俱舍論記 18.93

18.93

「有說唯思至福業轉故」者，第三解。或是經部，有說：唯思是真福業，善故名福，作故名業，非是所託事故不名事。福業之事謂施、戒、修，以此三種為所依門，福業轉故、是所託故，此三名事。非真福業故，不名福業。又解：思真福業，此顯能依。福業之事謂施、戒、修，此顯所依。能依、所依合說，故言福業事也。《正理》四十四亦有三釋，同此論。

"Some say that intention alone [...] because meritorious action operates": the third explanation, which is perhaps the Sautrāntika. Some say: Intention alone is true meritorious action; because it is wholesome, it is called merit, and because it creates, it is called action; but because it is not the basis that is relied upon, it is not called a basis. The "bases of meritorious action" refer to giving, morality, and cultivation; because meritorious action operates taking these three as its dependent gateway, and because they are what is relied upon, these three are called bases. Because they are not true meritorious actions, they are not called meritorious actions. Another explanation: Intention is the true meritorious action, which indicates that which relies. The bases of meritorious action refer to giving, morality, and cultivation, which indicates that upon which it relies. That which relies and that upon which it relies are stated together, hence it is said "basis of meritorious action". The Nyāyānusāra, fascicle 44, also has three explanations, identical to this treatise.