成唯識論述記 1.94

1.94

如上所說四種計執，初之二種，小、大二乘，執境、執心非無、非有。後之二種，大、小二乘，執心、執所，非多、非異。然清辨計，總撥法空，為違中道，強立唯境。諸心所現，即是唯境，有何心也？順世外道亦立唯有四大種色。若依此義，四句分別，清辨、順世有境無心；中道、大乘有心無境；小乘多部有境有心；邪見一說都無心境，總是第一別敘計也。又四句分別，有見無相，謂正量部師，不作相分，而緣境也；有相無見，謂清辨師；相見俱有，餘部及大乘等；相見俱無，即安惠等。又有別解，如《樞要》說。

As for the four kinds of clingings explained above: the first two, belonging to the Hinayana and the Mahāyāna, cling to object and mind as not nonexistent and not existent. The latter two, belonging to the Mahāyāna and the Hinayana, cling to mind and mental factors as not multiple and not different. However, Bhāviveka's doctrine completely repudiates phenomena as empty; contradicting the Middle Way, he forcibly establishes 'object-only'. Whatever is manifested by the minds is simply 'object-only'—how could there be any mind? The Cārvāka non-Buddhists also establish that there is only the form of the four great elements. If analyzed according to the four alternatives (catuṣkoṭi): Bhāviveka and the Cārvākas have objects but no mind; the Middle Way and the Mahāyāna have mind but no objects; many Hinayana schools have both objects and mind; the single school of wrong view has neither mind nor objects. All this belongs to the first, the distinct recounting of doctrines. Furthermore, analyzed by four alternatives: having the darśana but no nimitta refers to the Saṃmatīya masters, who perceive objects without forming a nimittabhāga; having the nimitta but no darśana refers to Master Bhāviveka; having both nimitta and darśana refers to the other schools and the Mahāyāna; having neither nimitta nor darśana refers to Sthiramati and others. There are also distinct interpretations, as stated in the Shunyao.