成唯識論演祕 5.343

5.343

有云：邪見總顯五見，若云邪定唯顯邪見，餘之四見何以不說？若等言等，何邪見後舉鈍等利？又《雜集》云：「邪決定者，謂顛倒智。」而總相說不言邪見，故知邪定同彼通五。有義救云：《疏》無有失，邪見多由疑惑生故，故邪定言，但說邪見餘見等等，戒禁取等，設無疑者而亦生故，故此不說。

Someone says: 'Wrong view' comprehensively indicates the five views. If one says that 'wrong determination' only indicates wrong view, why are the other four views not mentioned? If the word 'and so forth' means etcetera, why does it adduce dull afflictions and so forth after wrong view to mean sharp ones? Moreover, the Abhidharmasamuccaya-bhāṣya states: 'Wrong determination is inverted cognition.' It speaks generally without mentioning wrong view. Therefore, we know that wrong determination, like that text, pervades all five. An interpretation comes to the rescue, saying: The Commentary is without error. Because wrong view mostly arises from doubt, the phrase 'wrong determination' only mentions wrong view, with the other views included in 'and so forth'; attachment to rules and vows and so on also arise even if there is no doubt, and therefore they are not mentioned here.