瑜伽論記 13.70

13.70

第三相中，初問等如前判文，此因亦非正立第八之因，為外釋義難時，外便返問，因為通難返立本識，謂外小計識不並生意緣色時在眼識後，今破此識緣過去色境，應不明了。應立量云：眼識等後散心意識緣次過去眼等，所引境色應不明了（宗）。此言簡彼定心及獨頭意今遠緣者，今偏破過去近意識簡遠意識（因），云不定位攝緣過去故，此言又問定心，如散心中緣過去等百千劫事此是亦簡定心（泰云：）薩婆多等意識緣次五識境界，現量所收是明了識，以緣近故。

In the third characteristic, the initial question etc. is divided as in the preceding text. This reason is also not a direct reason establishing the eighth; because when the outsider interpreted the meaning and raised an objection, the outsider then counter-questioned, and taking occasion to resolve the objection, the basic consciousness is conversely established. This means that the external Hīnayāna posits that consciousnesses do not arise simultaneously, and mental cognition of visible form occurs after visual consciousness. Now this is refuted: this consciousness cognizing past visible form as an object should be unclear. One should formulate the syllogism: 'The distracted mental consciousness following visual consciousness etc., cognizing the immediately past visible form of the object introduced by the eye etc., should be unclear (thesis).' This phrasing excludes the meditative mind and the solitary mental consciousness that now cognize at a distance; here it specifically refutes the immediately past mental consciousness and excludes the distant mental consciousness (reason), stating: 'because it is subsumed under the non-meditative state and cognizes the past.' This phrasing again examines the meditative mind, like cognizing matters of hundreds of thousands of kalpas in the past within a distracted mind; this also excludes the meditative mind. (Tai says:) The mental consciousness of the Sarvāstivādins etc., cognizing the immediate sphere of the five consciousnesses, is subsumed under direct perception (pratyakṣa) and is clear cognition, because it cognizes what is immediate.