俱舍論記 13.192

13.192

「諸有心者至於業有用」者，通。非言無心不能發戒，但說諸有心者業起分明，故隨轉心於業有用。《正理》三十六云「若無隨轉，雖有先因為能引發，如無心位。或如死屍，表應不轉。隨轉於表有轉功能，無表不依隨轉而轉，無心亦有無表轉故。」俱舍師難云：「於無心位得別解脫，雖無隨轉，表業亦轉，初念必具表、無表故。如無心位，表應不轉，此言有失。若謂非據初念得表，據餘無心言應簡別，既不簡別，過失遂成。

Regarding the passage from "For those with mind..." up to "has utility for action": this resolves it. It is not saying that a mindless state cannot give rise to precepts, but only saying that for those with mind, the arising of action is distinct and evident; hence the conforming mind has utility for action. The Nyāyānusāra, fascicle 36, states: "If there were no conforming [mind], then although there is a prior cause inducing it, manifestation would not proceed, as in a mindless state or as in a corpse. The conforming [mind] has the function of causing manifestation to proceed; non-manifestation does not proceed by relying on the conforming [mind], because non-manifestation also proceeds in a mindless state." The Kośa master objects: "When prātimokṣa is attained in a mindless state, even without a conforming [mind], bodily manifestation also proceeds, because the first moment must possess both manifestation and non-manifestation. To say that manifestation would not proceed as in a mindless state is flawed. If you say this does not refer to attaining manifestation in the first moment, but refers to other mindless states, a qualification should have been stated; since no qualification was stated, the fault is indeed incurred."