俱舍論疏 2.118

2.118

論「意彼同分唯不生法」，釋意根也。意同分有三，謂已、正、當生意。彼同分有一，謂不生法。識起必託於境，緣境即有自用，故唯不生是彼同分，更無異說。問：意能緣十七皆名為同分，十七為意緣應名為同分。答：五根、五識對自境方名為同分，不約為境義。雖被意緣，非同分。問：五根、五識對自境雖被意緣非同分，五境既對於能緣，意若緣時名同分。答：五境對自根、識名同分，不對意識名同分。問：意非五自識，被緣非同分。五非意自境，意緣非同分。答：五境用有三，謂自根、自識及意識。他識雖緣，非同分。緣五意一用，但起此用即同分。《婆沙》七十一云「問：餘十七界亦是意識所了別境，應皆同分便無彼同分，如何說有彼同分耶？答：餘十七界不依意識立為同分及彼同分，但依各別根、境相對。謂眼對色、色對眼，乃至身對觸、觸對身。問：若爾，意界及意識界唯應對法界立同分、彼同分，是即緣餘十七界者應非同分。答：理應如是。然以意界及意識界通能了別一切法故，依自作用立為同分。如眼等根有見等用，必不立為彼同分故。」

On the Śāstra's stating, "The mind's non-counterpart is exclusively the dharma that does not arise": this explains the mind-faculty. The mind's counterpart has three kinds: the past, currently arising, and destined to arise minds. Its non-counterpart has one kind: the dharma that does not arise. When a consciousness arises it necessarily relies upon an object; cognising an object entails having its own activity; therefore exclusively that which does not arise is its non-counterpart, and there is no other opinion. Question: The mind can cognise seventeen [dhātus] and is entirely called a counterpart; should the seventeen, being cognised by the mind, be called counterparts? Answer: The five sense-faculties and five consciousnesses are called counterparts only with respect to their own objects, not in terms of being an object. Though cognised by the mind, they are not counterparts. Question: The five sense-faculties and five consciousnesses, though cognised by the mind, are not counterparts with respect to their own objects; but since the five objects correspond to that which can cognise them, when the mind cognises them, should they be called counterparts? Answer: The five objects are called counterparts in relation to their own sense-faculties and consciousnesses, not in relation to mental consciousness. Question: The mind is not the five's own consciousness, so when cognised by it, they are not counterparts. The five are not the mind's own objects, so when cognised by the mind, they are not counterparts. Answer: The functions of the five objects are threefold: their own sense-faculties, their own consciousnesses, and mental consciousness. Although cognised by another consciousness, they are not counterparts. Cognising the five is one function of the mind; whenever it gives rise to this function, it is a counterpart. Vibhāṣā 71 says: "Question: The other seventeen dhātus are also cognitive objects apprehended by mental consciousness; they should all be counterparts and there would be no non-counterparts—how then is it said that there are non-counterparts? Answer: The other seventeen dhātus are not established as counterparts and non-counterparts based on mental consciousness, but solely based on the mutual correspondence of individual sense-faculties and cognitive objects: the eye in relation to visible form, visible form in relation to the eye, and so forth up to the body in relation to tangibles, tangibles in relation to the body. Question: If so, the mind-dhātu and mental-consciousness-dhātu should only be established as counterparts and non-counterparts in relation to the dharmadhātu; thus those cognising the other seventeen dhātus ought not to be counterparts. Answer: In principle it should be so. However, because the mind-dhātu and mental-consciousness-dhātu can universally apprehend all dharmas, they are established as counterparts based on their own activity. Just as sense-faculties such as the eye have functions such as seeing and are definitely never established as non-counterparts [while functioning]."