俱舍論記 30.23

30.23

「觀能問者至與身一異」者，論主答。觀能問者阿邪世故。問者執一內我實體名為命者，依此問佛與身一、異。我都無故，一、異不成，如何與身可記一、異？如不可言龜毛勒軟。龜毛本無，何論鞕軟？古昔諸師已解釋斯蟠結難義。「昔有」已下，指事可知。菴羅樹，在西方城外生，非王宮有。

Regarding 'Observing the inquirer's [intention ...] identical with or different from the body': the author of the treatise replies. It is because he observed the inquirer's intention (āśaya). The inquirer grasped at a real entity of an internal self termed the 'vital principle' (jīva), and on this basis asked the Buddha whether it was identical with or different from the body. Since the self is completely non-existent, identity or difference cannot be established; how could [the Buddha] declare it to be identical with or different from the body? It is like saying that turtle's hair cannot be declared either hard or soft. Since turtle's hair is fundamentally non-existent, how could one discuss hardness or softness? Ancient masters have already explained this intricate and difficult point. From 'Formerly there was' onward, it refers to an incident that is clear to understand. The mango tree grew outside the city in the Western regions, not in the royal palace.