成唯識論演祕 1.770

1.770

答：前因有決定相違過，相違量云：自七、八識應離六識有別自體；許為他識俱有根故；如眼等根。後量宗有一分他所別過，佛法不許第八與六一向相離；因亦一分他隨一過，八為六依非定異故。又俗有別，真無別故，既為似立，三支寧具？故我七、八識義得成。應更審思。

Answer: The former reason has the fallacy of a counterbalancing reason. The counterbalancing inference states: "Our seventh and eighth consciousnesses should have a separate intrinsic nature apart from the six consciousnesses; because they are accepted as simultaneously present faculties for other consciousnesses; just like the eye faculty and the like." In the latter inference, the proposition has the fallacy of being partially unaccepted regarding the subject by the other, for Buddhism does not accept that the eighth consciousness is entirely separate from the six; the reason also has the fallacy of being partially unaccepted by the other, because the eighth being the support of the six is not definitively different. Furthermore, conventionally they are distinct, whereas in ultimate truth they are not distinct; since it is a pseudo-proof, how could it be fully equipped with the three members? Therefore, our teaching of the seventh and eighth consciousnesses is established. One should reflect on this more thoroughly.