俱舍論記 9.193

9.193

「若爾便成至純大苦蘊集」者，論主破。顯彼經除執。後句能具破，前句應無用。此即破也。論主破訖，顯經意言：然或有勝論執有我為依行等得有，是依此有彼有。由無明等因分生故，行等得生，是此生故彼生。是故世尊為除彼執，決判行等果有即由無明等生因，非由於我。若此因生故彼果生，即是依此因有彼果有，非謂行等果有別依餘我為因。此有、彼有等即是無明緣行等，無別有我生。純大苦蘊集，如下文釋。

Regarding "If so, then it would follow … the arising of this entire great mass of suffering": the author of the treatise refutes it, showing that that sūtra eliminates false attachments. The latter clause would fully refute [both], and the former clause would be useless. This is the refutation. Having completed the refutation, the author clarifies the intent of the sūtra, saying: However, some Vaiśeṣikas hold that there is a self on which volitional formations and so forth depend and are able to exist, which corresponds to "depending on the existence of this, that exists"; and because causal parts such as ignorance arise, volitional formations and so forth are able to arise, which corresponds to "because of the arising of this, that arises." For this reason, in order to eliminate their false attachment, the World-Honoured One decisively determines that the existence of results such as volitional formations is precisely due to causal arising such as ignorance, not due to a self. If, because of the arising of this cause, that result arises, this is precisely that depending on the existence of this cause, that result exists; it does not mean that the existence of results such as volitional formations separately depends on another self as a cause. "Depending on the existence of this, that exists," and so forth, is precisely that ignorance conditions volitional formations, and so forth, with no separate self being born. "The arising of this entire great mass of suffering" is as explained below.