金剛三昧經論 1.55

1.55

論曰：自此已下第二問答。前一問答總明破有相門；今此問答別顯離二縛門，別舉二病以問其藥。言有我者，人執之病。若有心者，法執之病。言斯縛者，別而言之。人執是麁重縛，法執是相縛，通而說之二執皆有麁重相縛。又此二執皆有二縛，謂相應縛及能緣縛。二障章中其義已具。答中有二：先治人執、後治法執。治人執中，先總、後別。

The commentary says: From here below is the second question and answer. The previous question and answer generally clarified the approach of shattering the sign of existence; the present question and answer specifically reveals the approach of departing from the two bonds, specifically raising two ailments to inquire after their medicine. The words "if there is a self" refer to the ailment of clinging to a person. "If there is a mind" refers to the ailment of clinging to dharmas. "Such bonds": speaking specifically, clinging to a person is the bond of gross heaviness (dauṣṭhulya), and clinging to dharmas is the bond of signs (nimitta); speaking generally, both clingings possess the bond of gross heaviness and the bond of signs. Furthermore, these two clingings both have two bonds, namely the bond of association (saṃprayukta-bandhana) and the bond of taking objects (ālambana-bandhana). Their meanings have already been fully detailed in the chapter on the two obscurations. In the answer, there are two parts: first treating clinging to a person, and later treating clinging to dharmas. In treating clinging to a person, it is first general and then specific.