成唯識論演祕 4.68

4.68

The various explanations take this text as clarifying why sleep and fainting are excluded. Our present explanation is not so; it merely clarifies that states such as mindless [absorption] lack mind. Saying 'because there is nothing to be revulsed by' adduces that because there is no revulsed caitasika, it reveals that mind is also absent. Saying 'where there is a revulsed caitasika, mind then does not cease' inversely establishes the reason why, earlier, when there is no revulsed caitasika, mind ceases. Saying 'it is not that because it is not revulsed the king of mind still remains' resolves a hidden challenge from outside. The outside challenge says: Caitasikas are what is revulsed, so in that state they may be said to be absent. Since the king of mind is not revulsed, in that state it should still remain. Therefore it is explained: It is not that not being revulsed causes it to remain; because caitasikas are absent, it ceases along with them.