俱舍論疏 9.177

9.177

論「非一切經至此亦應爾」，有部引例證不了義，就勝說無明也，如《象迹喻》說。「云何內地界謂髮、毛等」，髮、毛等中非無色等，然說髮、毛為地界者，以髮、毛中地界勝故，故就勝說名地界也。無明支中亦有五蘊，經就勝說以為無明。

On the Śāstra's statement: 'Not all sūtras, up to: here it should also be so': the Sarvāstivādins cite an analogy to prove it is of interpretable meaning, designated according to what is predominant, as stated in the *Hastipadopama-sūtra*: 'What is the internal earth element? It refers to hair, bodily hair, and so on.' Among hair, bodily hair, and so on, it is not that color and so forth are absent, yet hair and bodily hair are stated to be the earth element because the earth element is predominant in hair and bodily hair; thus, it is called the earth element according to what is predominant. Within the limb of ignorance there are also the five aggregates, but the sūtra designates it as ignorance according to what is predominant.