成唯識論掌中樞要 2.31

2.31

「我於凡愚不開演」者，無性解云：「懷我見者，不為開示，恐彼分別計執為我。何容彼類分別計執，窮生死際行相一類無改轉故」。為顯二乘定性凡夫俱生之見未除，不得為說，恐增分別見故，非得聖者不為說也。今難：若以凡夫有俱生見不為說，二乘已斷者亦應為說。若為不愚法者說，凡夫定性亦有不愚，何故不說？故知不為凡夫正說。無性雖言懷我見者不為開示，非盡理言。又此論言障生聖道、凡決定性可爾，與無性同，非聖者身更障聖道故。又雖二乘聖者不為說，多分不愚法故，非同異生，此意不為正說，非不兼說。

'I do not reveal it to the foolish'—Asvabhāva explains: 'To those harboring the view of self, it is not revealed, fearing that they would conceptually grasp it as a self. How could that sort conceptually grasp it? Because throughout the bounds of birth and death, its cognitive aspect is of one uniform kind without alteration.' This manifests that for ordinary beings of determined nature in the two vehicles whose innate view [of self] has not yet been eliminated, it cannot be taught to them, fearing an increase in conceptual views; it does not mean that it is not taught to those who have attained sageliness. Now we object: If it is not taught to ordinary beings because they possess the innate view, it should be taught to those of the two vehicles who have already severed it. If it is taught to those who are not foolish regarding dharmas, ordinary beings of determined nature also include those who are not foolish; why is it not taught to them? Thus we know it is not primarily taught to ordinary beings. Although Asvabhāva says it is not revealed to those harboring the view of self, it is not an exhaustive explanation. Furthermore, when this treatise says it obstructs the arising of the noble path, this holds for ordinary beings of determined nature, agreeing with Asvabhāva, because the bodies of noble ones do not further obstruct the noble path. Moreover, although it is not taught to the noble ones of the two vehicles, most of them are not foolish regarding dharmas, unlike ordinary beings; the intention is that it is not primarily taught to them, not that it is not taught secondarily.