瑜伽論記 9.266

9.266

言於自性假立、唯見自性假立者，景云：合觀名義二種自性都不稱，更互為客名為假立，所以者何，假設名言於彼義中非其行處，故名望義為客，性絕言即非名類，望名為客互為客，俱名假立。又此第三亦名雙觀真俗，名是世俗，義是勝義，所以者何？以名唯自遍計所執世俗故名屬世諦，依他圓成自性離言是勝義法，今合觀察即是雙觀真俗二諦。

Regarding 'with respect to the conventional designation of intrinsic nature, seeing only the conventional designation of intrinsic nature': Jing says: Contemplating both intrinsic natures—names and referents—together, they do not correspond at all, and mutually serve as guests; this is called conventional designation. Why is this? A conventionally posited verbal designation is not the domain of operation within that referent; therefore, relative to the referent, the name is a guest. The intrinsic nature is beyond words and is thus not of the class of names; relative to the name, it is a guest. Being mutually guests, both are called conventional designations. Furthermore, this third [investigation] is also called the dual contemplation of the ultimate and the conventional. Names are conventional, and referents are ultimate. Why is this? Because names belong solely to the conventionality of the imagined (parikalpita) nature, names belong to conventional truth; the intrinsic natures of the dependent (paratantra) and the consummate (pariniṣpanna) are beyond words and are ultimate phenomena. Now, observing them together is precisely the dual contemplation of the two truths, ultimate and conventional.