俱舍論記 17.10

17.10

「譬喻論師至彼名業道」者，問。毘婆沙師，貪等非思，各別有體，別釋業道。譬喻論師，執貪、嗔等即是意思，無有別體，依何義釋彼貪、嗔等名為業道？

Regarding "The Dārṣṭāntikas ... designate them courses of action": A question. For the Vaibhāṣikas, covetousness and the rest are not volition (cetanā), but each has a distinct entity, and they explain the course of action separately. The Dārṣṭāntikas maintain that covetousness, ill-will, and the rest are precisely mental volition and have no distinct entity; based on what meaning do they explain those—covetousness, ill-will, and the rest—as courses of action?