成唯識論了義燈 7.151

7.151

今謂：不爾。《瑜伽》五十五但云「又前二心法智相應，第三心類智相應」，亦無文釋。五十八云「是如、智相應類」者，釋「一心」言。意謂三心別斷，何名一心？以同緣如、智無別故，名為一心，不釋法、類。若以彼證，總名為類，無有法智。然此論云「言後聖智皆此類」者，解十六心，非是三心。三心之中，自云前二名法智，各別緣故；第三名類智，總合緣故。

I now say: this is not so. Yogācāra, fascicle fifty-five, merely says: "Furthermore, the first two minds are associated with dharma-knowledge, and the third mind is associated with anvaya-knowledge"; it has no text explaining this. Fascicle fifty-eight says "this is the category associated with tathatā and wisdom" in order to explain the phrase "one mind." The meaning is: if the three minds sever separately, why is it called "one mind"? Because they identically take tathatā as object and wisdom is without distinction, it is called "one mind"; it does not explain dharma and anvaya. If one uses that as proof, everything is called anvaya, and there is no dharma-knowledge. However, what this treatise says—"it is said that subsequent noble wisdoms are all of this category"—explains the sixteen minds, not the three minds. Within the three minds, it naturally says that the first two are called dharma-knowledge because they take separate objects, and the third is called anvaya-knowledge because it takes objects collectively.