俱舍論疏 21.14

21.14

論「三見、二取至立為二結」，答也。有二義故，分見為二結：一為物等、二為取等。如文可解。《正理論》云「說此物等，於義何益？於結義中見有益故。此言意說：如貪、瞋等一一獨能成一結事，三見、二取各十八物和合各成一結事故。若異此者，應說五見各為一結，如貪、瞋等故。見及取各十八物，共立一結方敵貪等。若爾，身見、邊見、見取有十八物，戒取、邪見十八亦然，豈非物等？不爾，本釋其理決定。所以者何？以取等故。三見等所取，二取等能取。」

The Śāstra says: "Because the three views and two graspings, up to 'are established as two fetters'"—this is the answer. Because of two meanings, the views are divided into two fetters: first, because the entities are equal; second, because the graspings are equal. This can be understood from the text. The Nyāyānusāra states: "What benefit to the meaning is there in stating that these entities are equal? Because it is seen to be beneficial with respect to the meaning of a fetter. The meaning of this statement is: just as attachment, hostility, and so forth can each independently accomplish the function of a single fetter, the eighteen entities each of the three views and the two graspings combine to accomplish each the function of a single fetter. If it were otherwise, one ought to say that the five views are each an individual fetter, just like attachment, hostility, and so forth. Therefore, the eighteen entities each of views and graspings collectively establish a single fetter so as to match attachment and the rest. If so, the view of self-existence, the view of extremes, and the view of grasping have eighteen entities, and the grasping of precepts and vows and wrong view likewise have eighteen; are they not also equal in entities? Not so; the original explanation's reasoning is definitive. Why is this? Because the graspings are equal: the three views and so forth are that which is grasped, while the two graspings and so forth are that which grasps."