瑜伽論記 13.198

13.198

基云：此文為前文，由有阿賴耶故，末那得有文勢故起，如本地分中同時依止意彼未解相依起過行相。今此明之，由有末那故第六起相縛，謂由末那計第八為我故，第六於境起法執，執有等緣境起縛名為相縛，相縛體即六塵，所緣皆縛也。又由有此末那故，八識緣境皆有緣縛，即諸論云謂境界相能生縛也，此縛為由法執末那故起，為由人執故起，若法執者，二乘及大乘人聖觀應是有漏，必待所依法執故，今唯知有人執末那，故第六識等起縛，何以如此者，此人執是惑性體麁故，起他識相縛，法執不然，故不為例，此皆以自識所行境相望為縛。又他境為縛，由末那所緣順第六法識相，所以起縛，若緣無漏。第七不順相，不為縛緣自他境，文以意解縛解解非他於自境起縛，亦緣他境起縛。

Ji says: This text follows the preceding text, arising from the force of the statement that 'because the ālayavijñāna exists, manas is able to exist.' Just as in the Maulī Bhūmiḥ, [the text describes] the mode of activity of the faults that arise dependent upon the simultaneous supporting manas when it is not yet understood. Now, this explains that because manas exists, the bond of perceptual forms arises in the sixth [consciousness]. That is, because manas conceives the eighth to be a self, the sixth conceives phenomena on objects, grasping at existence and so forth; arising in connection with the object, it generates bondage, which is called the 'bond of perceptual forms.' The substance of the bond of perceptual forms is simply the six sense-objects; all that is cognized is bound. Furthermore, because of this manas, all eight consciousnesses have cognitive bondage when taking objects, which is what the treatises describe as 'the perceptual form of the object is able to produce bondage.' Does this bondage arise on account of the manas that grasps at phenomena, or does it arise on account of grasping at a person? If it were due to grasping at phenomena, the noble contemplation of the persons of the two vehicles and the Great Vehicle would have to be contaminated, because it would necessarily depend on the support of grasping at phenomena. Now we know it is only because of the manas grasping at a person that the sixth consciousness and others generate bondage. Why is this so? This grasping at a person is by nature a delusion and its substance is coarse, so it gives rise to the bond of perceptual forms of the other consciousnesses; grasping at phenomena is not so, and thus does not serve as an analogy. These are all instances of bondage viewed with respect to the perceptual forms of the objects engaged by their own consciousnesses. Furthermore, other objects act as bondage because what is cognized by manas conforms to the perceptual forms of the sixth conscious-phenomenon, which is why bondage arises. If it takes the uncontaminated as its object, the seventh does not conform to the perceptual form and does not act as a condition for bondage. Regarding its own and other objects, the text uses 'mind' to explain bondage and liberation: liberation is not through another; it gives rise to bondage with respect to its own object, and also gives rise to bondage by taking other objects as conditions.