成唯識論演祕 6.392

6.392

《疏》判七處得離繫果，今以理准應八處得。既待能證方有所證，取領受處亦何爽理？下文不言觀待因得離繫果者，據有為果隱無為果而不言也。《疏》依下文故云七處，亦不相違。

The Commentary determines that the fruit of disjunction (visaṃyoga-phala) is obtained from seven bases; but reasoning by principle here, it should be obtained from eight bases. Since one depends upon that which is capable of realizing in order for there to be that which is realized, what error of principle is there in taking the basis of experiencing (upabhoga-sthāna) as well? That the text below does not mention obtaining the fruit of disjunction from the cause of reliance (apekṣā-hetu) is because it relies on conditioned fruits and leaves unmentioned the unconditioned fruit. The Commentary states 'seven bases' based on the text below, so there is likewise no contradiction.