俱舍論疏 25.34

25.34

論「以見所斷至必無退理」，答也。以見所斷依無事，故唯無也。此有三重：第一我體無故名為無事；第二謂有身見依我處轉，我體既無名依無事；第三見斷餘惑以我見為根，身見不退亦無退理。

On the Śāstra's statement: "Because what is abandoned by seeing ... there is definitely no principle of falling away": This is the reply. Because what is abandoned by seeing relies on what is without an objective fact (vastu), it is strictly non-existent. This has three levels: First, because the entity of a self does not exist, it is called "without an objective fact"; second, the view of individuality operates based on the locus of a self, and since the entity of a self does not exist, it is called "relying on what is without an objective fact"; third, the remaining defilements abandoned by seeing take the view of self as their root, so when the view of individuality does not fall away, there is also no principle by which they could fall away.