成唯識論述記 7.601

7.601

述曰：此無為法亦有展轉證得之義，非此所說，此說能生分別種故。言「分別」者，有漏三界心、心所法，以妄分別為自體故，隱其無漏有為不論，但染依他對心外法故，下文自例淨法亦爾。由此道理復亦不取無漏有為，一切種子於彼四果攝果不盡，並有能生彼果義，故此中說也。又解，此文為釋伏難，非成離繫，謂有難言，何故頌說種生分別，不說分別能生種耶？今答之言：亦有展轉相生之義。然以前問唯問分別從何而生，其現生種非此所說，此頌但說能生現行分別種故，然前解者順此論文。既是種子何故名「識」？

The Commentary states: This unconditioned dharma also has the sense of being realized through mutual succession, but it is not what is discussed here, because this discusses seeds capable of producing conceptual discrimination. By "conceptual discrimination" is meant the sāsrava citta and caitasika dharmas of the three realms, because their intrinsic nature is false discrimination. Concealing anāsrava conditioned dharmas, they are not discussed, but only defiled dependent nature in contrast with dharmas external to the mind; below the text will analogously state that pure dharmas are also like this. For this reason, it also does not include anāsrava conditioned dharmas; all seeds do not encompass all fruits among those four fruits, but all have the sense of being able to produce those fruits; hence they are spoken of here. Another interpretation: this text resolves a latent objection, not establishing the unconditioned. That is, an objection asks: why does the verse state that seeds produce conceptual discrimination, but not that conceptual discrimination can produce seeds? Now it answers: there is also the sense of them mutually producing each other. However, because the previous question only asked from what conceptual discrimination arises, samudācāra producing seeds is not what is discussed here; this verse only speaks of the seeds capable of producing samudācāra conceptual discrimination. Yet the previous interpretation conforms better with this text. Since it is a seed, why is it called "consciousness"?