成唯識論述記 1.408

1.408

述曰：難非現量得大等法第二，量云：汝之大等，亦非現量所得；多事成故，或是假故；如軍林等。前已破假，故得為因。若爾，即有一分違自宗失，此許五大中四大并五唯量，皆多事成，現量所得。此亦不然！彼執是常，宗言汝執，故無過失。

The Commentary states: The second [argument] refutes that the mahat and other principles are apprehended by direct perception. The syllogism is: Your mahat and so forth are also not apprehended by direct perception; because of being established by multiple entities, or because of being designations; like an army, a forest, and so forth. Since their nominal character has already been proven above, it can serve as a reason. If so, then there would be the fault of partially contradicting our own school, for we accept that among the five great elements, four elements along with the five tanmātras are all established by multiple entities and are apprehended by direct perception. This is also not the case! They grasp them as permanent, whereas the thesis specifies "your posits," so there is no fault.