成唯識論演祕 1.376

1.376

詳曰：此與本疏第二釋者名別意同，觀此德意，取此為勝。今取《疏》斷，所以然者，疏主躬參譯司親奉指誨，豈諸末學同年語哉！亦猶三傳演經，餘二豈與丘明騁駕？

Examination: This has different words but the same intent as the second explanation in the original Commentary. Observing this master's intention, he adopts this as superior. Now we adopt the judgment of the Commentary. Why is this so? The author of the Commentary personally participated in the translation bureau and received oral instructions directly; how could subsequent students be mentioned in the same breath? Just as with the three commentaries elucidating the Spring and Autumn Annals, could the other two vie with Zuo Qiuming?