成唯識論掌中樞要 2.100

2.100

所知障中，縱不善不覆二乘，名無覆；障菩薩，名有覆。又解不善心中，亦唯無記，與煩惱障不相違也。問：智障不障於二乘，即名無覆；惑障不障菩薩，應名無覆。答：聲聞唯求一果，智障故，名無覆；菩薩雙求二果，惑障故，非無覆。問：智障障菩薩，即唯名有覆；惑障障三乘，應非是不善。答：智障唯障真見，但名有覆；惑障令處生死，故通不善，又自損損他故。

Regarding the cognitive obstruction (jñeyāvaraṇa), even though [some of its aspects might be thought of as] unwholesome, because it does not obstruct the two vehicles it is designated as unobstructive-neutral (anivṛtāvyākṛta); yet because it obstructs bodhisattvas, it is designated as obstructive (nivṛta). Another explanation holds that even within unwholesome minds, it remains purely indeterminate (avyākṛta), so it does not contradict the afflictive obstruction (kleśāvaraṇa). Question: If the cognitive obstruction is designated as unobstructive because it does not obstruct the two vehicles, then since the afflictive obstruction does not obstruct bodhisattvas, should it also be designated as unobstructive? Answer: Śrāvakas seek only one fruit [i.e., arhatship]; because the cognitive obstruction [does not obstruct this], it is designated as unobstructive. Bodhisattvas seek both fruits [i.e., liberation and omniscience]; because the afflictive obstruction [obstructs this], it is not unobstructive. Question: If the cognitive obstruction obstructs bodhisattvas and is thus designated strictly as obstructive, then since the afflictive obstruction obstructs all three vehicles, should it not be unwholesome? Answer: The cognitive obstruction only obstructs true insight, so it is merely designated as obstructive; the afflictive obstruction causes one to abide in saṃsāra, so it is unwholesome, and furthermore, it harms oneself and harms others.