成唯識論演祕 7.405

7.405

詳曰：而言法者，但法真見緣如、智別，不據法彼別別行相，以真見中無別行故。第三雖但證前二智，第四亦然，或緣第三。然祇是智而緣於智，據此一邊別配二道，不約三四解行以分，故亦何爽？故《論》結云：「差別建立名相見道。」若第三、四俱雙法前二道自證，差別之義而不顯也。若法二道證自證分，有理無文。或亦無失，文省略爾。

Examination: What is called emulating merely emulates the distinction between taking suchness and taking cognition as object in the real path of vision; it is not based on emulating their individual distinct mental forms, because there are no distinct mental forms in the real path of vision. Although the third only realizes the preceding two cognitions, the fourth is also like this, or takes the third as object. Yet it is simply cognition taking cognition as object; based on this single aspect, they are separately matched to the two paths, not differentiated in terms of the understanding and practice of the third and fourth, so how could there be any contradiction? Therefore the Treatise concludes: 'Distinctions are established and named the approximate path of vision.' If the third and fourth both emulated the self-verifying parts of the preceding two paths together, the meaning of distinction would not be evident. If they emulated the verification-of-the-self-verifying parts of the two paths, there is reason but no text. Or perhaps there is no fault, and the text merely omitted it.