俱舍論記 30.77

30.77

「則因名主至亦不離因」者，論主示正義。若令念起名念主者，則念因名主是其所屬，念果名能屬。由念因增上力，令念果得生，故因名主。果於生時是因所有，故名能屬。即生念因足為念主，何勞立我為念主邪？即諸行五蘊聚，是緣成假。前後一類相續，是相屬假。世間共施設是制怛羅牛，立制怛羅名為牛主。即此牛主是牛相續。從此至彼於異方生，變異生因故名牛主。此中無一實我制怛羅牛主，亦無實我是牛，但假施設，故言牛主亦不離因。牛是所驅役名果，牛主能驅役名因，同前念主不離念因。

Regarding "Then the cause is called the master... nor is it apart from causes": the author of the treatise shows the correct doctrine. If causing memory to arise is called being the 'master of memory', then the cause of memory is called the 'master' because it is what it belongs to, and the result, memory, is called that which belongs [to it]. Since, by the sovereign power of the cause of memory, the result, memory, is brought into being, the cause is therefore called the master. When the result arises, it belongs to the cause, and hence is called that which belongs [to it]. The cause that brings about memory is indeed sufficient to be the master of memory; what need is there to establish a self as the master of memory? That is, the aggregates of the five skandhas of conditioned forces (saṃskāras) are a conceptual designation based on causal conditions (pratītyasamutpāda). The succession of a homogeneous series before and after is a conceptual designation based on relation. The world conventionally designates this as 'Caitra's ox', establishing Caitra as the ox's master. This very ox-master is the ox's continuum. Because it is the cause of transformation and arising—[causing it to go] from here to there and to arise in a different location—it is called the ox's master. In this there is no single real self that is the ox-master Caitra, nor is there a real self that is the ox; it is merely a conventional designation. Therefore it says: 'The ox's master is also not apart from causes.' The ox is what is driven and is called the result; the ox's master is the one capable of driving and is called the cause; this is the same as the master of memory not being apart from the cause of memory.