俱舍論記 10.156

10.156

「自地諸惑至猶如生有」者，答。自地，顯非他地。諸惑，顯是本惑。謂此地生、此地本惑皆容現起染污生有。引說可知。又解：不現起者，有染能故亦名能染。論文既言此地一切煩惱染污此地生有，明知皆有染能。然諸結生唯本惑力，并無慚、無愧、惛沈、掉舉，以是本惑相應纏故亦能助潤。非由自力纏、垢可能現起，性羸劣故。要由思擇方現在前。初結生位身心昧劣，故非現起。自力纏者，謂慳、嫉、忿、覆、悔。自力垢者，謂六垢。問：纏中睡眠，為是自力？為是隨從？解云：是隨從。理實此位亦無睡眠，而不別簡者，若自力纏、垢初結生位定非現起，故此別簡。其隨從纏則非決定。若無慚、無愧、惛沈、掉舉，此位相應。若睡眠，不相應，以結生位非睡眠故。以隨從纏性不定故，文不別簡。又解，睡眠是自力纏。若作此解，即自力纏中已簡。故《婆沙》五十簡纏非結中有一復次，睡眠、惡作雖亦獨立而不離二（已上論文）。或說自力、或說隨從，兩釋無違。并會《婆沙》，如心所中已具分別。雖生有位，心身昧劣，而由過去數起煩惱，或由過去近現行，或由二勝因引發力故，此位煩惱任運現起。應知中有初續剎那亦必染污與生有同，此即義便兼明。

Regarding 'All defilements of one's own stage [...] just like the birth-existence': This is the answer. 'One's own stage' clarifies that they are not of another stage. 'All defilements' clarifies that these are fundamental defilements. That is to say, for one born in this stage, the fundamental defilements of this stage can all manifest to defile the birth-existence. This is understood from the citations. Another explanation: even those that do not manifest, because they possess the capacity to defile, are also called capable of defiling. Since the treatise says that all defilements of this stage defile the birth-existence of this stage, it is clear that they all possess defiling capacity. However, all links to rebirth occur solely through the power of fundamental defilements, together with shamelessness, unconscionableness, torpor, and restlessness; because these are entanglements associated with fundamental defilements, they can also assist in moisturising [rebirth]. Entanglements and defilements operating by their own power cannot manifest, because their nature is weak and inferior; they must depend on deliberate scrutiny before they can present themselves. At the initial state of rebirth-linking, body and mind are dim and weak, and thus they do not manifest. The entanglements operating by their own power are miserliness, envy, anger, concealment, and regret. The impurities operating by their own power are the six impurities. Question: Among the entanglements, is sleep [operating] by its own power, or is it an attendant? The explanation says: it is an attendant. In reality, at this state there is also no sleep, and as for why it is not separately excluded: if entanglements and impurities operating by their own power definitely do not manifest at the initial state of rebirth-linking, then here they are separately excluded. Attendant entanglements, however, are not definitely fixed. Shamelessness, unconscionableness, torpor, and restlessness are associated with this state. Sleep is not associated, because the state of rebirth-linking is not sleep. Because the nature of attendant entanglements is variable, the text does not separately exclude it. Another explanation says that sleep is an entanglement operating by its own power. If this explanation is adopted, then it is already excluded among the entanglements operating by their own power. Therefore, *Mahāvibhāṣā* 50, in distinguishing entanglements from fetters, presents a second alternative: 'Although sleep and remorse also stand independently, they are not separate from the two' (end of treatise citation). Whether said to be by its own power or said to be attendant, the two explanations do not contradict each other. Harmonising with the *Mahāvibhāṣā* has already been fully differentiated under the mental factors. Although at the state of birth-existence body and mind are dim and weak, due to frequently arising defilements in the past, or due to proximate active occurrence in the past, or due to the instigating power of the two superior causes, the defilements of this state spontaneously manifest. One should know that the initial connecting moment of the intermediate existence must also be defiled, the same as the birth-existence; this is clarified here in passing as convenient to the meaning.