唯識二十論述記 1.16

1.16

後辨造論所由者，然此無文，准餘論說。令法久住，利益有情，故造論也；或為令知第三時教，契會中道，造斯論焉；或執外境如心是有，如薩婆多師等；或執內心如境是無，如空見外道等；或執諸識用別體同，如一類菩薩等；或執離心無別心所，如經部等；或執獄卒等是實有情，如大眾部等；或說獄卒等，非實有情，業生大種，大種相異，如薩婆多等；或說獄卒等雖非有情，然熏習所起，非是識變，如經部等；或執外境體是一物，如吠世師等；或執境多念，心唯一剎那，如正量部等；或執極微，有相資相，為五識境，如眾賢師等。此等論師，皆由邪知、無知二種，於義不了，遂於二果覆障不證。今為遮此種種異執，令於唯識深妙理中，得如實解，故作斯論。隨下破中，一一別顯，故不預釋。

Finally, to distinguish the reasons for composing the treatise: although there is no explicit text here, it may be inferred from other treatises. It was composed to make the Dharma abide for long and to benefit sentient beings; or, this treatise was composed to make known the teaching of the third period and tally with the middle path; or because some hold that external objects exist just as the mind does, like the masters of the Sarvāstivāda and others; or because some hold that the internal mind is non-existent just as external objects are, like the heterodox who hold views of emptiness; or because some hold that the various consciousnesses differ in function but are identical in essence, like a certain class of bodhisattvas; or because some hold that apart from the mind there are no separate caittas, like the Sautrāntikas and others; or because some hold that hell wardens and so forth are real sentient beings, like the Mahāsāṃghikas and others; or because some say that hell wardens and so forth are not real sentient beings, but are primary elements born of karma, with distinctive characteristics among the primary elements, like the Sarvāstivāda and others; or because some say that although hell wardens and so forth are not sentient beings, they are produced by perfuming and are not transformations of consciousness, like the Sautrāntikas and others; or because some hold that the essence of external objects is a single entity, like the Vaiśeṣikas and others; or because some hold that objects endure for many moments while the mind lasts for only a single kṣaṇa, like the Saṃmatīyas and others; or because some hold that paramāṇus have the aspect of mutual support and serve as the objects of the five consciousnesses, like Master Saṅghabhadra and others. All these masters, due to the two kinds of wrong knowledge and ignorance, failed to understand the meaning, and consequently were obscured from realizing the two fruits. Now, in order to ward off these various deviant attachments and enable beings to attain real understanding within the profound and subtle principle of vijñapti-mātra, this treatise was composed. As these will be individually revealed in the refutations below, they are not explained in advance.