成唯識論述記 5.607

5.607

述曰：下顯差別有三：一、彰二別明識有、無；二、引證；三、大小異。此初也。此總凡解，不共無明顯此識者，「一、恒行不共」，此七俱是；今此所諍，「餘識無也」。其第二，「獨行不共」，則與忿等相應起，故名為獨行；或不與餘俱起，無明獨迷諦理。此識非有，為成此後所說無明。

The Commentary states: Below, revealing the distinction has three parts: 1. Making clear the two distinctions and explaining the presence and absence in consciousnesses; 2. Citing proof; 3. Differences between Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna. This is the first. This is a general explanation: To reveal this consciousness, unshared ignorance is, first, 'constantly-active unshared', which is associated with this seventh; what is now disputed is that 'the other consciousnesses lack it'. The second is 'solitary-active unshared', which arises in association with anger and the like, and hence is called solitary-active; or it does not arise together with others, but ignorance alone is confused about the truth principles. This consciousness does not possess it, in order to establish the ignorance spoken of hereafter.