成唯識論述記 4.361

4.361

述曰：後難異執。於中有三：一、申難；二、返質；三、解徵。此申難也。經說三法更互依持，餘二相續，獨識間斷，豈符正理？闕一不可，名互依持。彼說六識故言間轉，間者斷，轉者易。量云：三法中識應一類相續；三法攝故；如壽、煖二。又或應返質，壽、煖二法亦應間斷；三法攝故；如彼許識。此論主徵。

The Commentary states: Afterwards it refutes disparate positions. In this there are three: 1. stating the objection; 2. cross-examining in return; 3. resolving the query. This is stating the objection. The sūtra says that the three dharmas mutually rely on and sustain one another; if the other two are continuous and consciousness alone is interrupted, how could it accord with correct reasoning? If one is lacking, it will not do—this is called "mutually relying on and sustaining." They assert the six consciousnesses and therefore say "interruption and changing"; "interruption" means severance, and "changing" means altering. The syllogism is: The consciousness among the three dharmas should be uniform and continuous; because it is subsumed under the three dharmas; like the two, life and warmth. Alternatively, one should cross-examine in return: The two dharmas of life and warmth should also be interrupted; because they are subsumed under the three dharmas; like the consciousness asserted by them. This is the treatise master's query.