<!-- Pramāṇa, a library of Indian primary sources · https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833.2.162 -->

[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) › [成唯識論演祕](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833) › 2.162

# 成唯識論演祕 2.162

成唯識論演祕 2.162

- **Language:** Classical Chinese

### [2.162](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833.2.162)

答：對敵申宗略故不說，稍同外故。故《順正理》三十二云，極微有二，一實；二假，實謂極成色等自相，於和集位現量所得，假由分折比量所知，恐濫有宗故但說假，理實大乘亦有二也。而言聚色無極微者，亦准此知。豈於自宗無細礙色？又大乘中非由散微集成聚色，說聚色無，折聚成微義不違也。又菩薩等作水等觀，變於本質根、塵等類皆為水、火、金、銀、蘇等，何獨微觀不能變彼本質成微？若許成微，云何不許有微本質？

> Answer: When presenting the doctrine against opponents, it was omitted because it slightly resembles the non-Buddhists. Hence fascicle thirty-two of the \*Nyāyānusāra\* says: Atoms are of two kinds, first, real; second, designated. "Real" refers to the intrinsically established intrinsic nature of form and the like, acquired by direct perception at the stage of aggregation; "designated" refers to that known through inference by breaking down. Fearing confusion with the Sarvāstivāda school, it only spoke of the designated; in reality, Mahāyāna also has both. Saying that aggregated matter has no atoms is also to be understood in this way. How could our own school lack subtly obstructive matter? Furthermore, in Mahāyāna, aggregated matter is not formed by the accumulation of dispersed atoms; when it is said that aggregated matter lacks them, the principle of breaking down the aggregate into atoms is not contradicted. Furthermore, when bodhisattvas and others engage in the contemplation of water and the like, they transform the faculties, dusts, and other categories of the fundamental material basis into water, fire, gold, silver, ghee, and so forth; why then should contemplation of atoms alone not be able to transform that fundamental material basis into atoms? If one allows them to become atoms, why not allow that there is a fundamental material basis of atoms?  
> — English (machine translation) (machine translation)

- [Previous: 2.161](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833.2.161)
- [Next: 2.163](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833.2.163)
- [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833.2)

## Translations (1)

- [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833~en-mt.2.162) — English, machine translation

---
Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833.2.162](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833.2.162) · Pramāṇa
