俱舍論記 8.34

8.34

「略說段食至妙色故」者，答。略說段食、婬所引貪，名之為欲。下復引頌證欲是貪，大意可知。如《法蘊足論》第六云「然五妙欲非真欲體，真欲體者是緣彼貪。如世尊說：『世諸妙境非真欲，真欲謂人分別貪。妙境如本住世間，智者於中已除欲。』此頌意言：可愛妙色、聲、香、味、觸非真欲體。真欲體者，謂緣彼生分別貪著。欲境如本，智者於中名離欲。故尊者舍利子有時為人說如是頌。爾時有一邪命外道不遠而住，以頌難詰舍利子說：『若世妙境非真欲，真欲謂人分別貪。苾芻應名受欲人，起惡分別尋思故。』時舍利子報外道言：『起惡尋思，實名受欲。非諸苾芻於世妙境皆起不善分別尋思，故汝不應作斯難詰。』以頌反詰彼外道言：『若世妙境是真欲，說欲非人分別貪。汝師應名受欲人，恒觀可意妙色故。』時彼外道默然不能答，彼師實觀可愛色故。由此知欲是貪非境（已上論文）。」問：何故境名欲？解云：是欲具故名欲，如樂具故名樂。問：何故名妙？答：如《婆沙》一百七十三，一解云：復次諸欲下賤，而貪欲者分別增益取為淨妙，故說為妙（廣如彼釋）。問：何故但言五妙欲境，不言法耶？答：如《婆沙》云「意所識法何故不立妙欲耶？答：皆是愛所緣者立妙欲。意所識法有非愛所緣，故不立妙欲（廣如彼釋）。」

"Briefly stated, solid food... wondrous form" is the answer. Briefly stated, the craving induced by solid food and sexual intercourse is termed "desire". Below, a verse is cited again to prove that desire is craving, the general meaning of which can be understood. As the *Dharmaskandha*, fascicle 6, states: "However, the five wondrous sensual objects (kāmaguṇa) are not the real substantial entity of desire; the real substantial entity of desire is the craving conditioned by them. As the World-Honoured One said: 'The wondrous objects of the world are not real desire; / Real desire is man's conceptualized craving. / Wondrous objects abide in the world as they are; / The wise have eliminated desire therein.' The meaning of this verse is: lovely and wondrous sights, sounds, smells, tastes, and tangibles are not the real substantial entity of desire. The real substantial entity of desire is the conceptualized craving and attachment arising conditioned by them. Sensual objects remain as they are; the wise are called separated from desire in their regard. Thus the Venerable Śāriputra once recited this verse to others. At that time, an Ājīvika non-Buddhist was staying not far away and challenged Śāriputra with a verse, saying: 'If the wondrous objects of the world are not real desire, / And real desire is man's conceptualized craving, / Then a bhikṣu should be called one who experiences desire, / Because he gives rise to evil conceptual thoughts.' Then Śāriputra replied to the non-Buddhist: 'Giving rise to evil thoughts is indeed called experiencing desire. But not all bhikṣus give rise to unwholesome conceptual thoughts toward the wondrous objects of the world; therefore, you should not raise such an objection.' He then questioned that non-Buddhist in return with a verse, saying: 'If the wondrous objects of the world are real desire, / And desire is said not to be man's conceptualized craving, / Then your master should be called one who experiences desire, / Because he constantly views agreeable and wondrous form.' At that time, that non-Buddhist remained silent and could not answer, because his master indeed viewed lovely form. From this it is known that desire is craving, not the objective realm" (end of treatise passage). Question: Why are objective realms called desire? Explanation: Because they are implements of desire, they are called desire, just as implements of pleasure are called pleasure. Question: Why are they called wondrous? Answer: As the *Mahāvibhāṣā*, fascicle 173, explains in one interpretation: Furthermore, sensual desires are base, but those who crave them conceptually superimpose upon them and grasp them as pure and wondrous, hence they are called wondrous (explained extensively therein). Question: Why does it only speak of the five wondrous sensual objects and not mention mental phenomena (dharma)? Answer: As the *Mahāvibhāṣā* states: "Why are dharmas cognized by the mind not established as wondrous desires? Answer: Those which are entirely the intentional objects of love are established as wondrous desires. Among dharmas cognized by the mind, there are those that are not the intentional objects of love, so they are not established as wondrous desires" (explained extensively therein).