成唯識論述記 1.376

1.376

述曰：此有二量：我既常有，誰能作、受？言變易者，是體改轉，無常之義。量云：汝我應不能作業、受果；許無變易故，許體常故；如虛空等。諸執我常，皆無變易。今設遮計，亦得；若用轉變，令體無常，亦得。若用有變易，汝所執我，應體無常；許用變易故；如色聲等。若破僧佉，令體亦轉變，或隨卷舒，名為變易，故應無常。或是設遮。

The Commentary states: Here there are two syllogisms: Since your self is permanent, who can act and experience? Saying 'change' means alteration of substance, the meaning of impermanence. The syllogism: 'Your self should be unable to perform karma and experience fruit; because it is admitted to be without change, and its substance is admitted to be permanent; like empty space, and the like.' All who grasp a permanent self hold that it is without change. Now, hypothetically warding off their imputation is also acceptable; if the function changes, causing the substance to be impermanent, that is also acceptable. 'If the function has change, the self you grasp should have an impermanent substance; because its function is admitted to change; like form, sound, and the like.' If refuting the Sāṃkhyas, causing the substance also to alter, or following contraction and expansion, it is called change, and therefore it should be impermanent. Or it is a hypothetical warding off.