The point is that a baby does not have any idea about ‘sakkāya’ (i.e., attachment) or sakkāya diṭṭhi (wrong view about attachment). The question is, “Why is that the case?” or “How is that possible?”
- Has the baby removed all samyojana/gati/anusaya etc.?
- Obviously, a baby has NOT removed all samyojana/gati/anusaya, etc. If that were the case, a baby would be born an Arahant!
- So, what explains the observation?