大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 79.66

79.66

疏「又心既是無」下，第二縱破。縱汝心無智有，亦有二過：一違義。心王最勝尚說為無，智無所依豈當獨立？如無君主，何有臣下？二「非唯」下，明其違文。言「上二論」者，即《唯識》、《攝論》言。《涅槃》滅無常則通五蘊，故經云「憍陳如！因滅無常色而獲常色，受想行識亦復如是。」既有常識則有心矣。

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Furthermore, since mind is absent..." downward: this is the second, the concessionary refutation. Conceding that for you mind is absent and cognition exists, there are still two faults: First, a contradiction in meaning. If the mind-king, which is supreme, is spoken of as absent, how could cognition, having nothing upon which to rely, stand independently? Just as without a sovereign, how could there be ministers? Second, from "Not only..." downward, it shows its contradiction with the text. The phrase "the above two treatises" refers to the statements of the Vijñaptimātratā-siddhi and the Mahāyānasaṃgraha. In the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, the cessation of the impermanent applies to all five aggregates; hence the sūtra says: "Kauṇḍinya! By ceasing impermanent form one obtains permanent form; sensation, perception, formations, and consciousness are likewise." Since there is permanent consciousness, there is mind.