成唯識論演祕 1.493

1.493

詳曰：若言我見有二種者，即彼我體亦我見緣，云何得言非我見境？故知彼宗淨我見者，不作我解，不名我見。《疏》雖不作如解等者，無分別智雖復不作真如之解，仍喚真如緣真如心緣。汝我應爾，然彼本計而不許也。

Detailed analysis: If one says there are two kinds of views of a self, then that essence of the self is also cognized by the view of a self; how could one say it is not an object of the view of a self? Therefore, we know that that school’s pure view of a self does not form an understanding of a self and is not called a view of a self. When the Commentary says “although it does not form an understanding of suchness, etc.”, [it means that] although non-conceptual wisdom does not form a conceptual understanding of true suchness, it is still called the mind that cognizes true suchness cognizing true suchness. Your self should be the same, yet their original doctrine does not accept this.