成唯識論述記 2.782

2.782

The Commentary states: This means that these seeds are stated to be substantially existent only in conventional truth, not like tathatā. Tathatā is exclusively the ultimate of ultimates; seeds are not like this, for they are not exclusively ultimate, but also pervade conventional truth, because they are logical conventionality (yukti-saṃvṛti). Now, to show the difference from the ultimate, they are said to be based only on the conventional, not that they do not extend to the ultimate. Furthermore, according to the ultimate truth of the Yogācārabhūmi and other texts, there is only the single inexpressible truth (anabhilāpya-satya); therefore seeds are designated with 'only,' for tathatā is exclusively ultimate, whereas in fact seeds also extend to the ultimate. Furthermore, within conventional truth they may be called substantially existent, but when pushed into the ultimate, they are deceptive and nominal dharmas; tathatā, regardless of which of the two truths it is in, is always real, for it is real even in the conventional ultimate based on exposition. If it is the non-established [ultimate], there is only one kind; this is an exclusivity of truth, because it does not extend to the ultimate. If one establishes four kinds of ultimate, this is an exclusivity of reality, because it is nominal within the ultimate truth. This assists the Yogācārabhūmi in harmonizing these matters; the Yogācārabhūmi has clear passages agreeing with this. This applies generally to all seeds, both with outflows and without outflows, because the principle is identical for all. The fifth is: which part of the fundamental consciousness do seeds with outflows depend on? This is the gate of differentiation among the four parts.