大乘義章 1.68

1.68

次辨其相。受法二門相對分別，如龍樹說：假法是受，實法是法。總相雖然，義猶難解，於中略以兩義分別：第一直就因和合中隨義分別，一切受法，攬細成麁、攝別成總，皆名為受；隨別細分，皆名為法。如人成眾，眾名為受。人一是法，攬陰成人，人復是受，陰復是法，如是一切。受法雖異，同籍緣成，假集義一，故通名假。二就因和、法和分別。一切因和，攬別成總，斯名受假。一切法和，苦無常等諸法相成，皆是法假。受法如是。言名假者，論釋有二：一就通以釋。前受及法二種名字，通為名假。故論說言「用其名字」。取前二法，是其名假；第二唯取受假之名，以為名假。法假之名，判屬法假。故論釋言「於多名邊更有名生，說為名假。」如五陰名邊有眾生名生，根莖枝葉華果名邊有樹名生，眾樹名邊有林名生，如是一切說名為假。體相如是（此二門竟）。

Next, discerning their characteristics: The two approaches of apprehension and dharmas are discriminated in contrast to each other. As Nāgārjuna said: provisional dharmas are apprehension, while real dharmas are dharmas. Although the general characteristics are such, their meanings remain difficult to understand; therein they are briefly discriminated through two meanings: First, directly discriminating according to their meanings within causal combination: all dharmas of apprehension, whether grasping the subtle to form the coarse or gathering particulars to form a whole, are called 'apprehension'; when finely analyzed according to particulars, all are called 'dharmas'. Just as people form a crowd, the crowd is called 'apprehension', and an individual person is a 'dharma'; grasping the aggregates to form a person, the person in turn is 'apprehension', and the aggregates in turn are 'dharmas', and so on for all things. Although apprehension and dharmas differ, they equally rely on conditions for their establishment; since the meaning of provisional aggregation is one, both are universally called 'designation'. Second, discriminating according to causal combination and dharma combination: all causal combinations, grasping particulars to form a whole, are called 'designation by apprehension'; all dharma combinations, wherein dharmas such as suffering and impermanence mutually establish one another, are all 'designation of dharmas'. Such are apprehension and dharmas. Regarding 'designation of names', the treatise explains it in two ways: First, explaining it universally: the names of the preceding two, apprehension and dharmas, are universally 'designation of names'. Thus the treatise states that 'using their names' to refer to the preceding two dharmas is 'designation of names'. Second, taking solely the names of designation by apprehension as 'designation of names', while the names of designation of dharmas are judged to belong to designation of dharmas. Thus the treatise explains: 'Alongside multiple names, further names arise; this is spoken of as designation of names.' Just as alongside the names of the five aggregates the name 'sentient being' arises, and alongside the names of root, trunk, branch, leaf, flower, and fruit the name 'tree' arises, and alongside the names of many trees the name 'forest' arises—all such cases are called designation. Such are substance and characteristics. (This completes the two approaches.)