成唯識論演祕 4.94

4.94

The exposition states: The opponent again saves [their thesis] by saying: 'The blending mental consciousness and the separately arising mental consciousness arise alternately with interruptions before and after; this also does not contradict the sūtra's prohibition against the simultaneous arising of the same category.' Hence it is refuted again: 'The entity of the blending consciousness is conceded to be retribution; if it arose with interruptions, its entity would be interrupted. If so, subsequent linking would have to be called being reborn anew.' Therefore, a syllogistic refutation is framed: The blending mental consciousness should not arise with interruptions; because it is conceded to be retribution; like retribution materiality. Furthermore, the entity of retribution is only constantly continuous, having no other destiny.