俱舍論記 9.163

9.163

「不爾所觀至父子等名」者，釋。觀待不同，謂若觀此前因名緣已生，非即觀斯前因復名緣起。謂若觀此後果名為緣起，非即觀斯後果復名緣已生。雖於一法所望不同，猶如一物望後名因、望前名果，父子亦然。

Regarding "It is not so; what is regarded [...] the names of father and son, and so forth": this is the explanation. The relative perspectives are not the same: namely, if one regards this prior cause, it is called dependently arisen, but one does not regard this very same prior cause as also being called dependent origination. Namely, if one regards this subsequent fruit, it is called dependent origination, but one does not regard this very same subsequent fruit as also being called dependently arisen. Although with respect to a single dharma the points of reference differ, just as a single thing in reference to what is after is called a cause, and in reference to what is before is called a fruit; father and son are also like this.