俱舍論疏 2.40

2.40

論「若離境愛至男根亦生」，難也。難中有二：一難本釋、二難轉釋。此文初也。凡起根愛為有境貪，若離境貪，根貪定無。既離境貪即無根愛，既無根愛，鼻、舌無因，即應非有。若謂雖離境貪得有根愛有鼻、舌根，男根亦應如鼻、舌有。

The treatise says: "If, being free from craving for objects... the male faculty would also arise." This is an objection. Within the objection there are two parts: first, objecting to the original explanation; second, objecting to the modified explanation. This passage is the first. Whenever craving for a faculty arises, it is because there is greed for the object; if one is free from greed for the object, craving for the faculty is definitely absent. Since one is free from greed for the object, there is no craving for the faculty; and having no craving for the faculty, the nose and tongue lack a cause and should therefore not exist. If one claims that despite being free from greed for objects, one can have craving for the faculties so that the nose and tongue faculties exist, then the male faculty should also exist just like the nose and tongue.