俱舍論疏 12.195

12.195

論「又於一火至應不得成」，又破勝論計。彼計光明遍一窟中，有一麁色遍於室內。衣亦復爾，隨衣大、小，一色遍衣。今破光明，衣亦隨破。如一光明界分之中，近即明熱、遠便闇冷。既同一體，如何不同？

The treatise says: "Furthermore, regarding a single fire... it should not be possible," this again refutes the Vaiśeṣika doctrine. They posit that light pervades an entire cave, having a single coarse visible form pervading the inside of the room. Cloth is also like this: corresponding to whether the cloth is large or small, a single visible form pervades the cloth. Now, in refuting light, cloth is also refuted along with it. Just as within the expanse of a single light, what is near is bright and hot, while what is distant is dark and cold: since they are of one identical substance, how could they not be the same?