俱舍論記 4.139

4.139

「二俱有過至應顯無明」者，外人出過。若見彼罪怖果，而不怖畏，名不見怖。應顯智慧，智慧謂邪見，以此邪見撥因果故。故《正理》云「應顯邪見。若不見彼罪怖畏果，名不見怖，應顯無明，以此無明不見怯怖。」又解：若見罪而不怖，應顯邪見。若不見彼罪家怖果，應顯無明。

Regarding the passage from "There are faults in both cases" up to "it ought to indicate ignorance": The opponent points out the faults. If seeing the dreadful fruition of that fault and yet not being terrified counts as "not seeing what is dreadful", it ought to indicate wisdom—"wisdom" meaning wrong view (mithyādṛṣṭi), because through this wrong view one denies cause and effect. Hence the Nyāyānusāra says: "It ought to indicate wrong view. If not seeing the dreadful fruition of that fault counts as 'not seeing what is dreadful', it ought to indicate ignorance (avidyā), because through this ignorance one fails to perceive cowardice and dread." Another interpretation: If seeing the fault and not being terrified, it ought to indicate wrong view. If not seeing the dreadful fruition of that fault, it ought to indicate ignorance.