俱舍論疏 22.182

22.182

論「唯緣欲界至由此已成」，此明所緣境界別也。「依十地」者，以此十地皆容能緣欲界色故。故《婆沙》云「以無色界無緣色法不淨觀故，所緣境者唯是欲界顯、形色也。不緣諸入，以唯緣色，故是緣義不緣名也。」《正理論》云「此不淨觀力能遍緣欲界所攝一切色處。若謂尊者阿泥律陀不能觀天以為不淨，舍利子等於佛色身亦不能觀以為不淨，如何此觀遍緣欲色？此難不然。勝無滅者，能觀天色為不淨故，佛能觀佛微妙色身謂不淨故，由是此觀定能遍緣欲色為境。由此已顯緣義非名。上已顯成通緣三性。」

The treatise says, "It focuses only on the desire realm... by this it is already established," which explains the distinction in the objective sphere focused upon. "Relying on ten stages" is because these ten stages are all capable of focusing on matter of the desire realm. Therefore the Vibhāṣā says: "Because in the formless realm there is no contemplation of impurity focusing on material dharmas, its objective sphere is only the visible color and shape of the desire realm. It does not focus on the āyatanas, because focusing solely on matter, it focuses on the referent and not on names." The Nyāyānusāra says: "This contemplation of impurity has the power to universally focus on all rūpa-āyatanas subsumed within the desire realm. If it is said that Venerable Aniruddha could not contemplate heavenly beings as impure, and Śāriputra and others also could not contemplate the material body of the Buddha as impure, how then could this contemplation universally focus on desire-realm matter? This objection is not correct. Those superior to Aniruddha are able to contemplate heavenly matter as impure, and the Buddha is able to contemplate the Buddha's subtle material body as impure; therefore, this contemplation is definitely capable of universally taking desire-realm matter as its object. By this it has already been clarified that it focuses on the referent and not on names. Above it has already been established that it universally focuses on the three natures."