俱舍論記 2.63

2.63

「所餘九界至名無執受」者，眼等五根住現在世，有彼心、心所法執受，名有執受。去、來不爾，名無執受。問：現在五根，若入無心或起意識即無識執受，或五識間起非識依者亦無執受，如何說現在五根執受？解云：現在五根，識不依時亦名執受，執受類故。問：去、來五根亦執受類，應名執受。解云：現在五根容有發識，名有執受；去、來五根無容發識，名無執受。又解：現在五根，識不起時非是執受；而言執受，據識起時以執受義作用顯故。如定、道大種雖不離身亦現在，名無執受，五根亦爾。又《品類足》說「表業非執受」，此亦現在不離身故。若作前解，通彼文言定、道大種入定雖有，出定即無，名無執受。此論說表，屬身執受。論意各別。或可《品類》據表暫起猶如客寄，名無執受。此論〈業品〉據多時起得與根合，名有執受。

Regarding "The remaining nine dhātus... are called non-appropriated": The five sense faculties such as the eye residing in the present tense are appropriated by those mind and mental factors, and are called appropriated (upātta). The past and future are not so, and are called non-appropriated. Question: If present five faculties enter the mindless state or when mental consciousness arises, then they are not appropriated by consciousness, or when the five consciousnesses arise intermittently, those that are not supports for consciousness are also non-appropriated; how then can the present five faculties be said to be appropriated? Explanation: For the present five faculties, even when consciousness does not rely upon them, they are still called appropriated, because they belong to the category of the appropriated. Question: Past and future five faculties also belong to the category of the appropriated, so they should be called appropriated. Explanation: Present five faculties have the capacity to give rise to consciousness, so they are called appropriated; past and future five faculties have no capacity to give rise to consciousness, so they are called non-appropriated. Another explanation: When consciousness does not arise, the present five faculties are not appropriated; but stating that they are appropriated is based on when consciousness arises, where the function of the meaning of appropriation is prominent. Just as the great elements of concentration and the path, although not separated from the body and also present, are called non-appropriated, the five faculties are also like this. Furthermore, the *Prakaraṇapāda* states: "Informative karma is non-appropriated," and this is also because it is present and not separated from the body. If one follows the former explanation, to reconcile with that text one would say that the great elements of concentration and the path exist when entering concentration, but do not exist upon emerging from concentration, so they are called non-appropriated. This treatise states that informative karma belongs to what is appropriated by the body. The intents of the treatises differ. Or perhaps the *Prakaraṇapāda* speaks based on informative karma arising temporarily like a guest lodger, hence it is called non-appropriated; while the "Karma-nirdeśa" chapter of this treatise speaks based on it arising for a long time and uniting with the sense faculties, hence it is called appropriated.