成唯識論述記 9.123

9.123

述曰：結正也，解二句為二。若為初性及依他起合為門者，此初師結。若分三性各別明以下，解依他。由斯理趣眾緣所生心、心所體及相、見分，異生、二乘有漏、無漏皆依他起，善順聖教不違理故。解第二頌初句，及遍計所執體性非有，答問其相，二師異說有體、無體寬狹不同。辨二性，別答第二問，總是廣前第一頌訖，并解第二頌初句，因結上文，兼生下故。

The Commentary states: Concluding with the correct [position], explaining the two lines in two [parts]. If one takes the initial nature and the other-dependent together as a topic, this is the first master's conclusion. If one distinguishes the three natures separately below, it explains the other-dependent. By this principle, the substances of the mind and mental factors born from multiple conditions, as well as the nimitta- and darśana-bhāgas, whether of pṛthagjanas or of the two vehicles, whether sāsrava or anāsrava, are all other-dependent, because they properly accord with the sacred teachings and do not contradict reason. This explains the first line of the second verse, and that the substance and nature of the imagined are non-existent, answering the question about its characteristics; the two masters hold different views on whether there is substance or no substance, and their scope differs in breadth. Distinguishing the two natures separately answers the second question; this brings to a close the elaboration of the previous first verse and explains the first line of the second verse, concluding the text above while introducing what follows.