俱舍論記 4.183

4.183

「謂有為法至決定如是」者，此下別釋。就別釋中，所依有二：一有為、二無為，此即別解有為。謂有為法中，若墮在自相續身有得、非得，非他相續身無有成就他身法故、非屬我故，所以不成。若有成就他相續身，即有趣、身、業壞、自他雜亂過故。非相續謂外非情，非是內相續身故。言非相續，非非相續，無有成就非情法故。以非屬我，故不成就。若成非情，即壞法性，為是有情？為非有情？且有為法決定如是。

Regarding "Conditioned factors [...] are definitely like this": From here downward is the specific explanation. Within the specific explanation, the basis is twofold: first, the conditioned; second, the unconditioned. This specifically explains the conditioned. That is, among conditioned factors, if they fall within the continuum of one's own body, there are acquisition and non-acquisition; it is not the continuum of another body, because one does not possess factors belonging to another's body, and because they do not belong to oneself, they are not possessed. If one were to possess another's continuum, there would be the fault of the destruction of destinies (gati), bodies, and karmas, and the confusion of self and other. "Non-continuum" refers to external insentient things, because they are not the internal continuum of a body. When it says 'not continuum,' it does not mean 'not non-continuum'; because one does not possess insentient factors, since they do not belong to oneself, they are not possessed. If one were to possess the insentient, that would destroy the nature of things: would one be a sentient being, or not a sentient being? Conditioned factors, for now, are definitely like this.