and left behind a text. The followers of the Sutra School believe that it was the Ashtasahasrika Prajnaparamita, while the Mantrayana practitioners say that it was the Tattvasamgraha (梵文：Tattvasaṃgraha，梵文罗马转写：Tattvasamgraha，汉语字面意思：真实摄), which means "Compendium of Reality." In any case, there is no contradiction, but I think the former is more reasonable. This refers to the appearance of the Mahayana in the human realm after the Teacher's nirvana.