摩訶止觀 5.113

5.113

又違經，經言：「非內非外，亦非中間，亦不常自有。」又違龍樹，龍樹云：「諸法不自生，亦不從他生，不共、不無因。」更就譬檢，為當依心，故有夢？依眠，故有夢？眠法合心，故有夢？離心、離眠，故有夢？若依心有夢者，不眠應有夢。若依眠有夢者，死人如眠，應有夢。若眠心兩合而有夢者，眠人那有不夢時？又眠心各有夢，合可有夢？各既無夢，合不應有。若離心、離眠而有夢者，虛空離二，應常有夢。四句求夢尚不得，云何於眠夢見一切事？心喻法性，眠喻黎耶。云何偏據法性、黎耶生一切法？當知四句求心不可得，求三千法亦不可得。

Furthermore, this contradicts the sūtras, for a sūtra states: "It is not internal, not external, nor in between; nor does it constantly exist of itself." It also contradicts Nāgārjuna, who says: "Things do not arise from themselves, nor do they arise from another, nor from both, nor without a cause." Examining this further through an analogy: is there a dream based on the mind? Is there a dream based on sleep? Is there a dream from the factor of sleep combining with the mind? Or is there a dream apart from both mind and sleep? If a dream existed based on the mind, one would dream when not asleep. If it existed based on sleep, a corpse resembles someone asleep and should have dreams. If a dream existed from the combination of both sleep and mind, how could a sleeping person ever not be dreaming? Furthermore, if sleep and mind each had a dream, could their combination have a dream? Since each lacks a dream, their combination should not have one either. If a dream existed apart from both mind and sleep, empty space—being free from both—should constantly have dreams. When a dream cannot even be found through the four positions, how could one see all manner of things within a sleeping dream? The mind illustrates dharmatā, and sleep illustrates the ālaya[vijñāna]. Why hold one-sidedly that dharmatā or the ālaya produces all phenomena? One should know that when sought through the four positions, the mind cannot be found, and the three thousand phenomena cannot be found either.