俱舍論記 13.86

13.86

「若爾何故至清淨鮮白」者，難。若在無漏定中有道共無表，名正語、業、命。何故契經中云「彼如是知是智，彼如是見是忍；或彼如是知是見道，彼如是見是修道；或彼如是知是修道，彼如是見是見道。修習正見等五皆至圓滿，正語等三先時已得。」此經既於無漏定中不說正語、業、命，復言正語、業、命先時已得，明知此三在無漏定體即非有，何得證有無表色耶？

"If so, why [...] pure and pristine?": an objection. If in uncontaminated concentration there is path-concomitant uninformative [matter] called right speech, right action, and right livelihood, why does a sūtra say: "Such knowing of his is knowledge, such seeing of his is forbearance; or such knowing of his is the path of seeing, such seeing of his is the path of cultivation; or such knowing of his is the path of cultivation, such seeing of his is the path of seeing. Cultivating the five, such as right view, all reach completion, while the three, such as right speech, have already been attained previously"? Since this sūtra does not mention right speech, right action, and right livelihood within uncontaminated concentration, and furthermore says that right speech and the other three were already attained previously, we clearly know that these three do not exist as entities in uncontaminated concentration; how can this prove the existence of uninformative form?