na svataḥ prasiddhiḥ pratyakṣasya tenaiva pratyakṣena, anumānasya tenaivānumānena, upamānasya tenaivopamānena, āgamasya tenaivāgamena |
nāpi parasparataḥ pratyakṣasyānumānopamānāgamaiḥ, anumānasya pratyakṣopamānāgamaiḥ, upamānasya pratyakṣānumānāgamaiḥ, āgamasya pratyakṣānumānopamānaiḥ | nāpipratyakṣānumānopamānāgamānām anyaiḥ pratyakṣānumānopamānāgamair yathā svam |
nāpi prameyaiḥ samastavyastaiḥ svaviṣayaparaviṣayasaṃgṛhītaiḥ | nāpy akasmāt |
nāpi samuccyenaiteṣāṃ kāraṇānāṃ pūrvoddiṣṭānāṃ viṃśattriṃśaccatvāriṃśatṣaṭviṃśatyer vā |
tatra yad uktaṃ pramāṇādhigamyatvāt prameyānāṃ bhāvānāṃ santi ca te prameyā bhāvās tāni ca pramāṇāni yais te pramāṇaiḥ prameyā bhāvāḥ samadhigatā iti tad na |
yat punar bhavatoktam | kuśalānāṃ dharmāṇāṃ dharmāvasthāvidaś ca manyante | kuśalaṃ janāḥ svabhāvaṃ śeṣaṣvapyeṣa viniyoga iti || atra brūmaḥ |
此偈明何義 如是量非自成 現非現成 比非比成 喻非喻成 阿含亦爾非阿含成
比非比成 喻非喻成 阿含亦爾非阿含成 非是自僚迭互相成 現非比喻阿含等成 比非現喻阿含等成 喻非現比阿含等成 阿含非現比喻等成 非異現比譬喻阿含別有現比譬喻阿含異量來成
如量自分和合不成 自他境界和合不成
非無因成非聚集成 此之因緣如先所說 二十三十或四五六 二十三十四十五十或有六十
若汝所說以有量故得言所量 有量所量證一切法皆有自體義不相應
又復汝說偈言智人知法說 善法有自體世人知有體 餘法亦如是出法出自體 是聖人所說如是不出法 不出法自體此偈 我今答 偈言
raṅ gis te mṅon sum ni mṅon sum de ñid kyis daṅ | rjes su dpag pa ni rjes su dpag pa de ñid kyis daṅ | luṅ ni luṅ de ñid kyis daṅ | dpes gźal ba ni dpes ’jal ba de ñid kyis rab tu mi ’grub la
phan tshun gyis te | mṅon sum ni rjes su dpag pa daṅ | dpes ’jal ba daṅ | luṅ rnams kyis daṅ | rjes su dpag pa ni mṅon sum daṅ | dpe ’jal ba daṅ | luṅ rnams kyis daṅ | dpes ’jal ba ni mṅon sum daṅ rje su dpag pa daṅ | luṅ rnams kyis daṅ | luṅ ni mṅon sum daṅ | rjes su dpag pa daṅ | dpes ’jal bas kyaṅ ma yin la | raṅ gi ji lta ba bźin du | mṅon sum daṅ rjes su dpag pa daṅ | dpes ’jal ba daṅ | luṅ rnams kyis ni mṅon sum daṅ | rjes su dpag pa daṅ | dpes ’jal ba daṅ | luṅ gźan rnams kyis kyaṅ ma yin la |
gźal bar bya ba raṅ daṅ gźan gyis bsdus pa mtha’ dag daṅ | re res kyaṅ ma yin la | rgyu med pas kyaṅ ma yin la |
kun bsdus pas kyaṅ ma yin no || gtan tshigs sṅar bstan pa de dag ni | ñi śu’am | sum cu’am | bźi bcu’am | sum cu rtsa drug gis kyaṅ mi bsgrub na |
de la gaṅ khyod kyis gźal bar bya ba’i dṅos po rnams ni tshad mas khoṅ du chud par bya ba yin pa’i phyir dṅos po gźal bar bya ba de dag kyaṅ yod la | khyod kyi tshad ma gaṅ dag gis dṅos po gźal bar bya ba dag yaṅ dag par khoṅ du chud pa’i tshad ma de dag kyaṅ yod do źes smras pa gaṅ yin pa de mi ruṅ ṅo ||
gźan yaṅ khyod kyis | skye bo chos kyi gnas skabs mkhas || dge ba dag gi chos rnams la || dge ba’i raṅ bźin yin par ni || sems śiṅ lhag ma rnams daṅ yaṅ || źes smras pa gaṅ yin pa de la bśad par bya ste |
Perception is not established by that very perception, inference is not established by that very inference, identification is not established by that very identification, and testimony is not established by that very testimony.
Nor are they established by one another, i.e., perception by inference, identification and testimony, inference by perception, identification and testimony, identification by perception, inference and testimony, and testimony by perception, inference and identification. Nor are perception, inference, identification and testimony established, respectively, by another perception, another inference, another identification, and another testimony.
Nor are the pramāṇas established by the prameyas, taken collectively or individually, each pramāṇa being established either by the corresponding prameya or by the other prameyas too.
Nor are they established accidentally. Nor again are they established by a combination of the causes mentioned before, whatever their number: twenty, thirty, forty or twenty-six.
-In these circumstances, your statement: ‘Because the things to be cognized are to be apprehended through the means of true cognition, those things to be cognized exist as well as those means of true cognition through which those things to be cognized are apprehended’, is not valid.
Complete text
Verse 1-10