俱舍論疏 1.173

1.173

論「本論中說至及平等香」，第三引本論三香也。《正理》釋云「若能長養諸根、大種名為好香，與此相違名為惡香（相違者，謂能損諸根），無前二用名平等香。或諸福業增上所生名為好香，若諸罪業增上所生名為惡香，唯四大種勢力所生名平等香。」今詳上釋，香隨其一，義非決定也，望多有情損益不定故。三香四香說雖不同，皆攝香盡。更互相攝，思而可知。非是要義，不煩廣述。

[Regarding the] treatise's [statement]: "In the root treatise it is said […] and balanced odor": the third [part] cites the three odors of the root treatise. The *Nyāyānusāra* explains: "If it can nourish the sense faculties and the great elements, it is called a good odor; the contrary of this is called a bad odor (the contrary means it can harm the faculties); that which has neither of the previous two functions is called a balanced odor. Alternatively, that which is produced by the predominance of meritorious karmas is called a good odor; if produced by the predominance of sinful karmas, it is called a bad odor; that which is produced solely by the power of the four great elements is called a balanced odor." Now examining the above explanation: whichever odor it may be, its meaning is not definitive, because harm and benefit are not fixed relative to multiple sentient beings. Although the accounts of three odors and four odors are not identical, both encompass odors completely. Their mutual subsumption can be understood on reflection; it is not an essential point, so there is no need to elaborate.