成唯識論述記 4.235

4.235

述曰：下徵根、法。謂眼等根、及所餘法與眼等識，一則根同，眼識等亦為次第滅根故，名意根故。亦與餘法類同，法義通故。或信等餘法，與眼等根義同。眼等根法，與非根法法類同，應互相熏。然汝不許，違自宗故，義雖通爾，以彼本計識類受熏，即眼等根是識根類，或所餘法是識法類，應互相熏，識之類故。然汝不許是此本意，若以根等與餘信等為根類同，便令相熏，失彼宗意。此法類同《攝論》亦無，彼言或應意根成造色性，與眼等根類同故。

The Commentary states: Below investigates sense-faculties and dharmas. That is, the eye and other sense-faculties and the remaining dharmas, together with the eye-consciousness and so forth, are firstly identical in sense-faculty, because the eye-consciousness and so on are also immediately antecedent sense-faculties, called the manendriya. They are also identical in category with remaining dharmas, because the meaning of dharma is universal. Or, remaining dharmas such as faith are identical in meaning with the eye and other sense-faculties. Dharmas of the eye and other sense-faculties and dharmas that are non-faculties are identical in the category of dharmas, so they should mutually perfume each other. Yet you do not accept this, because it contradicts your own school; although the meaning is universally applicable in this way, since their original assertion was that the category of consciousness receives perfuming, then the eye and other sense-faculties are the sense-faculty category of consciousness, or the remaining dharmas are the dharma category of consciousness, so they should mutually perfume each other, because they are categories of consciousness. Yet you do not accept this—this is the original meaning here. If one takes the sense-faculties and so forth and other [dharmas] such as faith as being identical in the category of sense-faculties, and thereby makes them perfume each other, that loses their school's intention. This identity in the category of dharmas is also absent in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha; it says that either the mental faculty should become of the nature of derived matter, because it is identical in category with the eye and other sense-faculties.