成唯識論演祕 2.319

2.319

答：正辨如《疏》。復有二說：一云非情外器自所變者，種成非現，現行非情，非內身故。若成就彼應名有情，若他所變非自種生，若種若現俱非成就。若於他身自所變者，種成非現，若成現行應自身攝。若他所變，若種若現皆非所成。一云非情及與他身自所變者，種現俱成，雖非執受攝為己體，從自種子非外起故，自識變故，不離識故，彼亦說名為可成法；他變他身外器虛空，名非可成，非自種生、自識變故。

Answer: The correct analysis is as stated in the Commentary. Furthermore, there are two explanations. One says: Regarding insentient external containers transformed by oneself, seeds are possessed, but actual states are not, because actual insentient things are not the internal body. If one were endowed with them, they should be called sentient beings. If they are transformed by others and not generated from one's own seeds, neither seeds nor actual states are possessed. Regarding another's body transformed by oneself, seeds are possessed, but actual states are not; if one were endowed with the actual state, it should be subsumed under one's own body. If transformed by others, neither seeds nor actual states are possessed. The other says: Regarding insentient things and another's body transformed by oneself, both seeds and actual states are possessed. Although they are not appropriated and grasped as one's own essence, because they arise from one's own seeds and not externally, are transformed by one's own consciousness, and are not separate from consciousness, they are also said to be possessable factors. Another's transformation of another's body, the external container, and space are called non-possessable, because they are not produced from one's own seeds nor transformed by one's own consciousness.