成唯識論演祕 5.627

5.627

詳曰：若非大門此屬何門？若云屬前前門，但明迷諦親疎，門義全差，何得屬彼？又有事等自是一義，文明有事自為其門，竟違何理而見不許？不言後十，後十遍染、不善之心，隨彼所遍，通事無事，易故不說。緣有漏等既云准上而不作法，即當第二例餘門也。

In detailed evaluation: If it is not a major category, to which category does it belong? If it is said to belong to the preceding category, that preceding category only clarifies the direct or distant nature of delusion regarding the truths; the meaning of the category is entirely different, so how could it belong to that? Furthermore, 'having concrete affairs' and so forth is an independent meaning in itself; the text clearly establishes 'having concrete affairs' as its own category. Exactly what principle does it contravene that it should not be accepted? The latter ten are not mentioned because the latter ten pervade defiled and unwholesome minds; according to what they pervade, they are common to concrete affairs and absence of concrete affairs, and because it is easily understood they are not spoken of. Since it is stated that grasping sāsrava and so forth is 'by analogy with the above' without formulating the method, it constitutes the second category that parallels the others.