瑜伽師地論略纂 13.3

13.3

論云「問前說種子依謂阿賴耶識」，此即初也。謂前〈本地分〉中已明第八是諸種子依，種子皆依有故。小乘諸論「未說有、有之因緣、廣分別義」者，此即第二、開三問端，為問由致。　「而未說有」者，前〈本地〉雖大乘有第八，然小乘經而未說有。一問也。　問曰：如《攝論》引小乘經中云：愛、樂、喜、習著阿賴耶。所餘經中亦如是說此言，即小乘經已有，何故言未有耶？述曰：二義。此為無者，說如薩婆多等。又然彼經雖說有，體即第六，無別所詮及餘別義，謂因緣、廣分別等。今言未有者，無別體有，非名有也。

The treatise states: "Question: Earlier it was stated that the support of the seeds is the ālayavijñāna..." This is the first part. That is to say, earlier in the Maulī Bhūmi, it was already explained that the eighth consciousness is the support of all seeds, because the seeds all exist in dependence upon it. As for "the various treatises of the Hīnayāna have not spoken of its existence, the causes and conditions of its existence, or its extensive discrimination," this is the second part, which opens the three lines of inquiry, serving as the motivation for the questions. Regarding "yet they have not spoken of its existence": although earlier in the Maulī Bhūmi the Mahāyāna accepts the eighth [consciousness], the Hīnayāna sūtras have not spoken of its existence. This is the first question. Question: As cited in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, a Hīnayāna sūtra states: "They delight in, enjoy, rejoice in, and cleave to the ālaya." Other sūtras also speak in this way. This wording already exists in Hīnayāna sūtras; why then say it has not existed? Explanation: There are two meanings. As for those for whom it does not exist, this refers to schools such as the Sarvāstivāda. Furthermore, although that sūtra speaks of its existence, its substance is merely the sixth [consciousness]; there is no distinct referent nor other distinct meanings, namely its causes and conditions, extensive discrimination, and so on. Now when it is said that it has not existed, it means that it does not exist as a distinct substance, not that its name did not exist.