瑜伽論記 2.233

2.233

In the third refutation: regarding ‘a self that possesses movement, etc.’: for the Sāṃkhya and Vaiśeṣika, the self has no movement because it pervades space; the Nirgrantha and others assert that the self has movement because it does not pervade space. Although the meaning of ‘agent’ is the same, the meaning of ‘movement’ is different. If a self that possesses movement performs actions, it would constantly act and should not act again; because the self is permanent, it would move perpetually and act constantly, rather than beginning to act now, and it should not act again. The syllogism is: Your moving self should have acted prior to acting; because it moves constantly; like what it does now. If a self without movement performs actions, this is illogical. The syllogism is: Your self should perform no action; because it is accepted to be devoid of movement; like space, etc.