俱舍論疏 3.81

3.81

論「此非成證至外異生品」，自下論主破，有二：一通化地部引文證成無漏、二自引經文證通有漏。此即初也。「此非成證」，總非。「依無漏根說此言故」，釋所以信等五根通其二種，謂有漏、無漏。彼說聖有凡無，依無漏根說，不依有漏信等五根。云何知然者？化地部徵：云何知依無漏根說？言「先依無漏至說此言故」，釋。論主釋依無漏信等五根所以也。夫建立聖人唯有為無漏、非無為有漏。彼經既以信等五根建立聖人，故知唯依無漏根說。前說聖有，依無漏根。既言若全無此信等五根，故知唯說無漏。「或諸異生至外異生品」，論主第二釋，如文可解。

On the Śāstra's statement: "This is not a proof […] class of external ordinary beings": From here below, the author of the treatise refutes [them], which has two parts: first, explaining the passage cited by the Mahīśāsakas to establish that it proves [the five faculties] are anāsrava; second, citing sutra passages of his own to prove that they also extend to being sāsrava. This is the first part. "This is not a proof" is a general negation. "Because these words are spoken based on the anāsrava faculties" explains the reason why the five faculties such as faith extend to both kinds—namely, sāsrava and anāsrava. When that [school] says they are possessed by noble beings and absent in ordinary beings, this is spoken based on the anāsrava faculties, not based on the sāsrava five faculties such as faith. How is this known to be so? The Mahīśāsaka questions: How is it known that it is spoken based on the anāsrava faculties? The words "Because previously based on anāsrava […] these words were spoken" provide the explanation. The author of the treatise explains the reason why it is based on the anāsrava five faculties such as faith. For establishing noble beings relies solely on the conditioned anāsrava, not on the unconditioned or the sāsrava. Since that sutra establishes noble beings through the five faculties such as faith, it is therefore known that it is spoken solely based on the anāsrava faculties. The earlier statement that noble beings have them was based on the anāsrava faculties. Since it says "if one is entirely devoid of these five faculties such as faith," it is therefore known that it speaks solely of the anāsrava [faculties]. "Or else ordinary beings […] class of external ordinary beings": This is the author of the treatise's second explanation, which can be understood from the text.