俱舍論疏 6.90

6.90

論「若爾至即所除法」，第二染污苦諦難也。此不正義家誦《品類足論》第三節文，與正義家不同。正義宗云：除未來有身見相應法。此是舉身見除相應法也。以未來身見從過去、現在身見生故，而不能更生有身見。未來既無同類、遍行二因，故知身見望於身見更無餘因，故舉身見除相應法。由此但言除未來身見相應苦諦，不言及彼。不正義宗誦第三節文，即加「及彼」二字，云除未來身見及彼相應法。既有「及彼」二字，即是兩件除法，身見亦是俱句故除。即是未來身見能生身見，身見望身見無相應、俱有、異熟因義。既言未來身見與身見為因，故知即是同類因也。

The Śāstra states: "If so ... is the dharma to be excluded," which is the second objection concerning the defiled duḥkhasatya. Here, the heterodox party's recitation of the third passage of the Prakaraṇapāda differs from that of the orthodox party. The orthodox school says: "Exclude dharmas associated with the future view of self-identity (satkāyadṛṣṭi)." This cites the view of self-identity to exclude its associated dharmas. Because the future satkāyadṛṣṭi arises from past and present satkāyadṛṣṭi, it cannot further produce a satkāyadṛṣṭi. Since in the future there are neither sabhāga-hetu nor sarvatraga-hetu, we know that satkāyadṛṣṭi has no other cause with respect to satkāyadṛṣṭi; therefore, it cites satkāyadṛṣṭi to exclude its associated dharmas. For this reason, it only says "exclude the duḥkhasatya associated with the future satkāyadṛṣṭi," and does not say "and that [view]". The heterodox school recites the third passage adding the two characters "and that" (及彼), saying: "exclude the future satkāyadṛṣṭi and its associated dharmas." Since there are the two characters "and that", there are two excluded items, and satkāyadṛṣṭi is also part of the conjunct clause, hence excluded. This would mean that a future satkāyadṛṣṭi can produce satkāyadṛṣṭi; but satkāyadṛṣṭi with respect to satkāyadṛṣṭi has no meaning of saṃprayuktaka-hetu, sahabhū-hetu, or vipāka-hetu. Since it says that future satkāyadṛṣṭi serves as a cause for satkāyadṛṣṭi, we know it would have to be a sabhāga-hetu.