成唯識論述記 5.179

5.179

述曰：此順理教。所以者何。多處唯言有我見，不言有所故。何謂多處？五十一云：由此末那我見、慢等恒共相應。《揚》十七初云：由此意根恒與我見、我慢等相應。彼卷復云：如前所說意根恒與四惑俱，謂薩迦耶見、我慢、我愛、無明相應。薩迦耶言雖攝我所，然不別說，故以為證。前三師即以此為證，亦攝我所故。若我見言即不攝所。十九《顯揚》云：我見、我慢相應，亦無我所故。

The Commentary states: This accords with reason and scripture. Why is this? In many places it speaks only of having self-view, and does not speak of having 'mine'. What are these many places? Chapter Fifty-One says: 'Because of this, manas is constantly associated with self-view, conceit, and so forth.' The beginning of Chapter Seventeen of Prakaraṇāryavācā says: 'Because of this, the manas faculty is constantly associated with self-view, self-conceit, and so forth.' That same fascicle further says: 'As stated before, the manas faculty is constantly accompanied by four afflictions, namely, it is associated with satkāyadṛṣṭi, self-conceit, self-attachment, and ignorance.' Although the word 'satkāya' includes 'mine', it is not separately stated, and so it is taken as proof. The previous three masters took this precisely as their proof, because it also subsumes 'mine'. But if one says 'self-view', it does not subsume 'mine'. Chapter Nineteen of Prakaraṇāryavācā says: 'Associated with self-view and self-conceit', and likewise there is no 'mine'.