俱舍論疏 13.111

13.111

論「是故所言至定為應理」，論主評取經部前師釋也。《正理》云「應問此中何名相續？何名轉變？何名差別？彼作是答：思業為先，後後心生，說名相續。即此相續於後後時別別而生，說名轉變。即此無間能生果時功力勝前，說名差別。如有取識為命終心，於此心前雖有種種感後有業，而於此時唯有極重、或唯串習、或近作業，感果功力顯著非餘（此與對法論同。此中有難：非極重、非串習、非近作業，此時熟者豈非顯著）。」

On the treatise's statement, "Therefore, what was said ... is definitely reasonable": the author of the treatise evaluates and accepts the explanation of the former Sautrāntika masters. The *Nyāyānusāra* says: "Here, one should ask: What is called continuity? What is called transformation? What is called distinction? They answer as follows: With the karma of volition coming first, subsequent minds arise, which is called continuity. This very continuity arising distinctly at later times is called transformation. Immediately following this, the capacity to produce a fruit with greater power than before is called distinction. Just as with grasping consciousness acting as the dying mind: prior to this mind, although there are various karmas inducing future existence, at this moment only that karma which is extremely heavy, or habitual, or recently performed, shows prominent efficacy in inducing the fruit, and not others (this agrees with the *Abhidharmasamuccaya*. Here there is an objection: if a karma that is not extremely heavy, not habitual, and not recently performed ripens at this moment, is its efficacy not prominent?)."