仁王護國般若波羅蜜多經疏 2.175

2.175

問《瑜伽論》云「一本性住種性、二習所成種性。」此經乃云「一習種性、二性種性。」何故經論前後相違？答：論中所明，先本有性，依本修習後習成性。經中所明，先明修習，習成種性，後以習成為性種性。論約本習、未習、已習；經唯修習。初習久習各據一義，亦不相違。

Question: The Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra states: 'First, the lineage abiding in its original nature; second, the lineage formed through practice.' This sūtra, however, says: 'First, the acquired lineage; second, the nature lineage.' Why do the sūtra and the treatise contradict each other in sequence? Answer: What is explained in the treatise is that first there is the originally existent nature; relying on the original, one practices, and thereafter practice forms into a nature. What is explained in the sūtra is that it first explains practice: practice forms into a lineage, and thereafter, having been formed through practice, it becomes the nature lineage. The treatise speaks in terms of original practice, what is not yet practiced, and what has been practiced; the sūtra speaks purely of practice. Initial practice and long-term practice each rely on one perspective, and thus they do not contradict each other.