成唯識論述記 7.320

7.320

述曰：文第四，義第九，三學等分別。前言有為善法在學、無學身即名學、無學，滅定實從現行是學、無學，以似涅槃無進趣、止息行相，不可說為有學、無學，是非學非無學，雖屬道諦，同餘有為，似涅槃故，故是非二，不同餘種子，彼非止息故。六十二說正與此同。彼說非所行故，似涅槃故，非二所攝，然此中無進趣止息，不同善身業等亦是學等故。由此義故，非二通有為、無為，有為中通有漏、無漏，滅定有為無漏非二攝故。有學、無學中，通有漏、無漏，以苦、憂根等是無學故。

The Commentary states: This is the fourth section of text, the ninth topic: distinction according to the three trainings and so forth. Previously it was said that conditioned wholesome dharmas existing in the person of a trainee (śaikṣa) or an adept (aśaikṣa) are called trainee or adept dharmas; in actuality, according to its active manifestations, the concentration of cessation belongs to trainee or adept [dharmas]. However, because it resembles nirvāṇa and lacks the mental activities of proceeding forward or coming to rest, it cannot be called trainee or adept; it is neither-trainee-nor-adept. Although it belongs to the truth of the path, like other conditioned phenomena, because it resembles nirvāṇa, it is neither of the two; unlike other seeds, which are not [states of] cessation. Fascicle sixty-two says precisely the same as this. It states: Because it is not an object of practice and because it resembles nirvāṇa, it is not subsumed under either. But here, lacking proceeding forward or coming to rest, it is not like wholesome bodily karma and so forth, which are also trainee [dharmas] and so on. For this reason, neither-of-the-two encompasses both conditioned and unconditioned; within conditioned it encompasses sāsrava and anāsrava, for the concentration of cessation is conditioned, anāsrava, and subsumed under neither. Trainee and adept encompass both sāsrava and anāsrava, because the faculties of suffering, grief, and so forth are adept [in an arhat].