俱舍論記 17.57

17.57

「頌曰至別遮一八五」者，上兩句明不善業道與思俱轉，下兩句明善業道與思俱轉。此中言業道思俱轉者，據同一剎那俱時而轉，非據因等起思前後俱說。以受四支及七支戒中不說無心得戒，故知定約剎那以說。問：如《婆沙》一百一十三云「若住染污心、或住無記心、或無心時，由七善業道俱生思究竟轉。」《雜心》亦說無心。彼論既說無心，明知俱轉亦約因等起說，何故乃言定約剎那？解云：《婆沙》、《雜心》言無心者，義便兼明無心得戒，非是正解思俱轉也。理實俱轉定約剎那故，於此論七俱轉中不說無心。又解：俱有二種。一是並俱，謂同剎那俱時並起。二是有俱，謂前、後俱。由有彼前法故，此後法得有。《俱舍》據並俱，故不說無心。《婆沙》、《雜心》通據有俱，故兼說無心。各據一義，並不相違。

"The verse says: [...specifically barring one, eight, and five]": The upper two lines clarify unwholesome paths of action operating together with volition; the lower two lines clarify wholesome paths of action operating together with volition. Here, paths of action operating together with volition is stated based on their concurrent operation at the very same instant (*kṣaṇa*), not based on the cause-originating volition (*hetu-samutthāna-cetanā*) being spoken of as occurring before or after. Because in receiving the fourfold or sevenfold branch precepts, obtaining precepts during an unconscious state (*acittaka*) is not mentioned, we know it is definitely stated in terms of an instant. Question: As the *Mahāvibhāṣā*, fascicle 113, states: "When abiding in a defiled mind, an indeterminate mind, or without mind, the completion occurs through the volition arisen together with the seven wholesome paths of action." The *Saṃyuktābhidharmahṛdaya* (*Záxīn*) also speaks of being without mind. Since those treatises speak of being without mind, we clearly know that concurrent operation is also stated in terms of the cause-originating [volition]; why then say that it is definitely in terms of an instant? Answer: When the *Mahāvibhāṣā* and the *Saṃyuktābhidharmahṛdaya* mention being without mind, they are incidentally explaining the attainment of precepts while without mind; it is not the primary explanation of operating together with volition. In truth, concurrent operation is definitely in terms of an instant, which is why in this treatise's discussion of seven operating together, being without mind is not mentioned. Another explanation: 'Together' (*jù*) is of two kinds: first, 'simultaneous togetherness', meaning arising side by side at the same instant; second, 'sequential togetherness', meaning occurring before and after: because that prior dharma exists, this subsequent dharma is able to exist. The *Abhidharmakośa* relies on simultaneous togetherness, hence does not mention being without mind. The *Mahāvibhāṣā* and *Saṃyuktābhidharmahṛdaya* encompass sequential togetherness, hence they also mention being without mind. Each relies on one meaning, so there is no contradiction.