因明義斷 1.12

1.12

有人云：因喻何無極成？自解云：因喻必要極成，以無濫故。真似相翻，皆無此說。其義云何？答：此亦不然。因中既有兩俱不成、隨一不成，翻彼故須極成。但言略故，准理定有。故《成唯識論》第五卷云「極成六識，隨一攝故」等。又《理門》云「令彼憶念本極成故，是故此中唯取彼此俱定許義」，故知因喻亦有極成。

Someone asks: Why is there no mention of being prasiddha for the hetu and udāharaṇa? He explains himself: The hetu and udāharaṇa must necessarily be prasiddha so that there is no unwarranted overextension. Flipping between the genuine and semblance, neither has this statement. How is this meaning to be understood? Answer: This too is not so. Since among the hetu there are ubhayāsiddha and anyatarāsiddha, flipping those [errors] necessarily requires that it be prasiddha. It is merely that the words are abbreviated; based on reason it definitely exists. Thus the fifth fascicle of the *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi* says: "Because it is subsumed under any one of the prasiddha six consciousnesses," and so forth. Furthermore, the *Nyāyamukha* says: "Because it causes the other to recall what was originally prasiddha; therefore herein one takes only the meaning that is definitely accepted by both." Hence we know that the hetu and udāharaṇa also possess being prasiddha.