成唯識論演祕 5.316

5.316

答：而有斷云：第三為正，初說違文。果位唯善，自他共許。何煩更說定所引言，第二違理。前言欲界無有輕安，今復成有，故違理也。有義釋云：三皆無違。初標宗故，未論因果，故說善言。大地菩薩生欲界中，無漏引生亦無有失。會前文者，如《疏》具明。

Answer: Some make the judgment: The third is correct; the first assertion contradicts the text. The state of fruition is solely wholesome, as is accepted by self and others alike. Why bother to further say "induced by concentration"? The second contradicts reasoning. Earlier it was said that the desire realm has no pliancy, but now it is again established as having it; thus it contradicts reasoning. Another opinion explains: None of the three is contradictory. Because the first sets forth the tenet, it does not yet discuss cause and effect, and therefore speaks of "wholesome." When a great-ground bodhisattva is born into the desire realm, for [pliancy] to be induced by the uncontaminated is also without fault. The reconciliation of the previous text is as fully explained in the Commentary.