成唯識論演祕 3.374

3.374

答：亦無違，不親緣故。若言親用而方變者，第八不應變他扶塵，六亦不變菩薩魚等，非親用故。若許親用，便非唯識，又論明言定通等力，界地自他而不決定，何強分別致有多違，可謂與蛇而安足矣。又云上來作欲界化，下見自地，理亦不然。言作欲化，似欲界故，實上地繫，欲界地法無修得化，如下當辨。

Answer: There is also no contradiction, because it does not directly cognize it. If one were to say that it only transforms when directly using [an object], the eighth consciousness ought not to transform another's supporting matter, nor would the six [consciousnesses] transform the bodhisattva's fish and the like, since they are not directly used. If one were to permit direct use, that would not be vijñapti-mātra. Furthermore, the Treatise states clearly that by the power of meditative concentration, supernormal powers, and the like, the realm, plane, self, and other are not determinate. Why forcefully make distinctions that lead to many contradictions? This could be called 'adding legs to a snake.' Again, the claim that one from above comes to produce an apparition of the desire realm so that those below see their own plane is also unreasonable. Calling it an 'apparition of the desire realm' is because it resembles the desire realm; in reality, it is bound to the upper plane, for the dharmas of the desire realm have no apparitions attained through cultivation, as will be distinguished below.