俱舍論疏 24.150

24.150

論「謂如分離至故不成證」，指事破也。非想地惑共許無有漏得，練根捨時雖無二得，煩惱不起，共許異生生上地時，下地煩惱斷得都無，下地煩惱亦不得起。故不成證。《正理論》云「此二雖無煩惱斷得，而勝進故，遮惑得生。彼亦應然，故證非理。由此但可作如是言：二道於中所作同故，隨一現起，引二得生。不可說言為成斷故。」

On the Śāstra's statement: "Namely, like the severance of a portion up to therefore it does not constitute proof": This points to concrete cases to refute it. For the defilements of the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, it is mutually accepted that there is no āsrava possession; when renounced during faculty-training, although neither possession is present, the afflictions do not arise. It is mutually accepted that when an ordinary worldling is reborn in a higher ground, there is no possession of severance of the lower ground's afflictions at all, yet the lower ground's afflictions still cannot arise. Therefore, this does not constitute proof. The Nyāyānusāra states: "Although in these two cases there is no possession of severance of afflictions, because of superior progress, the arising of the possession of defilement is blocked. The same should apply to that case as well; therefore the proof is illogical. Thus one can only speak as follows: Because the function of the two paths therein is identical, when either one becomes manifest, it induces both possessions to arise. It cannot be said that this is in order to establish severance."