成唯識論述記 6.267

6.267

述曰：下解釋外問，有六：一、問；二、答；三、難；四、通；五、徵；六、釋。此問也。若崇重善為慚，唯緣善故；輕拒惡為愧，唯緣惡故，是二之別相者，此二所緣既有異故，應不俱生。彼此二失既同，何乃偏能嘖我？我亦境別，緣自他故，不同時故。

The Commentary states: Below is the explanation of the opponent's question, which has six parts: first, the question; second, the answer; third, the objection; fourth, the resolution; fifth, the interrogation; sixth, the explanation. This is the question. If venerating the wholesome is shame (hrī) because it cognizes only the wholesome, and scorning/rejecting the unwholesome is modesty (apatrāpya) because it cognizes only the unwholesome, and these are the distinct characters of the two, then since the objects cognized by these two are different, they should not arise together. Since the faults of both of us are the same, why do you uniquely reproach me? For I too maintain that the objects are distinct, cognizing self and other, and therefore they are not simultaneous.