成唯識論述記 2.798

2.798

述曰：如眼等識異性相依，從根為名，但名眼識，即依士釋，依眼根識，名眼識也。不可說言：「識依眼故，亦名無記。」應返質云：「無漏依識名異熟，亦令從識名無記。識依於眼名眼識，應亦從眼名無記。此既不爾，彼云何然？」故無漏種不名無記，此除佛無漏，即齊義解，又有不齊釋。

The Commentary states: Just as the eye consciousness and the like depend mutually on different natures and are named after the faculty, being called simply eye consciousness—which is a tatpuruṣa compound, the consciousness depending on the eye faculty being named eye consciousness—one cannot say: 'Because consciousness depends on the eye, it is also named indeterminate.' One should counter-question: 'Without outflows depends on consciousness and is named retribution, and you would also have it named indeterminate following consciousness. Consciousness depends on the eye and is named eye consciousness; it should also be named indeterminate following the eye. Since this is not the case, how could that be so?' Therefore, seeds without outflows are not named indeterminate. This excludes the unsoiled state of a Buddha, which is explained through equal meaning; there is also an explanation of unequal meaning.