成唯識論述記 1.40

1.40

由此如來、所說正法及聖弟子皆可歸依，非餘天等。三寶、歸敬及二體性并諸門義，三寶可敬，餘不可敬，並如《瑜伽》第六十四、七十四卷，《顯揚》第六、第十三卷及《勝鬘經》、《別章》等說。此中第四亦得說敬非人、非法：法寶即非人；佛、僧非法故。雖有四義釋上二句，正取歸敬本、釋二師，於境第七說唯識性故，第四聲中說滿、分淨故，如《樞要》說。總是第一歸敬福田。

For these reasons, the Tathāgata, the correct Dharma expounded by him, and the noble disciples are all worthy of refuge, unlike other deities and the like. Concerning the Three Jewels, taking refuge, paying homage, both their essential natures, and the various analytical headings—why the Three Jewels are worthy of homage while others are not worthy of homage—all are as expounded in fascicles sixty-four and seventy-four of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra, fascicles six and thirteen of the Prakaraṇāryavācā, the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra, the Bie zhang, and other works. In this context, the fourth [interpretation] may also be said to express homage to non-persons and non-Dharma: the Dharma-jewel is non-person, and the Buddha and Saṅgha are non-Dharma. Although there are four meanings explaining the above two lines, the primary intention is to take refuge in and pay homage to the two masters of the root text and the commentary: because the nature of consciousness is stated in the locative case (the seventh case) of object, and the fully and partially purified are stated in the dative case (the fourth case), as explained in the Cheng weishi lun shuyao. This completely covers the first [topic], the field of merit to which refuge and homage are paid.