瑜伽師地論分門記 1.104

1.104

二明從緣顯了論分二　一立彼宗見分二。一明標宗計人。二明立論因由分二。一問。二答分二。一總答。二別釋分二。一教。二理分五。一明立論因。二非前宗。三立自宗。四答難分二。一問。二答。五結　二廣破邪見分二。一破顯了宗。二破聲論見。初破顯了宗分六。一有障無障理破分二。一問。二非分二。一無障。二有障分三。一破。二喻。三重破。二有相果相理破分二。一問。二非分二。一有性。二果性分二。一破。二喻。三顯異顯異理破分二。一問。二非分二。一顯不異過。二顯異過分二。一問。二破分二。一無因過。二有因過。四總結。五非邪宗見。六說正義分二。一標。二釋分六。一遠。二四障。三微細。四散亂。五根壞。六未得相應智。二破聲論見分三。一破邪見。二明差別。三結。

Second, explaining the doctrine of manifestation through conditions has two parts: 1. Stating their view, which has two parts: (1) Explaining those who identify and uphold the doctrine; (2) Explaining the reasons for establishing the doctrine, which has two parts: [a] Question; [b] Answer, which has two parts: <i> General answer; <ii> Detailed explanation, which has two parts: <A> Scriptural authority; <B> Reasoning, which has five parts: {i} Explaining the reasons for establishing the doctrine; {ii} Negating the preceding thesis; {iii} Establishing one's own thesis; {iv} Answering objections, which has two parts: a. Question; b. Answer; {v} Conclusion; 2. Extensively refuting the heterodox view, which has two parts: (1) Refuting the doctrine of manifestation; (2) Refuting the view of the Śabda theorists. First, refuting the doctrine of manifestation has six parts: [a] Refuting through the logic of having obstacles versus lacking obstacles, which has two parts: <i> Question; <ii> Negation, which has two parts: <A> Lacking obstacles; <B> Having obstacles, which has three parts: {i} Refutation; {ii} Analogy; {iii} Re-refutation; [b] Refuting through the logic of having the characteristic of the existent versus the characteristic of the fruit, which has two parts: <i> Question; <ii> Negation, which has two parts: <A> Nature of being; <B> Nature of fruit, which has two parts: {i} Refutation; {ii} Analogy; [c] Refuting through the logic of manifestation being different versus manifestation being non-different, which has two parts: <i> Question; <ii> Negation, which has two parts: <A> The flaw of manifestation not being different; <B> The flaw of manifestation being different, which has two parts: {i} Question; {ii} Refutation, which has two parts: a. The flaw of causelessness; b. The flaw of having a cause; [d] General conclusion; [e] Negating the heterodox view; [f] Stating the correct meaning, which has two parts: <i> Presentation; <ii> Explanation, which has six parts: <A> Remoteness; <B> Four obstacles; <C> Subtlety; <D> Distraction; <E> Impairment of faculties; <F> Not having attained concordant knowledge; (2) Refuting the view of the Śabda theorists, which has three parts: [a] Refuting the heterodox view; [b] Explaining distinctions; [c] Conclusion.