俱舍論頌疏論本 2.6

2.6

問：「若法境界有對，亦所緣有對耶？」答：「應順後句，謂所緣有對必是境界有對。以心、心所緣境起時必取境故。自有境界有對而非所緣有對，謂眼等五根，以眼等根能取境故，名境界有對；不緣境故，非所緣有對。」依經部宗中，大德鳩摩羅多作如是說。鳩摩羅多，此云豪童也。「是處心欲生，他礙令不起，應知是有對，無對此相違。」此頌意者，如有色處，其心欲生，被他聲礙，心遂不起。心不起時，名為有對；心正生時，即名無對。不同有宗，於心生位說名有對。論主意朋鳩摩羅多釋故。論云：此是所許。

Question: "If a phenomenon has resistance through sphere of activity, does it also have resistance through cognitive object?" Answer: "One should follow the subsequent alternative: that which has resistance through cognitive object is necessarily having resistance through sphere of activity, because when mind and mental factors arise taking an object as condition, they necessarily grasp a sphere of activity. There are those that have resistance through sphere of activity but not resistance through cognitive object, namely the five faculties: the eye and the rest. Because faculties such as the eye can grasp a sphere of activity, they are called having resistance through sphere of activity; because they do not take an object as cognitive condition, they do not have resistance through cognitive object." Relying on the Sautrāntika school, the venerable Kumāralāta said this (Kumāralāta is translated here as 'youth of noble birth'): "Where the mind wishes to arise, and another obstructs it so that it does not arise, one should know that it has resistance; the absence of resistance is the opposite of this." The meaning of this verse is: for instance, where visible form is present, when the mind wishes to arise and is obstructed by another sound, the mind then does not arise. At the time when the mind does not arise, it is called 'having resistance'; when the mind is actually arising, it is called 'without resistance'. This differs from the Sarvāstivāda, which speaks of it as having resistance at the state where the mind arises. The author of the treatise in his intention aligns with Kumāralāta's explanation; hence the treatise says: 'This is accepted.'"