成唯識論述記 2.114

2.114

述曰：以此極微體即是分而體有方，故言極微猶有方分。或復分者，謂有二義；一、方之分；二、方即分。麁具二種，細唯後一，方即是分，故無有失。若更折之便心相變似虛空現，不作色相現，所折之物即非極微。極微細故，故不可折，非如心等，故有方分。方即分故，非更有分。《瑜伽》說云，極微有方無分者，更無細分，故不相違，以此微相與空相隣故。諸經論皆說極微是色邊際，邊際者是窮盡義，過此更折便為非色，然此分別如《對法》第一、《瑜伽》第三、五十四等說。五十四說，非肉、天眼境，唯餘三眼境，唯惠折之，非實有故。

The Commentary states: Because the substance of this atom is itself a spatial part and its substance has spatial extension, it is said that the atom still has spatial parts. Or alternatively, 'part' has two meanings: first, a part of a spatial region; second, the spatial region is itself the part. Coarse [matter] possesses both kinds; subtle [matter] has only the latter—spatial region is itself the part—so there is no error. If one were to divide it further, the mental image would transform into an appearance resembling empty space and would not appear as the characteristic of form; what is divided would then not be an atom. Because the atom is subtle, it cannot be divided; yet unlike mind and the like, it has spatial parts. Because the spatial region is itself the part, it does not have further parts. When the Yogācārabhūmi states that an atom has spatial extension but no parts, it means it has no further finer parts, and thus there is no contradiction, because this subtle mark borders on empty space. All sūtras and treatises say that the atom is the limit of form; 'limit' means the point of exhaustion, beyond which further division becomes non-form. This analysis is explained in the first fascicle of the Abhidharma-samuccaya, and the third and fifty-fourth fascicles of the Yogācārabhūmi, etc. The fifty-fourth fascicle states that it is not the realm of the physical or divine eyes, but only the realm of the remaining three eyes, being divided only by wisdom, as it is not an actual existent entity.