成唯識論演祕 1.55

1.55

Examination: It originally intended to indicate the author of the commentary; since Vasubandhu was not, he is not mentioned. What does that have to do with brief wording and incomplete meaning? Furthermore, although the present title belongs to the commentary, the root verses are also entitled Cheng weishi lun; saying that "Cheng weishi" belongs exclusively to the commentary also slightly fails in precise discrimination.