俱舍論記 9.41

9.41

「有餘師言至無相違失」者，第二師解。由業力故別生根依大種，是中有末身根大種為同類因，引起生有初念根依大種。此中有末身根大種依精血住，精血即是大種同時精血，依彼不淨為緣住故。寄喻來況。如依棄糞別有虫生。若不依彼不淨為緣，無力能生生有根依，如種生芽必依地等。經云父母不淨生羯剌藍者，不淨聚中根依大種生羯剌藍，故與彼經無相違失。《正理論》意評取此論後師，破此論前師云「彼執生有色法生時，非中有色相續而起，與芽從種道理相違。無情與情為種引起，不應道理，相續異故。有情、無情二色俱滅，後情色起，無情為因、情不為因，言非應理。

[On the passage] 'Other masters say... there is no fault of contradiction': the second master explains. Due to the force of karma, the great elements that are the basis of the faculties are separately produced; it is the great elements of the body faculty at the end of the intermediate existence that serve as the homogeneous cause, giving rise to the great elements that are the basis of the faculties in the initial moment of rebirth-existence. These great elements of the body faculty at the end of the intermediate existence abide reliant on semen and blood; semen and blood are the contemporaneous semen and blood of those great elements, which abide using that impurity as a condition. A metaphor is drawn to illustrate this: just as insects are separately born relying on cast-off dung. If it did not rely on that impurity as a condition, it would lack the power to produce the basis of the faculties of rebirth-existence, just as a seed producing a sprout must rely on the earth and so forth. As for the sūtra saying that 'the impurity of the parents produces the kalala,' it is the great elements that are the basis of the faculties within the mass of impurity that produce the kalala; therefore, there is no fault of contradicting that sūtra. The intent of the *Nyāyānusāra* evaluates and adopts this latter master of the treatise, refuting the former master of this treatise by saying: 'His assertion that when the physical matter of rebirth-existence arises, it does not arise in continuation of the physical matter of intermediate existence, contradicts the principle of the sprout [arising] from the seed. For insentient and sentient to serve as seed and give rise [to one another] is not reasonable, because their continuums are different. When the two physical matters of the sentient and insentient perish together, and subsequent sentient physical matter arises, to say that the insentient is the cause while the sentient is not the cause is unreasonable.'