俱舍論疏 20.22

20.22

論「若自謂是至非此部攝」，簡別宗也。分別說部者，說義有是有非，更須分別故，名分別說部。舊《婆沙》云毘婆闍婆提，訛也。新《婆沙》云毘婆闍縛地。毘婆此云分別，縛地此云說。《宗輪論》云「飲光部計，若業果已熟則無，果未熟則有。彼計同分別說部。」

On the Śāstra's statement: "If one considers oneself to be […] one is not subsumed under this school": this distinguishes other schools. As for the Vibhajyavādins, they state that among meanings some exist and some do not, requiring further distinction (vibhajya); hence they are named the Vibhajyavāda school. The old Vibhāṣā says 'Vibhajyavādī' (pipo shepotī), which is erroneous; the new Vibhāṣā says 'Vibhajyavādī' (pipo shefūdī). 'Pipo' (vibha-) here means distinction (vibhajya), and 'fūdī' (-vādī) here means assertion (vāda). The Samayabhedoparacanacakra states: "The Kaśyapīya school posits that if the fruit of an action has already ripened, it does not exist; if the fruit has not yet ripened, it exists. Their tenet is identical to that of the Vibhajyavādins."