俱舍論頌疏論本 2.4

2.4

十有色有對者，五根、五境稱之為十。體是色故，名為有色。此十色界極微所成，更相障礙，故名有對。論云：如手礙手，如石礙石，或二相礙（手石名二）。應知有對總有三種：一障礙有對、二境界有對、三所緣有對。對是礙義，礙有二種：一障礙礙、二拘礙礙。障礙礙者，謂障礙有對，十色為體，障礙即有對，持業釋也。拘礙礙者，謂境界所緣二種有對。境界有對，體者，論云：謂十二界（六根、六識），法界一分（於法界中唯取心所，故云一分），諸有境法，於色等境（前十二界及法界一分能取境故，名諸有境法。於色等境者，即所取境也）。此十二界為境所拘，名為有對。境界之有對，依主釋也。所緣有對，體者，謂七心界全（六識及意界也），法界一分（心所是也）。言所緣者，色等六境也。言有對者，七心界，法界一分也。此七心界法界名所緣有對者，為所緣境之所拘礙，名為有對。所緣之有對，依主釋也。論引《施設足論》證境界有對，作四句分別故。《施設足論》作如是說：此中於水，有礙非陸，如魚等眼。於陸有礙非水，從多分說，如人等眼。有於俱礙，如畢舍遮（唐云食血肉鬼）、室獸摩羅，及捕魚人、蝦蟆等眼（此畢舍遮等，於水陸俱能見色，故通俱礙耳）。有俱非礙，謂除前相。論云：境界所緣，復有何別（問也）？若於彼法，此有功能，即說彼為此法境界。心、心所法執彼而起，彼於心等名為所緣。解云（答也）：彼法者，色等六境也。此有功能者，此六根、六識於彼色等，有見聞等功能也。准此論文，功能所託，名為境界。如眼能見色，識能了色，喚色為境界，以眼識於色有功能故也。心、心所法其性劣弱，執境方生，猶如羸人非杖不起，故色等境識所攀附，名為所緣也（已上注也）。准此論文，境界、所緣，二義全別。且如一色被眼所見，名為境界，眼為有功能於色故也。即此一色能引識起，名為所緣，為與識為力故也。由此道理，礙取境義邊，名境界有對。故境界有對通六根、六識，以根及識能取境故。礙緣境義邊，名所緣有對，故所緣有對唯心、心所，以心、心所杖境起故。亦光法師云：「礙體義邊，名所緣有對。礙用義邊，名境界有對。」更有多釋，煩而不敘。亦論云：云何眼等於自境界及自所緣轉時說名有礙（問礙義也。云何眼根、眼識等於自境界轉時說名有礙？問境界有對也。云何眼識等於自所緣轉時說名有礙？問所緣有對也。言自簡他，如眼見色、耳聞聲也）？越彼依餘，此不轉故（解云：答也。越彼色等，於餘聲等，此眼等不轉，故名為礙也）。或復礙者是和合義，謂眼等法，於自境界及自所緣和合轉故（解云：是約和合義以釋礙也）。

Regarding "ten are material and have resistance": the five faculties and the five objects are called ten. Because their intrinsic nature is material (rūpa), they are called "material". These ten material dhātus are composed of subtle particles (paramāṇu) and mutually obstruct each other; hence they are called "having resistance" (sapratigha). The treatise says: "Like hand obstructing hand, like stone obstructing stone, or both obstructing each other (hand and stone are called both)." One should know that, in general, there are three kinds of resistance: first, resistance through physical obstruction (āvaraṇa-pratighāta); second, resistance through sphere of activity (viṣaya-pratighāta); third, resistance through cognitive object (ālambana-pratighāta). Resistance means obstruction. There are two kinds of obstruction: first, obstruction by physical impediment; second, obstruction by confinement. Obstruction by physical impediment refers to resistance through physical obstruction; its intrinsic nature is the ten material dhātus; obstruction itself is resistance, which is a karmadhāraya compound. Obstruction by confinement refers to the two kinds of resistance: through sphere of activity and through cognitive object. As for the intrinsic nature of resistance through sphere of activity, the treatise says: "It refers to the twelve dhātus (the six faculties and six consciousnesses), a portion of the dharmadhātu (within the dharmadhātu, taking only the mental factors, hence called 'a portion'), and all phenomena possessing a sphere of activity, with respect to objects such as visible forms (the preceding twelve dhātus and a portion of the dharmadhātu, because they can grasp objects, are called 'all phenomena possessing a sphere of activity'. 'With respect to objects such as visible forms' refers to the objects grasped)." These twelve dhātus are confined by their spheres of activity and are therefore called "having resistance". Resistance of a sphere of activity is a tatpuruṣa compound. As for the intrinsic nature of resistance through cognitive object: it refers to all seven mind-dhātus (the six consciousnesses and the mind-dhātu) and a portion of the dharmadhātu (mental factors). The term "cognitive object" (ālambana) refers to the six objects: visible forms and the rest. The term "having resistance" refers to the seven mind-dhātus and a portion of the dharmadhātu. That these seven mind-dhātus and the dharmadhātu are called "having resistance through cognitive object" means that they are confined and obstructed by their cognitive objects, and are therefore called "having resistance". Resistance of a cognitive object is a tatpuruṣa compound. The treatise cites the Prajñaptipāda-śāstra to prove resistance through sphere of activity, because it makes a fourfold alternative (catuṣkoṭi). The Prajñaptipāda-śāstra speaks thus: "Herein, there is obstruction in water and not on land, such as the eyes of fish and the like. There is obstruction on land and not in water, speaking from the majority, such as the eyes of humans and the like. There is obstruction in both, such as the piśācas (in Chinese: ghosts that eat flesh and blood), the śiśumāra, and the eyes of fishermen, frogs, and the like (these piśācas and others can see forms both in water and on land; therefore they are capable of obstruction in both). There is non-obstruction in both, namely, excluding the previous characteristics." The treatise says: "Between sphere of activity (viṣaya) and cognitive object (ālambana), what further difference is there?" (A question). "If this has functioning with respect to that phenomenon, then that is said to be the sphere of activity of this phenomenon. The mind and mental factors arise by grasping that; that is called a cognitive object with respect to mind and the rest." The explanation says (answering): "That phenomenon" refers to the six objects: visible forms and the rest. "This has functioning" means that these six faculties and six consciousnesses have functions such as seeing and hearing with respect to those forms and the rest. According to this text of the treatise, that upon which functioning relies is called the "sphere of activity". For example, the eye can see form and the consciousness can discern form; one calls form a "sphere of activity" because the eye and consciousness have a function regarding form. Mind and mental factors are by nature weak and feeble, and arise only by grasping an object, just as a frail person cannot stand up without a staff; hence objects such as visible forms are clung to by consciousness and are called "cognitive objects" (ālambana) (the above is the commentary). According to this text of the treatise, the two meanings of sphere of activity and cognitive object are completely distinct. Take for instance a single visible form: being seen by the eye, it is called a "sphere of activity", because the eye has a function regarding the form. This same visible form can induce consciousness to arise and is called a "cognitive object", because it provides power to consciousness. By this principle, in terms of the sense of obstruction in grasping a sphere, it is called resistance through sphere of activity. Therefore, resistance through sphere of activity extends to the six faculties and six consciousnesses, because faculties and consciousnesses can grasp spheres of activity. In terms of the sense of obstruction in taking an object as condition, it is called resistance through cognitive object; therefore, resistance through cognitive object belongs only to mind and mental factors, because mind and mental factors arise relying upon objects. Master Guang also said: "In terms of the sense of obstructing the substance, it is called resistance through cognitive object. In terms of the sense of obstructing the function, it is called resistance through sphere of activity." There are many more interpretations, which would be tedious and are not narrated here. The treatise also says: "How is it that the eye and the rest, when proceeding with respect to their own sphere of activity and their own cognitive object, are said to have obstruction?" (Asking the meaning of obstruction. How is it that the eye faculty, visual consciousness, and the rest, when proceeding with respect to their own sphere of activity, are said to have obstruction? Asking about resistance through sphere of activity. How is it that visual consciousness and the rest, when proceeding with respect to their own cognitive object, are said to have obstruction? Asking about resistance through cognitive object. The word "own" excludes others, as the eye sees forms and the ear hears sounds.) "Because, going beyond that and relying on another, these do not proceed." (The explanation says: This is the answer. Going beyond that form and the like, toward other sounds and the like, this eye and the rest do not proceed; hence it is called obstruction.) "Or again, obstruction has the meaning of conjunction (saṃnipāta); that is to say, phenomena such as the eye proceed in conjunction with their own sphere of activity and their own cognitive object." (The explanation says: This explains obstruction in terms of conjunction.)