成唯識論述記 8.205

8.205

述曰：若不爾者，無色界中五種心所應無境故，既彼有境故，必以本識所變為質也，諸心、心所理例並然。然前師意各各緣自所變種子，然唯心王所變種子能生現行，非五所變，如眼根等無能生識用也，此師難曰：何故同一所緣分為二義，第八五數無本質也？前師解云：若必有本質，如第六識緣虛空時以何為質？第八心王不託五數境生，如何同本質？有說一切心必託本質方生，如緣虛空託名為本質，第八心王以五數所變相假力故，為本質起，名同所緣。

The Commentary states: If it were not so, the five kinds of caitasikas in the formless realm would lack cognitive objects; since they do possess cognitive objects there, they must take that which is transformed by the root consciousness as their archetype. For all citta and caitasikas, the principle applies by analogy. However, the previous master's view was that each cognizes the seeds transformed by itself; yet only the seeds transformed by the cittarāja can generate active manifestations, not those transformed by the five caitasikas, just as the eye-faculty and so forth have no function of generating consciousness. This master objects: Why divide 'sharing the same cognitive object' into two meanings, claiming that the five caitasikas of the eighth have no archetype? The previous master explains: If there must be an archetype, then when the sixth consciousness cognizes empty space, what does it take as its archetype? The eighth cittarāja does not arise by relying on the objects of the five caitasikas; how could it share an archetype? Some say that all minds must rely on an archetype to arise, just as cognizing empty space relies on its name as an archetype; the eighth cittarāja, by virtue of the provisional power of the forms transformed by the five caitasikas, arises taking them as its archetype, which is called sharing the same cognitive object.