This paper aims at studying the interpretation of PV III 338-340 by mKhas grub rje. He interprets these three verses as those which establish gzhan rig (other-cognition) of Yogacara. On the other hand, he has raised an objection to Tibetans who consider PV III 338 as presenting Sautrantika theory, and considers PV III 339-340 to present Yogacara theory. Such an interpretation can be traced to bLa ma dam pa bsod nams rgyal mtshan's PV commentary. Focusing on the difference of between both opinions, we examine why mKhas grub rje needed to understand these three verses as such. Most particularly, do these two commentators take PV III 338 as presenting Sautrantika theory or Yogacara theory?
