瑜伽師地論分門記 1.107

1.107

五明計常論分三。一立彼宗見。二廣破邪宗。三明真常住相　初文分四。一總標計人。二立彼宗見分二。一標。二釋分五如論。三別簡計人分三。一計前際。二計後際。三計極微者。四明立論因由分二。一問。二答分二。一引教答。二以理答分三。一明計前際之因分六。一依靜慮。二依天眼。三依諸識流轉相續。四依梵王隨意成立。五依四大變異。六依諸識變異。二明計後際之因分二。一明起後際因。二結。三明計極微常住之因分二。一明正因。二結　二廣破邪宗分二。一略破。二廣破分二。一正破二總結。初正破分三。一破前際常住論分二。一依取蘊我破分二。一問。二破分二。依取蘊破。二依取我破。二依識滅轉破分二。一問。二破分二。一依滅破。二依轉破。二破後際常住論分二。一依想受有變異無變異破分二。一問。二破分二。一有變破。二無變破分二。一無想過。二無受過。二解釋三十二見分九。一釋有色二釋非色。三釋亦色亦非色。四釋非色非非色。五釋有邊。六釋無邊。七釋亦有邊亦無邊。八釋非有邊非無邊。九釋解脫。此九中初四釋想。次四釋邊。後一釋解脫。三破極微常住論分五。一依觀察不觀察破分二。一問。二破分二。一不觀察。二觀察。二依共相破分二。一問。二破分二。一由細。二由相異分二。一麁相不從彼生過。二極微失自相過。三依自相破分二。一問。二破分二。一依不異相破分二。一果常過。二因果無差別過。二依異相破分二。一問。二破分二。一從離散分二。一切時果生過。二因果無決定過。二從聚集分二。一問。二破分三。一不過質量。二過質量分二。一不可分折過。二麁物亦常過。三救難。四依由起造破分二。一問。二破分三。一依種子等喻破。二依陶師等喻破。三依無同喻破。五依根本所用破分二。一問。二破分二。一為有情破。二不為有情破第二總結分二。一雙結前際後際常住論。二結極微常住論　第三明真常住相分三。一標。二釋分五。如論應知。三結。

Fifth, explaining the doctrine asserting permanence has three parts: 1. establishing their school's view; 2. broadly refuting the heterodox school; 3. explaining the characteristics of true permanence.

The first section has four parts: 1. generally indicating the theorists; 2. establishing their school's view, which has two parts: (1) stating it, and (2) explaining it in five points as in the treatise; 3. separately distinguishing the theorists, which has three parts: (1) those asserting regarding the past limit, (2) those asserting regarding the future limit, and (3) those asserting minute atoms; 4. explaining the reasons for establishing the doctrine, which has two parts: (1) question, and (2) answer, which has two parts: [a] answering by citing scriptural teaching, and [b] answering by reasoning, which has three parts: <1> explaining the causes for asserting regarding the past limit in six parts: <i> relying on dhyāna, <ii> relying on the divine eye, <iii> relying on the continuous flow of the consciousnesses, <iv> relying on Brahmā's establishing at will, <v> relying on the transformation of the four great elements, and <vi> relying on the transformation of the consciousnesses; <2> explaining the causes for asserting regarding the future limit, in two parts: <i> explaining the causes giving rise to [assertion regarding] the future limit, and <ii> conclusion; <3> explaining the causes for asserting the permanence of minute atoms, in two parts: <i> explaining the correct cause, and <ii> conclusion.

Second, broadly refuting the heterodox school has two parts: 1. brief refutation; 2. broad refutation, which has two parts: (1) direct refutation, and (2) general conclusion. The first, the direct refutation, has three parts: [1] refuting the doctrine of permanence regarding the past limit, which has two parts: [a] refutation relying on the grasped aggregates and the self, in two parts: <1> question, and <2> refutation, which has two parts: <i> refutation relying on the grasped aggregates, and <ii> refutation relying on the grasped self; [b] refutation relying on the cessation and arising of consciousness, in two parts: <1> question, and <2> refutation, which has two parts: <i> refutation relying on cessation, and <ii> refutation relying on arising; [2] refuting the doctrine of permanence regarding the future limit, which has two parts: [a] refutation relying on ideation and sensation being with or without variation, in two parts: <1> question, and <2> refutation, which has two parts: <i> refutation regarding having variation, and <ii> refutation regarding lacking variation, which has two parts: the fault of lacking ideation, and the fault of lacking sensation; [b] explaining the thirty-two views, in nine parts: <1> explaining having form, <2> explaining non-form, <3> explaining both form and non-form, <4> explaining neither form nor non-form, <5> explaining having an end, <6> explaining being endless, <7> explaining both having an end and being endless, <8> explaining neither having an end nor being endless, and <9> explaining liberation (among these nine, the first four explain ideation, the next four explain ends, and the last explains liberation); [3] refuting the doctrine of the permanence of minute atoms, which has five parts: [a] refutation relying on examination versus non-examination, in two parts: <1> question, and <2> refutation, in two parts: non-examination and examination; [b] refutation relying on common characteristics, in two parts: <1> question, and <2> refutation, in two parts: <i> due to subtlety, and <ii> due to difference in characteristics, which has two parts: the fault that coarse characteristics would not arise from them, and the fault of minute atoms losing their own-characteristic; [c] refutation relying on own-characteristics, in two parts: <1> question, and <2> refutation, in two parts: <i> refutation relying on non-different characteristics, which has two parts: the fault that effects would be permanent, and the fault that cause and effect would be undifferentiated; <ii> refutation relying on different characteristics, which has two parts: <A> question, and <B> refutation, which has two parts: <I> from dispersion, which has two parts: the fault that effects would arise at all times, and the fault that cause and effect would lack determination; <II> from aggregation, which has two parts: question, and refutation in three parts: not exceeding mass, exceeding mass (which has two parts: the fault of being indivisible, and the fault that coarse objects would also be permanent), and defending against objections; [d] refutation relying on origination, in two parts: <1> question, and <2> refutation, in three parts: <i> refutation relying on the simile of seeds and so forth, <ii> refutation relying on the simile of the potter and so forth, and <iii> refutation relying on the absence of a similar example; [e] refutation relying on fundamental utility, in two parts: <1> question, and <2> refutation, in two parts: refutation regarding being for the sake of sentient beings, and refutation regarding not being for the sake of sentient beings. The second [part of the broad refutation], the general conclusion, has two parts: (1) concluding both the doctrines of permanence regarding the past and future limits, and (2) concluding the doctrine of the permanence of minute atoms.

Third, explaining the characteristics of true permanence has three parts: 1. statement; 2. explanation in five parts, as should be known from the treatise; 3. conclusion.