俱舍論疏 4.131

4.131

論「外方諸師至心所俱起」，敘異師說。異師意云：憂如喜根，非唯有記，由此惡作亦通三性，此相應品便有十三心所俱起。《正理論云》「然此惡作通善、不善，不通無記，隨憂行故，離欲貪者不成就故。非無記法有如是事，然有追戀：我頃何為不消而食？我頃何為不畫此壁？如是等類。彼心乃至未觸憂根，但是省察未起惡作，若觸憂根便起惡作。爾時惡作理同憂根，故說惡作有如是相，謂令心慼惡作心品。若離憂根，誰令心慼（名省察誤）？」

The Śāstra says: "Masters of foreign lands […] arise co-presently with mental factors." This relates the theory of other masters. The meaning of the other masters is: sorrow (daurmanasya), like the faculty of joy (saumanasya), is not exclusively recorded; consequently, regret also extends to the three moral natures, and this associated category then has thirteen mental factors arising together. The Nyāyānusāra states: "However, this regret extends to wholesome and unwholesome, but does not extend to the indeterminate, because it follows sorrow, and because those free from desire-greed do not possess it. Indeterminate dharmas have no such occurrence. Rather, there is the lingering thought: 'Why did I eat when indigestion was present? Why did I not paint this wall just now?' and such like. As long as that mind does not touch the faculty of sorrow, it is merely examination and has not yet given rise to regret; if it touches the faculty of sorrow, it then generates regret. At that time, regret is in principle identical with the faculty of sorrow; hence it is said that regret has such a characteristic, namely a mental category of regret that causes the mind to grieve. If separated from the faculty of sorrow, what would make the mind grieve (to call it examination is an error)?"