Vasubandhu’s Twenty Stanzas (Viṃśikā) is among the most influential anti-Realist philosophical treatises in the history of Indian Buddhism. In particular, his refutation of the theories about the accumulation of atoms (paramāṇu) in stanza 12 if often regarded as compelling or even conclusive. But if this is the case, then the transition from stanza 12 to 13 would seem very odd, because in stanza 13 Vasubandhu bothers himself with yet another version of atomic accumulation. In this paper, I give an interpretation of stanzas 12–13 by drawing clues from the Abhidharmakośabhāṣya and Dharmapāla’s Dasheng guangbailun shilun (Taishō 1571). I argue that Vasubandhu’s refutation in stanza 12 is valid only if we assume that the only possible way atoms can accumulate is by means of physical contacts with neighboring atoms. Conversely, if the opponents do not accept this assumption, then Vasubandhu’s refutation would miss its target. Given that stanza 13 cites the theory of the Kāśmīravaibhāṣikas and seeks to refute it, we must interpret that the Kāśmīravaibhāṣikas hold that atoms can form an accumulation in which atoms do not come into physical contact with each other, because this would be the only way to deal with the challenge previously posed in stanza 12. Dharmapāla provides more details about this theory and seeks to refute it again. Assuming the same Vasubandhu to be the author of Abhidharmakośabhāṣya, in which the author deals with the same issue, we must judge that Vasubandhu himself is quite aware of the limitations of his refutation in stanza 12, and this explains why he feels the need to devote stanza 13 to further refuting the theory of the Kāśmīravaibhāṣikas. However, I also argue that Vasubandhu’s refutation of this theory fails. If my argument holds, then we must conclude that the refutation of the accumulation of atoms in the Twenty Stanzas may not be successful. This explains, at least in part, why Dignāga feels the need to find new arguments in his Ālambanaparīkṣā.

中文翻译：

---

原子积聚的三种感觉——从阿毗达磨śabhāṣya和法轮大圣广百伦诗论解读瓦苏班杜的ViṃśikāStanzas 12-13

Vasubandhu的二十节（Viṃśikā）是印度佛教史上最具影响力的反现实主义哲学论文之一。特别是，他在第 12 节中对原子积累理论 (paramāṇu) 的反驳，如果通常被认为是令人信服的，甚至是决定性的。但如果是这种情况，那么从第 12 节到第 13 节的过渡就显得很奇怪了，因为在第 13 节中，Vasubandhu 用另一种形式的原子积累来困扰自己。在这篇论文中，我从《阿毗达磨》和法轮的《大圣广百论》（Taishō 1571）中汲取线索，对第 12-13 节进行了解释。我认为 Vasubandhu 在第 12 节中的反驳只有在我们假设原子积累的唯一可能方式是通过与相邻原子的物理接触时才有效。反过来，如果对方不接受这个假设，那么瓦苏班杜的反驳就落空了。鉴于第 13 节引用了 Kāśmīravaibhāṣikas 的理论并试图反驳它，我们必须解释 Kāśmīravaibhāṣikas 认为原子可以形成一个堆积，原子之间不会发生物理接触，因为这是唯一的方法处理先前在第 12 节中提出的挑战。法轮提供了有关此理论的更多细节，并试图再次反驳它。假设同一个 Vasubandhu 是 Abhidharmakośabhāṣya 的作者，作者在其中处理了同样的问题，我们必须判断 Vasubandhu 本人非常清楚他在第 12 节中的反驳的局限性，这解释了为什么他觉得有必要投入第 13 节进一步驳斥了 Kāśmīravaibhāṣikas 的理论。然而，我也认为 Vasubandhu 对这一理论的反驳是失败的。如果我的论点成立，那么我们必须得出结论，二十节中对原子积累的反驳可能不会成功。这至少部分解释了为什么 Dignāga 觉得有必要在他的 Ālambanaparīkṣā 中找到新的论点。