瑜伽師地論略纂 3.76

3.76

「若言過者，諸極微體無細分故不可分折，取生麁物亦應是常」者，極微不可折，有體既稱常；麁物雖過本，有體亦應常。《顯揚》十四云：若過彼量者，過量之處，麁質礙物非極微成，應是常住。此意難言：極微無細分，不可折，稱常；所生麁物過量之處，餘之細分不可分折，亦應是常。且難初二合所生麁名極微，非難餘有分。若轉計言：過量之處，餘之細分，一分極微，本無今起者，是即汝計極微為常，不應道理，許新生故。《顯揚》云：若汝計有餘極微生，是則極微應非常住。或諸麁物是細極微性而得新生，本無今起，應一切極微，體皆非常。此重難前不過量義。過量義是轉計，不過量是本宗。上來合是第三段破，有三轉遮，尋文可解。

Regarding "If it is said that it exceeds it, because the substance of atoms has no subtle parts and thus cannot be divided, the coarse object produced should also be permanent": since an atom cannot be divided and, having substance, is called permanent, then although the coarse object exceeds the original, having substance, it should also be permanent. Chapter Fourteen of the Prakaraṇāryavācā states: "If it exceeds that measure, at the place that exceeds the measure, the coarse obstructive object is not composed of atoms, and should be permanent." The intention here is to object: an atom has no subtle parts, cannot be divided, and is called permanent; at the place where the produced coarse object exceeds the measure, the remaining subtle parts cannot be divided, and should also be permanent. This provisionally objects that the coarse [entity] produced by the initial combination of two is called an atom, not objecting to the remaining wholes. If they shift their position to say: at the place exceeding the measure, the remaining subtle parts, as a portion of atoms, did not exist originally and arise now; then your positing that atoms are permanent is unreasonable, because you accept new origination. The Prakaraṇāryavācā states: "If you posit that other atoms arise, then atoms should not be permanent." Or, if all coarse objects are of the nature of subtle atoms yet newly originate, having not existed originally and arising now, then all atoms should be impermanent in substance. This re-challenges the previous assertion of not exceeding the measure. The assertion of exceeding the measure is a shifted position; not exceeding the measure is their fundamental tenet. The above collectively forms the third section of refutation, having three shifting rejections; it can be understood by following the text.