俱舍論疏 28.244

28.244

「論曰至相應等持」，明空等持也。《正理論》云「故說空等持近治有身見，身見亦有二行相故。謂空行相近治我所見，非我行相近治我見。觀法非我名非我行相，觀此中無我名空行相，由此治別。問：知此非我、此中無我，二種行相竟有何別？答：非無差別。言此中無我，不能顯我畢竟無體故。謂此但顯彼此互無，不能顯成畢竟無我，以有體法亦互無故。若言此法非我，便顯我畢竟無，以一切法法相等故。由此若修非我行相，便治我見。修空行相，治我所見。如何無別（已上論文）？」

From "The Śāstra says:" up to "the corresponding samādhi" explains the emptiness samādhi (śūnyatā-samādhi). The Nyāyānusāra says: "Therefore it is said that the emptiness samādhi directly counteracts the view of self-existence (satkāyadṛṣṭi), because the view of self-existence also has two aspects: namely, the aspect of emptiness directly counteracts the view of what belongs to a self, and the aspect of non-self directly counteracts the view of a self. Contemplating phenomena as not self is called the aspect of non-self; contemplating that within this there is no self is called the aspect of emptiness. It is due to this that their counteractions differ. Question: What difference is there ultimately between the two aspects: knowing this is not a self and within this there is no self? Answer: It is not that there is no distinction. Saying 'within this there is no self' cannot reveal that the self ultimately lacks real existence. That is, this merely shows that one and the other are mutually non-existent, but cannot establish that there is ultimately no self, because even existent entities are mutually non-existent. If one says 'this phenomenon is not a self', this then reveals that the self is ultimately non-existent, because the phenomenal characteristics of all phenomena are identical. Therefore, if one cultivates the aspect of non-self, one then counteracts the view of a self; if one cultivates the aspect of emptiness, one counteracts the view of what belongs to a self. How could they not be distinct?" (End of citation from the Śāstra).