俱舍論頌疏論本 13.21

13.21

應二根取故者，是經部師正立理破，汝薩婆多若謂實有別類形色，則應一色二根取過，如長等色，一眼根見，二身根觸，以身觸時知長短故，由此應成二根取過。十二處中，理無色處二根所取，故知形色本無實體。論云：「然如依觸取長等相，如是依顯能取於形（解云：此文是經部立正義。言依觸者，以形是假，身根觸時，意識於中依身根觸取假長等，故言依觸，即是意識依身根觸，取長等也）。」

'Because it would have to be grasped by two sense faculties': the Sautrāntika masters formally establish reasoning to refute [them]. If you, Sarvāstivādin, assert that there is a substantially existent, distinct category of physical shape, then there would be the fault that a single [kind of] matter is grasped by two sense faculties: just as with matter such as length, first it is seen by the eye faculty, and second it is touched by the body faculty, because when touching with the body one knows length and shortness; hence, there would follow the fault of being grasped by two sense faculties. Within the twelve sense bases, there is logically no form base that is grasped by two sense faculties; hence one knows that physical shape originally has no substantial entity. The treatise says: 'However, just as one apprehends the characteristic of length and so forth dependent on touch, so too dependent on color one can apprehend shape (Explanation: This passage presents the correct position established by the Sautrāntikas. Saying "dependent on touch" means that because shape is nominal, when the body faculty touches, mental consciousness therein apprehends nominal length and so forth dependent on the body faculty's touch; hence it is said "dependent on touch," which means mental consciousness apprehends length and so forth dependent on the body faculty's touch).'