俱舍論記 2.139

2.139

「然經說眼至唯為見色」者，識見家通經引證。經言眼見，是見所依，如意能識。或就所依根說能依識業用，如座言聲。又如眼所識色，亦就所依說能依識。已上通經引例。「又如經說」下，復證眼識依眼門見。此經意說：門非是見，依門識見。若門即見，豈容被經重說見言？

"However, the sūtra speaks of the eye […] solely for the purpose of seeing forms" is the citation of scriptural testimony by the proponent of consciousness seeing to reconcile the sūtras. When the sūtra speaks of the eye seeing, it is the basis of seeing, just as the mind is able to cognize. Or, it speaks of the activity of the consciousness that relies [upon the organ] in terms of the supporting organ, just as when a seat is said to make a sound. Moreover, it is like the "form cognized by the eye," which also speaks of the consciousness that relies [upon it] in terms of its support. The above reconciles the sūtras and cites analogies. From "Furthermore, as a sūtra says" downward, it further proves that visual consciousness sees relying on the gate of the eye. The intent of this sūtra is to say: the gate is not itself seeing; it is consciousness relying on the gate that sees. If the gate were itself seeing, how could that sūtra redundantly use the word 'see'?