俱舍論記 2.135

2.135

「眼識於彼至何緣不起」者，眼見家總徵。理定眼識於被障色何故不生？此即總徵。「許眼見者」已下，理定我宗許眼見者，眼有對故不見障色。識與依根一境轉故，可言於被障色眼識不生。汝許識見者，於被障色何緣不起？

"Why does visual consciousness not arise […] with respect to that?" is the general inquiry by the proponent of the eye seeing. In correct principle, why does visual consciousness not arise with respect to obstructed forms? This is the general inquiry. From "Those who accept that the eye sees" onward: In correct principle, for our school, which accepts that the eye sees, because the eye has physical obstruction (sapratigha), it does not see obstructed forms. Because consciousness and the organ it relies upon operate upon a single object, one can say that with respect to an obstructed form, visual consciousness does not arise. For you who accept that consciousness sees, for what reason does it not arise with respect to an obstructed form?