唯識二十論述記 1.118

1.118

述曰：此長行中，文有其三，初以如夢喻，合解處、時二難；次解第三徵；後解第四難。就初段中，文復有三：初解頌說「如夢」之言；次解處、時俱定之理；後結二定非不得成，此即初也。然舊譯家，不閑此義，遂略不翻。梵云：伊（上聲呼之）縛（平聲呼之，合名夢也）筏（此有二義：一是有義；二譬喻義），今言「如夢」，顯是譬喻，故言「意說如夢所見」，非謂有夢名伊縛筏；或復有釋，夢者能緣其村園等，夢之所見，夢心所有。今頌略言喻「如夢」者，顯夢所見為二定喻，非能緣夢心，為處、時同法，恐以能緣為同喻故，今簡略也。

Commentary: In this prose commentary, there are three [parts] in the text: first, using the simile of a dream to jointly resolve the two objections regarding place and time; next, resolving the third inquiry; afterwards, resolving the fourth objection. Within the first section, the text again has three [parts]: first, explaining the words "like a dream" stated in the verse; next, explaining the principle that place and time are both determined; afterwards, concluding that the two determinations do not fail to be established. This is the first. However, the older translators did not comprehend this meaning, and consequently omitted it without translating it. In Sanskrit, *iva* (pronounced with the departing tone on *i* and level tone on *va*, together meaning "like") or *vat* has two senses: one is "existing", and the second is the sense of simile. Here, saying "like a dream" shows that it is a simile; therefore it says "means what is seen in a dream," not that the existence of a dream is called *iva* / *vat*. Or alternatively, it is explained: the dream is the cognizing subject of those villages, gardens, and so forth, whereas what is seen in the dream belongs to the dreaming mind. Now the verse says briefly by way of simile "like a dream" to show that what is seen in a dream serves as the simile for the two determinations, not that the cognizing dreaming mind is the shared phenomenon (sādharmya) for place and time; fearing that the cognizing subject might be taken as the shared example, it makes this clarification here.