成唯識論述記 9.239

9.239

述曰：遍計所執隨於此名，橫計於義為實有體，此非實有。於此非有中假名為義者，於非義中假立義稱，謂此但有所執之義，無隨依他之名故也，顯圓成實離名離義，不可為名之所依，故成所遍計，說之為名，不可隨名執此為實有，假立為義故，俱非二攝。《楞伽》、《中邊》所說五法，或通有、無，或體實有，遍計所執假亦通有。《瑜伽》等不然，《顯揚》十六說：計所執無，五不攝故，即五法體唯是有也。

The Commentary states: The parikalpita erroneously conceives of objects following these names as having real substances, but these are not really existent. Provisionally designating [them] as ‘objects’ in the midst of this non-existence means provisionally establishing the appellation ‘object’ in what is not an object; that is to say, it possesses only the conceptualized object, and lacks the name that follows the paratantra. This shows that the pariniṣpanna-svabhāva is free from names and free from objects, and cannot serve as the basis for names; thus, becoming that which is conceptualized, it is called ‘name’, and one cannot conceive of this as really existent in accordance with names, so it is provisionally designated as ‘object’. Hence, it is subsumed under neither of the two. The five factors spoken of in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra and the Madhyāntavibhāga either apply to both existence and non-existence, or their substances are really existent; what is provisionally designated as parikalpita is also categorized under existence. The Yogācārabhūmi and others are not so. Prakaraṇāryavācā, fascicle sixteen, states that the parikalpita is non-existent and not subsumed under the five [factors], meaning that the substances of the five factors are solely existent.