成唯識論了義燈 3.61

3.61

《論》：若唯始起，無因緣故，應不得生。西明云：三乘初生，見道無漏，應不得生，以無現行無漏熏故。今謂此解，不依論文，又復因有自不定過，為如汝初生見道無漏，無現行而得生耶？亦有兩俱不成，三乘見道初無漏心，皆不許有，現無漏心，為能熏生，又亦自違。自初生見道無漏，亦不由現無漏熏，方始生故。

Regarding the treatise statement: "If they were only newly originated, then lacking a direct cause, they should not be able to arise": the master of Ximing says, "When the uncontaminated [mind] of the path of vision (darśanamārga) of the three vehicles first arises, it should not be able to arise, because there has been no active uncontaminated perfuming." I now maintain that this explanation does not rely on the text of the treatise. Furthermore, the reason has the fallacy of being self-inconclusive (svato 'naikāntika): is it like your uncontaminated [mind] of the path of vision when first arising, which can arise without an active manifestation? There is also the fallacy of being unestablished for both parties (ubhayāsiddha), for in the initial uncontaminated mind of the path of vision of the three vehicles, neither party admits that there is an active uncontaminated mind that acts as the perfuming cause to produce it; and it is also self-contradictory, because one's own uncontaminated mind upon first arising in the path of vision does not initially arise due to being perfumed by an active uncontaminated state.