成唯識論演祕 7.386

7.386

而言「內等」傳有兩釋：一解如《疏》，自身名「內」。故《對法論》云：云何遣各別有情假所緣法智為相？由此智相於自相續中有不分別我相，不分別者是除遣義。云何為遣各別法假所緣法智為相？由此智於自相續中不分別色等法相。餘同於前，故知「內」者約自身說。二云約界以辨內、外。初遣欲界自、他有情假，第二遣欲界自、他法假，同在欲界，故說「內」言。猶言「內人」，通自及他，皆名「內」也。第三遍遣上界我、法二假皆盡，故說「遍」言。

Regarding the words 'internally and so forth', two explanations have been transmitted: The first explanation is as the Commentary says: one's own body is called 'internal'. Hence the Abhidharmasamuccaya-bhāṣya states: 'What is the characteristic of the cognition of phenomena that expels the object that is the conceptual designation of individual sentient beings? By the characteristic of this cognition, within one's own mental continuum there is no conceptualization of the characteristic of a self; not conceptualizing is the meaning of expelling. What is the characteristic of the cognition of phenomena that expels the object that is the conceptual designation of individual dharmas? By this cognition, within one's own mental continuum there is no conceptualization of the characteristics of dharmas such as form.' The rest is the same as before; hence we know that 'internal' is spoken in terms of one's own body. The second explanation states: 'Internal' and 'external' are distinguished in terms of realms. The first expels the conceptual designation of sentient beings—both oneself and others—in the desire realm; the second expels the conceptual designation of dharmas—both oneself and others—in the desire realm; being together in the desire realm, it is called 'internal'. It is like saying 'internal people', which encompasses oneself and others, all being called 'internal'. The third comprehensively expels both the conceptual designations of self and dharmas in the higher realms entirely; therefore, the word 'comprehensively' is used.