俱舍論記 13.140

13.140

「餘義皆與散無表同」者，例。表四大同散無表能造四大，是等流性，是有執受，別異大生。又解：是有情數，及能造大同散無表。故《正理》云「餘義皆與散無表同」，謂有情數及依、等流、有執受、別異四大種起。問：如《婆沙》一百二十二說化語有兩說云「有作是說：彼是語業，由心發故。有餘師說：彼非語業，但名語聲，以所化身無執受故。」前師意說雖無執受大種因生，由心發故，化語是業。後師意說化身無執受，即顯化語非從執受四大種生。既非執受四大種生，明知化語非業。但非執受大種生者皆非是業，若是業者執受大生。然無評家。化身是業、非業，雖未見文，准化語亦應有二說。此論為依何說？解云：此論義當婆沙後師，以說表業執受大種生故。

"The remaining meanings are all the same as for distracted non-information": this draws an analogy. The four great elements of informative matter are the same as the four great elements capable of creating distracted non-information in that they are of the nature of uniform outflow, are grasped at, and arise from distinct great elements. Another explanation: they belong to the category of sentient beings, and the creating great elements are the same as for distracted non-information. Thus Nyāyānusāra states: "The remaining meanings are all the same as for distracted non-information", meaning that they belong to the category of sentient beings, and arise relying on great elements that are of uniform outflow, grasped at, and distinct. Question: As the Mahāvibhāṣā, fascicle 122, says, there are two explanations regarding illusory speech: "Some say: That is vocal karma, because it is initiated by the mind. Other masters say: That is not vocal karma, but is merely called vocal sound, because an illusory body is not grasped at." The earlier master's intention is that although it arises with great elements that are not grasped at as its causes, because it is initiated by the mind, illusory speech is karma. The latter master's intention is that an illusory body is not grasped at, which demonstrates that illusory speech is not born from the four great elements that are grasped at; since it is not born from the four great elements that are grasped at, it clearly follows that illusory speech is not karma. All that is born from great elements that are not grasped at is not karma; if it is karma, it is born from great elements that are grasped at. However, there is no verdict given by the redactor. Although no text has been seen regarding whether an illusory body is karma or not karma, by analogy with illusory speech there should also be two explanations. Which explanation does this treatise rely on? Explanation: The meaning of this treatise corresponds to the latter master in the Mahāvibhāṣā, because it states that informative karma is born from great elements that are grasped at.