成唯識論演祕 3.513

3.513

詳曰：夫言改轉，易換異名。若也，始終一類之事，應無思業，無改轉故。故今釋者，性但令作，業役令作，單重廣略，行相有異。既云善等，等惡無記，無記通於八識皆有，說思名遍，亦何爽理？若准《瑜伽》第三所說，思之行相，是別非遍。如疏所述，彼可知也。

I examine: As a rule, 'modifying' is an alternate name for changing. If an affair were of a single type from beginning to end, there would be no activity of volition, because there would be no modification. Therefore, what is explained now is: nature merely causes action, while activity employs [the mind] to cause action; whether single or repeated, broad or brief, their active modes differ. Since it says 'wholesome and others', the 'others' include unwholesome and indeterminate, and the indeterminate extends to all eight consciousnesses; how would stating that volition is universal violate principle? If one accords with what is stated in Yogācāra fascicle 3, the active mode of volition is specific and not universal; as expounded in the Commentary, that can be understood.