成唯識論演祕 4.21

4.21

詳曰：理恐未然，《瑜伽》、此論皆云心等所緣等同，不同行相。故此論云心與心所同所依根，所緣相似，行相各別，了別、領納等作用各異故。亦不可言據自相說，如所緣相，相分各別，即說相似。行相有同，何即不說？教既無憑，臆斷難准，可從初釋。

Examination: In principle, I fear this is not so. Both the Yogācārabhūmi and this treatise say that citta and so forth have the same ālambana, but not the same ākāra. Therefore this treatise says that citta and caitasikas share the same supporting faculty, their ālambana are similar, but their ākāras are distinct, because their functions of discerning, experiencing, and so forth are each different. Nor can one say that it is spoken in terms of own-characteristic; just as with the aspect of the intentional object, the nimitta-bhāgas are distinct, yet they are said to be similar. If their ākāras were identical, why would it not be stated so? Since the teaching has no basis for this, subjective judgment is difficult to rely upon, and one should follow the first explanation.