In Royden's book, he gives a lemma called the simple approximation lemma which states:
Let $f$ be a measurable real-valued function on $E$. Assume $f$ is bounded on $E$; that is, there is an $M \geq 0$ for which $|F| \leq M$ on $E$. Then for each $\varepsilon > 0$, there are simple functions $\varphi_\varepsilon$ and $\psi_\varepsilon$ defined on $E$ which have the following approximation properties:
$\varphi_\varepsilon \leq f \leq \psi_\varepsilon$ and $0 \leq \psi_\varepsilon - \varphi_\varepsilon < \varepsilon$.
Now, to prove that if $f$ is a bounded function on a measurable set $E$ with finite measure implies integrability, he uses $\frac{1}{n}$ instead of $\varepsilon$; that is, he uses the following inequalities in this proof sketch
Using the simple approximation $\varphi_n \leq f \leq \psi_n$ on $E$ and $0 \leq \psi_n - \varphi_n \leq \frac{1}{n}$ on $E$.
By monotonicity and linearity $0 \leq \int_E \psi_n - \int_E \varphi_n = \int_E [\psi_n - \varphi_n] \leq \frac{1}{n} \cdot m(E)$
etc...
What I'm most curious about if $\varepsilon$ is interchangeable with $\frac{1}{n}$ and why you would use one or the other in proofs. In this case, it is not obvious for me.