成唯識論述記 2.425

2.425

述曰：此下別破中有五：第一、論主別出理非，如色非詮難，色等異聲體是實有，非實能詮，名等應爾。量云：如汝所說實名、句等，非實能詮；汝許異聲有實體故；如色、香等。我宗所許名等，異聲實體無故，聲為能詮；汝許異聲有，如色非能詮。

The Commentary states: Below, within the detailed refutation, there are five parts: First, the author of the treatise specifically brings out the logical flaw through the objection that they would be non-signifying like color-form. Color-form and so forth are distinct from sound and are real in essence, yet they are not real signifiers; words and so forth should likewise be so. The formal argument (prayoga) is: 'The real words, phrases, and so forth asserted by you are not real signifiers; because you accept that they have a real entity distinct from vocal sound; just like color-form, scent, and so forth.' In our school's acceptance, because words and so forth have no real entity distinct from sound, vocal sound itself is the signifier; you accept that they exist distinct from sound, so like color-form, they should not be signifiers.