瑜伽論記 20.222

20.222

問：若如後說者，何故深密解脫云如來名字？解云：外道稱自師名如來，故無有過，若解節經云大師。言若是本師假施設句；即是遍計所集、言辭所說等者，但以眾生隨名起執，於佛假施設句執有定法，故言是遍計所集乃至不成實故，非是有為。言無為者，亦墮言辭者，佛為眾生假立無為，亦墮言辭假施設句，墮名起執非無為也。設離有為無為小有所說、其相亦爾者，設如犢子部立第五法藏名不可說，不可說是有為無為，亦是假立言說施設，上來未就遍計所執以答前問。然非無事而有所說等者，由有幻等依他因緣之法緣之起說也。言無為者，亦是本師假施設句乃至其相亦爾者，亦破犢子部說不可言法藏亦但有名言。然非無事而有所說等者，由證離言法性為他假說，謂之無為。

Question: If it is as the latter says, why does the Shenmi jietuo [jing] say 'the name of the Tathāgata'? Answer: Non-Buddhists call their own teacher 'Tathāgata', so there is no fault; and the Jiejie jing says 'the Great Teacher.' Regarding 'If it is a phrase conventionally posited by the original teacher, then it is accumulated by conceptual construction, expressed by words', and so forth: it is only because living beings form attachments conforming to names, clinging to fixed entities in the phrases conventionally posited by the Buddha, that it says 'it is accumulated by conceptual construction' up to 'because it is not established in reality, it is not conditioned.' Regarding ''Unconditioned' also falls into words': the Buddha's conventional establishment of the unconditioned for living beings also falls into words and conventional phrases; falling into names and arousing attachment, it is not the unconditioned. Regarding 'Even if one were to say a little apart from the conditioned and unconditioned, its characteristic would also be the same': even if, like the Vātsīputrīyas, one posits a fifth dharma-treasury called 'the ineffable', saying it cannot be said to be conditioned or unconditioned, this is also a conventional verbal positing. Up to this point, the previous question has not yet been answered with respect to parikalpita. Regarding 'Yet it is not that there is an explanation without an underlying reality', and so forth: it is because there are phenomena of paratantra causes and conditions, like illusions, that one speaks conditioned on them. Regarding ''Unconditioned' is also a phrase conventionally posited by the original teacher' up to 'its characteristic is also the same': this also refutes the Vātsīputrīyas' assertion of an ineffable dharma-treasury as also being mere designation. Regarding 'Yet it is not that there is an explanation without an underlying reality', and so forth: through realizing the ineffable nature of phenomena, one conventionally speaks of it for others, calling it 'unconditioned.'