俱舍論記 1.118

1.118

「論曰至不正為後」者，就長行中，一解五境、二明生識總別。此下解五境，文即為五所見名色。就解色境中，一出色體、二辨四句。就出色體中總有三說，此即初解釋頌色二，一顯、二形。顯色有四，青、黃、赤、白，是本顯色。餘光、影、明、闇、雲、烟、塵、霧八種顯色，是此四色差別建立。光是黃攝，日初出時見赤色者，餘物映故。或光是赤攝，或光是黃、赤色攝。影、闇青色攝。明通青、黃、赤、白色攝，皆有明故。雲、烟、塵、霧皆通青、黃、赤、白色攝。問：光等八色是四差別，寧非是假？解云：論其本色但是青、黃、赤、白四種。於此四中隨義差別立餘八名，各有實體，而非是假。問：雲、烟、塵、霧若顯色收，如何四句之中是俱句攝？一解云：雲、烟、塵、霧是顯非形，相狀顯彰名之為顯。質礙麁著因觸可憶，知長、短等說之為形。雲、烟、塵、霧無此礙用，故顯非形。此即理證。又諸論中，形、顯二種說雲等四皆顯色攝。若亦通形，何故不說？此即文證。然諸論說雲等四種俱句攝者，謂此四色實非長等、似長等現。意識緣彼，勝解力故起長等解。如不淨觀，雖緣實色，勝解力故作青瘀等解。以此四色顯中稍麁、生長等解，故俱句攝。影、光、明、闇在於空中，自體疎散託質方現，以微細故不同雲等。第二解云：雲、烟、塵、霧通顯及形，諸論皆說俱句攝故。然諸論中說雲等四顯色攝者，生顯智強，故俱偏顯攝。問：若據生顯智強即顯攝者，四句分別應初句收，如何乃是俱句所攝？解云：四句之中前兩單句雖據生智強說，若於此聚有別新生形、顯色者，立兩單句。雲等四色雖顯強形，無別新生顯、形俱故，生智非過希奇，所以非初句攝。第三解云：雲、烟、塵、霧是顯色攝，同第一解，然說俱句者是餘師義。第四解云：雲、烟、塵、霧通顯及形同第二解，然說顯者是餘師義也。

Regarding the passage from "The commentary states: […] ending with the irregular": in the prose, there are two parts: first, explaining the five sensory objects; second, clarifying the generic and specific generation of consciousness. The explanation of the five objects below is divided into five parts; that which is seen is called visible form (rūpa). In explaining the visible form object, there are two parts: first, setting forth the substance of visible form; second, distinguishing the four permutations. In setting forth the substance of visible form, there are three explanations in total. This is the first, explaining the two kinds of visible form in the verse: first, color (varṇa); second, shape (saṃsthāna). There are four colors: blue, yellow, red, and white; these are the primary colors. The other eight colors—sunlight, shadow, brightness, darkness, cloud, smoke, dust, and mist—are established through distinctions within these four colors. Sunlight is subsumed under yellow; the red seen when the sun first rises is due to reflection by other matter. Alternatively, sunlight is subsumed under red, or sunlight is subsumed under both yellow and red. Shadow and darkness are subsumed under blue. Brightness spans and is subsumed under blue, yellow, red, and white, because all have brightness. Cloud, smoke, dust, and mist all span and are subsumed under blue, yellow, red, and white. Question: If the eight colors such as sunlight are distinctions of the four, how could they not be conceptual (prajñapti)? Answer: If we discuss their primary color, there are only the four kinds: blue, yellow, red, and white. Among these four, the other eight names are established according to distinct meanings; each has a real substance and is not conceptual. Question: If cloud, smoke, dust, and mist are included under color, how are they subsumed under the category of "both [color and shape]" among the four permutations? One explanation says: Cloud, smoke, dust, and mist are color and not shape; the conspicuous manifestation of their appearance is called color. That which is tangible, coarse, and prominent, which can be recollected on account of touch, so that one knows long, short, etc., is called shape. Cloud, smoke, dust, and mist lack this function of physical obstruction; hence they are color and not shape. This is the proof from reasoning. Moreover, in the various treatises, between shape and color, the four such as cloud are all stated to be subsumed under color. If they also pertained to shape, why would this not be stated? This is the textual proof. However, when the various treatises state that the four kinds such as cloud are subsumed under the category of "both," it means that these four colors are in reality not long, etc., but appear similar to long, etc. When mental consciousness grasps them, through the force of resolve (adhimokṣa) it gives rise to the conception of long, etc. Just as in the contemplation of impurity, although one observes real visible forms, through the force of resolve one forms the conception of blueness, lividness, and so forth. Because these four colors are somewhat coarse among colors and give rise to the conception of long, etc., they are subsumed under the category of "both." Shadow, sunlight, brightness, and darkness exist in the sky; their substance is diffuse and dispersed, only appearing when relying on solid matter; because they are subtle, they are not like cloud and the others. A second explanation says: Cloud, smoke, dust, and mist pertain to both color and shape, because the various treatises all state that they are subsumed under the category of "both." However, where treatises state that the four such as cloud are subsumed under color, it is because the cognition of color generated by them is predominant, so they are predominantly subsumed under color. Question: If being subsumed under color is based on generating a predominant cognition of color, then in the fourfold permutation they should be included in the first permutation [color only]; how can they be subsumed under the permutation of "both"? Answer: Among the four permutations, although the first two simple permutations are explained based on the predominance of cognition generated, if in that aggregation there are distinct newly arisen shapes or colors, the two simple permutations are established. Although the four colors such as cloud have color predominating over shape, because there are no distinct newly arisen color and shape coexisting, the cognition generated is not extraordinarily distinct; therefore, they are not subsumed under the first permutation. A third explanation says: Cloud, smoke, dust, and mist are subsumed under color, which agrees with the first explanation; however, the statement that they belong to the permutation of "both" is the opinion of other masters. A fourth explanation says: Cloud, smoke, dust, and mist pertain to both color and shape, agreeing with the second explanation; however, the statement that they are color is the opinion of other masters.