成唯識論述記 1.556

1.556

述曰：此為例破，如文可知。此破六句，故至和合義及九句，一一為之，并前有九，若二合等，准前應思。前破境實，非緣離識現量所得。今意正破緣離識實等智，非現量智。意明前實是非緣離識境之現量所得，後實智非是緣離識境之現量智攝。其眼識等，雖緣多色，假合而生，非緣實智，無不定失。前說和合非現量得，今遮現量者意，故不相違。准此知境六皆現量得。又解境據本計，破五非現量所得。智據末計，破六非現量智。影互顯也。

The Commentary states: This draws the parallel refutations, as is evident from the text. This refutes the six categories, extending to the meaning of inherence and the nine categories, formulating them one by one, which together with the previous makes nine; if taken in pairs and so on, it should be considered as before. The previous [argument] refuted the real object as not being apprehended by direct perception apart from consciousness. Now the intention is directly to refute the cognition grasping substance and the rest apart from consciousness as not being direct perceptual cognition. The intention clarifies that the previous substance is not apprehended by direct perception of an object apart from consciousness, and the subsequent cognition of substance is not subsumed under direct perceptual cognition of an object apart from consciousness. Although the visual consciousness and so forth grasp multiple visible forms and arise from a composite, they are not cognitions grasping substance; hence there is no fault of indeterminacy. Earlier it was said that inherence is not apprehended by direct perception, whereas now it refutes the view of direct perception; therefore they do not contradict each other. From this, one knows that all six objects are apprehended by direct perception. Another explanation is that the object is based on the original tenet, refuting five as not being apprehended by direct perception; while cognition is based on the later tenet, refuting six as not being direct perceptual cognition. They mutually illuminate each other.