成唯識論述記 1.85

1.85

述曰：自下第三為破邪執，造斯論也。於中有三：初總舉迷謬；次別敘邪執；第三總結。此即初也。此四計中，第一、第四名迷唯識，全不解故；第二、第三名謬唯識，邪分別故。清辨計言：若論世諦，心、境俱有；若依勝義，心、境俱空。經中所言唯心等者，識最勝故，由心集生一切法故，非無心外實有境也。德光論師先小乘學，造《十地疏》，釋一心言：如言王來，非無臣從，舉勝者故，非謂唯心，便無境等。小乘、外道雖多異執，總略勝者，不過四種。

The Commentary states: The third part below is composing this treatise in order to refute heterodox clingings. In this there are three parts: first, a general mention of confusion and error; next, a distinct account of heterodox clingings; third, a general conclusion. This is the first. Among these four doctrines, the first and fourth are called being confused about consciousness-only, because they utterly fail to understand it; the second and third are called being erroneous about consciousness-only, because they discriminate wrongly. Bhāviveka holds: speaking in terms of worldly truth, both mind and objects exist; relying on ultimate truth, both mind and objects are empty. When the sūtras say 'mind-only' and the like, it is because consciousness is supreme, and because all dharmas are gathered and born from mind, not that there are no real objects outside the mind. Master Guṇaprabha previously studied the Hinayana and composed a Commentary on the Daśabhūmika, explaining the phrase 'one mind': just as saying 'the king comes' does not mean he has no retinue of ministers, it mentions the supreme one, not that 'mind-only' implies there are no objects and so forth. Although the Hinayana and non-Buddhists have many disparate clingings, summarily the prominent ones do not exceed four kinds.