瑜伽論記 20.243

20.243

第三復次，若行與勝義一者應同勝義，無有差別。若爾，已見諸行即為最竟，不後更求勝義，勝義與行而不異故。若一向異者，不應就行明無我性是勝義也。又應俱時別相成立，謂雜染相及清淨相者，勝義與行超然有異，是即見勝義時應不除染，見染行時應不障淨，順說可說。

In the third further exposition: if conditioned formations and the ultimate truth were identical, they would be identical to the ultimate truth, without any distinction. If so, having already seen conditioned formations would be the ultimate end, and one would not subsequently seek the ultimate truth, because the ultimate truth and conditioned formations would not be different. If they were utterly different, one should not explain that the nature of selflessness based on conditioned formations is the ultimate truth. Furthermore, they would be established at the same time with distinct characteristics—namely, the characteristic of defilement and the characteristic of purity—the ultimate truth and conditioned formations being transcendentally different; and thus, when seeing the ultimate truth one would not eliminate defilement, and when seeing defiled conditioned formations one would not obstruct purity. The direct exposition is easy to explain.