俱舍論疏 5.91

5.91

論「毘婆沙師至等無間緣」，引《婆沙》釋，由過去世等無間緣力能生也。《正理》廣明在滅定位總無有心，故彼論云「無心有情理必應有，有命等故，異於命終有情色、心非決定有。心若定有，色亦應然；色有時無，心亦應爾。故有命者，即名有情。然命必依色、心隨一。引契經說識不離身，於定無心亦無違害。以即於此所依身中識必還生，故言不離。謂一相續眾同分中，識相續流非畢竟斷。譬如鬼病暫不發時，由未永除仍名不離。乃至然定後心復得生者，定前心作等無間緣所引發故。又加行中要期勢力所引發故。」

Regarding the treatise's statement, "The masters of the Vaibhāṣika school ... as the samanantara-pratyaya": Citing the Vibhāṣā's explanation, it is able to arise through the power of the samanantara-pratyaya in the past. The Nyāyānusāra extensively clarifies that at the stage of cessation, there is completely no mind; thus that treatise states: "Reason dictates that sentient beings without mind must necessarily exist, because they possess vitality and so on, unlike dead sentient beings. Matter and mind are not definitively present. If mind were definitively present, matter should also be so; if matter is sometimes absent, mind should also be so. Therefore, one who possesses vitality is named a sentient being. However, vitality must rely on either matter or mind. Citing the sūtra's statement that consciousness does not leave the body is also without contradiction for the mindless attainment, because consciousness will definitely arise again right within this support of the body; hence it is said not to leave. That is to say, within the nikāya-sabhāga of a single continuum, the stream of consciousness's continuum is not completely severed. Just as when a demonic possession temporarily does not manifest, because it has not yet been permanently eradicated it is still said not to have departed. ... As for the fact that the mind after the attainment is able to arise again: it is because the mind prior to the attainment acts as the samanantara-pratyaya to induce it; furthermore, it is induced by the power of the resolve made during prayoga."