成唯識論了義燈 5.12

5.12

The Śāstra: "First, it is common to the mental continuum of all ordinary persons (pṛthagjana)." Ximing offers two explanations: first, it explains the continuum of grasping; second, it says that "continuum" refers to the body, and its intention favors this latter interpretation. The Yaoji also says: "This refers to the body of the five aggregates as a continuum, not to grasping and not to the mind." Now I say this is not so. The intention of this text is to reveal that the distinctions among the three states involve continuity and interruption. First it explains it generally, and later it re-examines the times of arising and non-arising. Therefore, the preceding 'continuum' explains that this accompanying intention has interruption and continuity; it does not explain its body. If one took the body of the five aggregates as the support and called it a continuum, then, just as grasping at a self also depends on the body of a noble one, why is it not called a continuum? The wisdom of equality also depends on a bodhisattva, so why is it also not called a continuum?