俱舍論記 13.217

13.217

「但應說言至無記表業」者，論主顯前通經過已，今復教彼正釋經文。但應說言彼經唯據餘近因心為所間隔遠因等起，說見所斷心是遠因等起。為餘修斷近因隔故，故見斷心雖能為轉，而於欲界定無有覆無記表業。改「但」作「唯」，改「前」作「餘心所間」，即無妨矣。問：表成三性，從轉心判。欲無表業，從何判耶？解云：從前轉心判善、惡性。問：隨心無表，從何判性？解云：從隨轉心以判善性。故《正理》三十六云「然隨定心諸無表業，與俱時起，心一果故。由隨轉力善性得成，定屬此心而得生故也。」

"One should merely say... indeterminate informative action": having shown the fault in the earlier interpretation, the author of the treatise now instructs them how to interpret the sūtra text correctly. One should merely say that that sūtra relies solely upon the remote causal origination that is separated by another proximate-cause mind, stating that the mind abandoned through seeing is a remote causal origination. Because it is separated by another proximate cause abandoned through cultivation, although a mind abandoned through seeing can act as a motivator, in the desire realm there is definitely no defiled-indeterminate informative action. By changing 'merely' to 'solely', and changing 'prior' to 'separated by another mind', there is no obstacle. Question: Informative action becoming of the three natures is determined from the motivating mind. From what is uninformative action in the desire realm determined? Explanation: Its wholesome or unwholesome nature is determined from the prior motivating mind. Question: From what nature is the mind-concomitant uninformative action determined? Explanation: Its wholesome nature is determined from the concurrent motivating mind. Thus the Nyāyānusāra, fascicle 36, says: "However, all uninformative actions concomitant with the concentrated mind arise simultaneously with it, being of a single fruit with the mind. By the force of the concurrent motivator their wholesome nature is established, because they are produced as definitely belonging to this mind."