俱舍論記 6.132

6.132

「熟果不應至簡別餘因」者，論主敘經部宗義。熟果不應餘五因所得，果具二義方得熟名：一由造業非即感果，要待相續將欲感果名轉變，正感果時名差別，由斯果體方乃得生。二由異熟果隨因勢力勝劣，時有分限，或經十年或百年等。俱有、相應所生果體，雖有後義而闕前義。能作、同類、遍行三因所生果體，雖有前義而闕後義。由此但應作如是釋：由因變異而果方熟，是異熟義。汝毘婆沙師不應但異簡別餘因，攝義不盡。若言變異攝義周盡，論主非異熟果非餘五因得，但異攝義不周盡。

Regarding "The fruit of ripening should not... to distinguish it from the other causes": the author of the treatise presents the Sautrāntika tenet. The fruit of ripening should not be obtained from the other five causes. Only when a fruit possesses two meanings can it receive the name "ripening": first, through the performance of karma, the fruit is not immediately brought about; it must await the mental continuum (saṃtāna), and when it is about to bring about the fruit, this is called transformation (pariṇāma), and at the very moment of bringing about the fruit, it is called culmination (viśeṣa)—through this, the substantial entity of the fruit is finally able to arise. Second, the fruit of maturation has a temporal limit according to the superior or inferior force of the cause, whether lasting ten years, a hundred years, or the like. The substantial entity of the fruit produced by coexistent and associated [causes], although possessing the latter meaning, lacks the former meaning. The substantial entities of the fruits produced by the three causes—efficient, similar, and universal—although possessing the former meaning, lack the latter meaning. Consequently, one should only explain it thus: that the fruit only ripens through the transformation of the cause is the meaning of vipāka. You Vaibhāṣikas should not merely rely on "different" to distinguish it from the other causes, as that does not exhaustively encompass the meaning. If one says "transformation" (pariṇāma), it exhaustively encompasses the meaning. The author of the treatise does not deny that the fruit of maturation is not obtained by the other five causes; rather, [he points out that] merely "different" does not exhaustively encompass the meaning.