因明入正理論疏 3.181

3.181

若爾，互用豈亦別緣？答：「依未自在，且作是說。若依前解，即無此妨。或現之量，五根非一，名現現，識名為量，現唯屬根。准《理門》釋，理則無違。若通明四，意根非現，又闕其識。自體現名，但隨所應，依主、持業二種釋也。」

If so, does reciprocal use [of the faculties] also apprehend separately? Answer: 'This is stated provisionally on the basis of [those who have] not achieved mastery. If one relies on the former explanation, there is no such objection. Alternatively, in the "means of knowing through immediate presence" (pratyakṣa-pramāṇa), the five sense-faculties are not single, hence called "each immediate presence"; consciousness is called the "means of knowing"; and "immediate presence" pertains solely to the faculties. According to the explanation in the Nyāyamukha, the principle does not conflict. If explaining all four generally, the mental faculty is not an immediate physical faculty, and furthermore it would lack the consciousness. The name "immediate presence" for its own substance simply follows what is appropriate, being explained as either a tatpuruṣa or a karmadhāraya compound.'