俱舍論疏 24.7

24.7

論「然復應說至或過此故」，釋不說成根，說生數也。若唯說斷三、四品惑名為家家，不說受三、二生者，以有雖斷三、四品惑，若增進時生不定故，若至一來一間即生少也。若得現般涅槃即全無也。若作上流那含及却退者，此即復過三、二生也。若進若退，即非家家。故置生言欲簡此類，非如治根義決定也。

The treatise says, "However, it should further be stated... or exceeding this." This explains why it does not speak of perfecting the faculties but states the number of births. If one merely spoke of abandoning the defilements of the three or four categories as being a kulāṅkula without stating the undergoing of three or two births, then because there are those who, although having abandoned the defilements of the three or four categories, have indeterminate births when they advance—if they reach the once-returner or the ekavīcika, their births become fewer; if they attain parinirvāṇa in the present life, they have none at all; if they become an ūrdhvasrotas anāgāmin or regress, this then exceeds three or two births. Whether advancing or regressing, they are not a kulāṅkula. Therefore the word "birth" is placed here to exclude these classes; it is not definitive like the meaning of the counteractive faculties.