成唯識論演祕 2.424

2.424

釋曰：正理難意：於無色界無內五處，或起餘心無異熟意，異熟勢分於彼既無，說何為壽？《疏》中敘難但取彼意，不具彼文。言不同分心者，即是染污有漏善等，與業所引異熟心別，名不同分。雖無漏心亦非同分，無漏、漏別，故別言之。經部命根而有兩說：一、《正理》說依六處立；二、《俱舍》說依眾同分。然俱舍師救前破云：若依異熟立者是異熟，若依餘立者，雖依彼立非隨彼法而判性，如名、句等依善、惡聲。

Explication: The purport of the Nyāyānusāra's objection is that in the formless realm there are no internal five sensory bases, and if another mind arises, there is no karmically matured mind; since the momentum of karmic maturation is already absent there, what can be spoken of as life-span? The Commentary's summary of the objection only captures its import without providing the full text. The phrase "dissimilar mind" refers to defiled, wholesome sāsrava, and other such minds, which differ from the karmically matured mind projected by karma, and thus are called "dissimilar." Although an anāsrava mind is also not dissimilar [in its lack of karmic maturation], because anāsrava and sāsrava are distinct, it is stated separately. The Sautrāntika has two explanations of the life-faculty: first, the Nyāyānusāra states that it is posited based on the six sensory bases; second, the Kośa states that it is posited based on the generic similarity (nikāya-sabhāga). However, the master of the Kośa rescues it from the preceding refutation, saying: "If it is posited on karmic maturation, it is karmic maturation; if it is posited on something else, although posited on it, its moral quality is not determined according to that phenomenon, just as name-groups, phrase-groups, and the like are based on wholesome or unwholesome speech."