成唯識論掌中樞要 2.83

2.83

識種不能現取自境，可有依義者：《疏》中有二義：一云前師識種許依本識。本識具三義，可與種為所依。種果不能現取自境，果無自所緣故。異熟識與彼為依，非所依也。故說種有依，不說有所依。又解：此解識種不能與現行為所依，可有分位差別決定、為主，無有境故。可有識依義，而非識所依。上來分位差別即染、淨依，別與為名，名分位差別。

Regarding 'Seeds of consciousness cannot presently grasp their own cognitive objects, yet they may have the sense of being a reliance': In the Commentary there are two interpretations: One says that the former master allows that seeds of consciousness rely on the root consciousness. The root consciousness possesses the three criteria, so it can serve as a basis (āśraya) for the seeds. The fruition of the seeds cannot presently grasp its own cognitive object, because the fruition has no cognitive object of its own. The fruition-consciousness serves as a reliance (yī) for them, not as a basis (suǒyī). Therefore it is said that seeds have a reliance (yī), but not that they have a basis (suǒyī). Another interpretation: this explains that seeds of consciousness cannot serve as a basis (suǒyī) for actual manifestations; although they may have determinateness in status difference and act as master, they lack possessing an object. Thus they may have the sense of being a consciousness-reliance (shíyī), yet not a consciousness-basis (shísuǒyī). Above, status difference is precisely the defiled/pure basis; being given a distinct name, it is named status difference.