俱舍論記 1.142

1.142

「於色界中至傳說如此」者，約界分別。色界不資段食，故無飢、渴；餘皆有。彼界衣服，一一別住，即不可稱，多衣積聚方可稱故，此顯有重。涼風觸身能為饒益，表有冷觸。經部色界無冷，論主意明經部不信有冷，故云傳說。若依《婆沙》一百二十七云「有說：色界衣雖不可稱，而餘物可稱。有說：彼界一一衣雖不可稱，多衣積集即可稱。如細縷、輕毛，積集便重（然無評家。此論同後師）。」問：五境之中，何故色、味二種當體立名，聲、香、觸三約因等辨？如聲中執受、不執受大種因聲，此是約因。有情名、非有情名聲，此是約用，由聲顯故。可意、不可意聲，此是約果，因聲生故。或約情說，如香中好、惡等香，此是約情。或據相形、或據勝劣，如觸中四大澁、滑、輕、重據體，後三約果或皆約體。解云：色、味相顯，故約體明。聲、香相隱，故約因等辨。觸通隱顯，故約體約果。又解：離中知內，色相顯了，當相立名。聲相稍隱，約因等辨。合中知內，味相顯了，當相立名。香相難知，約情以辨。觸通隱顯，故約體說。八約果說，三以實而言。色等五境皆有執受、不執受為因，有情數、非有情數大種為因，可意、不可意、好、惡、平等，此論不具說者，略而不論。或可影顯，廣如《正理》、《法蘊》、《品類》、《五事》、《入阿毘達磨論》說。若作句數，皆准聲應知。

Regarding "In the form realm […] so the tradition says": This distinguishes according to the realms. The form realm is not nourished by material morsel food, and therefore has no hunger or thirst; it has all the rest. The garments of that realm, when existing individually, cannot be weighed; only when many garments are accumulated can they be weighed; this shows that there is heaviness. A cool breeze touching the body can bring benefit, which indicates that there is cold touch. In the Sautrāntika view, there is no cold in the form realm; the author of the treatise intends to show that the Sautrāntikas do not believe there is cold, which is why he says "so the tradition says". According to fascicle 127 of the *Mahāvibhāṣā*: "Some say: Although garments in the form realm cannot be weighed, other objects can be weighed. Some say: Although individual garments in that realm cannot be weighed, when many garments are accumulated they can be weighed, just as fine threads and light wool become heavy when accumulated (However, there is no critical arbitrator; this treatise agrees with the latter masters)." Question: Among the five sense-data, why are the two kinds, visible form and taste, named after their own entities, while the three—sound, fragrance, and touch—are differentiated with reference to causes and so forth? As in sound: sound caused by appropriated and unappropriated primary elements—this is with reference to cause; sound named as sentient and non-sentient—this is with reference to function, because it is manifested by sound; agreeable and disagreeable sound—this is with reference to effect, because they arise due to sound. Or they are spoken of with reference to subjective experience: as in fragrance, good, bad, and neutral fragrances—this is with reference to subjective experience. Or it is based on mutual comparison; or based on superiority and inferiority. As in touch: the four primary elements, roughness, smoothness, lightness, and heaviness are based on entities, while the last three are with reference to effect, or all are with reference to entities. The explanation says: The characteristics of visible form and taste are prominent; therefore they are explained with reference to entity. The characteristics of sound and fragrance are concealed; therefore they are differentiated with reference to causes and so forth. Touch is both concealed and prominent; therefore it is explained with reference to both entity and effect. Another explanation says: Cognized internally at a distance, the characteristics of visible form are clear, and its name is established according to its own characteristics. The characteristics of sound are somewhat concealed, and are differentiated with reference to causes and so forth. Cognized internally in conjunction, the characteristics of taste are clear, and its name is established according to its own characteristics. Fragrance is difficult to know, and is differentiated with reference to subjective experience. Touch is both concealed and prominent; therefore eight are stated with reference to entity, and three are stated with reference to effect. Speaking in terms of reality: all five sense-data of form and so forth have appropriated and unappropriated as causes, have sentient and non-sentient primary elements as causes, and are agreeable, disagreeable, good, bad, and neutral; that they are not completely expounded in this treatise is because they are abbreviated and not discussed, or perhaps they are implicitly indicated, as explained at length in the *Nyāyānusāra*, *Dharmaskandha*, *Prakaraṇapāda*, *Pañcavastuka*, and *Abhidharmāvatāra*. If one were to formulate logical permutations, all should be understood by analogy with sound.