成唯識論述記 9.65

9.65

The Commentary states: This reconciles the second contradiction, in two parts: first, reconciliation; second, objection. This reconciles and initially objects that although all defiled minds manifest resembling the marks of what is grasped and that which grasps, they are not all minds capable of pervasive imagination. Because of the wholesome and indeterminate minds of dependent arising, although the two graspings manifest, they do not all give rise to grasping; one does not, merely because of resembling the two, judge that all are capable of pervasive imagination, for only minds possessing deliberative discrimination in which the marks of the two graspings manifest are capable of pervasive imagination. That Madhyāntavibhāga treatise speaks solely with reference to the sixth and seventh consciousnesses. If resembling the two graspings were in all cases grasping, so that the undefiled mind would not also have grasping, then the subsequent undefiled wisdom of all bodhisattvas and the two vehicles, which possesses the marks of the two graspings, should all have grasping. Fascicle seven of the Buddhabhūmi-sūtra-śāstra only says that the undefiled [wisdom] of the two vehicles has grasping; according to the commentary on the Viṃśikā, the subsequent [wisdom] of bodhisattvas also has dharmagrāha, which differs from the Buddhabhūmi. That text only says the two vehicles' undefiled state has grasping; here it merely says the Buddha lacks it, showing that the others also have it.