成唯識論述記 2.201

2.201

述曰：下第三段，別難實有，有二比量，此第一也。有法同前，故文不說，謂不相應行定非實有，或心、心所及色、無為所不攝故，如畢竟無。畢竟無者，即龜毛等。《瑜伽》〈思惠地〉有四種無，此即彼一。前言異等，真如與心等不一不異，故因不舉無為。今言實有為宗法，故舉無為也，簡不定失。

The Commentary states: The third section below separately challenges real existence; it has two inferences, of which this is the first. The subject is the same as before, hence the text does not state it, meaning: Viprayukta-saṃskāras are definitely not real entities; or, because they are not subsumed under mind, mental factors, form, or the unconditioned; just like an absolute non-entity. An absolute non-entity refers to a turtle's hair and so forth. The "Stage of Reflection" (Cintāmayī bhūmi) in the Yogācārabhūmi has four kinds of non-existence, and this is one of them. Previously, when speaking of "distinct" and so forth, tathatā and mind and so forth are neither identical nor distinct, so the unconditioned was not cited in the reason. Here, since "real entity" is the property to be proved, the unconditioned is cited to eliminate the fallacy of inconclusiveness.