大乘百法明門論開宗義決 1.50

1.50

雖此二義亦通無我等者。此通伏難。謂有難言。既言法者是軌持義。此義合通下一無我。何故五種獨名為法。為通此難言難此等一軌唯有體無法非緣不生心故者。心緣有無生不生心有其二說。一云。緣無之時亦得生心。緣過去未來等心亦生故。二云不生。雖過未等外質是無。而有影像當情而現。要緣影像方得生心。無相分時心不生故。是故無法不得成緣。非所緣緣心不生故。既軌則者生物解義。是故軌義無法不成。

Regarding "although these two meanings also apply to non-self," etc.: This resolves a latent objection. That is, an objection asks: Since "dharma" means "holding to its measure and maintaining its nature" (gui-chi), this meaning should equally apply to the "non-self" below. Why are the five categories alone called dharmas? To resolve this objection, it is said: [First,] "measure" applies only to existing entities, for non-existent dharmas cannot serve as conditions to generate mind. Regarding whether the mind does or does not arise when apprehending existence or non-existence, there are two explanations. One says: When apprehending non-existence, mind can also arise, because mind also arises when apprehending the past and future. The second says it does not arise: although external substances of the past and future are non-existent, their images appear before the consciousness, and mind can only arise by taking those images as objects; when there is no nimitta-bhāga, mind does not arise. Therefore, a non-existent dharma cannot constitute a condition; because it is not an ālambana-pratyaya, the mind does not arise. Since "measure" means that which produces understanding in beings, the meaning of "measure" cannot be established with respect to non-existent dharmas.