成唯識論述記 3.389

3.389

述曰：言受等者，等二因之喻及初喻中受等心所法，或受可通初、後二喻。但等中喻，即以三因破彼經部，非即三和，亦得說為第二宗法，此為宗法即無妨也。此中大乘觸別有體，非即三和；經部一師說三和成觸，觸即三和，是假非實。又一師說三和生觸，觸非三和；一切有部觸雖別有，不能分別變異而生心心所等，但以受等所依為業。三部不同。

The Commentary states: When it says 'feeling and so forth,' it includes the examples for the two reasons and the mental factors of feeling and so forth in the first example; or, feeling can apply to both the first and latter examples. Merely including the middle example, it refutes that Sautrāntika by means of the three reasons: 'not identical with the coming together of the three' can also be stated as the second property of the thesis (sādhyadharma); taking this as the property of the thesis poses no obstruction. Here, in Mahāyāna, contact has a distinct substance and is not identical with the coming together of the three. One master of the Sautrāntika says that the coming together of the three constitutes contact, so contact is the coming together of the three, and is nominal, not real. Another master says that the coming together of the three produces contact, so contact is not the coming together of the three. In the Sarvāstivāda, although contact exists distinctly, it cannot discriminate modification to produce the mind and mental factors, but merely has serving as the basis of feeling and so forth as its activity. The three schools differ.