唯識二十論述記 2.85

2.85

述曰：上二句，顯有分失；下二句，明無分過。初之二句，文意可知；下二句中，總有三破。若無方分應無發影，應無為障。頌第三句，有此二難，破無方分。頌第四句，破外救義。若諸聚色，不異極微，極微無二，其諸聚色應無影障。重成前義，至下當知。然舊論頌乃分為三，初二句為一；下二句各一。

The Commentary says: The first two lines show the fault of having parts; the latter two lines clarify the fault of lacking parts. The meaning of the first two lines is clear; in the latter two lines, there are three refutations in total. If it lacks spatial divisions, it should cast no shadow and present no obstruction. The third line of the verse contains these two objections, refuting the lack of spatial divisions. The fourth line of the verse refutes the opponent's revised defense: if aggregate forms are not different from paramāṇus, and paramāṇus lack both [shadow and obstruction], then aggregate forms should lack shadow and obstruction. Re-establishing the previous meaning will be known below. However, the verse in the old translation is divided into three parts: the first two lines form one part, and the latter two lines form one each.