成唯識論了義燈 3.76

3.76

問：論本頌中，具有不可知執受、處了。何但問「處了」，不問「不可知」？釋中即具明不可知處了。答：有二解：一、云影略說；二、云總依於別故，但問別。釋中具辨故，通總、別。又問：但據體？答：并顯用，故不相違。

Question: In the basic verses of the treatise, 'unknowable holding-and-appropriating, location, and perception' (不可知執受處了) are all present. Why does it only ask about 'location and perception' and not ask about 'unknowable'? Yet in the explanation it fully clarifies unknowable, location, and perception. Answer: There are two explanations: 1. It is an implicit, abbreviated statement. 2. The general relies on the specific, so it only asks about the specific. Because the explanation fully distinguishes them, it applies to both the general and the specific. Another question: Does it only rely on substance? Answer: It also reveals function, hence there is no contradiction.