成唯識論述記 2.919

2.919

述曰：自下正難：有漏善心，性非無漏，名雜染故；如不善等。此「雜染」言，通一切三性有漏法得為因也。言「雜染」者，為諸煩惱所緣縛義。又此有漏善心，不應與無漏為因，是雜染故；如不善心等。或可總云：有漏善心性非無漏，不應與無漏為因；是雜染故；如惡心等。此有法不極成，誰許有漏善心性非無漏？故應如前所說為善，何故有漏不得為無漏因？

The Commentary states: From here down, the treatise directly objects: The nature of sāsrava good minds is not anāsrava, because it is called defiled; like non-good [minds] and the like. This word 'defiled' encompasses all sāsrava dharmas of the three natures that can serve as causes. By 'defiled' is meant the sense of being bound as the objective support of the defilements. Furthermore, this sāsrava good mind should not serve as a cause for anāsrava, because it is defiled; like non-good mind and the like. Alternatively, one can state generally: The sāsrava good mind is not anāsrava in nature and should not be a cause for anāsrava; because it is defiled; like bad minds and the like. In this [formulation] the subject is not mutually established; who admits that the nature of sāsrava good mind is not anāsrava? Therefore the formulation stated earlier is better. Why can the sāsrava not serve as a cause for the anāsrava?