[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [瑜伽師地論略纂](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1829) › 3.86 # 瑜伽師地論略纂 3.86 瑜伽師地論略纂 3.86 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.86](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1829.3.86) 邊無邊論，文亦有四，皆依靜慮宿住通後，方起此見。　「若依斷邊際求世邊時」等者，此觀壞劫間斷之時，不見後成，便起邊想。非我後生，故非邊見。若見成劫，不見壞劫時，起無邊想。若依十方周遍廣求時，於上下處所見極邊際，起亦有邊想；傍運神通至一二千界，不至三千，謂至無邊，起亦無邊想。由異生類神境智通不越三千，今言無邊，但傍運至一二千界，非過三千，亦不得邊。八十七說與此不同。彼云：若時憶念成劫分位，爾時便生三種妄想：若一向憶上下邊際，住有邊想；若一向憶傍無邊際，住無邊想；若上下及傍二俱雙憶起，亦有邊亦無邊想。若時憶念壞劫分位，起非有邊非無邊想，諸器世間無所得故。各舉一執，亦不相違，並是此邊無邊攝。 > Regarding the treatises on the finite and infinite, the text also has four parts; all rely on the supernormal knowledge of past lives through dhyāna before this view arises. As for "If one seeks the edge of the world relying on the boundary of cessation," etc.: when observing the interval of cessation during the aeon of destruction and not seeing subsequent formation, one gives rise to the conception of the finite. Because it is not that "I" will be born later, it is not the view of the finite. If one sees the aeon of formation but does not see the aeon of destruction, one gives rise to the conception of the infinite. If, relying on seeking broadly throughout the ten directions, one sees the extreme boundaries in the upper and lower directions, one gives rise to the conception of being also finite; and when extending supernormal power horizontally reaching one or two thousand realms, but not reaching three thousand, one thinks one has reached infinity, and gives rise to the conception of being also infinite. Because the supernormal cognition of worldlings does not exceed three thousand realms, when it is said here to be "infinite," it is only that they extend horizontally to one or two thousand realms, not exceeding three thousand, nor do they reach the boundary. Fascicle eighty-seven explains this differently. It says: when one recollected the states of the aeon of formation, at that time three kinds of false conceptions arose: if one exclusively recollected the upper and lower boundaries, one dwelt in the conception of the finite; if one exclusively recollected the horizontal infinity, one dwelt in the conception of the infinite; if one recollected both the upper/lower and the horizontal together, one gave rise to the conception of being both finite and infinite. When one recollected the states of the aeon of destruction, one gave rise to the conception of being neither finite nor infinite, because the vessel world could not be apprehended at all. Each mentions one clinging, and they do not contradict each other; both are subsumed under this finitude and infinitude. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.85](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1829.3.85) - [Next: 3.87](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1829.3.87) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1829.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1829~en-mt.3.86) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [瑜伽論記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1828.2.310) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1829.3.86](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1829.3.86) · Pramāṇa