俱舍論頌疏論本 13.30

13.30

第四非作成業證者，又自非作，遣他殺等，若無無表，不應成業道。所以然者，謂發語處分遣他殺等，此發語表非業道攝，謂使未作殺等事故；若彼使者行殺等竟，此前語表更無異性，如何能教者成殺等業道？明知別有殺等無表來入身中，故能教人得成業道，故此業道即無表攝。

Fourth, as for the proof from non-action constituting karma: furthermore, when oneself does not act but dispatches another to kill and so forth, if there were no avijñapti, it would not constitute a karmapatha. Why is that? Namely, issuing speech to give orders dispatching another to kill and so forth—this issuance of speech-intimation (vijñapti) is not subsumed under the karmapatha, because the agent has not yet carried out the act of killing and so forth; when that agent has finished carrying out the killing and so forth, that earlier speech-intimation has no different nature, so how could the commander accomplish the karmapatha of killing and so forth? One clearly knows that there is an additional avijñapti of killing and so forth that comes into [the commander's] body, whereby the commanding person accomplishes the karmapatha; therefore, this karmapatha is subsumed under avijñapti.