成唯識論述記 2.618

2.618

述曰：比量應云：現在彼聚他心智等所緣之境心、心所法，非此聚識親所緣緣，他聚攝故，如非所緣，若疎所緣我不障故，此因在後，喻在於前，外道、小乘皆在此破。他聚者，謂他身，或自身中八識更相望為他聚識也。護法解云：《二十唯識》說，佛他心智所變之相，是與本質心相極相似故，勝餘之智，非謂親能取得他心，名異餘智。不爾，便有識非唯故，《二十唯識》世親自釋，及護法唯識釋，皆不言「親取」，如《二十疏》及下第七自當廣解。然上座部、法藏部等計，同聚心相應之法，亦互能緣。

The Commentary states: The syllogism (pramāṇa) should be: The phenomena of mind and mental factors that are the object conditioned by knowledge of others' minds belonging to that other aggregation at present are not the direct objective-support condition (pratyakṣa-ālambana-pratyaya) of the consciousness of this aggregation; because they are subsumed under another aggregation; just like what is not an object. For if it is an indirect objective condition (bāhya-ālambana), we do not exclude it. Here the reason comes after and the example comes before. Non-Buddhists and Hīnayānists are both refuted here. 'Another aggregation' refers to another's body, or the eight consciousnesses within one's own body viewed mutually as consciousnesses of other aggregations. Dharmapāla explains: The Viṃśikā says that the nimitta transformed by the Buddha's knowledge of others' minds is extremely similar to the nimitta of the source-object (archematter, vastuf-form) mind; therefore, it is superior to other forms of knowledge, but this does not mean that it can directly apprehend another's mind and is thus different from other types of knowledge. Otherwise, there would be consciousness that is not consciousness-only. In the Viṃśikā, Vasubandhu's own commentary and Dharmapāla's commentary on the Viṃśikā both do not speak of 'direct apprehension', as will be explained at length in the Commentary on the Viṃśikā and below in fascicle seven. However, the Sthavira and Dharmaguptaka schools posit that mental factors associated within the same aggregation can also mutually condition one another.