唯識二十論述記 1.160

1.160

述曰：上來二頌，答非不成。自下三頌，破外救義。於中有三：初之一頌，破摩訶僧祇、犢子部等救義；次有一頌，破薩婆多師等救義；次有一頌，破經部師等救義。或初一頌，破救如前；次有一頌，正破薩婆多，兼破經部救義；次有一頌，正破經部，兼抑薩婆多，令有熏習。然二解中，前說為勝。

The Commentary says: The preceding two verses answered [the objection] that [the four points] are not unestablished. From this point onward, three verses refute the rival rescues of meaning. In this there are three parts: the first verse refutes the rescued position of the Mahāsāṃghika, Vātsīputrīya, and so forth; the next verse refutes the rescued position of the Sarvāstivāda masters and so forth; the next verse refutes the rescued position of the Sautrāntika masters and so forth. Alternatively, the first verse refutes the rescue as before; the next verse directly refutes the Sarvāstivāda and concurrently refutes the Sautrāntika's rescued position; the next verse directly refutes the Sautrāntika and concurrently suppresses the Sarvāstivāda, obliging them to admit perfuming. However, between these two interpretations, the former explanation is superior.