俱舍論記 2.63

2.63

Regarding "The remaining nine dhātus... are called non-appropriated": The five sense faculties such as the eye residing in the present tense are appropriated by those mind and mental factors, and are called appropriated (upātta). The past and future are not so, and are called non-appropriated. Question: If present five faculties enter the mindless state or when mental consciousness arises, then they are not appropriated by consciousness, or when the five consciousnesses arise intermittently, those that are not supports for consciousness are also non-appropriated; how then can the present five faculties be said to be appropriated? Explanation: For the present five faculties, even when consciousness does not rely upon them, they are still called appropriated, because they belong to the category of the appropriated. Question: Past and future five faculties also belong to the category of the appropriated, so they should be called appropriated. Explanation: Present five faculties have the capacity to give rise to consciousness, so they are called appropriated; past and future five faculties have no capacity to give rise to consciousness, so they are called non-appropriated. Another explanation: When consciousness does not arise, the present five faculties are not appropriated; but stating that they are appropriated is based on when consciousness arises, where the function of the meaning of appropriation is prominent. Just as the great elements of concentration and the path, although not separated from the body and also present, are called non-appropriated, the five faculties are also like this. Furthermore, the *Prakaraṇapāda* states: "Informative karma is non-appropriated," and this is also because it is present and not separated from the body. If one follows the former explanation, to reconcile with that text one would say that the great elements of concentration and the path exist when entering concentration, but do not exist upon emerging from concentration, so they are called non-appropriated. This treatise states that informative karma belongs to what is appropriated by the body. The intents of the treatises differ. Or perhaps the *Prakaraṇapāda* speaks based on informative karma arising temporarily like a guest lodger, hence it is called non-appropriated; while the "Karma-nirdeśa" chapter of this treatise speaks based on it arising for a long time and uniting with the sense faculties, hence it is called appropriated.