成唯識論了義燈 6.169

6.169

准亦有二解：一云，既言於五取蘊觀無常、苦。通苦、集下六種行相，但言無常、苦者，舉果行相，攝集因四，准此道理，空中二解，前解亦得。一云，准文但無常、苦名無願行，即不攝集，以於果上，多計常、樂而起願求。今偏治此故，但苦下無常、苦二為無願行。云何無相心三摩地？謂即於彼諸取蘊滅，思惟寂靜，心住一緣。准此無相攝滅四行，性無相故，道四行相，非三等持，義准前解，此第三復次。

Following this, there are also two explanations: One says: since it says contemplating impermanence and suffering with respect to the five grasping aggregates, it encompasses the six aspects under suffering and arising. Only stating 'impermanence and suffering' adduces the aspects of the fruit to subsume the four causes of arising. According to this reasoning, of the two explanations concerning emptiness, the former explanation also holds. The other says: following the text, only impermanence and suffering are called the wishless practice, thus not subsuming arising; for regarding the fruit, one mostly conceptualizes permanence and pleasure and gives rise to wishing and seeking. Now, particularly to remedy this, only the two aspects under suffering—impermanence and suffering—constitute the wishless practice. "What is the signless mental samādhi? It means reflecting upon the cessation of those grasping aggregates as peaceful, with the mind dwelling on a single object." Following this, the signless subsumes the four aspects of cessation because their nature is signless. The four aspects of the path are not [subsumed under] the three samādhis. The meaning follows the previous explanation; this is the third alternative.