成唯識論述記 7.119

7.119

述曰：自下第七、十煩惱俱門。悔行相麁必獨生染分，不與貪等九法並起，唯無明相應，貪等行相細故，此據多分，不許餘俱。下文邪見，悔修定，則說與俱邪見，與瞋俱故，悔亦與邪見、瞋俱，此文不盡理。又先行施後生追悔，悔與貪俱。有言我何意作此事，即分別我見亦與悔俱，合瞋、邪見、貪、我見得俱。此中約麁相不得。又解必不得俱，與悔間起，非必相應。問：忿等獨頭生許慢等俱起，惡作別頭起，應貪等俱生？答：忿等瞋等分，如本得相應，惡作別有體，非與貪俱起。何故忿等各別起耶？於自十中各別起故。

The Commentary states: From here down is the seventh section: association with the ten kleśas. Because the ākāra of remorse is coarse, it necessarily arises independently as a defiled part, not arising alongside the nine dharmas such as greed; it is associated only with ignorance, because greed and the others have subtle ākāras. This is based on the majority of cases, not admitting association with the rest. A passage below says that when false view regrets cultivating absorption, it is said to be accompanied by false view; and because false view is accompanied by anger, remorse is also accompanied by false view and anger; this text [here] does not exhaust the principle. Furthermore, one first practices giving and later gives rise to regret, in which case remorse accompanies greed. Some say, "Why did I intend to do this deed?", which is a discriminative view of self that also accompanies remorse; combining these, anger, false view, greed, and view of self can accompany it. Here, in terms of coarse characteristics, they cannot. Another explanation: They definitely cannot accompany it, but arise alternately with remorse, not necessarily being associated. Question: When anger (krodha) and the like arise independently, they are permitted to arise together with conceit (māna) and the like; when remorse arises as a separate head, should it arise together with greed and the others? Answer: Anger and the like are parts of hatred and the like, so they can be associated just like their roots; remorse has a distinct substantial entity, so it does not arise together with greed. Why do anger and the like each arise separately? Because they arise separately among their own ten.