金剛般若經疏論纂要 1.71

1.71

前但指三事，今則心境空有，微細盡袪。故偈云「遠離取相心。」論云「不見施物、受者、施者。」無著云：「不住相想。」有人將此結文為答降伏問，非也。前標、次釋、次結皆云無住，都是修行中降伏之義，何忽偏判配結之文為答別問？

Previously it pointed only to three matters; now both mind and object, emptiness and existence, are completely dispelled down to the finest subtleness. Therefore the verse says: 'Far removed from the mind that grasps at marks.' The treatise says: 'Not seeing the given object, the recipient, or the giver.' Asaṅga says: 'Not abiding in the perception of marks.' Some people take this concluding text as answering the question on subduing [the mind], which is incorrect. The preceding statement, the following explanation, and the subsequent conclusion all speak of 'non-abiding', all of which are the meaning of subduing within practice; why suddenly assign this concluding passage exclusively to answer a different question?