[325] How does one see volitional formations (saṅkhārā) as self?
Here someone sees volition (cetanā) born of eye-contact, volition born of ear-contact, volition born of nose-contact, volition born of tongue-contact, volition born of body-contact, volition born of mind-contact as self: "That which is volition born of mind-contact, that am I; that which I am, that is volition born of mind-contact" — thus he sees volition born of mind-contact and self as not two. Just as, when an oil lamp is burning, one sees the flame and the colour as not two: "That which is the flame, that is the colour; that which is the colour, that is the flame" — even so, here someone sees volition born of mind-contact as self: "That which is volition born of mind-contact, that am I; that which I am, that is volition born of mind-contact" — thus he sees volition born of mind-contact and self as not two.
The adherence and misapprehension is a view. The view is not the basis; the basis is not the view. The view is one thing, the basis another. The view together with the basis — this is the first view of self (attānudiṭṭhi) having volitional formations as its basis. The view of self is wrong view (micchādiṭṭhi) … these are fetters, but not views. Thus one sees volitional formations as self.
English translation from the Pali (Siam Raṭṭha edition) — under review, not for citation.