瑜伽師地論分門記 6.186

6.186

六答中第一答諸蘊善巧相分七中第七廣破唯心實有非諸心所異執之見分六。一標異執宗見。二略非彼宗。三徵。四廣破邪執。五總結。六頌攝　廣破邪執分四　一依五蘊不成就過破彼宗見　第二依分位差別不成過破彼宗見分四。一立彼宗。二略示過。三徵。四答所分二。一略答。二別釋分二。一示執有過。二示執無過　第三依因緣無差別過破彼宗見分五。一破如六識身有分位差別見分四。一立正義。二徵。三答所以。四結。二破有轉變執分四。一立正義。二徵。三答所以。四立喻。三破行別有分位見分二。一立因。二顯果。四破於一剎那有分位差別執。五總結　第四依違教理破彼宗見分七。一略標正理。二徵問。三引經證成。四廣破異執分三。一總問。二廣答分二。一依理破分二如論。二依教破分三如論。三總結。五依經答難。六明經意趣分三。一問。二答。三結。七明違教之過分四。一總標。二徵問。三列經句分二。一標。二釋分三如論。四釋經意　第五明總結　第六明以頌略攝分四如論。

Among the six answers, within the first—answering the characteristics of kauśalya regarding the skandhas—which has seven parts, the seventh, refuting in detail the divergent view holding that mind alone is substantially real and mental factors are not, has six parts: 1. identifying the tenets and views of the divergent school; 2. briefly rejecting that school; 3. questioning; 4. refuting the wrong attachment in detail; 5. a general conclusion; 6. summarizing in verse. Refuting the wrong attachment in detail has four parts: 1. refuting their tenets based on the fault that the five skandhas would not be established; 2. refuting their tenets based on the fault that the distinctions of states would not be established, having four parts: (1) setting forth their school, (2) briefly demonstrating the fault, (3) questioning, (4) answering the reason, having two parts: a. a brief answer, b. an individual explanation, having two parts: i. demonstrating that holding [them to] exist has faults, ii. demonstrating that holding [them] not to exist has faults; 3. refuting their tenets based on the fault that causes and conditions would lack distinction, having five parts: (1) refuting the view that there are distinctions of states like the six consciousness-bodies, having four parts: a. establishing the correct meaning, b. questioning, c. answering the reason, d. conclusion; (2) refuting the attachment to transformation, having four parts: a. establishing the correct meaning, b. questioning, c. answering the reason, d. setting forth a simile; (3) refuting the view that activities distinctively have different states, having two parts: a. establishing the cause, b. revealing the effect; (4) refuting the attachment that there are distinctions of states within a single moment; (5) a general conclusion; 4. refuting their tenets based on conflict with scripture and reason, having seven parts: (1) briefly indicating the correct principle, (2) raising the inquiry, (3) citing scripture to substantiate it, (4) refuting the divergent attachment in detail, having three parts: a. a general inquiry, b. a detailed answer, having two parts: i. refuting based on reason, having two parts as in the treatise, ii. refuting based on scripture, having three parts as in the treatise, c. a general conclusion; (5) answering objections based on scripture, (6) explaining the scriptural intent, having three parts: a. inquiry, b. answer, c. conclusion; (7) explaining the fault of conflicting with scripture, having four parts: a. a general presentation, b. raising the inquiry, c. presenting the scriptural phrases, having two parts: i. identification, ii. explanation, having three parts as in the treatise, d. explaining the meaning of the scripture; 5. explaining the general conclusion; 6. explaining the brief summarization by verse, having four parts as in the treatise.