俱舍論記 5.203

5.203

「是故生等至此亦應爾」者，上來經部破訖，歸宗自釋，是故四相唯假建立，無別實物。如是本無今有生相，依五蘊法種類眾多，為簡所餘諸蘊恐濫彼故，說第六轉言、色之生等，為令他知此生唯色非餘受等。言色之生，說餘四蘊例此亦然。如世間說旃檀之香簡沈香等，石子之體簡瓦體等。又解：旃檀之香，離旃檀外無別有香。石子之體，離石子外無別有體。此色之生等，應知亦爾。

"Therefore arising and so forth [...] this should also be understood likewise": The above concludes the Sautrāntika's refutation; he now returns to his own school to explain: Therefore, the four characteristics are merely conventional designations, without distinct real entities. In this way, the characteristic of arising as 'previously nonexistent and now existing' is based on the five skandha dharmas which are manifold in kind; in order to exclude the remaining skandhas for fear of confusion with them, one uses an expression in the sixth case, 'the arising of form' and so forth, to let others know that this arising is only of form and not of the remaining feeling and so forth. In speaking of 'the arising of form,' speaking of the remaining four skandhas is by analogy also like this. Just as in conventional worldly speech one says 'the fragrance of sandalwood' to exclude agarwood and the like, or 'the substance of a pebble' to exclude the substance of a roof-tile and the like. Another explanation: In 'the fragrance of sandalwood,' apart from the sandalwood there is no distinct fragrance; in 'the substance of a pebble,' apart from the pebble there is no distinct substance. This 'arising of form' and so forth should be known to be also like this.