成唯識論演祕 5.525

5.525

答：後約菩薩，今據二乘及外道等。有義二釋：初義同前；二云後據理觀。今依事觀，有漏六行，名為事觀；觀無我等，名為理觀。又分別惑有迷事者，世道亦伏，能障定故。論約迷理說不伏言，若不伏者，俱生應然，俱迷事故。若見事惑、見理惑引，故不伏者，應修事惑、修理惑引同彼不伏。又，見事惑散亂麁動逾於俱生，障定應勝，何乃不伏？故知論中且據迷理言不伏也。

Answer: The later refers to bodhisattvas, whereas the present text refers to the two vehicles, non-Buddhists, and the like. There is an opinion that gives two explanations: the first is the same as the above; the second says the later refers to contemplation of principle, whereas the present relies on contemplation of phenomena: the contaminated six modes of practice are called contemplation of phenomena; contemplating selflessness and the like is called contemplation of principle. Furthermore, among discriminating afflictions there are those confused about phenomena, which the mundane path can also subdue, because they can obstruct concentration. The Treatise speaks of not subduing them with reference to confusion about principle; if they were not subdued, the same should apply to innate ones, since both are confused about phenomena. If it is said that because afflictions seeing phenomena are induced by afflictions seeing principle they are not subdued, then afflictions of cultivation seeing phenomena should be induced by afflictions of cultivation seeing principle and likewise not be subdued. Moreover, afflictions seeing phenomena are more restless and coarse than innate ones and should obstruct concentration more, so why would they not be subdued? Therefore one knows that the Treatise provisionally says 'not subdued' with reference to confusion about principle.