俱舍論頌疏論本 29.66

29.66

上來理破，已下教證，論云：「薄伽梵告梵志言：我說一切有，唯是十二處攝。若數取趣，非是處攝，無體理成。若是處攝，則不應言是不可說。又汝部誦契經亦言：諸所有眼，諸所有色，廣說乃至，苾芻當知，如來齊此施設一切、建立一切有實體法。此中無有補特伽羅，如何可說彼有實體？頻婆沙羅契經亦說：此中無有我、我所性，唯有一切眾苦法體將、正、已生，乃至廣說。據上理教，都無我性，如何犢子橫計執我耶？」

The above was logical refutation; below is scriptural proof. The treatise says: 'The Bhagavān told the brāhmaṇa: "I say that all that exists is subsumed only under the twelve bases." If the pudgala is not subsumed under the bases, it logically follows that it has no substance. If it is subsumed under the bases, then one should not say it is inexpressible. Furthermore, the sūtra recited by your school also says: "Whatever eye there is, whatever visible matter there is," and so on in detail up to: "Monks, you should know that the Tathāgata only to this extent designates all things and establishes all substantially existent phenomena. Within this there is no pudgala." How can it be said to have a substantial entity? The Bimbisāra Sūtra also says: "Within this there is no nature of self or of what belongs to a self; there are only the substances of all suffering phenomena that are about to arise, are currently arising, and have already arisen," and so on in detail. Relying on the above reasoning and teaching, there is entirely no nature of a self. How can the Vātsīputrīyas crosswise fabricate clinging to a self?'