成唯識論述記 6.520

6.520

述曰：下別釋有四，合二取故。梵云：「薩迦耶達利瑟致」，經部師云：「薩」是偽義，「迦耶」是身，「達利瑟致」是見。身是聚義，即聚集假，應言緣聚身起見，名偽身見。佛遮當來薩婆多等執為有身見者故，說薩偽言。雖一「薩」言亦目於有，然今說是「思誕提底薩」義，故「薩」言表偽。薩婆多云：「薩」是有義，迦耶等如前。雖是聚身而是實有，身者自體之異名，應言自體見。佛遮當來經部師等說為偽身見者故，說薩有言。雖一「薩」言亦目於偽，今者應言「阿悉提底薩」義，故「薩」言表有。大乘應言「僧吃爛底薩」，便成移轉，由此薩迦耶見大少別說。薩婆多名「有身見」，經部名「虛偽身見」，今大乘意心上所現似我之相，體非實有，是假法故也；又體非全無，依他起性成所緣緣故。既非實有，亦非虛偽，唯是依他移轉之法，我之所依。又依所執可言虛偽，依所變相可言為有，非如餘宗定實、定偽，故名移轉。此兼我所，不唯我見，或總緣蘊，或別緣蘊。分別、俱生或許總、別緣，如《顯揚》第一說。然俱生中如第七識唯計心為我，故雖不如分別起者簡擇別緣蘊，亦任運別緣故。然以此我見為所依本，諸見得生，故名「一切見趣所依」。趣者，況也，或所歸處也。

The Commentary states: Below are four specific explanations, because the two clings (to views and vows) are combined. In Sanskrit, it is satkāyadṛṣṭi. The Sautrāntika masters say: 'sat' means false, 'kāya' is body, and 'dṛṣṭi' is view. 'Body' has the meaning of aggregation, which is nominal aggregation; one should say that giving rise to a view in reference to the aggregated body is named 'view of a false body'. The Buddha, in order to refute future adherents of the Sarvāstivāda and others who grasp it as a 'view of an existent body', stated 'sat' to mean false. Although the single word 'sat' also designates existence, here it is stated in the sense of santīti sat ('existing temporarily/contingently'), so 'sat' expresses falsehood. The Sarvāstivādins say: 'sat' means existent, and kāya, etc., are as before. Although it is an aggregated body, it is substantially existent; 'body' is an alternative name for self-essence (svabhāva), so one should say 'view of self-essence'. The Buddha, in order to refute future Sautrāntikas and others who say it is a 'view of a false body', stated 'sat' to mean existent. Although the single word 'sat' also designates falsehood, here one should say it has the meaning of astīti sat, so 'sat' expresses existence. The Mahāyāna should say saṃkrāntīti sat, which then becomes 'transiting' (changing); hence, satkāyadṛṣṭi is explained differently by Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna. The Sarvāstivāda calls it 'view of an existent body', the Sautrāntika calls it 'view of a false body', but now the Mahāyāna intent is that the appearance resembling a self manifested upon the mind has an essence that is not substantially existent, because it is a nominal dharma; nor is its essence completely non-existent, because in its other-dependent nature it constitutes an objective support condition (ālambanapratyaya). Since it is neither substantially existent nor purely false, it is simply an other-dependent transiting dharma, the basis for the [imputed] self. Furthermore, based on what is grasped, it can be called false; based on the transformed appearance, it can be called existent. It is not definitely real or definitely false like in other traditions; hence it is called 'transiting'. This view encompasses what belongs to a self, not only the view of a self; it grasps the aggregates either collectively or separately. Both conceptually discriminated and innate [views] may grasp them collectively or separately, as stated in the first fascicle of the Prakaraṇāryavācā. However, among innate [views], such as the seventh consciousness which only grasps the mind as a self, although it does not discriminate and grasp the aggregates separately like conceptually generated ones do, it also spontaneously grasps them separately. Since this view of a self serves as the root basis from which all views are able to arise, it is named 'the basis of all viewpoints'. 'Point' (dṛṣṭigata) means standpoint, or that to which they return.