俱舍論頌疏論本 3.18

3.18

且初述自宗者，將明問起，論云：「若增上故立為根者，無明等性應立為根，無明等因，於行等果各各別有增上用故（此約自宗為難，十二因緣互相引發，有增上用，應立為根）。」又語具等應立為根，語具、手足、大小便處，於語、執行、棄樂事中，如其次第有增上故。解云：此約外道數論宗為難。彼宗立五根，語具是肉舌，於語有增上用；手於執有增上用，足於行步有增上用；大便處於棄穢有增上用，小便處起婬樂有增上用，應立為根。如是等事不應立根，由所許根有如是相，頌曰：

First, regarding the statement of one's own school, introducing the objection, the śāstra states: 'If they are established as indriyas due to predominance, then nescience and the rest should be established as indriyas, because causes such as nescience have each their respective predominant functions with respect to results such as formations' (this raises an objection from the perspective of their own school: the twelve links of dependent origination mutually induce one another and have predominant functions, so they should be established as indriyas). 'Also, vocal organs and the like should be established as indriyas, because vocal organs, hands, feet, and the excretory and sexual organs have predominance, respectively, in speaking, grasping, walking, and discarding and pleasure.' Explanation: this raises an objection from the perspective of the non-Buddhist Sāṃkhya school. That school establishes five indriyas: the vocal organ is the fleshy tongue, having a predominant function in speech; the hands have a predominant function in grasping; the feet have a predominant function in walking; the anus has a predominant function in discarding waste, and the urinary organ has a predominant function in producing sexual pleasure; thus they should be established as indriyas. Things such as these should not be established as indriyas; due to the accepted indriyas having such characteristics, the verse states: