俱舍論記 19.79

19.79

「又若有緣至非見彼斷」者，此即第四集、滅邪見難。又若有緣見集、滅諦所斷邪見等執為清淨因，此戒禁取復何因緣非見彼集、滅斷耶？《正理》救云「若有計彼謗集邪見能得清淨，豈不此見無斷集用。若有計彼謗滅邪見能得清淨，豈不此見無證滅用（解云：彼論意說，若撥無集便無所斷，計道無用。若撥無滅便無所證，計道無用）。」俱舍師破云：如撥無道，應無能證。雖撥無道，計有餘道能證，何妨雖撥無集、滅，計有餘集、滅為所斷、所證。

[On the passage], "Furthermore, if there are those who take ... why are they not abandoned upon seeing them?": This is the fourth objection, that of the wrong views regarding origin and cessation. Furthermore, if there are those who take the wrong views and so forth abandoned upon seeing the truths of origin and cessation as their object and grasp them as the cause of purification, for what reason is this clinging to rules and vows not abandoned upon seeing that origin and cessation? The Nyāyānusāra defends: "If someone calculates that the wrong view slandering origin can attain purification, would this view not lack the function of abandoning origin? If someone calculates that the wrong view slandering cessation can attain purification, would this view not lack the function of realizing cessation? (Explanation: The intention of that treatise is to say: If one repudiates origin, there is nothing to be abandoned, and calculating a path is useless. If one repudiates cessation, there is nothing to be realized, and calculating a path is useless)." The Kośa master refutes this, saying: Just as repudiating the path would mean there is nothing capable of realization, yet despite repudiating the path they calculate that there is another path capable of realization—what prevents them, despite repudiating origin and cessation, from calculating that there are other origins and cessations to be abandoned and to be realized?