成唯識論演祕 1.180

1.180

詳曰：依斷種言不踰本疏見道等也，豈見道等種不盡耶？又言：四地斷第六識法執少分，理恐有乖。按彼《佛地》、唯識等論，皆云四地便永斷滅，准此等文，豈唯少分？《花嚴》但言七地中勝，不言其執七地方盡，何得為證？以第四地初學二乘，五、六兩位猶效於彼。第七超彼名勝，何失？更思。

I examine [this] as follows: the statement 'in terms of severing seeds' does not go beyond the *Commentary*'s path of seeing and so on; could it be that on the path of seeing and so on the seeds are not exhausted? Furthermore, to say that on the fourth ground a small portion of the grasping of phenomena in the sixth consciousness is severed is, in principle, likely mistaken. According to treatises such as the *Buddhabhūmi* and *Cheng weishi lun*, all state that on the fourth ground it is severed forever; based on such texts, how could it be only a small portion? The *Avataṃsaka* only says that on the seventh ground it is supreme, not that its grasping is only exhausted on the seventh ground; how can it serve as proof? Because on the fourth ground one initially learns the two vehicles, and in the fifth and sixth stages one still emulates them. That the seventh surpasses them and is called supreme—what fault is there? Ponder this further.