成唯識論了義燈 2.166

2.166

《論》：微微心時熏異熟識，成厭心種。何不即於此位，立無心定，待後剎那，方名無心定，前後等故。西明云：真諦三藏但云依種立，不離前難。今說二定，依種假立，故雖成種，緣未具故，不立二定。要待心滅，方立二定。如律儀無表初成種時，緣未具故，不成無表。今謂真諦解亦無難，無心依種。初有能熏未是無心，故云依種。本為厭心，有心未立，後位方立。

The Treatise: 'At the time of the extremely subtle mind, perfuming the maturation consciousness, it forms the seed of the revulsing mind.' Why not establish the mindless attainment at this very stage, but wait for the subsequent kṣaṇa to then name it the mindless attainment, since the earlier and later are equal? Ximing says: Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha merely said it is established based on the seed, which does not escape the previous objection. Now we say that the two attainments are nominally established on the basis of seeds; therefore, although the seed is formed, because conditions are not yet complete, the two attainments are not established. One must wait until the mind ceases, and only then establish the two attainments. Just as when the avijñapti of morality first forms its seed, because conditions are not yet complete, it does not constitute avijñapti. Now I say that Paramārtha's explanation also has no flaw: mindlessness is based on seeds. At first, there is the perfumer, which is not yet mindlessness, hence it is said to be based on seeds. It originally aimed at revulsing from mind; while mind still exists it is not established, and it is established only in the subsequent stage.