瑜伽論記 18.342

18.342

八、相定境色，問：上論已說定自在色何四大造。答：隨依何定心起即彼定地四大所造，今此論中即言隨彼所緣本質四大造影像色，上論又言此影像色從定心起非四大造，三處相違若為和會。解云：前說非四大造，是盡理言，以定所生色從心所起非是對礙之法，故非大造。今言從所緣色本質大造顯一影像色者，約遠緣說，由觀彼質故影像生，故作是說。前文說從能觀定心同地大造者，從彼近緣而說，謂由定心起當地四大，與影像色同時同處義說為造，理實不造，雖有三說而不相違。

Eighth, the form that is the sphere of meditative absorption. Question: The treatise above has already stated what four great elements make the form of meditative mastery. Answer: It is made by the four great elements of whatever bhūmi of meditative absorption the mind arises in reliance upon. Now in this treatise, it is said that the reflected form is made by the four great elements of the original archetype that is its cognitive object. The treatise above also said that this reflected form arises from the meditative mind and is not made by the four great elements. How are these three mutually contradictory places reconciled? Explanation: The earlier statement that it is not made by the four great elements is an exhaustive statement of principle: because form born of meditative absorption arises from the mind and is not a phenomenon of material obstruction, it is not made of the great elements. The present statement that a reflected form is manifested as made by the great elements of the archetype of the cognized form is spoken in terms of a remote condition: because the reflection arises through observing that archetype, it is spoken of in this way. The earlier text's statement that it is made by the great elements of the same bhūmi as the meditating mind that observes it is spoken from the perspective of an proximate condition: because the meditative mind gives rise to the four great elements of that bhūmi, which are simultaneous and co-locational with the reflected form, it is conceptually spoken of as "making" it, but in principle it does not actually make it. Although there are three statements, they do not contradict one another.