成唯識論演祕 7.294

7.294

詳曰：《疏》中不言二乘伏惑，亦不說云生空智也，何得輒以二乘不斷所知障體而為難耶？那知《疏》主不依法空智伏惑說，而言今依菩薩說耶？《疏》理實通，非可局情自度破他。

I examine this and say: In the Commentary it is not said that the two vehicles suppress delusions, nor does it speak of the wisdom of personal emptiness. How can one rashly raise an objection based on the fact that the two vehicles do not abandon the substance of cognitive hindrances? How does one know that the author of the Commentary did not speak of suppressing delusions based on the wisdom of phenomenal emptiness, such that one says it is now spoken in terms of bodhisattvas? The principle of the Commentary is in fact comprehensive; one must not confine oneself to one's own bias and speculate to refute another.