俱舍論記 20.104

20.104

「同無記性至名有漏義」者，答。一同無記性。二同於內門轉。《正理》破云「彼界煩惱亦於外門有緣色、聲、觸境轉故，應更別說第二合因，謂彼隨眠同一對治。設依此義，無壞頌文。謂此應言：何緣合說二界煩惱為一有漏？同無記、對治、定地故合一。俱舍師救云：雖彼上惑亦外門轉，言內門轉，從多分說。諸法立名種種不同，若不爾者，如言色界，豈無受等。三同依定地生。由三義同故合為一。如前所說名有貪因，因是所以義，即是此中名有漏義。有謂有身，貪多緣有故名有貪，漏多緣有故名有漏。

Regarding "Because they are equally indeterminate [...] the meaning of being called an existence-outflow": Answer: First, they are equally indeterminate (avyākṛta) in nature. Second, they equally operate internally. The *Nyāyānusāra* refutes this, saying: "The defilements of that realm also operate externally by taking visible forms, sounds, and tangible objects as their domain; therefore, a different second reason for combining them should be stated, namely that their anuśayas have a single counteragent (pratipakṣa). If one relies on this meaning, it does not damage the verse text. That is, it should say: For what reason are the defilements of the two realms combined and spoken of as one existence-outflow? Because they are identical in indeterminacy, counteragent, and meditative stage, they are united as one." The Kośa master defends: Although those higher afflictions also operate externally, saying they operate internally is stated according to the majority. The assigning of names to dharmas has various differences; if it were not so, just as when one says "form realm" (rūpadhātu), could there not be sensation (vedanā) and the like? Third, they equally arise based on a meditative stage (samāhitabhūmi). Because these three meanings are identical, they are combined as one. As stated previously, the reason for being named "existence-desire" (bhavarāga)—"reason" means the rationale—is precisely the meaning of being called "existence-outflow" here. "Existence" refers to the existing body; because desire mostly takes existence as its object, it is called existence-desire, and because outflows mostly take existence as their object, they are called existence-outflows.