唯識二十論述記 2.136

2.136

述曰：此第一破，配頌可知。若執為一，眼所行境，無隔障處，世間應無漸次行大地義，以地一故，若下一足已至一切，如何可說有漸次行。應立量言：無隔障處，下此一足時，所未至處時亦應至；汝執一故，彼即此故；猶如於此。或云：無隔大地應無漸次行義；若下一足至一切故；如此足處。然今論文，有大宗意其為比量，應如是知。然今眼境名大地者，假名大地，非實地大。

Commentary: This is the first refutation, corresponding to the verse as can be recognized. If held to be one, then in a place within the visual range where there are no intervening obstructions, in the world there would be no sense to progressively walking upon the great earth, because the earth is one; if one foot is set down and one has already reached everywhere, how could one speak of progressive walking? One should frame an inference (anumāna): In a place without intervening obstructions, when setting down this one foot, the places not yet reached should also be reached at that time; because you hold it to be one, and that is identical to this; just like this place. Or one may say: The great earth without intervening obstruction should lack the principle of progressive walking; because if one foot is set down, one reaches everywhere; just like this place under the foot. However, the present treatise text has the intention of a great thesis (pratijñā), and its logical inference should be understood in this way. Moreover, that the visual object is here called "the great earth" is a metaphorical name of "great earth," not the actual earth element.