俱舍論記 26.104

26.104

「若爾慧應至不相應故」者，論主難。若此行相唯慧為體，不通餘心心所，是即慧應非有行相。若兩慧俱起，可言彼此相有；以慧與慧不相應故，不可說言慧有行相。

"If so, prajñā would […] because of not being associated": This is the author's objection. If this mode of activity has only prajñā as its essential nature and does not extend to the other minds and mental factors, then prajñā would not possess a mode of activity. If two prajñās arose simultaneously, one could say they reciprocally possess each other; but because prajñā and prajñā are not associated, one cannot say that prajñā possesses a mode of activity.