成唯識論了義燈 5.50

5.50

問：小乘云根及作意，能勝發起，由彼勝解難，云應無窮失？彼或難汝宗作意，應亦待餘，亦有無窮失？答：以彼救言根及作意為勝發起，復由勝解，既有兩重，故應更有，故無窮失。大乘作意，能驚所餘，更無能驚，故不可難，應有無窮。若強為難，返例作意令心趣異境，作意亦應更待餘，方能趣異境。

Question: The Hīnayāna says that the sense faculty and attention are capable of predominant instigation, [and when challenged] that through resolve (adhimokṣa) this would entail the fault of infinite regress, they might challenge your school: should not attention also depend on something else, likewise entailing the fault of infinite regress? Answer: Because they defend their position by saying that the sense faculty and attention serve as the predominant instigation and this is further due to resolve; since there are already two levels, there ought to be further ones, hence the fault of infinite regress. In the Mahāyāna, attention can alert what remains, and there is nothing further that can alert it; therefore it cannot be challenged with an infinite regress. If one forcibly raises an objection, it could be turned by analogy: attention causes the mind to turn toward a different object; should attention then also depend on something further before it can turn toward a different object?