瑜伽師地論略纂 14.36

14.36

論解何因得知有此？「不應如響」等者，今論主云：若有色界無中有傳識，云何得生於彼？外伏難云：如谷響應，豈須物傳而能傳響者？如月影等，豈假傳來流影水裏？如緣遠處，豈假傳往？如此三事不假物傳，何容受生而藉中有？今答之云：不應如響，唯惑心亂等，次第配三。大乘如響如影，耳聞時，唯聞本聲，但意惑亂故，謂言谷中有響，如鏡中像相似。今就彼宗，故言不滅。

Regarding the treatise's explanation of how one knows this exists, stating: 'It should not be like an echo' and so forth: now the treatise master says: If the form realm lacked an intermediate existence (antarābhava) to transmit consciousness, how could one be reborn there? An opponent poses a hidden objection: Just as an echo resounds in a valley, does it require any material thing to transmit in order to transmit the sound? Just as with the reflection of the moon and so forth, does it depend on any transmission coming forth to cast its reflection into the water? Just as when cognizing a distant place, does it depend on transmitting and going forth? Since these three phenomena do not depend on material transmission, why should taking rebirth require the support of an intermediate existence? Now in answering this, it says: it should not be like an echo, which is merely a confused and disordered mind, and so forth, matching the three in sequence. In the Mahāyāna, regarding the echo and the reflection, when the ear hears, it only hears the original sound, but because the mind is confused and disordered, it claims that there is an echo in the valley, just like an image in a mirror. Here, conforming to that school's view, it is said not to perish.