成唯識論述記 9.28

9.28

The Commentary states: The latter half of the verse, namely the lower two lines, only then expounds that the pervasive-imaginative constructed nature is non-existent, because its non-existence has already been broadly demonstrated in the preceding seventh fascicle. However, as the fourth and fifth fascicles of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha state that the 'pervasive imaginator' is this first line, the 'pervasively imagined' is this second line, and the 'pervasive-imaginative constructed own-nature is thus established' is the latter half of the verse here. Above, it merely re-explained what is grasped in the first verse; from here below, it broadly explains the first verse as well as the dependent-arising nature. Below, it broadly explains the three natures in three parts; however, in the third line, it explains it together with the dependent nature. Since it states that the first line is the pervasive imaginator, the treatise next asks: