瑜伽師地論略纂 3.112

3.112

見取中，「以薩迦、邊執見、邪見」等者，此明見取之境。　「所依」者，根。　「所緣」者，境。　「所因」者，種子。總執為勝及與能淨，二義具足，方名見取行相。戒取亦然。所執見、戒有差別故，分成二取。此中，見取但言為勝，不說能淨；戒取但說能淨解脫，不說為勝。《唯識》會云：影略說故，或隨轉門。不爾，如何非滅計滅、非道計道，說是邪見，非二取攝？　「為最為上，勝妙第一」者，執三界法，如次別故。

Under adherence to views, "taking the views of identity, attachment to extremes, wrong view, and so forth": this explains the object of adherence to views. "Basis" is the faculties. "Object" is the cognitive domain. "Cause" is the seeds. Only when one generally grasps them as superior and as capable of purifying, with both meanings complete, is it called the cognitive mode of adherence to views. Adherence to rules and observances is also like this. Because the grasped views and rules differ, they are divided into two adherences. Here, adherence to views only speaks of being superior, not of purifying; adherence to rules and observances only speaks of purifying liberation, not of being superior. The *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi* reconciles this: it is spoken through elliptical phrasing, or it is a provisional teaching according with convention. If not so, how could postulating what is not cessation as cessation, and what is not the path as the path, be called wrong views and not be subsumed under the two adherences? "As supreme, as highest, as exquisite, as foremost": this is because one grasps the dharmas of the three realms differently according to this sequence.