成唯識論了義燈 7.288

7.288

今謂本釋但是總釋圓鏡智名，圓鏡雖喻，六釋之中無從喻釋。然智及識諸相應品亦總名智，智相應故，圓鏡即智，並持業釋。除種及相定道戒等，不能現生身等影故。現雖種生，現望於種，現非種影，但由現智變帶生故，名之為智。如說識言識自相故等，然別解五法得智名者，心、心所法相應法故，隣近得名。不相應等依相應釋，即非名隣近者，亦通隣近，故下云「如是四智相應心品」。雖言各有二十二法，能變、所變，種、現俱生，而智用增，以智名顯，故餘名智，皆隣近釋。

I say now: the original explanation is merely a general explanation of the name 'Great Mirror Wisdom'. Although 'great mirror' is a metaphor, among the six types of compound there is no compound 'named from a metaphor'. However, wisdom and the various associated factors of consciousness are also collectively named 'wisdom' because they are associated with wisdom; the great mirror is itself wisdom, and both are karmadhāraya compounds. This excludes bījas, external marks, and the moral disciplines of meditation and the Path (dhyāna-saṃvara and anāsrava-saṃvara), because they cannot directly manifest and generate reflections of the body and the like. Although active manifestations arise from bījas, when active manifestations are viewed relative to bījas, the active manifestations are not reflections of bījas; merely because active wisdom transforms, bears, and generates them, they are named 'wisdom'. As when speaking of 'consciousness', it refers to the intrinsic characteristic of consciousness and so forth. Yet, in separately explaining how the five dharmas obtain the name 'wisdom', minds and mental factors obtain the name through proximity because they are associated dharmas. If one explains the non-associated and so forth based on association, then even what is not strictly called 'proximity' can also be considered proximity. Thus below it says, 'such mental factors associated with the four wisdoms'. Although it is said that each possesses twenty-two dharmas, and the transforming and the transformed, bījas and samudācāras, arise together, yet the function of wisdom is predominant, and it is made manifest by the name 'wisdom'; therefore, the others being named 'wisdom' are all explanations through proximity.