成唯識論演祕 1.136

1.136

I examine [these] as follows: the first three are difficult to establish. If its essence is delight, could the scattered mind and scattered stages be devoid of this pleasure? If clothing and the like are its essence, how does it differ from the pleasure of causes? If it is pleasant and joy feelings, is it that whenever suffering ceases, pleasant and joy feelings are invariably produced and there is never neutral feeling? If neutral feeling exists, why is it not its essence and why is it not accepted? Furthermore, the *Yogācārabhūmi* states: 'Herein, the pleasure of feeling is called pleasure because its intrinsic nature is pleasure. The pleasure of counteracting suffering is called pleasure because it puts an end to various sufferings, not because its intrinsic nature [is pleasure].' If its essence is pleasant feeling, why does the treatise say that its intrinsic nature is not [pleasure]? The fourth meaning is logically coherent.