English
English version: Among these methods, there are the 'method of subtle particles' (細末方便) and the 'method of non-perception' (無所見方便). For situations where there is a great deal of dust, the 'method of subtle particles' is used (breaking down coarse things into fine particles). The *Mahamegha Sutra* (*大云经*) says that it is about breaking down coarse dust to its most minute state. This method is used to break down coarse forms (色相). The 'subtle particles' (微尘) mentioned here are based on the Mahayana (大乘宗) view, which imagines dividing a mass of form until it is divided into extremely minute forms, which are called 'subtle particles'. This is not the 'real subtle particles' of the Hinayana (小乘宗). 2. Breaking down subtle particles through the method of non-thought (不念方便破微尘): Why is this so? If the collection of these subtle particles were truly existent, the Buddha would not say that it is a collection of subtle particles. Why is that? When the Buddha says it is a collection of subtle particles, it is not a true collection of subtle particles; it is merely called a collection of subtle particles. The *Yogacarabhumi-sastra* (*瑜伽师地论*) says that subtle particles are crushed into fine powder, so they are not in one place; subtle particles gather together, so they are not separate from each other. Therefore, the Buddha abides in the Dharmadhatu (法界), not abiding in one place, nor abiding in different places. Furthermore, if the collection of subtle particles were truly existent, worldly ordinary people would also know it themselves; why would the Buddha need to explain it? It is precisely because they do not know that its nature cannot be established that the Buddha speaks in this way. Therefore, Asanga (无著) says that the World-Honored One (世尊) says 'not' because the nature of this collection cannot be established. If it were not so, even if the Buddha did not say it, people would naturally know that it is a collection. 3. Breaking down the world through the method of non-thought (不念方便破世界): World-Honored One, the three thousand great thousand worlds (三千大千世界) spoken of by the Tathagata (如来) are not true worlds; they are merely called worlds. The meaning of the *Yogacarabhumi-sastra* refuting the unreality of the world is understandable. Asanga says that what is refuted here is the 'name-and-body world' (名身世界), which is the world of sentient beings (众生世界). 4. Simultaneously refuting the concept of combination with respect to both subtle particles and the world (俱约尘界破和合): Why is this so? If the world were truly existent, then it should be a single, unified appearance (一合相). When the Tathagata speaks of a single, unified appearance, it is not a true single, unified appearance; it is merely called a single, unified appearance. The *Yogacarabhumi-sastra* says that if there truly existed one world, the Tathagata would not speak of three thousand worlds. The *Mahamegha Sutra* says that if there truly existed one world, it should be a completely unified whole. If it were a completely unified whole, there would not be multiple differences. Now that the Buddha has spoken of three thousand, it shows that it is not a completely unified whole. Therefore, the one unified world is refuted by the three thousand. Asanga says that in order to simultaneously explain the world and the world of subtle particles, there are two kinds of 'gathering' (抟取): one is the 'gathering of the whole', and the other is the 'gathering of differences'. The *Mahamegha Sutra* says that here it is explained that the collection of subtle particles and the kinds of sentient beings are both called 'world'. 'Single unified appearance' is 'gathering'. 'Gathering' becomes a single whole, so it is called 'combination' (和合). --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
故此一合有二抟取。一者一抟取。即是世界和合为一。二差别抟取。即是微尘有众多极微。名为差别。非一合者第一义中二界无实故。五佛印无中妄执有。 须菩提。一合相者则是不可说。但凡夫之人贪着其事 论云。以彼聚集无物可取。虚妄分别故云妄取。若有实者即是正见。无著云。世谛说抟取。第一义不可说。彼小儿凡夫如言说取。大云云。执见五蕴取其和合。是贪着事迷于事法起烦恼矣○二约止观破我法二。初除我执二。初斥错解。 须菩提。若人言佛说我见人见众生见寿者见。须菩提于意云何。是人解我所说义不。世尊。是人不解如来所说义 二遣言执。 何以故。世尊说我见人见众生见寿者见。则非我见。人见。众生见。寿者见。是名我见。人见。众生见。寿者见 论云。我见虚妄分别。佛说即是不见。无著云。此显示如所不分别。云何显示如。外道说我。如来说为我见故。安置人无我。又为说有此我见故。安置法无我。如是观察菩萨入相应三昧时。不复分别。即此观察为入方便○二除法执二○初除分别。 须菩提。发阿耨多罗三藐三菩提心者。于一切法应如是知。如是见如是信解。不生法相 无著云。此显示何人无分别。于何法不分别。何方便不分别○此显示增上心增上智故 现代汉语译本： 因此，这一‘合’（samghata）包含两种‘抟取’（graha）。第一种是‘一抟取’，指的是世界和合成为一体。第二种是‘差别抟取’，指的是微尘包含众多极微，因此名为‘差别’。如果不是‘一合’，那么在第一义谛（paramārtha-satya）中，二界（dhatu）没有实体，因为五佛印（pañca-buddha-mudrā）在‘无’中虚妄地执着为‘有’。 须菩提（Subhuti），‘一合相’（samghata-lakshana）是不可说的，但凡夫（prthagjana）之人贪着于此事。《论》（Shastra）中说：‘因为在聚集之中没有事物可以获取，所以虚妄分别，因此称为妄取。’如果存在真实的事物，那就是正见（samyag-drsti）。无著（Asanga）说：‘世俗谛（samvriti-satya）说抟取，第一义谛不可说。’那些小儿凡夫如言语所说的那样去取。’《大云经》（Mahamegha Sutra）说：‘执见五蕴（skandha），取其和合，这是贪着于事，迷惑于事法，从而生起烦恼。’这里从止观（samatha-vipassana）的角度破除我法二执，首先去除我执，又分两部分，首先是驳斥错误的理解： 须菩提，如果有人说佛（Buddha）说有我见（atma-drsti）、人见（pudgala-drsti）、众生见（sattva-drsti）、寿者见（jiva-drsti），须菩提，你认为如何？这个人理解我所说的含义吗？’世尊（Bhagavan），这个人不理解如来（Tathagata）所说的含义。’第二部分是去除语言上的执着： ‘为什么呢？世尊说我见、人见、众生见、寿者见，就不是我见、人见、众生见、寿者见，只是名为我见、人见、众生见、寿者见。’《论》中说：‘我见是虚妄分别，佛说就是不见。’无著说：‘这显示了不如所分别。如何显示如呢？外道（tirthika）说我，如来说为我见，因此安置人无我（pudgala-nairatmya）。又为了说有此我见，因此安置法无我（dharma-nairatmya）。’像这样观察，菩萨（Bodhisattva）进入相应三昧（samadhi）时，不再分别，这种观察就是进入的方便。第二部分是去除法执，又分两部分，首先是去除分别： 须菩提，发阿耨多罗三藐三菩提心（anuttara-samyak-sambodhi-citta）的人，对于一切法（dharma）应该这样知、这样见、这样信解，不生法相（dharma-samjna）。’无著说：‘这显示了什么人没有分别？对于什么法不分别？用什么方便不分别？’这显示了增上心（adhisila）和增上智（adhiprajna）的缘故。
English
English version: Therefore, this 'union' (samghata) contains two types of 'grasping' (graha). The first is 'one grasping,' which refers to the world uniting as one. The second is 'differentiated grasping,' which refers to the fact that minute dust particles contain numerous extremely minute particles, hence the name 'differentiated.' If it is not a 'union,' then in the ultimate truth (paramārtha-satya), the two realms (dhatu) have no substance, because the five Buddha seals (pañca-buddha-mudrā) are falsely clung to as 'existent' in 'non-existence.' Subhuti, the 'characteristic of union' (samghata-lakshana) is unspeakable, but ordinary people (prthagjana) are attached to this matter. The Shastra says: 'Because there is nothing to grasp in the aggregation, it is falsely discriminated, hence it is called false grasping.' If there were a real thing, that would be right view (samyag-drsti). Asanga says: 'Conventional truth (samvriti-satya) speaks of grasping, but ultimate truth is unspeakable.' Those childish ordinary people grasp as the words say. The Mahamegha Sutra says: 'Clinging to the view of the five aggregates (skandha), grasping their union, this is attachment to things, delusion about the dharma of things, thereby giving rise to afflictions.' Here, from the perspective of calm abiding and insight (samatha-vipassana), the attachment to self and phenomena are refuted. First, the attachment to self is removed, which is divided into two parts. First, refuting the wrong understanding: Subhuti, if someone says that the Buddha (Buddha) speaks of the view of self (atma-drsti), the view of person (pudgala-drsti), the view of sentient beings (sattva-drsti), and the view of a life-span (jiva-drsti), what do you think, Subhuti? Does this person understand the meaning of what I have said?' World Honored One (Bhagavan), this person does not understand the meaning of what the Tathagata (Tathagata) has said.' The second part is to remove the attachment to language: 'Why is that? The World Honored One says that the view of self, the view of person, the view of sentient beings, and the view of a life-span are not the view of self, the view of person, the view of sentient beings, and the view of a life-span; they are merely called the view of self, the view of person, the view of sentient beings, and the view of a life-span.' The Shastra says: 'The view of self is false discrimination; the Buddha says it is non-seeing.' Asanga says: 'This shows what is not discriminated as it is. How is it shown as it is? The non-Buddhists (tirthika) speak of self; the Tathagata speaks of it as the view of self, therefore establishing the non-self of persons (pudgala-nairatmya). And in order to say that there is this view of self, therefore establishing the non-self of phenomena (dharma-nairatmya).' Observing in this way, when a Bodhisattva (Bodhisattva) enters the corresponding samadhi (samadhi), they no longer discriminate; this observation is the means of entry. The second part is to remove the attachment to phenomena, which is divided into two parts. First, removing discrimination: Subhuti, those who have aroused the mind of unexcelled perfect enlightenment (anuttara-samyak-sambodhi-citta) should know, see, and understand all phenomena (dharma) in this way, not giving rise to the appearance of phenomena (dharma-samjna).' Asanga says: 'This shows who does not discriminate? About what phenomena is there no discrimination? By what means is there no discrimination?' This shows the cause of higher morality (adhisila) and higher wisdom (adhiprajna). --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
。于无分别中知见胜解○于中若智依止奢摩他故知。依止毗钵舍那故见。此二依止三摩提故胜解。以三摩提自在故。解内攀缘影像。彼名胜解○云何无分别。此正显无分别。大云云。前之方便是加行智。今不分别是根本智。即亲证真如离能所取。名不分别○二显本寂。 须菩提所言法相者。如来说即非法相。是名法相 无著云。此显示法相中。不共义及相应义。如前已说。二十六断化身说法无福疑。因闻真化非一非异。意云。若就非一化唯虚假。若就非异又唯冥合归一。法身即化身终无自体。若尔即所说法受持演说无福○断之文二○初明说法功德。 须菩提。若有人满无量阿僧祇世界七宝持用布施。若有善男子善女人。发菩萨心者。持于此经乃至四句偈等。受持读诵为人演说。其福胜彼 偈云。化身示现福非无无尽福。论云。虽诸佛自然化身作业。而彼诸佛化身说法。有无量无尽无漏功德○二明说法不染。 云何为人演说。不取于相。如如不动 无著云。为说法不染故。以有如是大利益故决定演说。如是演说即无所染○云何演说等者。显示不可言说故。若异此者则为染说。以颠倒义故。又说时不求信敬等。亦为无染说法○大云云。若能不以生灭心行说实相法。则如彼真如。故曰如如。又心如境如故 现代汉语译本：在无分别中产生知见和胜解（殊胜的理解）。如果智慧依赖于奢摩他（止，samatha），那么产生知；如果依赖于毗钵舍那（观，vipasyana），那么产生见。这两者都依赖于三摩提（定，samadhi），因此产生胜解。因为对三摩提自在运用，所以能理解内在攀缘的影像，这被称为胜解。什么是无分别呢？这正是为了彰显无分别的境界。《大云经》中说，之前的方便是加行智，现在不分别是根本智，即亲自证悟真如，远离能取和所取，这被称为不分别。二是为了彰显本来的寂静。 须菩提所说的‘法相’，如来说‘即非法相，是名法相’。无著菩萨说，这是为了显示法相中不共的意义和相应的意义。如前所述，二十六种断除化身说法无福的疑惑。因为听到真化非一非异，心中疑惑：如果就非一而言，化身只是虚假的；如果就非异而言，又只是冥合归一，法身即是化身，终究没有自体。如果这样，那么所说的法，受持演说就没有福德。断除疑惑的文分为两部分。首先说明说法的功德。 ‘须菩提，若有人以充满无量阿僧祇（无数，asamkhya）世界的七宝来布施，若有善男子善女人，发起菩萨心者，持此经，乃至四句偈等，受持读诵，为人演说，其福胜过前者。’偈颂说：化身示现的福德并非没有，而是无尽的福德。论中说：虽然诸佛自然化身作业，但诸佛化身说法，有无量无尽无漏的功德。第二部分说明说法不被染污。 ‘云何为人演说？不取于相，如如不动。’无著菩萨说：为了说法不被染污，因为有如此大的利益，所以决定演说。如此演说就没有染污。‘云何演说’等，是为了显示不可言说。如果不是这样，那就是被染污的说法，因为是颠倒的意义。又说，说法时如果不求信敬等，也是无染的说法。《大云经》中说：如果能不以生灭心行来说实相法，那就如彼真如，所以说如如。又心如境如，所以无染。