[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) › [成唯識論了義燈](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832) › 2.45 # 成唯識論了義燈 2.45 成唯識論了義燈 2.45 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.45](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.2.45) 今者，此中且破經部師、薩婆多有對色。先破能成，次破所成。且有宗云：以七極微成一拏色，照不涉入，各各相去一微，能所俱實，即從拏色始五識得。若一一微唯意識得，非五識境，經部所緣五識境，同有部說，照能成七微是實，所成拏色是假。 > Now, here we temporarily refute the forms with resistance of the Sautrāntikas and Sarvāstivādins. First we refute the producing \[causes\], and next we refute what is produced. First, the Sarvāstivāda school says: seven paramāṇus form a single aṇu-form; their illumination does not penetrate one another, and they are separated from each other by \[the space of\] one paramāṇu; both the producer and the produced are real, and it is starting from the aṇu-form that the five consciousnesses apprehend it. If each single paramāṇu is apprehended only by the mental consciousness, it is not an object of the five consciousnesses. The Sautrāntika's cognitive object for the five consciousnesses is the same as the Sarvāstivāda's claim: the seven paramāṇus that can produce through illumination are real, while the produced aṇu-form is conceptual. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.44](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.2.44) - [Next: 2.46](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.2.46) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832~en-mt.2.45) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.2.45](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.2.45) · Pramāṇa