成唯識論述記 6.434

6.434

述曰：無漏之位若無輕安，應輕安覺支非無漏攝。前師若言散心無此輕安非遍，誰謂無漏輕安不俱？深為錯難。然以前師輕安覺支非在無漏觀，有無漏觀後有漏觀時生，然亦名覺支，體非無漏。說為無漏者，無漏定遠引故，如苦根無漏。若爾，佛應無此覺支。

The Commentary states: If pliancy (prasrabdhi) did not exist in the anāsrava state, the pliancy-limb-of-awakening (prasrabdhi-saṃbodhyaṅga) should not be included under the anāsrava. If the former master claims: 'This pliancy does not exist in the distracted mind, so it is not pervasive—who says pliancy does not accompany the anāsrava?', this objection is deeply mistaken. However, according to the former master, the pliancy-limb-of-awakening is not within the anāsrava contemplation itself, but arises at the time of sāsrava contemplation subsequent to anāsrava contemplation; yet it is also named a limb of awakening, while its substance is not anāsrava. It is spoken of as anāsrava because it is distantly induced by anāsrava samādhi, just as the suffering indriya can be [termed] anāsrava. If that were so, the Buddha would lack this limb of awakening.