俱舍論疏 2.41

2.41

論「若謂不生至鼻舌應無」，釋轉救也。若謂鼻、舌為嚴身故有，男根以醜陋故無者，陰藏隱密是善業招，何容醜陋？「又諸根生」已下，第二難也。若諸根生，非由有用無用、醜陋端嚴，有因即生，何論醜陋？鼻、舌、男根俱離境貪，理合齊無根愛，男根非有，鼻、舌應無。

On the Śāstra's: "If it is said that they do not arise... the nose and tongue should also be non-existent": this explains the shifted defense. If it is said that the nose and tongue exist for the sake of adorning the body, whereas the male faculty is absent because of ugliness, [then we reply:] the concealed private parts are brought about by wholesome karma, so how could they allow for ugliness? From "Moreover, the arising of faculties..." onwards is the second objection. If the arising of the faculties is not due to utility or lack of utility, ugliness or beauty, but rather they arise wherever the cause exists, why discuss ugliness? Both the nose and tongue and the male faculty are free from attachment to their objects, so by principle they should equally lack attachment to the faculties; thus, if the male faculty does not exist, the nose and tongue should also be non-existent.