俱舍論疏 16.153

16.153

「論曰至偏立覺名」，述《婆沙》釋義也。《婆沙》一百二十一云「見、聞、覺、知是根非識。然舉識者，顯眼等根必由識助方能取境，以同分根能有作用，非彼同分故。問：何故眼等三識所受各立一種，而鼻、舌、身三識所受合立一種名為覺耶？尊者世友說曰：三識所緣皆唯無記，境無記故根立覺名。又以三根唯取至境，與境合故立以覺名。大德說言：唯此三根境界鈍昧猶如死尸，故能發識說名為覺。」此論言「無記性」，是世友義。「如死無覺」，是大德義。此論說識，意欲取根，如《婆沙》釋。

[On the passage in the] treatise: 'The text says: […] is exclusively designated with the name "sensed"': This states the explanation from the Vibhāṣā. Fascicle 121 of the Vibhāṣā states: 'Seeing, hearing, sensing, and knowing are faculties, not consciousnesses. However, consciousness is mentioned to show that the eye and other faculties must be assisted by consciousness to be capable of apprehending an object, because a faculty that is sabhāga has functioning, whereas that which is tat-sabhāga does not. Question: Why are what is experienced by the eye and other three consciousnesses established separately as one each, whereas what is experienced by the three consciousnesses of nose, tongue, and body are established collectively as one, called "sensed"? The Venerable Vasumitra said: What the three consciousnesses cognize is exclusively indeterminate; because the object is indeterminate, the faculties are designated with the name "sensed." Moreover, because the three faculties apprehend only contiguous objects, being united with the object, they are designated with the name "sensed." The Bhadanta said: Only the objects of these three faculties are dull and obscure, like a corpse; therefore, being able to generate consciousness is called "sensed".' In this treatise, 'indeterminate nature' represents Vasumitra's view; 'insensate like death' represents the Bhadanta's view. When this treatise speaks of consciousness, it intends to take the faculties, as explained in the Vibhāṣā.