因明入正理論疏 2.91

2.91

問：「若說我是思所別不成者，如何可立我等為有？」答：「若有所簡，即便無過，謂我能詮必有所目，如色等類便無過故，不爾便成。上二過中，初過亦名所依不成，能別有故。後過亦名能依不成，所別有故。兩俱、隨一、全分、一分皆悉具有，由是所立不與能依、所依之名。義准亦有能別、所別猶預不成，偏生疑故，至因當知。」

Question: 'If saying "the self is consciousness" has an unestablished subject, how can one establish that the self and so on exist?' Answer: 'If there is a qualification, then there is no flaw, meaning that what designates the self must have a referent; like categories such as form, there is then no flaw; otherwise, [the flaw] is incurred. Among the above two flaws, the first flaw is also called "unestablished locus (āśrayāsiddha)," because the predicate exists. The latter flaw is also called "unestablished dependent (āśritāsiddha)," because the subject exists. Both, either, whole, and partial are fully present in each case; therefore what is established is not given the names "dependent" and "locus." By implication, there are also dubious unestablished forms of the predicate and subject, because they give rise to doubt specifically; this will be known when arriving at the hetu.'