成唯識論掌中樞要 2.37

2.37

破清辨似比量：宗有一分，所別不成。如論中道勝義，亦有一分違宗之失，不成，如疏中解。同喻如幻者，依俗諦如幻有二徵：如幻實事，非緣生，故能立不成；如幻似事，此宗非空，所立不成。依勝義諦，彼此二宗一切法皆不可言，非空，非不空，非緣生，非不緣生，何得以空華等為喻。同喻亦有俱不成失，名似比量。

Refuting Bhāviveka's fallacious inference: the pakṣa has a defect where a portion of the viśeṣya is unestablished. As discussed regarding the middle way and the paramārtha-satya, there is also the flaw of partially contradicting one's own thesis, which is unestablished, as explained in the commentary. In the sādharmya-dṛṣṭānta 'like an illusion', based on saṃvṛti-satya there are two interrogations: if like the actual entity of an illusion, it is not dependently originated, hence the sādhana is unestablished; if like the illusory appearance, in this school it is not empty, hence the sādhya is unestablished. Based on paramārtha-satya, in both his school and our school all dharmas are ineffable, neither empty nor non-empty, neither dependently originated nor not dependently originated; how could one use sky-flowers and the like as examples? The sādharmya-dṛṣṭānta also has the flaw where both are unestablished; hence it is called a fallacious inference.