大乘法苑義林章 5.22

5.22

Second, explaining objections: The Avataṃsaka-sūtra states: "Bodhisattvas are able to know how many atoms make up the palaces of the formless realm." The fifty-fourth [fascicle of the Yogācārabhūmi] states: "Briefly stated, there are fifteen kinds of atoms: the five sense faculties, the five sense objects, the four great elements, and the real matter included in the realm of mental objects." Authoritative teachings such as these are not singular in various places. If atoms do not exist, how are those [texts] to be reconciled? Although there is no real essential nature of an atom, as analyzed by prajñā, its measure is also established. It speaks of knowing those atoms because they are the measure analyzed [by prajñā]. The fifty-fourth [fascicle] states: "It is not that coarse matter is formed by aggregating atoms." The Cheng weishi lun states: "When the various consciousnesses transform, according to the greatness or smallness of the measure, a single image appears suddenly; they do not separately transform into many atoms that combine to make a single object." The Yogācārabhūmi also states: "When aggregated matter first arises, it arises in its entirety; when it finally perishes, it does not reach [the stage of] atoms, but perishes completely in between, like a drop of water." This shows the meaning: just as when water in a hot cauldron boils down to nothing, it does not reach a limit but all matter ends suddenly. Reading the above passage at length, and re-interpreting it: all matter ceases suddenly without reaching atoms and is completely extinguished; it is not that like a drop of water it reaches the fine limit, for when all matter finally perishes it does not even reach the limit, let alone there being real atoms to be seen. Therefore, one merely knows what is analyzed by prajñā. Furthermore, among real entities and functions there is that which is the most extremely minute, namely the aṇu; this is called an atom (paramāṇu). What flaw is there in this either?