因明入正理論疏 3.38

3.38

問：「若難離實之大有性，所別所依犯自不成，亦犯違宗隨一不成。若難不離實等大有而非有性，既犯相符，亦違自教，彼豈非有？」答：「彼先總說，今亦總難。彼既成立離實之有，故今難有，令非此有。言同意別，故無諸過。」

Question: 'If one objects to the Great Existence-ness apart from substance, the subject and its substratum commit the fallacy of being unestablished for oneself (svayam-asiddha), and also commit the fallacy of being unestablished for one party (anyatarāsiddha) by contradicting one's school. If one objects to the Great Existence that is not separate from substance and so forth as not being existence-ness, it both commits the fault of proving what is already accepted (siddhasādhana) and contradicts one's own teaching; for how could that not exist?' Answer: 'The opponent previously stated it generally, and now we also object generally. Since they established an existence separate from substance, we now object to existence to make it not be this existence. The words are the same while the meanings differ, so there are none of these faults.'