俱舍論疏 3.110

3.110

論「毘婆沙師至故非異熟」，有部引《婆沙》釋。《正理論》云「何緣定謂憂非異熟？此是異熟不應理故。云何不應？離欲貪者不隨轉故，異熟不然。設計隨轉，應如苦根，阿羅漢等亦可知有；而實非有，經所遮故。如契經說：設見大師般涅槃位，亦無愁等。又無用故，善亦不行，非能攝益如喜根故。」

The treatise says: "The Vaibhāṣikas up to therefore it is not vipāka"—the Sarvāstivādins cite the Vibhāṣā to explain. The Nyāyānusāra states: "For what reason is grief definitively said not to be vipāka? Because this being vipāka is illogical. Why is it illogical? Because it does not continue in those who are free from lustful desire, whereas vipāka does not behave in this way. Even if one assumes that it does continue, it should be like the faculty of pain, which can also be known to exist in arhats and the like; yet in reality it does not exist, as excluded by the sūtras. As a sūtra states: 'Even if they see the Great Master entering parinirvāṇa, they have no sorrow or the like.' Moreover, because it is useless, it is not present even in wholesome states, and it cannot benefit and nourish as the faculty of joy does."