成唯識論述記 5.140

5.140

述曰：許緣彼識見及相分，相不離見，教有成文。執我、我所論有明證，故知我境以能變之功，但屬識之見分；我所有屬他之用，但屬識境，即現色蘊，非彼種子。心所既別有體，論復不說別緣，故知識之見、相，如次執為我及我所。相、見二分俱一識為體故，不違聖說。所以者何？有我所故，明緣彼境；不離識故，明不緣所，但言「緣第八識」，故不違教。

[The Commentary states:] It is admitted that it takes the darśanabhāga and the nimittabhāga of that consciousness as cognitive objects; the nimitta is not separate from the darśana, which is explicitly recorded in scripture. Grasping at self and what belongs to a self has clear evidence in the treatises; thus we know the sphere of self, through the power of transformation, belongs only to the darśanabhāga of the consciousness; while the sphere of what belongs to a self, through the function of belonging to another, belongs only to the objective realm of the consciousness, which is the present aggregate of matter (rūpa-skandha), not its seeds. Since caitasikas have distinct substances, and the treatises do not mention taking them separately as cognitive objects, we know that the darśana- and nimitta-bhāgas of the consciousness are grasped respectively as self and what belongs to a self. Because both nimitta and darśana divisions have the one consciousness as substance, it does not contradict what the Noble One stated. Why is this? Because there is what belongs to a self, it is clear that it takes that objective realm as cognitive object; because they are not separate from consciousness, it is clear that it does not take caitasikas as cognitive object; it merely says 'takes the eighth consciousness as cognitive object', so there is no contradiction of scripture.