成唯識論述記 8.521

8.521

又解相應縛心及遍行等性非染法，與煩惱俱名煩惱縛。煩惱斷時，彼心王遍行等名為得斷，離相應惑故，名斷雜彼煩惱。心王遍行等，雖與染法相應，性非應斷法故，在此門收，此解違下唯修斷文，見道豈無相應縛也，由此應知，前二說善。若說七識名雜煩惱，離欲九品未得無學，欲界善等應不名斷，以雜煩惱猶未斷故。若准此義，離欲之時，但能緣盡說之為斷，非雜煩惱。既爾，生上聖者，不斷雜煩惱，亦自然無。如見道煩惱修惑緣縛未盡，亦名為斷，斷已永不生，以自性強故，說之為斷。其善等法類亦應然，緣彼煩惱強故，不待斷雜惑亦名為斷。既爾，如何由之名有漏此義應思也。

Another interpretation: in bondage through association, the citta and the omnipresent [mental factors] and so on are not of defiled nature, but because they are concomitant with afflictions, they are called bound by afflictions. When the afflictions are abandoned, that cittarāja, the omnipresent [mental factors], and so on are said to attain abandonment; because they are freed from associated afflictions, it is called abandoning the afflictions mixed with them. Although the cittarāja, omnipresent [factors], and so on are associated with defiled dharmas, because their nature is not among dharmas that should be abandoned, they are included under this heading. This interpretation contradicts the subsequent text on being abandoned only by cultivation, for how could the path of seeing lack bondage through association? From this one should know that the former two explanations are good. If it is said that the seven consciousnesses are called mixed afflictions, then having separated from the nine grades of desire without yet attaining the state of a non-learner (aśaikṣa), the wholesome and so on of the desire realm should not be called abandoned, because the mixed afflictions are not yet abandoned. If according to this meaning, when separating from desire, one speaks of abandonment merely because the capacity to take them as object is exhausted, not because of the mixed afflictions. If so, when an ārya is born into a higher realm, without abandoning the mixed afflictions, they naturally cease to exist as well. Just as with the afflictions of the path of seeing, when the bondage of being an object of cultivation-afflictions is not yet exhausted, they are also called abandoned; once abandoned they will never arise again, because their self-nature is strong, so they are spoken of as abandoned. Their wholesome and other dharmas should by analogy also be like this: because the afflictions that take them as object are strong, they are called abandoned without waiting for the abandonment of mixed afflictions. If so, how do they become called "having outflows" on their account? This meaning should be reflected upon.