成唯識論演祕 1.875

1.875

詳曰：或但如《疏》亦不交加。言共非一者，有、同異性與所有法而非是一，如似共相與所相法而非是一，假、實、能、所種種異故。言別非異者，有、同異性異其所有，別別法外而無有體，體即彼故，故名不異。似佛法中所有共相，故言如共。有說：以無別故，故稱為一；義差別故，復言亦異，如內宗中水波等喻，大意同疏。

I examine [this and suggest]: Or it may simply follow the Commentary without any chiasmus. The statement that 'the common is not identical' means that the existence-nature and identity-difference-nature are not identical with the possessor-phenomena, just as a common characteristic is not identical with the phenomena characterized, because they are variously different in being nominal, real, active, or passive. The statement that 'the distinct is not different' means that the existence-nature and identity-difference-nature, being different from their possessors, have no substance outside the several distinct phenomena, for their substance is precisely those [phenomena]; hence they are called 'not different.' They resemble the common characteristics found in Buddhist teaching; hence it says 'like the common.' Some say: because they are not distinct, they are called 'identical'; because their senses differ, they are also said to be 'different,' as in the inner school's metaphor of water and waves, the general idea being the same as in the Commentary.