成唯識論演祕 2.7

2.7

I examine [this and suggest]: This is not necessarily so. Why should mental factors alone be termed 'close'? If being similar is called 'close,' why not also include mind? If being close to the king is called 'close,' the intentional object is even closer; why then refute it first? Or, relying on one perspective, the principle certainly holds, but it becomes overly fragmented.