成唯識論演祕 4.48

4.48

We evaluate: If one simply examines the explicit verbal expression, it seems as they object. But if one traces the intended thesis, the Commentary's purport is subtle and profound. That is, absorption lacking mind and non-absorption lacking mind are different; if the reason does not specify 'absorption', then in fainting and so forth, the reason operates, and compared with the intended thesis it becomes inconclusive. Only when the word 'absorption' is included in the reason is this fallacy averted; therefore the meaning is correct as [stated].