俱舍論記 4.160

4.160

「又麁細性至以別尋伺」者，論主又難。夫麁、細性相待而立，或約三界、或約九地、或約九品，差別不同。上、下相形，下地名麁、上地名細。乃至有頂望下地為細、望滅定為麁，應有尋、伺。又解：麁名為上、細名為下，即麁、細相形，乃至有頂應有尋、伺。論主敘經部計為難。故《婆沙》五十二云「或有執從欲界乃至有頂皆有尋、伺，如譬喻者（已上論文）。」又諸法中麁、細二性無別體類，不可依之以別尋、伺二種差別。如受領納所顯、想取像所顯，諸心所法皆有別相。此麁、細性總通五蘊，故不可依以別尋、伺。

Regarding the passage from "Furthermore, gross and subtle natures" up to "to distinguish vitarka and vicāra": The author of the śāstra objects again: In general, gross and subtle natures are established relative to one another, whether in terms of the three realms, the nine grounds, or the nine grades, with various distinctions. Comparing higher and lower, a lower ground is called gross, and a higher ground is called subtle. Even the Peak of Existence (bhavāgra), relative to lower grounds, is subtle, but relative to the attainment of cessation (nirodhasamāpatti), is gross; thus it ought to possess vitarka and vicāra. Another interpretation: gross is called superior, and subtle is called inferior; thus, comparing gross and subtle, even up to the Peak of Existence there ought to be vitarka and vicāra. The author of the śāstra raises the Sautrāntika view as an objection. Hence fascicle 52 of the Mahāvibhāṣā states: "There are some who maintain that from the desire realm up to the Peak of Existence there are vitarka and vicāra, like the Dṛṣṭāntikas (end of citation)." Furthermore, among all dharmas, the two natures of gross and subtle have no distinct substantial category; one cannot rely on them to distinguish the two differences of vitarka and vicāra. Just as feeling is manifested by experiencing, and ideation is manifested by grasping characteristics, so all mental factors have distinct characteristics. These gross and subtle natures generally pertain to all five aggregates, so one cannot rely on them to distinguish vitarka and vicāra.