成唯識論演祕 4.57

4.57

雖有識體但無行相，以微細故，長連讀之。若不爾者，他許定中而有識故，何得說云自位無識？

Although the substance of consciousness exists, there is simply no ākāra, because it is subtle. This should be read continuously. If not so, since the opponent admits that consciousness exists in absorption, how could it be said that 'in their own state there is no consciousness'?