成唯識論述記 6.301

6.301

述曰：此會違也。「惠為體」者，舉無癡之因果，以顯無癡。無癡之因及果皆通四惠，或是俱時，或是別念；此是等流、增上、士用果故；如彼論解信中，亦以忍、樂即勝解、欲。舉信因果以解信故，無癡亦然，以為同喻，理必應然。以四惠為因果而表無癡，所以者何。

The Commentary states: This is reconciling the contradiction. "Taking wisdom as its entity" adduces the cause and fruit of non-delusion to reveal non-delusion. The cause and fruit of non-delusion both extend across the four types of wisdom, either simultaneously or in different moments; this is because they are outflow (*niṣyanda*), sovereign (*adhipati*), and virile (*puruṣakāra*) fruits. Just as that treatise, in explaining faith (śraddhā), also uses assent and wish, namely resolution (adhimokṣa) and desire (chanda)—adducing the cause and fruit of faith to explain faith—so too is non-delusion. Taking this as a parallel example, reason definitely dictates that it must be so, designating non-delusion by taking the four wisdoms as its cause and fruit. Why is this?