唯識二十論述記 1.128

1.128

述曰：自下第二，解第三難，於中有三：初別解「如鬼」等言；次解相續不定；後結不定義成。今先解「如鬼」言。梵云：筏，有二義，如前已說。今顯譬喻，非顯有義，故言「如鬼」。或復有釋，鬼有二種：一、福德鬼，住此洲西，報與天同；二、薄福德，所見水等，皆為猛火。今以薄福，喻身不定，故如餓鬼。若福德鬼，喻不成故（舊論無此，如前已說）。

Commentary: Below is the second [section], explaining the third objection, within which there are three [parts]: first, individually explaining the words "like ghosts" and so forth; next, explaining the indetermination of continuum; afterwards, concluding the establishment of the meaning of indetermination. Now it first explains the words "like ghosts." In Sanskrit, *vat* has two meanings, as stated before. Here it indicates a simile, not the meaning of existence; hence it says "like ghosts." Or alternatively, it is explained: there are two kinds of ghosts: first, ghosts of merit, dwelling to the west of this continent, whose retribution is equal to devas; second, those of meager merit, for whom water and so forth that they see turns entirely into raging fire. Here, those of meager merit are used to exemplify the indetermination of continuum, hence "like hungry ghosts." If it were ghosts of merit, the simile would not be established (the older treatise lacked this, as stated before).