Chinese
以能发识比知有根。此但功能非外所造故。本识上五色功能名眼等根。亦不违理。功能发识理无别故。在识在余虽不可说。而外诸法理非有故。定应许此在识非余。此根功能与前境色。从无始际展转为因。谓此功能至成熟位。生现识上五内境色。此内境色复能引起异熟识上五根功能。根境二色与识一异或非一异。随乐应说。如是诸识。惟内境相为所缘缘。理善成立。 观所缘缘论 现代汉语译本： 五根（panchindriya，指眼、耳、鼻、舌、身五种感觉器官）的命名依据是其应有的道理： 五根的功能和作为其对象的色（rupa，指可见的形态），从无始以来就互相作为因。 通过能够生起识（vijnana，指意识）这一点，可以推知五根的存在。这仅仅是功能，不是外在事物所创造的。因此，在阿赖耶识（alayavijnana，根本识）上的五种色法的功能，可以称为眼根等，这并不违背道理。因为功能生起识的道理没有差别。无论说它在识中还是在其他地方，虽然都不可说，但是外在的诸法在道理上是不存在的，所以必定应该承认它在识中而不是在其他地方。这五根的功能与之前的境色（visaya-rupa，作为对象的色法），从无始以来辗转作为因。意思是说，这功能到了成熟的阶段，就会在现识上产生五种内在的境色。这内在的境色又能够引起异熟识（vipakavijnana，果报识）上的五根功能。根和境这两种色法与识是一体、异体，还是非一体非异体？可以根据自己的意愿来解释。像这样，各种识仅仅以内在的境相作为所缘缘（alambana-pratyaya，生起识的条件），这个道理能够很好地成立。 出自《观所缘缘论》
English
English version: The naming of the five indriyas (panchindriya, referring to the five sense organs: eye, ear, nose, tongue, and body) is based on their appropriate rationale: The functions of the five indriyas and the rupa (rupa, referring to visible forms) that serve as their objects have been mutually causal since beginningless time. The existence of the indriyas can be inferred from their ability to generate vijnana (vijnana, referring to consciousness). This is merely a function, not created by external things. Therefore, the functions of the five types of rupa on the alayavijnana (alayavijnana, the fundamental consciousness) can be called eye-indriya, etc., which is not contrary to reason. Because there is no difference in the principle of function generating consciousness. Although it is unspeakable whether it is in consciousness or elsewhere, since external dharmas do not exist in principle, it must be admitted that it is in consciousness and not elsewhere. The function of these five indriyas and the previous visaya-rupa (visaya-rupa, rupa as objects) have been mutually causal since beginningless time. This means that when this function reaches the stage of maturity, it will produce five internal visaya-rupa on the present consciousness. These internal visaya-rupa can in turn cause the functions of the five indriyas on the vipakavijnana (vipakavijnana, resultant consciousness). Are the two types of rupa, indriya and visaya, one with consciousness, different from consciousness, or neither one nor different? It can be explained according to one's own preference. In this way, the various consciousnesses only take the internal visaya-rupa as alambana-pratyaya (alambana-pratyaya, the condition for the arising of consciousness), and this principle can be well established. From the *Treatise on Conditions for Cognition* --------------------------------------------------------------------------------