成唯識論掌中樞要 2.254

2.254

何故諸地十障皆舉小分，唯第二、第三地、第五、第六、第七、第八、第九、第十、第十一障攝二愚皆盡？攝法盡故，唯有初四地有通，有別。初地異生性本故，惡趣愚末故，此依前釋。若依後釋，即總攝盡，更不須說。第四地障身見等，不入二愚中。二愚不說為十障，有何意也？答：二愚據因前地所起，說與後為障。身見等據久遠所行，名十障。又十障據因說，身見等能起諸煩惱故。後二為果，正能障故，說為二愚，不相違也。

Why is it that the ten obstacles of the various bhūmis all cite minor parts, whereas only the second, third, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, and eleventh obstacles exhaustively subsume the two ignorances? Because they exhaustively subsume the phenomena, only the first four bhūmis have common and distinct aspects. In the first bhūmi, the nature of an ordinary worldling is the root, while the ignorance of evil destinies is the branch; this is according to the former explanation. If according to the latter explanation, then it is completely subsumed, and there is no further need to explain. The fourth bhūmi obstructs the view of self and so forth, which is not included in the two ignorances. Why are the two ignorances not stated as the ten obstacles? Answer: The two ignorances are stated as being obstacles to the subsequent [stages] based on causes arising from the preceding stages. The view of self and so forth are called the ten obstacles based on practices performed long ago. Furthermore, the ten obstacles are explained in terms of cause, because the view of self and so forth can give rise to the various afflictions. The latter two are results; because they directly obstruct, they are explained as the two ignorances; there is no contradiction.