成唯識論述記 7.264

7.264

述曰：第三師說。末後有心同前第二所解，違論亦如彼說。唯初生有心與前師別，此言初生亦有識故，亦死時也。然上座部等說：彼中有亦無有心，恐此前師亦作此計，故說中有末後有心。大乘中有生支攝故，彼中有末心，必起潤生煩惱故，無想天亦有心也，彼云中有彼處攝故，第五《對法》等說：中有末心亦唯染故。若諍生有有心者今為量云。

The Commentary states: The third master’s explanation. Having mind at the very end is the same as explained by the previous second master; the reconciliation of conflicting treatises is also as stated by him. Only having mind at initial birth differs from the former master, for here it says that initial birth also has consciousness, as does the time of death. However, the Sthaviravāda and others hold that their intermediate existence is also without mind; fearing that the former master might also hold this view, it states that at the end of intermediate existence there is mind. In the Mahāyāna, intermediate existence is subsumed under the constituent of birth; the final mind of that intermediate existence necessarily arouses defilements that moisten rebirth; therefore, the heaven of no-thought also has mind, because that intermediate existence is subsumed under that place. The fifth fascicle of the *Abhidharma-samuccaya* and others state that the final mind of intermediate existence is also exclusively defiled. If debating whether the existence at birth has mind, we now formulate a formal proof: