俱舍論記 23.47

23.47

「此四善根至及欲七地」者，釋第三句。此四依六，謂四靜慮、未至、中間。欲界中無，闕等引故。餘上無色地中亦無，以是見道近眷屬故，又無色心不緣欲故。於欲界苦先應遍知，於欲界集先應斷故，故無色界無有見道，無見道故亦無煖等。此四善根是有漏故，能感色界五蘊異熟，為圓滿因，不能牽引，憎背有故，故唯依色。頌說或聲，顯二異說，謂煖、頂二。尊者妙音說依前六及欲七地，此非正義。故《正理》破云「對法諸師不許彼說，非聞、思所成順決擇分故。」

Regarding 'These four roots of good... and the seven grounds of desire': this explains the third pāda. These four rely on six [grounds], namely the four dhyānas, the threshold (anāgamya), and the intermediate (dhyānāntara). They are absent in the desire realm, because equipoise is lacking. They are also absent in the remaining higher immaterial grounds, because these are proximate retinues of the path of seeing, and immaterial minds do not observe the desire realm. Because the desire realm's suffering must first be fully known and the desire realm's origination must first be abandoned, there is no path of seeing in the immaterial realm; because there is no path of seeing, there are also no Heat and the rest. Because these four roots of good are with outflows (sāsrava), they can induce the five-skandha retribution of the form realm as completing causes (paripūrakajñāna), but cannot serve as impelling causes (ākṣepaka), because they loathe and turn away from existence; hence they rely solely on the form realm. When the verse says 'or' (vā), it indicates two divergent views, concerning Heat and Summits. The Venerable Ghoṣaka says that they rely on the preceding six and the desire realm, making seven grounds; this is not the orthodox doctrine. Hence the Nyāyānusāra refutes it: 'The Abhidharma masters do not accept his explanation, because the factors leading to penetration are not accomplished through hearing or reflection.'