俱舍論頌疏論本 9.27

9.27

釋曰：前一行明無我，但有由惑、業相續入胎也。後一行明生死輪轉。無我唯諸蘊者，無我者，正遮外道，謂外道執我，臨命終時能捨此蘊，於受生時能續餘蘊。若無有我，誰能蘊續？故有我也。為破此執，故言無我。故論云：「內用士夫，此定非有，如色、眼等不可得故。」（注曰）解云：外道執我，名為士夫，如士夫用也。故論主破言：「此定非有，如色等五境是現量知，眼等五根是比量知。汝今執我，非如色、眼等現、比量知，故不可得也。世尊亦言：『有業有異熟，作者不可得。』謂能捨此蘊及能續餘蘊，唯除法假。」（注曰）解云：作者，我之異名也。眾生生死由業異熟，非由作者實我也。「法假謂何（問也）？依此有故彼有，依此生故彼生，廣說緣起。」（注曰）已上論文。解云：依此無明等有故，彼行等得有。彼無明等生故，彼行等得生。十二緣起假立於我，名為法假也。唯諸蘊者，正立義也。唯有五蘊，更無實我，於此蘊上假立為我，是正道理，非所遮遣。

Explanation: The first stanza clarifies that there is no self, and there is only entry into the womb through the continuity of delusion and karma. The second stanza clarifies the cyclic turning of saṃsāra. Regarding "There is no self, only the aggregates": "there is no self" directly refutes the tīrthikas, meaning that tīrthikas adhere to a self that, at the time of death, can discard these aggregates, and at the time of taking rebirth, can continue other aggregates. If there were no self, who could continue the aggregates? Therefore, [they hold,] there is a self. To refute this attachment, it is said that there is no self. Thus the treatise says: "An internal operating person definitely does not exist, because it is unobtainable like form, the eye, and so forth." (Note says:) Explanation: The tīrthikas adhere to a self, calling it a person, as possessing the function of a person. Therefore the treatise master refutes it, saying: "This definitely does not exist, because the five sense-objects such as form are known through direct perception, and the five faculties such as the eye are known through inference. The self you now cling to is not known through direct perception or inference like form, the eye, and so forth, and is therefore unobtainable. The World-Honoured One also said: 'There is karma and there is maturation, but an agent is unobtainable,' meaning one who can discard these aggregates and continue other aggregates, except as a nominal designation for phenomena." (Note says:) Explanation: Agent is another name for the self. The birth and death of sentient beings is due to karma and maturation, not due to an agent that is a real self. "What is meant by nominal designation for phenomena? (Question) 'When this exists, that exists; with the arising of this, that arises,' as extensively explained in dependent origination." (Note says:) The above is from the treatise text. Explanation: Because this ignorance and so forth exist, those karmic formations and so forth can exist. Because that ignorance and so forth arise, those karmic formations and so forth can arise. The twelve links of dependent origination are nominally designated as a self; this is called a nominal designation for phenomena. Regarding "only the aggregates", this directly establishes the thesis: there are only the five aggregates, and no real self apart from them; nominally designating a self upon these aggregates is correct principle, not something to be rejected.