Disclaimer: This translation does not guarantee complete accuracy, please confirm with the original page text.
## Samantabhadra-Bharati [Chapter 3]
"He is not separate from the lineage - his existence does not arise at all in a completely separate form."
"This convention of using the word 'ananya' (non-dual) in relation to others is not false. How can it be? The primary meaning is not convention, and convention cannot exist without the primary meaning." [44]
"If (from the Buddhist perspective) it is said that this use of the word 'ananya' in relation to others, which refers to completely different moments of consciousness that are called 'lineage', 'non-dual', 'indivisible', or 'one soul', is a convention - a fabrication or a formality, not real - then, being completely conventional, why is it not false? It is certainly false, and therefore, no entity like a lineage-soul can be established based on it. If the lineage is considered as the primary meaning, then the primary meaning is not completely conventional. And if it is considered as conventional, then convention cannot exist without the primary meaning - there is no possibility of formality without the primary. Just as a lion's picture cannot exist without the lion's essence."
"The Buddhist belief that the fourfold alternative is inexpressible due to its inability to encompass all aspects is incorrect. The truth of the difference between the lineage and the lineage-possessor is inexpressible." [45]
"If (from the Buddhist perspective) it is said that since the fourfold alternative is not applicable in all religions - it cannot be said about any religion that it is real, unreal, both real and unreal, or neither real nor unreal - because saying it is completely real..."