成唯識論述記 3.180

3.180

述曰：下解三分，於中有二，初對十九部辨相差別；後申三分，此等即初。除大眾、正量外，皆是此也；又大眾部心得自緣，見分緣相與此等同。自緣體者則不如是，以緣自體不須別起行相，以能緣見者為行相，所緣見為所緣及事。此等取境者，彼執心外之境是所緣，心上有似所緣之相名行相，體即見分攝故，以大乘相、見分，即彼宗立名，非是彼定許有見、相分名也。《觀所緣》云：帶彼相故，即是行相，謂行於相、見分，能緣說名為事。「是心心所自體相故」，是釋「事」義；不言自體事，言「自體相」者，簡大乘事謂自證分，言自體事便濫彼故。

The Commentary states: Below is the explanation of the three parts, which has two sections: first, differentiating their marks in contrast to the nineteen schools; second, setting forth the three parts. This is the first. Except for the Mahāsāṃghika and the Saṃmatīya, all [other schools] are of this view. Furthermore, the Mahāsāṃghika hold that the mind can cognize itself, so their darśanabhāga cognizing the nimitta is the same as these; but regarding the cognizing of its own substance, it is not so, because in cognizing its own substance it does not need to separately produce an ākāra, taking the cognizing darśana as the ākāra, and the cognized darśana as the ālambana and the vastu. As for how these [schools] grasp objects: they cling to the object outside the mind as the ālambana, and the mark on the mind resembling the ālambana is called the ākāra, its substance being subsumed under the darśanabhāga. Because the Mahāyāna terms nimittabhāga and darśanabhāga are designated in that school's terminology, it does not mean that they definitely accept the names nimitta and darśanabhāga. The Ālambanaparīkṣā says: "Because it bears that mark," which is the ākāra, meaning it proceeds with respect to the mark; the darśanabhāga, which is capable of cognizing, is called the vastu (entity). "Because it is the intrinsic mark of the substance of mind and mental factors" explains the meaning of "vastu"; it does not say "the substance-vastu" but "intrinsic mark of the substance" to exclude the Mahāyāna vastu which refers to the svasaṃvittibhāga, for if it said "the substance-vastu," it would be confused with the latter.