御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演 2.198

2.198

經。若是微塵眾至佛則不說是微塵眾。演曰。第四釋也。論指此文。是為無所見方便。此說有何義。若微塵聚第一義是有者。世尊即不說非聚世尊說微塵聚非聚。是名微塵聚者。以此聚體不成就故。若異此者。雖不說亦自知。是聚何義須說　演曰。此明佛說微塵與外道異。若同外道是實有者不說自知何須佛說。今既佛說明微無體。但令折觀非實故也。故唯識云。為執麁色有實體者。佛說極微令其除折。非謂諸色實有極微。彼即正釋此等文意。此約觀行勝道理故名第一義。非據真諦。又解依真名第一義。以彼極微依俗觀察入真無故若依此解。便與唯識意稍不同。思之可解。彼論釋云。若實有一物聚集如來則不說微塵聚集。演曰。釋喻同此法合意者化身假相非真佛故還同假塵。

[Sūtra:] "If this multitude of fine dust motes… the Buddha would not have spoken of a multitude of fine dust motes." / [Exposition:] The fourth is the explanation. The treatise points to this text: this is the expedient of having nothing seen. What meaning does this statement have? 'If an aggregate of fine dust motes existed in paramārtha, the World-Honoured One would not speak of a non-aggregate. The World-Honoured One speaks of an aggregate of fine dust motes as a non-aggregate, which is called an aggregate of fine dust motes, because the substance of this aggregate is unestablished. If it were otherwise, even without being spoken, it would be known by itself; what meaning would there be in having to speak of it as an aggregate?' / [Exposition:] This clarifies that the Buddha's speaking of fine dust motes differs from non-Buddhists. If they were real as non-Buddhists [claim], they would be known by themselves without being spoken—why would the Buddha need to speak of them? Now, since the Buddha speaks of them, it clarifies that dust motes have no substance, merely causing one to contemplate their reduction as unreal. Therefore the Cheng Weishi Lun says: 'For the sake of those who grasp coarse form as having real substance, the Buddha spoke of paramāṇus to cause them to eliminate and reduce it, not meaning that forms really have paramāṇus.' That precisely explains the meaning of these passages. Here, taking the superior principle of contemplative practice, it is called paramārtha, not referring to the ultimate truth. Another explanation is: relying on the real, it is named paramārtha; because those paramāṇus, observed according to convention, are nonexistent upon entering the real. If one relies on this explanation, it differs slightly from the intent of the Cheng Weishi Lun; reflecting on it, it can be understood. That treatise's commentary says: 'If there were truly one entity aggregated, the Tathāgata would not speak of an aggregate of fine dust motes.' / [Exposition:] The explanation of the metaphor is the same as this. The meaning of the application to phenomena is: the provisional marks of the nirmāṇakāya are not the true Buddha; hence they are likewise equivalent to provisional dust motes.