瑜伽師地論略纂 13.15

13.15

論云「又彼諸識長時間斷，不應相續長時流轉」等者，又汝若執六識持種，如入無心定時，其六轉識長時間斷，既無能持之識，不應所持之種而得相續長時流轉不生滅也。應立量云：入無心定，種子應失（宗），無識持故（因），如入無餘般涅槃界。又應立量云：入滅定時，六識長時間斷，此即無識持種。即種已失，不應而有出定相續，而復更得長時流轉，用何種生？又此以何為識持身？難破無持種子識門，兼此破入滅定時六識間斷，不應其身而得長時流轉。彼經多時無識持故，便應爛壞。相續，謂身也。若爾，與下第七破何異？既爾，取第一、第二好。

The treatise says: "Furthermore, those consciousnesses are interrupted for a long time, so they should not continue and stream forth for a long time..." and so forth. Furthermore, if you hold that the six consciousnesses maintain seeds, when one enters the mindless absorption, the six evolving consciousnesses are interrupted for a long time; since there is no consciousness that can maintain them, the seeds that are maintained should not be able to continue and stream forth for a long time without arising and ceasing. One should formulate a syllogism: Upon entering the mindless absorption, seeds should be lost (thesis); because there is no consciousness to maintain them (reason); just like entering the realm of parinirvāṇa without remainder (example). Again, one should formulate a syllogism: When entering the absorption of cessation, the six consciousnesses are interrupted for a long time; this means there is no consciousness maintaining the seeds. If the seeds are already lost, there should not be a continuation upon emerging from the absorption and once again being able to stream forth for a long time; from what seeds would it arise? Furthermore, by what would this be a consciousness maintaining the body? Under the approach of refuting the lack of a consciousness maintaining seeds, this also refutes that when the six consciousnesses are interrupted upon entering the absorption of cessation, the body should not be able to stream forth for a long time. Because it lacks a consciousness maintaining it for a long time, it should decompose. "Continuation" refers to the body. If so, how does this differ from the refutation under the seventh below? Since that is so, taking the first and second is preferable.