成唯識論述記 9.622

9.622

述曰：既無相分，其他之心、他身土等離自己體之法，不帶影像應非所緣緣，直親照彼不變為相故，不同真如，真如即是智自體故。若爾，真如應非所緣緣，無似境相故。答：不然，帶如之相起故。離自體法既無影像，不可言帶彼相起，如何說有所緣緣？彼皆離自體故。既不帶相起名所緣緣，緣色等時應緣聲等，緣色等智不帶聲等相故。

The Commentary states: If there were no sign-part, other minds, other bodies, lands, and so forth that are separate from its own substance would not be objective conditions (ālambanapratyaya) because they would not bear an image, for directly illuminating them without transforming into a sign differs from tathatā, which is the very substance of wisdom itself. Objection: If so, tathatā should not be an objective condition, because there is no resembling objective sign. Answer: Not so, because it arises bearing the aspect of tathatā. Since phenomena separate from its own substance have no image, one cannot say it arises bearing their aspect; how then could they be said to be objective conditions? For they are all separate from its own substance. If being an objective condition does not require arising bearing an aspect, then when cognizing form, it should cognize sound and so forth, because the wisdom cognizing form does not bear the aspect of sound and so on.