成唯識論述記 1.594

1.594

述曰：下破有三：一、破能生四大；二、破所生麁色；三、合破二。初有三量：一、有方非實難。順世極微及與衛世皆無方分，唯有圓德。然今設破若有方分，即立量云：所執極微，體應非實；有方分故；如蟻行等。彼許蟻行有方分非實有，故以為喻。文中非次，准量應知。又以佛法義徵，可有擬宜之方分故；如蟻行等。

The Commentary states: Below, the refutation has three [parts]: first, refuting the producing four great elements; second, refuting the produced coarse matter; third, refuting both together. The first has three syllogisms. First is the objection that having spatial divisions entails being unreal. The atoms of the Lokāyatas and the Vaiśeṣikas have no spatial divisions (digbhāga) and possess only spherical quality (parimaṇḍalya). However, now hypothesizing a refutation [assuming] that they have spatial divisions, one sets up the syllogism: 'The grasped atoms should not be real in substance; because they have spatial divisions; like a line of ants, and so forth.' Because they admit that a line of ants has spatial divisions and is not real, it is taken as the example. The order in the text is not [syllogistic], but should be understood according to the syllogism. Furthermore, interrogating from the perspective of Buddhist doctrine, because they can have hypothetical spatial divisions; like a line of ants, and so forth.