俱舍論記 16.67

16.67

「又應違害至根本未息故」者，若言死後成業道，又應違害毘婆沙師釋本論中加行未息。謂《發智》本論「頗有已害生，殺生未滅耶？曰：有。如已斷生命，彼加行未息。」毘婆沙師釋此文言：此中於彼業道後起以加行聲說。如殺怨已，疑猶未死而行打棒。若言死後方成業道，毘婆沙師何故釋言於後起位以加行聲說？應言於根本說加行聲，以許命終後根本未息故。

Regarding "Furthermore, it would contradict ... because the fundamental [act] has not ceased": If one says that the path of action is accomplished after death, it would also contradict the Vaibhāṣika master's interpretation of the root treatise regarding the preparation not having ceased. Namely, the root treatise of the Jñānaprasthāna states: "Is there a case where a living being has been harmed, yet the killing has not ceased? Answer: There is. For example, when life has been terminated, but the preparation for it has not ceased." The Vaibhāṣika master explains this passage saying: "Here, the designation 'preparation' is used for what is subsequent to that path of action, as when, having killed an enemy, one suspects he is not yet dead and continues to beat him with a stick." If one says that the path of action is accomplished only after death, why did the Vaibhāṣika master explain that the designation 'preparation' is used for the subsequent stage? He should have said that the designation 'preparation' is used for the fundamental [act], since it is accepted that after the termination of life the fundamental [act] has not ceased.