成唯識論述記 6.510

6.510

述曰：訓釋辭中，汝以「末底」是慧，「毘」助之故，說慧體為疑。亦應「若南」是智，「毘」助之故，說智為識。「毘」是種種義，由助智故，變名為識，體非即智，何以助末底，疑體即慧？又如「職吉蹉」是治療義，「毘職吉蹉」是疑義，豈以毘言助之，疑體即治療？

The Commentary states: In the etymological phrasing: you hold that because 'mati' is prajñā, and 'vi' aids it, the nature of prajñā is stated to be doubt. Then by the same token, since 'jñāna' is wisdom, and 'vi' aids it, wisdom should be stated to be consciousness (vijñāna). 'Vi' means 'various'; because it aids jñāna, it changes its name to vijñāna, yet its entity is not identical with jñāna. Why would aiding mati make the nature of doubt identical with prajñā? Furthermore, just as 'cikitsā' means 'healing', while 'vicikitsā' means 'doubt', could it be that because the word 'vi' aids it, the nature of doubt is healing?