瑜伽師地論分門記 1.109

1.109

七明自在等乃作者論分二。一立彼宗。二廣破邪見　初文分四。一總標計人。二立彼宗見。三別簡計人。四明立論因由分二。一問。二答分二。一總答。二別答分二。一明教。二明理分四。一明造論因。二立理。三徵。四答所以分五。一依因立。二依果立。三□受。四明起邪見。五所化主　二廣破邪宗分二。一正破。二總結。初正破分二。一總問。二別破分四。一依功用破。二依攝不攝破。三依有用無用破。四依因性破。初文分二。一問。二破分二。一依功用。二依無功用。二依攝不攝破分二。一問。二破分二。一依攝。二依不攝。三依有用無用破分二。一問。二破分二。一依有用。二依無用。四依因性破分二。一問。二破分二。一依大自在。二依餘因分二。一問。二破分二。一依樂欲分二。一問。二破。二依餘因破分二。一因不可得過。二於欲無自在過。第二總結分四如論。

Seventh, explaining the doctrine that Īśvara and so forth are the creator has two parts: 1. establishing their school; 2. broadly refuting the heterodox view.

The first section has four parts: 1. generally indicating the theorists; 2. establishing their school's view; 3. separately distinguishing the theorists; 4. explaining the reasons for establishing the doctrine, which has two parts: (1) question, and (2) answer, which has two parts: [a] general answer, and [b] specific answer, in two parts: <i> explaining scriptural teaching, and <ii> explaining reasoning in four parts: the cause for composing the treatise, establishing the reasoning, questioning, and answering why in five parts: relying on cause, relying on effect, relying on […] experience, explaining the arising of the heterodox view, and the master who transforms.

Second, broadly refuting the heterodox school has two parts: 1. direct refutation; 2. general conclusion. The first, the direct refutation, has two parts: (1) general question; (2) specific refutations, in four parts: [a] refutation relying on deliberate activity, [b] refutation relying on subsumption versus non-subsumption, [c] refutation relying on having function versus lacking function, and [d] refutation relying on causality. The first [of these four] has two parts: question, and refutation in two parts: relying on deliberate activity, and relying on the lack of deliberate activity. The second, refutation relying on subsumption versus non-subsumption, has two parts: question, and refutation in two parts: relying on subsumption, and relying on non-subsumption. The third, refutation relying on having function versus lacking function, has two parts: question, and refutation in two parts: relying on having function, and relying on lacking function. The fourth, refutation relying on causality, has two parts: question, and refutation in two parts: relying on Maheśvara, and relying on other causes, which has two parts: question, and refutation in two parts: relying on desire (which has two parts: question and refutation), and refutation relying on other causes in two parts: the fault that a cause cannot be found, and the fault of lacking sovereignty over desire. The second [main part], the general conclusion, has four parts as in the treatise.