成唯識論了義燈 5.243

5.243

五句如次，初三不增長，輕故不必受異熟，即時定報不定，及俱不定，後二增長。重故必定受異熟，即報定時不定，及時報俱決定。故下文言：受異熟決定者，如先所說故思造業。若此定受時報俱定者，即無分位決定何得別說。故下分位定，云：如由此業，於現法中，必定受異熟生，後准此。又此無想定正是顛倒分別，妄報涅槃，既通四業。明知後二非唯時、報二俱決定。

The five clauses are in order: the first three are unaccumulated; because they are light, they do not necessarily experience ripening—that is, the time is definite and the retribution is indefinite, or both are indefinite. The latter two are accumulated; because they are heavy, they definitely experience ripening—that is, the retribution is definite and the time is indefinite, or both time and retribution are determinate. Therefore, the text below says: "Those whose ripening is determinate are as previously stated regarding karma committed deliberately." If this determinate experience were determinate in both time and retribution, then there would be no determination of state, so how could it be stated separately? Hence the determination of state below says: as through this karma, one definitely experiences ripening in the present life; the subsequent ones [i.e., in the next life and subsequent lives] are to be understood accordingly. Furthermore, this absorption of non-conception is precisely inverted discrimination, falsely presuming it to be nirvāṇa; since it applies to the four karmas, we clearly know that the latter two are not only determinate in both time and retribution.