俱舍論疏 3.13

3.13

論「有說此於至諸清淨法」，敘異說也。「扇搋」，謂無根、損根。「半擇」謂無勢、損勢。「二形」，謂具足二根。初以無根或被損故，於染、淨中無增上用。次以無勢或被損故，於染、淨中亦無增上。後具二根，具二煩惱，故染、淨中亦不增上。扇搋、半擇皆悉通有本性、損壞，由此故言本性、損壞扇搋、半擇。扇搋中有全無根、有分無根，半擇中有全無勢、有分無勢。諸經論中有說扇搋是無根者，全無、少無同名無故。《婆沙》九十解離欲名為丈夫四句中，云「或成就男根而不名丈夫，如扇搋、半擇迦等。」此意即說分無根也。有人多解，未能釋難。然此後釋，不及前師。所以然者？二根之者雖於染、淨無增上用，而得名根。故知有染、淨言非為定證。

On the Śāstra's: "Some say that with respect to […] all pure dharmas": this recounts an alternative explanation. "Ṣaṇḍha" refers to having no faculty or having an impaired faculty. "Paṇḍaka" refers to having no potency or having impaired potency. "Both sexes" (ubhayavyañjanaka) refers to being fully endowed with both faculties. The first, because of lacking the faculty or being impaired, has no predominant efficacy with respect to defilement or purification. The second, because of lacking potency or being impaired, likewise has no predominance with respect to defilement or purification. The last, being endowed with both faculties, is endowed with two sets of defilements, and therefore is also not predominant in defilement or purification. Both ṣaṇḍha and paṇḍaka include both the innate (jāti) and the impaired (upahata); hence it is said, "innate and impaired ṣaṇḍhas and paṇḍakas". Among ṣaṇḍhas, there are those entirely lacking the faculty and those partially lacking the faculty; among paṇḍakas, there are those entirely lacking potency and those partially lacking potency. Where various sūtras and śāstras say that a ṣaṇḍha is without a faculty, it is because lacking entirely and lacking partially are both equally called "without". In the Vibhāṣā, fascicle ninety, explaining the four propositions on being freed from desire being called a 'man' (puruṣa), it says: "Or one may possess the male faculty and yet not be called a man, such as a ṣaṇḍha, a paṇḍaka, and the like." This intent refers precisely to partially lacking the faculty. Some people provide numerous interpretations, yet have failed to resolve the objection. However, this latter interpretation does not match that of the former masters. Why so? Because although those with two faculties have no predominant efficacy with respect to defilement and purification, they still obtain the name "faculty". Thus we know that the statement concerning defilement and purification is not a definitive proof.