唯識二十論述記 1.108

1.108

述曰：先敘三事，無實用已，此通三事，為相例難。謂既無實境，許此識生，何故眩翳所見，無髮等用，餘髮、蠅等，有髮等用。乃至第三，如前已說。此中舉初餘髮、蠅等，等取第二餘飲等用，及等第三餘城等用。然舊論一一難下，皆自出例，今恐煩廣，故總顯之。

The Commentary says: Having previously described the three things as lacking real function, this applies across the three things to form an analogical objection. That is, since there is no real object, yet you grant that this consciousness arises, why is it that what is seen with cataracts lacks the functions of hair and so forth, while other hairs, flies, and so forth possess the functions of hair and so forth, down to the third, as previously stated? Here, mentioning the first, 'other hairs, flies, and so forth,' includes the second, 'the functions of other drinks and so forth,' and includes the third, 'the functions of other cities and so forth.' While under each objection the old translation set forth its own counter-example individually, here, out of concern for verbosity, it is displayed collectively.