唯識二十論述記 1.100

1.100

述曰：此舉決定，例不決定。既言虛妄分別以為緣故，似外境生，實無外境，如有眩翳，見髮、蠅等，無小實義，唯有識者。如世目眩及中有翳，以為緣故，同一時間，於虛空中，此決定見有髮、蠅、花等種種異物，非是眼中無眩翳者於此時、處，許有見髮、蠅等識生。何故於同一山之處及同一時，有多相續皆共見山，非是決定，如見髮等隨一能見。虛妄眩翳，唯識既齊，定隨一見，其義應等，既許多見，故是相續不決定也。謂立量云：有多相續同一時間，於一處所，應定一見，餘不能見；執唯識故；如多相續同一時間，於一髮等有見、不見。

The Commentary says: This adduces determination to analogize non-determination. Since you say that false conceptualization serves as the condition whereby [images] arise resembling external objects when in reality there are no external objects, just as someone with cataracts sees hairs, flies, and so forth without the slightest real entity, being consciousness alone; and just as in the world, having blurred vision or cataracts in the eyes serves as the condition whereby, at the same time and in empty space, this [person] determinately sees various distinct things such as hairs, flies, and flowers, while one who has no cataracts in their eyes is not granted to have the consciousness arise that sees hairs, flies, and so forth at this time and place; then why, in the place of the same mountain and at the same time, do multiple streams all collectively see the mountain, rather than it being determinate, like seeing hairs and so forth where only any single one can see it? Since false cataracts and vijñapti-mātra are equivalent, the determination that any single one sees it should be equal in principle; but since you grant that many see it, this constitutes non-determination of streams. That is, formulating the inference: When there are multiple streams at the same time and in one place, it should be determined that only one sees it and the others cannot; because you maintain vijñapti-mātra; just as among multiple streams at the same time, regarding a hair and so forth, there are those who see and those who do not see.