俱舍論記 1.245

1.245

「此難非理至十二處別」者，論主破經部。雖因多微積集方作生門，然多集時一一諸微皆有因用，是則一一皆成生門，顯所立因有不成過。若不爾者，而說根、境相助共生識等，無別因用，應非別處，同一處攝。若同一處，但應立六，是則應無十二處別。合共發識既非同處，根境各別、因用不同，說十二處。故知根、境共發識等，一一極微亦有因用，各得處名。按上所說，論主此宗許蘊是假，違破婆沙許處是實，故破經部。以理為量，不執一宗，隨何勝者，釋為已立。

"This objection is incorrect ... the distinction of twelve āyatanas": the author of the treatise refutes the Sautrāntika. Although they become gateways of arising only through the accumulation of many atoms, yet when many assemble, each individual atom possesses causal efficacy; thus each individual atom constitutes a gateway of arising, which shows that the stated reason commits the fallacy of being unestablished. If it were not so, and one were to say that faculty and object assist each other to jointly generate consciousness and the rest without distinct causal efficacy, then they should not be separate āyatanas, but would be subsumed under a single āyatana. If they were a single āyatana, only six should be established, and there would be no distinction of twelve āyatanas. Since their joint generation of consciousness does not make them a single āyatana, and faculties and objects are distinct with different causal efficacies, twelve āyatanas are taught. Therefore we know that when faculty and object jointly generate consciousness and the rest, each individual atom also possesses causal efficacy and each obtains the name āyatana. In accordance with what is said above, this system of the author of the treatise accepts that skandhas are provisional, refuting the Vibhāṣā, and accepts that āyatanas are real, thus refuting the Sautrāntika. Taking reason as the authority, he does not cling to a single school, but adopts whichever position is superior as his own established view.