成唯識論了義燈 2.60

2.60

論云：眼等識外所緣，緣理非有故。疏云：總非十八者，何也？若云：除根本部，即應十七。以一說部無實境故，應除一說及出世部，出世部說世間皆妄故，此雖可爾，出世如何？故本意說，隨古人說云，總非十八，據實二十。　若爾，一說云何破耶？執有虛妄外所緣緣，故今破之，不爾一說豈知唯識？

The treatise says: "Because external objective-conditions of the eye and other consciousnesses are not logically existent." The commentary states: "It generally negates eighteen [schools]"—why is this? If one says: "Excluding the root school, there should be seventeen." Because the Ekavyāvahārika school does not assert real objects, one should exclude both the Ekavyāvahārika and Lokottaravāda schools, as the Lokottaravāda states that the conventional world is entirely false. Although this may be so, what about the Lokottaravāda? Therefore, the original intent says: Following the ancients' formulation, it says "it generally negates eighteen," but in reality there are twenty. If so, how is the Ekavyāvahārika refuted? They cling to the existence of false external objective-conditions, and therefore are refuted now. Otherwise, how could the Ekavyāvahārika know vijñapti-mātra?