瑜伽論記 2.279

2.279

第二難云：轉復羸劣而言是常不應道理者，量云：微轉劣應非是常，損減羸劣故，如拏色拏色，彼計此麁色損減無常故。若由異相，是則極微超過地水等相，不同類相故，應不能生彼類果，量云：極微應非地水等相，許異地水等相故，如心心所；又亦不能生地等果，非種類故，如心心所；又彼極微離地等外更無異相可得定非地等，非彼類故，如虛空等，此中難皆是本宗。

The second challenge says: "Becoming ever more debilitated and yet saying it is permanent is not reasonable." The formal inference (prayoga) is: An atom, becoming ever more debilitated, should not be permanent, because of reduction and debility, just like an aṇu-form; they posit that this coarse form undergoes reduction and is impermanent. If it were due to a different characteristic, then an atom would transcend the characteristics of earth, water, and so forth, and because it would not share their generic characteristic, it should not be able to produce effects of that category. The formal inference is: Atoms should not have the characteristics of earth, water, and so forth, because you accept that they are different from the characteristics of earth, water, and so forth, like minds and mental factors; furthermore, they also could not produce effects such as earth, because they are not of the same category, like minds and mental factors; furthermore, apart from earth and so forth, those atoms have no other characteristic that can be obtained, and so are definitely not earth and so forth, because they are not of that category, like empty space and so forth. The challenges here all concern their primary tenets.