俱舍論疏 17.103

17.103

論「不言人壽至令不久住」，答。《正理》云「理應釋言：不說人壽是殺異熟，但應說言是殺生業近增上果。謂雖人壽是善業招，而由殺生增上力故，令彼相續唯經少時，以欲界中不善勝善有增上力能伏善故。若爾，何故說名等流果？顯增上果中有最近故。若二俱立增上果名，則不顯果有近、遠別。若謂不然，如何不善以修所斷無覆無記為等流果？與理無違，是故可言即人短壽是殺生業所引等流。」

The passage of the śāstra from "It does not say that human lifespan" up to "causes it not to abide for long" answers. The Nyāyānusāra says: "Reasonably, it should be explained: It is not said that human lifespan is the maturation of killing; rather, it should be said that it is the proximate dominant fruit (adhipatiphala) of the karma of killing. That is to say, although human lifespan is attracted by wholesome karma, by the dominant power of killing, it causes that continuum to endure for only a short time, because in the desire realm the unwholesome overcomes the wholesome, possessing dominant power capable of suppressing the wholesome. If so, why is it called a fruit of outflow? It reveals that among dominant fruits it is the most proximate. If both were designated with the name 'dominant fruit', it would not reveal that fruits have the distinction of proximate and remote. If one claims otherwise, how could the unwholesome have the undefiled indeterminate abandoned by cultivation as its fruit of outflow? There is no contradiction with reason; therefore, it can be said that this short lifespan of humans is the outflow induced by the karma of taking life."