瑜伽論記 2.224

2.224

First, the interrogation says: ‘Is the awareness of a sattva arisen directly from the object seen, etc.?’ This teacher originally asserts a self separate from the aggregates; hence, the thought taking the seen form and so forth to be the self is an inverted awareness. Excluding the assertion that it is identical with the aggregates avoids this fault of contradiction with scripture, without a separate syllogism. If they assert a self distinct from the aggregates, that the self has shape and measure, etc., would be illogical. Their self distinct from the aggregates is either of the size of a finger or like a mustard seed, and therefore has shape and measure; this challenges the assertion that the self has form as being unestablished. Having superior and inferior is the function of feeling; kṣatriya, etc., is the function of conception; foolish and wise is the function of volition; grasping objects is the function of consciousness. Therefore, apart from the aggregates, there is no separate capability of this kind. The general syllogism is: The self apart from the aggregates should be devoid of the five attributes such as shape and measure; because it is accepted as being distinct from the aggregates; like the horns of a hare, etc.