In the Lankavatara Sutra, it says: 能舍一切我见执着.
Red Pine translates: "who eliminate attachment to a self." Suzuki translates: "to keep themselves properly away from ego centered notions."
These terms have Sanskrit equivalent: 我见 (satkāya-dṛṣṭi) is usually translated as the "view of transitory collection." 执着 (abhiniveśana) is clinging or attachment.
The grammar is not clear to me.
Should it read "eliminating attachment to the view of transitory collection" or rather "eliminating the view of transitory collection that clings"?
In other words, how do I tell whether clinging is a substantive or a verb?
The context is:
Red Pine's translation is:
“This, Lord of Lanka, is the understanding of all great practitioners , who thereby overcome false doctrines and refute mistaken views, who eliminate attachment to a self , and who make use of the subtlest wisdom to transform their consciousness. This is the Mahayana path that leads to the stage attained by buddhas. You should therefore devote yourself to such an understanding self-realization).
Observations on technical issues:
恶见 is a classical Buddhist term meaning evil view or mistaken view.
执着 is a classical Buddhist term meaning clinging.
我见 is a classical Buddhist term meaning view of transitory collection.
妙慧 is a classical Buddhist term meaning subtle wisdom.
之道 is a classical Buddhist term for marga (Sanskrit).
自证 is a classical Buddhist term meaning self-realization.
转所依, 所依, 所依识, 识 are also technical Buddhist term I don't know how to split. It seems Red Pine and Suzuki didn't either because they have very different translations. But that is the subject of another later question.