瑜伽論記 17.8

17.8

泰云：舊攝論云：若無若下，無明諸行不生，若無修道無明諸行不熟。今云，一切能發，若為會通。解云，見惑若未斷修惑亦發業，斷見惑已修不得發，無助伴故，以此義。故攝論主云：若無若下，無明由見惑等修亦發業故。此論主云：一切發業。又解：見道煩惱能發引滿業，攝論約此義，修惑唯得發圓滿業，如預流等加捲等，此論主約此義。若爾，何故佛性論云：由思惟故，諸業得生。由見惑故，諸行得熟。後更思之。

Tai says: The old *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* says: 'If there were no ignorance under suffering, the formations would not arise; if there were no ignorance of the path of cultivation, the formations would not ripen.' Now it says that all can initiate [karma]; how are these to be reconciled? The explanation is: If afflictions of seeing have not yet been severed, afflictions of cultivation also initiate karma; after afflictions of seeing are severed, cultivation cannot initiate [karma], because of the lack of an accompanying partner. Due to this meaning, the master of the *Saṃgraha* says: 'If there were no ignorance under suffering... because through afflictions of seeing, cultivation also initiates karma.' Hence the master of this treatise says: 'All initiate karma.' Another explanation: Afflictions of the path of seeing can initiate projecting and completing karma; the *Saṃgraha* relies on this meaning. Afflictions of cultivation can only initiate completing karma, as in Stream-enterers and so forth undergoing further rebirths; the master of this treatise relies on this meaning. If so, why does the *Buddhadhātu-śāstra* say: 'Due to reflection, all karmas are born; due to afflictions of seeing, all formations ripen'? This should be reflected upon further later.