因明入正理論疏 1.46

1.46

相符極成者，若以相符本非宗故，依何立過？兩俱不成，及俱不成，并俱不遣，本非因、喻，依何立過？若以因、喻有所申述何非過者；宗亦有說，如何非過？是故加之。但陳那影略說，天主委具陳之，非是師資自為矛盾。

As for established by consensus: if one argues that because consensus is originally not a proposition, on what basis could a fault be established? Both unestablished in both, unestablished in both [factors], and both unexcluded are originally not reasons or examples; on what basis are faults established [for them]? If one argues that because the reason and example have put forward an assertion, how could it not be a fault? The proposition also has an assertion; how could it not be a fault? Therefore it is added. Diṅnāga merely spoke implicitly and concisely, whereas Śaṅkarasvāmin set it out comprehensively and in detail; it is not that master and disciple contradict each other.