瑜伽論記 13.252

13.252

下通伏難。難意：論主前說賴耶為雜染因，云何復說為還滅因，於一識中障治並有，豈不相違？論主下引二經成答，初引種子經，若一識中現起解惑，兩法相違，清淨種子依一識中，理便無損，故言薄伽梵說有十八界，由於賴耶有種種界，界是種子亦是因義。又如經說惡叉，乖離故，引第二經。三藏云：西國中見惡叉子，欲似此間染靴無食子也。西國取之將染或押取油，此間無名可翻，故存惡叉。

Below, a latent objection is resolved. The intent of the objection is: The author of the treatise previously stated that the ālaya[-vijñāna] is the cause of affliction; why does he now also say that it is the cause of cessation through return? If both obstacle and antidote coexist within a single consciousness, would that not be contradictory? Below, the author of the treatise cites two sūtras to frame his response. First, he cites the Bīja-sūtra: If within a single consciousness understanding and delusion arise in present activity, the two dharmas are contradictory; but when pure seeds reside within a single consciousness, in principle there is no fault. Therefore, it is said that the Bhagavān taught that there are eighteen dhātus; because of the ālaya[-vijñāna] there are various dhātus. Dhātu has the meaning of seed and also of cause. Furthermore, as the sūtra speaks of the akṣa [seeds], because of their divergence, the second sūtra is cited. The Tripiṭaka Master says: In the Western countries, the akṣa fruit is seen to resemble the inedible nut used here to dye boots. In the Western countries they take it to dye things or press it for oil. Since there is no name here to translate it, 'akṣa' is retained.