成唯識論演祕 6.216

6.216

答：《疏》既說云不可執為是實外色，若不破他而誠於誰云不可執？又，下方云若小乘等，若前不是破他說者，何乃中間言若等耶？以此而觀，《疏》意不唯明中自義，顯對他難理通辨正。思之！

Answer: Since the Commentary states 'one cannot grasp it as real external form', if it were not refuting the other, toward whom would it admonish that 'one cannot grasp it'? Furthermore, below it only then says 'if the Hīnayāna, etc.'; if the preceding part were not spoken to refute the other, why would it say 'if, etc.' in between? Observing from this, the intention of the Commentary is not only to clarify its own doctrine internally, but to show that in confronting the other's objection, the principle generally resolves and corrects. Reflect upon this!