On the other hand, Xuanzang 玄奘, who also translated the Mahāyāna-saṃgraha in 649, made it clear that there were no passages based on Tathāgatagarbha thought in the original text; the ālayavijñāna was nothing other than the unreal vijñāna. However, Tathāgatagarbha-based interpretations of śruta-vāsanā did not disappear, even among his own disciples. Therefore, Xuanzang gave a strict definition of śruta-vāsanā in his translation of the Cheng weishi lun 成唯識論 in 659.

1. The śruta-vāsanā in the Mahāyāna-saṃgraha is a contaminated śruta-vāsanā; it is not a direct cause of “the uncontaminated seeds 無漏種子” but their indirect cause.
2. Although the uncontaminated seeds are contained inherently, they differ among śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas and bodhisattva, and some beings are without them.
3. The uncontaminated seeds are not contained within the ālayavijñāna; they adhere to it externally.

Based on this, the different opinions disappeared in the Weishi 唯識 school. However Tathāgatagarbhic interpretations of śruta-vāsanā were kept alive in the texts of the Huayan school 華嚴 and continued to influence later scholars. See YOSHIMURA, Makoto, “Chūgoku yuishiki ni okeru mon kunjū ni tsuite 中国唯識における聞熏習說について” (On the Theory of the Śruta-vāsanā ( 'permeation by hearing' ) in Chinese Yogâcāra). Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies, vol. 58–1 (2010).