俱舍論記 15.113

15.113

「彼於惡中至相翻立故」者，釋。夫於善、惡心決定者，得善、惡戒，彼二根等於極惡中心不定故。又善、惡戒於一身中相翻而立，彼身既不能得善戒，故亦不能得彼惡戒。問：捨善、惡戒唯二形捨，非扇搋、半擇，何故得善、惡戒，三俱不得？解云：善戒善中增勝，惡戒惡中增勝。初得時難，必須勝依身起，故彼三種俱不能得，後起稱易。扇搋、半擇過非是重，不能捨彼善戒、惡戒。戒依彼身，二形過重，以能捨彼善戒、惡戒，戒不依彼。故《正理》三十九云「然二形生，捨善、惡戒，二依貪欲極增上故。非成扇搋等捨善、惡律儀，起二依貪非極重故。

Regarding 'In evil deeds, they ... to ... because they are established as mutually opposing': this is the explanation. In general, those whose minds are determinate regarding good or evil attain the wholesome or unwholesome vows; those with two faculties and the like do not have determinate minds with respect to extreme evil. Furthermore, wholesome and unwholesome vows are established as mutually opposing within a single body; since that body cannot attain wholesome vows, it likewise cannot attain those unwholesome vows. Question: Why is it that the abandoning of wholesome and unwholesome vows is done only by hermaphrodites (ubhayavyañjanaka) and not by ṣaṇḍhas and paṇḍakas, whereas when it comes to acquiring wholesome and unwholesome vows, neither of the three can acquire them? The explanation says: Wholesome vows are supreme among the good, and unwholesome vows are supreme among the evil. Their initial acquisition is difficult, necessarily requiring an exalted basis of body to arise, so none of those three types can acquire them; but their subsequent arising is comparatively easy. The faults of ṣaṇḍhas and paṇḍakas are not grave, so they cannot abandon those wholesome and unwholesome vows. The vows rest upon their bodies. The faults of hermaphrodites are extremely grave, so they are able to abandon those wholesome and unwholesome vows, and the vows do not rest upon them. Therefore the Nyāyānusāra, fascicle 39, states: 'However, when hermaphroditism arises, one abandons wholesome and unwholesome vows, because lust based on both supports is exceedingly intense. It is not that becoming a ṣaṇḍha and the like causes one to abandon wholesome or unwholesome restraint, because the lust based on both supports that arises is not exceedingly grave.'