俱舍論記 4.154

4.154

「愛敬有二至無色界無」者，答。若據緣法，愛、敬實通三界。此中意說緣補特迦羅，故不通無色。以欲、色界有色身故、有尊卑故、相貌顯故，可得相望有愛有敬。無色不爾，故在彼無。問：若通色界，何故《婆沙》二十九云「問：如是愛、敬於何處有？答：三界、五趣雖皆容有，而此中說殊勝愛、敬，唯在欲界人趣非餘，唯佛法中有此愛、敬。」准《婆沙》據別意說唯在欲界，何故此論通色界耶？解云：此論據顯故通色界，《婆沙》據殊勝故欲界，各據一義竝不相違。

Regarding the passage from "Affection and respect are of two kinds" up to "are absent in the formless realm": The answer: If based on taking dharmas as objective supports, affection and respect indeed pervade the three realms. What is intended here is taking pudgalas as objective supports, and therefore they do not extend to the formless realm. Because the desire realm and form realm possess physical bodies, have distinctions of exalted and base, and have manifest appearances, they can be mutually viewed as possessing affection and respect. The formless realm is not like this, and therefore they are absent there. Question: If it extends to the form realm, why does fascicle 29 of the Mahāvibhāṣā say: "Question: Where do such affection and respect exist? Answer: Although they are all admissible in the three realms and five destinies, what is spoken of here as superior affection and respect is exclusively in the human destiny of the desire realm, not others, and only within the Buddha's teaching is there such affection and respect"? According to the Mahāvibhāṣā, based on a specific intention, it is exclusively in the desire realm; why does this śāstra extend it to the form realm? The explanation is: this śāstra is based on manifest characteristics, hence it extends to the form realm; the Mahāvibhāṣā is based on superior quality, hence the desire realm; each relies on a particular meaning, and they do not contradict one another.