thos pa’i yang rnam pa ni ji lta bu, ’jug pa ni ci zhe na?

de skad dris pa dang lan du thos pa ni rnam pa’o, tshul bzhin yid la byed pa ni ’jug pa’o zhes gsungs te, thos pa ni shes rab kyi rang bzhin yin la, tshul bzhin yid la byed pa’i sgo nas chos rnams kyi mtshan nyid rtogs par ’gyur bas tshul bzhin yid la byed pa ni ’jug pa zhes bya’o. yang na, rnam pa ni shes rab kyi rang bzhin ji lta bu bye brag tu ’byed pa’o, de yang thos pa las shes rab kyi bye brag phyed par ’gyur te, de bas na thos pa’i rnam pa brgyad cu rtsa bzhi po de dag las shes rab ’byung ba’i phyir, brgyad cu rtsa bzhi po dag ni shes rab kyi bye brag gam rnam grangs zhes bya’o. yang na, shes rab de’i rnam pa ji lta bu zhes bya ba ni rgyu ’dri ba’i tshig ste, shes rab de’i rgyu gang yin zhes bya ba’i don to. The form (ākāra), namely learning (shruta), is explained as the essence (svabhāva) of prajnyā, but alternatively as eighty-four forms of prajnyā originating from shruta; and again, alternatively, ākāra is glossed with hetu, "What is the cause of insight?" being the meaning of the question "What is the form of insight?". In the Sanskrit text -ākāraṃ is clearly a bahuvrīhi in apposition to shruta, not withstanding the yang in the Tibetan text p. 622 between thos pa’i and rnam pa.