俱舍論頌疏論本 10.20

10.20

釋曰：觸六者，是眼等六識相應觸也。謂眼識相應觸，乃至意識相應觸，觸體雖一，據識分六。三和生者，釋觸義也。謂根、境、識三和所生，能有觸對，故名為觸。論云：「且如五觸生，可三和合，許根、境、識俱時起故。意根過去、法或未來、意識現在，如何和合？」解云：此文難也。法或未來者，緣未來法也。言或者，不定也。且據緣未來，亦通緣餘世，故言或也。此難意者，謂意、法、識三各居一世，豈名和合？論云：「此即名和合，謂因果義成，或同一果，故名和合。謂根、境、識三同順生觸故。」解云：答（前問也）此有兩釋：初釋者，意、法為因，意識為果，因果義成，即名和合；第二解者，根、境、識三同一觸果，同一果故，故名和合。此上兩釋不約同世名和合也。依薩婆多，離三和外別有觸體，是心所法。若是經部，三和即觸，更無別體。論有相破，煩而不敘。

Explanation: "Contacts are six" means the contacts associated with the six consciousnesses, such as the eye-consciousness; that is, the contact associated with eye-consciousness up to the contact associated with mental consciousness. Although the essence of contact is one, according to the consciousnesses it is divided into six. "Born of the meeting of three" explains the meaning of contact. That is, born of the combination of the three—faculty, object, and consciousness—it is able to make contact, and hence is called contact. The treatise states: "Now, as for the arising of the five contacts, a meeting of three is possible, because faculty, object, and consciousness are admitted to arise simultaneously. But the mental faculty is past, dharmas may be future, and mental consciousness is present—how can there be a meeting?" Explanation: This text raises an objection. "Dharmas may be future" refers to cognizing future dharmas. The word "may" indicates indefiniteness; taking cognizing the future as an example, it also extends to cognizing other time periods, hence it says "may". The intention of this objection is: the three—mental faculty, dharma, and consciousness—each reside in a different time period; how could this be called a meeting? The treatise states: "This is indeed called a meeting, because the sense of cause and effect is accomplished, or because they have the same single fruit, hence it is called a meeting—meaning that faculty, object, and consciousness together conform to producing contact." Explanation: This answers the preceding question with two explanations. In the first explanation, the mental faculty and dharmas are causes and mental consciousness is the effect; since the sense of cause and effect is accomplished, it is called a meeting. In the second explanation, the three—faculty, object, and consciousness—share the same single fruit of contact; having the same fruit, it is called a meeting. These two explanations above do not define meeting in terms of the same time period. According to the Sarvāstivādins, apart from the meeting of the three, there is a separate entity of contact, which is a mental factor. In the Sautrāntika view, the meeting of the three is itself contact, with no separate entity. The treatise has reciprocal refutations, but they are verbose and not recounted here.