瑜伽師地論略纂 4.136

4.136

「何等受不有故愛不有乃至加行緣識道理」者，問：受是果，愛是煩惱，行是業，識是果，全不相似，云何類同？答：行與識，果、業異故，異性相望；今受與愛，果或雖別，異性亦同，故指無別。如從業生異熟，異熟生煩惱，為類同故，義不相違。

"Because what sort of feeling does craving not exist, up to the principle of conditioning consciousness by preparatory effort": Question: Feeling is a fruit, craving is an affliction; formations are karma, consciousness is a fruit—they are completely dissimilar; how can they be analogised as the same? Answer: Between formations and consciousness, because fruit and karma are different, they look to each other across different natures; now, between feeling and craving, although fruit and affliction differ, their different natures are likewise the same; therefore pointing out [the analogy] makes no distinction. Just as from karma there arises maturation (vipāka), and from maturation there arise afflictions, so to make the analogy identical, the meaning is not contradictory.