成唯識論演祕 7.675

7.675

此遮伏難。伏難意云。按對法云。有二種應斷法。謂諸煩惱及此所依受。受有二種。謂變異及不變異。如其次第苦樂非苦樂。當知煩惱斷故建立擇滅。二受斷故如其次第建立不動及想受滅。既云斷受得二無為。二無為者如何。不是擇滅攝耶。疏意釋者種斷現息俱名為斷。受等據現暫爾不行。若不爾者於擇滅中。何不攝彼不動、想受。既開不攝。明非擇也。

This wards off a latent objection. The intent of the latent objection is: According to the Abhidharmasamuccaya, there are two kinds of phenomena to be severed: defilements and the feelings on which they rely. Feelings are twofold: changing and unchanging, which are in sequence suffering, pleasure, and neither-suffering-nor-pleasure. One should know that pratisaṃkhyā-nirodha is established because defilements are severed, and āneñja and saṃjñā-vedayita-nirodha are established in sequence because the two feelings are severed. Since it says that severing feelings attains the two unconditioned [dharmas], why are these two unconditioned [dharmas] not subsumed under pratisaṃkhyā-nirodha? The Commentary's intent in explaining it is: both the severance of seeds and the cessation of manifestations are called "severance." Regarding feelings and so on, it is based on manifestations temporarily not operating. Were it not so, why would āneñja and [the cessation of] perception and feeling not be subsumed under pratisaṃkhyā-nirodha? Since they are set apart and not subsumed, it is clear that they are not pratisaṃkhyā[-nirodha].