成唯識論了義燈 7.109

7.109

答：以漏、無漏性相違故，暫能伏除，雖行於相，不為相縛。即據此理，四分相望為所緣者，亦得名相。雖非相分，而是境相。前第五云「由斯見分彼相所拘」者，約顯相明，非唯相分名為相縛。故《瑜伽》七十五云：相、麁重縛有十四種。五、於所知境無智縛。六、於能知智無智縛。既能知、所知俱名相、麁重縛，明見分等亦得名縛。本疏復云：如前第二卷，引「眾生心二性，內外一切分，所取、能取纏」等，證四皆縛。西明、《要集》俱悉不許見、自證等亦名為縛。

Answer: Because contaminated and uncontaminated natures are mutually contradictory, it is temporarily able to subdue and eliminate it; although it operates upon appearances, it is not bound by appearances. Based precisely on this principle, when the four aspects are mutually regarded as cognitive objects, they may also be termed "appearances." Although not the objective aspect (nimittabhāga), they are objective appearances. When the fifth fascicle earlier states: "Due to this, the cognitive aspect (darśanabhāga) is bound by those appearances," this is explained with respect to prominent appearances, and it is not solely the objective aspect that is termed the bondage of appearances. Thus the Yogācārabhūmi fascicle seventy-five states: There are fourteen kinds of bondage of appearances and coarse heaviness: fifth, the bondage of ignorance regarding the known object; sixth, the bondage of ignorance regarding the knowing cognition. Since both the known and the knowing are termed the bondage of appearances and coarse heaviness, it is clear that the cognitive aspect and so forth may also be termed bondage. The original Commentary further states: Just as in the earlier second fascicle, citing "The dual nature of the mind of sentient beings, / all internal and external divisions, / are the entanglements of the grasped and grasper" and so forth proves that all four [aspects] are bound. Ximing and the Yaoji both do not accept that the cognitive aspect, self-authenticating aspect, and so forth are also termed bondage.