成唯識論述記 7.33

7.33

述曰：亦通善故，若唯癡者，如何善中乃是心、心所總數為體？應說此二染者，以癡為體，善即是無癡，相翻立故。五十五等依染分義邊，說是隨煩惱及是癡分攝。故《對法》言通善等者，顯非定癡分。如《顯揚》第一解惡作云：於善、不善事，若染、不染，追戀為體，不言無記，彼是通言故。善、染即以癡、無癡為體，又無記之中是總數，故說通無記。

The Commentary states: Since they also pervade the wholesome, if they were exclusively delusion, how could their substantial reality in wholesome states be the total aggregate of mind and mental factors? One should say that when these two are defiled, they take delusion as their substantial reality, and when wholesome, they are non-delusion (amoha), being established as opposites. When fascicle 55 and elsewhere say that they are secondary afflictions and subsumed as portions of delusion, this is based on the aspect of their defiled part. Therefore, when the Abhidharma-samuccaya says that they pervade the wholesome and so forth, it reveals that they are not determinately portions of delusion. As the first fascicle of the Prakaraṇāryavācā explains remorse: taking regretful longing with regard to wholesome and unwholesome deeds—whether defiled or undefiled—as its substantial reality; it does not mention the indeterminate (avyākṛta) because that is a general statement. The wholesome and defiled take non-delusion and delusion as their respective realities, and in the indeterminate it is the aggregate total, which is why it is said to pervade the indeterminate.