成唯識論述記 4.321

4.321

述曰：下破他非。設許別報心是趣生，既知除異熟無記心外，無趣生體故。此心若無，生無色界起善等位，應非趣生。謂在彼界起善心性有覆心時，應非趣生，此時無報故；不同下界有報色故。若此本難唯經部師，無不相應命根等故。若破薩婆多，不許彼不相應已，今為此難，於理不遮。故知設許別報法是趣生難，前已遮善等非趣生、雜起故；一趣成多趣法，應是多趣身故。第一設許別報心是趣生訖。

The Commentary states: Below is the refutation of the opposing positions. Supposing one concedes that the mind of distinct retribution (viśeṣa-vipāka) constitutes the realms and destinies, since it is already understood that apart from the indeterminate mind of retribution (vipāka-avyākṛta-citta) there is no substantial entity of the realms and destinies: if this [indeterminate retribution] mind does not exist, then when one is born in the formless realm and gives rise to wholesome [minds] and the like, one would not belong to any realm or destiny. That is to say, when one is in that realm and gives rise to a mind of wholesome nature or a defiled-unobscured mind, one would not belong to any realm or destiny, because at that time there is no retribution; unlike the lower realms, there is no retribution-matter (vipāka-rūpa). If this primary objection is directed solely against the Sautrāntika master, [it is] because [they] have no [substantial] non-associated life-faculty and the like. If it refutes the Sarvāstivādin, having already rejected their non-associated [formations], now posing this objection does not hinder reason. Therefore, it is understood that regarding the objection granting that distinct retribution phenomena constitute the realms and destinies, earlier it was already precluded that wholesome and other [minds] do not constitute the realms and destinies because they arise mixed together; for phenomena of one destiny would become phenomena of multiple destinies, and one would possess bodies of multiple destinies. The first [part], conceding that the mind of distinct retribution constitutes the destinies and realms, is concluded.