俱舍論記 13.111

13.111

「然此與彼至又先已說」者，論主答。評傳兩家，然此說一切有部與彼經部所說無表，俱難了知。或此經部與彼說一切有部俱難了知，我於其中心平等性正無所憎嫉。然說一切有部自許業道無表是善、惡心同性種類，以此無表是等起故，由心引得是心種類。又解：然我許彼思種業道是心種類，同是無色，故言種類。若說一切有部師言：彼受教者，由身加行從此至彼執持刃等作殺生等事究竟時，離於身、離於心，於能教者身中別有無表法生。如是所宗，不令生喜。經部師言：若由此能教者引彼所教者，從此至彼執持刃等加行生，作殺等事究竟成時，即此能教由彼所教事究竟故，不離身心方有根本業道思種相續轉變差別而生。如是所宗，可令生喜。經部但由於心身中有思種子相續轉變差別能生未來果故，非由別有無表能生。又先已說。

On "Yet both this and that ... and moreover it was already stated before": The author of the treatise answers. Evaluating and conveying both schools: however, the non-revelations spoken of both by this Sarvāstivāda and by that Sautrāntika are alike difficult to comprehend. Or, both this Sautrāntika and that Sarvāstivāda are difficult to comprehend; in my mind regarding them there is an equanimity entirely devoid of hatred or envy. However, the Sarvāstivādin himself accepts that the non-revelation of a course of action is of the same category of nature as a wholesome or unwholesome mind; because this non-revelation is an originated effect (samutthāna), and since it is induced by the mind, it is of the mind's category. Another explanation: however, I accept that their seeds of volition that constitute a course of action are of the mind's category, because both are non-material (arūpa); hence they are termed "of the [same] category". If the Sarvāstivāda master says: when the one who receives the instruction, through bodily preparatory action going from here to there and grasping a blade or the like, brings about an act of killing and completes it, apart from the body and apart from the mind, a separate non-revelation dharma arises in the body of the instigator—such a tenet does not bring delight. The Sautrāntika master says: if, through this instigator inducing the instructed one, preparatory action arises of going from here to there and grasping a blade or the like, and when the act of killing is completed, then precisely this instigator, because of the completion of the act by the instructed one, without being separate from body and mind, only then has the arising of the distinct transformation of the continuum of volition-seeds of the fundamental course of action—such a tenet can bring delight. The Sautrāntika holds that only because within the mental and physical [continuum] there is a distinct transformation of the continuum of volition-seeds that is able to produce a future fruit, it is not produced by a separately existing non-revelation. Moreover, this was already stated before.