成唯識論述記 5.613

5.613

述曰：第二，不共是見道斷，亦通修道斷。所以者何？忿等十皆通見所斷故。彼言通見，明知亦修，以極成故，所以不說，以忿等十各別頭生，故與相應名非主獨行。此十亦增上是主，故無此十時，唯無明增。此隨，小乘名為不共。然此忿等無別有體，即根本故，從輕相說名不共也。此雖二別，仍是不遍三性，心起無明所攝。

The Commentary states: The second unshared is abandoned by the vision path, and also runs through what is abandoned by the cultivation path. Why is that? Because the ten such as anger all run through what is abandoned by vision. That it says 'also runs through vision' clearly shows it is also of cultivation; because it is extremely well established, it is therefore not mentioned. Because the ten such as anger arise with separate origins, being associated with them is called non-sovereign solitary-active. These ten are also predominant and sovereign, so when these ten are absent, ignorance alone is predominant. These secondary [afflictions] are called unshared by the Hīnayāna. However, these, anger and the like, have no separate entity, being precisely root [afflictions]; spoken of from their milder aspect, they are called unshared. Although these two are distinct, they are still subsumed under the ignorance that arises in thoughts without pervading the three natures.