成唯識論述記 3.188

3.188

述曰：此二所依自體名事，言「所依」者，是依止義，謂相離見無別條，然各別自體。此二若無一總所依者，相離見應有，是二法故，如心與所。然無別體，但二功能，故應別有一所依體，起二用時，由有此體，故言相、見自體名事，即自證分。然小乘人心外有境，即以為所緣，大乘說無故，以彼小乘行相為大乘相分，大乘心得自緣，別立自體分即以為事，故以見分名行相，即小乘事體是見分，不立自證分，無返緣故。大、小二乘所說各別，然彼難云：刀不自割，如何心能自緣，別立自證分？

The Commentary states: The intrinsic substance upon which these two rely is called the vastu (entity). The word "that upon which... rely" has the meaning of support (āśraya), meaning that nimitta cannot exist apart from darśana as a separate item, yet each has its distinct substance. If these two lacked a single common support, then nimitta should exist apart from darśana, since they would be two dharmas, like mind and mental factors. Yet they have no distinct substances, being merely two functions; therefore there must be a separate supportive substance. When the two functions arise, it is due to the presence of this substance. Therefore it is said that the intrinsic substance of nimitta and darśana is called the vastu, which is the svasaṃvittibhāga. However, Hīnayāna practitioners maintain that objects exist outside the mind and take them as the ālambana. Mahāyāna says they do not exist; thus it takes their Hīnayāna ākāra as the Mahāyāna nimittabhāga. Mahāyāna holds that mind is capable of cognizing itself, separately establishing the intrinsic substance-part as the vastu, and therefore calls the darśanabhāga the ākāra; that is, the Hīnayāna vastu is the darśanabhāga, and they do not establish a svasaṃvittibhāga because there is no returning cognition. What is stated by Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna is distinct. However, they challenge: "A knife does not cut itself; how can the mind cognize itself, so that one separately establishes a svasaṃvittibhāga?"