成唯識論述記 7.661

7.661

述曰：且答近問。如《大論》第三及九十三、《顯揚》第十八與此文同。若此識等無間，謂為緣者，彼識等決定生，此說果有，既論說言決定生故，果定當有，方得為緣。亦不定論時節久遠，入無餘心之果非決定生，故非此緣。答前遠問者，既言此識等無間，明以識為緣，諸識等決定生，明果通心所，識有等言故。果法既許通一聚法，緣亦應爾。此即料簡廢立體性也。

The Commentary states: This answers the immediate question first. It is the same as the text in chapters three and ninety-three of the Great Treatise [Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra], and fascicle eighteen of the Prakaraṇāryavācā. If this consciousness is immediately contiguous, meaning it acts as a condition, that consciousness and the like will definitively arise; this states that the fruit exists. Since the treatise says 'definitively arise', only when the fruit will definitively exist can it serve as a condition. Nor is there a fixed restriction on how distant the time may be. The fruit of the mind entering without remainder will not definitively arise, and so it is not this condition. As for answering the earlier distant question: since it says 'this consciousness and the like are immediately contiguous', it makes clear that consciousness is taken as condition; and 'the consciousnesses and the like will definitively arise' makes clear that the fruit extends to mental factors, because consciousness has the word 'and the like'. Since the fruit factors are allowed to extend to the factors of an entire aggregation, the conditions should also be like this. This is the critical examination establishing and eliminating the real entities.