俱舍論記 4.190

4.190

「契經說故至乃至廣說」者，經部引經出過。經言「輪王成就七寶」，若成就是假，可言成就他身、非情。汝若言實，於七寶中若成輪、珠，成非情過；若成象、馬、女、主藏、主兵，成他相續過。故《婆沙》九十三敘譬喻者說云「問：彼何故作是執？答：彼依契經故作是執。謂契經說有轉輪王成就七寶。若成就性是實有者，成就輪寶、神珠寶故應法性壞。所以者何？亦是有情亦非有情故。成就象寶及馬寶故，復應趣壞。所以者何？亦是傍生亦是人故。成就女寶故，復應身壞。所以者何？亦是男身亦是女身故。成就主兵、主藏臣故，復應業壞。所以者何？君臣雜故。勿有此失，故成就性定非實有。」

Regarding 'Because sūtra says... up to extensive discourse': the Sautrāntika cites sūtra to point out the fault. The sūtra states: 'A wheel-turning king possesses the seven treasures.' If possession is nominal, it would be acceptable to speak of possessing another's continuum or inanimate things. But if you say it is real, then among the seven treasures, if one possesses the wheel and the jewel, there is the fault of possessing inanimate things; if one possesses the elephant, horse, woman, treasurer, and commander, there is the fault of possessing another's continuum. Thus, the ninety-third fascicle of the Vibhāṣā recounts the Dārṣṭāntika's statement: 'Question: Why do they hold this view? Answer: They hold this view relying on sūtra. That is, a sūtra says that there is a wheel-turning king who possesses seven treasures. If possession were an actual entity, then because he possesses the wheel-treasure and the divine jewel-treasure, the nature of dharmas would be violated. Why? Because he would be both a sentient being and an inanimate being. Furthermore, because he possesses the elephant-treasure and horse-treasure, the realms of existence would be violated. Why? Because he would be both an animal and a human. Because he possesses the woman-treasure, the bodily state would also be violated. Why? Because he would have both a male body and a female body. Because he possesses the commander and the treasurer ministers, karma would also be violated. Why? Because master and ministers would be conflated. Lest there be these faults, possession is definitely not an actual entity.'