俱舍論記 2.71

2.71

「若爾何故至乃至廣說」者，覺天引經為難。若眼等根非大種者，何故經言「云何名內地界？謂於眼肉團中，若內各別堅性堅類」，乃至廣說。彼經於眼說堅性等，故知眼根即是堅等。彼經即眼名為肉團，肉團是總、堅等是別，別依於總，故言於中；為簡非情，故言若內。諸有情異名為各別，或大小不同名為各別。簡濕性等名為堅性，堅中非一名為堅類。或此堅性是餘堅類名為堅類，乃至廣說濕、煗、動性。

On the passage "If so, why [...] up to extensive discussion": Venerable Bhadanta-Buddhadeva cites a sūtra to raise an objection. If the eye and the other sense faculties are not the great elements, why does the sūtra say: "What is called the internal earth element? It refers to that within the physical mass of the eye, which is internal, individual, having the nature of solidity, of the class of solidity," up to the extensive discussion? That sūtra speaks of the nature of solidity and so forth in the eye; therefore we know that the eye faculty is precisely solidity and so forth. That sūtra designates the eye as a "physical mass"; the physical mass is the general, while solidity and so forth are the particular, and because the particular relies on the general, it says "within". In order to set aside the insentient, it says "internal". The differences among sentient beings are termed "individual", or the differences in size are termed "individual". Setting aside liquidity and the rest is called "the nature of solidity"; there being more than one among solid things is called "of the class of solidity". Alternatively, this nature of solidity being of the same class as other solid things is termed "of the class of solidity"; and so on up to the extensive discussion of liquidity, warmth, and motion.