俱舍論疏 26.115

26.115

「論曰至名四實一」，述不正義也。《婆沙》七十九云「問：何故緣苦有四行相，名有四種，實體亦四。緣餘三諦而不爾耶？答：緣苦諦行相，是四顛倒近對治故，如四顛倒名、體各四。緣餘三諦所起行相，非四顛倒近對治故，名雖有四實體唯一（已上論文）。」

"The commentary states... four in name, one in reality": this recounts the incorrect view. The Vibhāṣā, fascicle 79, states: "Question: Why is it that those taking suffering as object have four aspects, being four in name and also four in real entity, while those taking the remaining three truths as object are not like this? Answer: Because the aspects taking the noble truth of suffering as object are the proximate antidotes to the four inversions, just as the four inversions are four in name and entity. The aspects arisen taking the other three truths as object are not the proximate antidotes to the four inversions; hence, though four in name, their real entity is only one (the above is from the treatise)."