大方廣佛華嚴經搜玄分齊通智方軌 3.36

3.36

八因緣觀者，三門同上。初所治者，謂計單因有力生果，如執自性因能生二十五諦。此身等因緣生，迷者不了謂自性作，即戒取見。二所依觀門者，三性同上。因緣生理，因有決定用，緣有發果能，方得法生。若但因力、無緣發果能者，其因六義不現在前。何者為六義？一念念滅。此滅是空，有力不待外緣。所以有力不待緣，為因體未對緣事自遷動故。二俱有，是空有力待緣。所以者，為得外緣，唯顯體空，俱成力用也。三隨逐至治際是有，無力待緣。所以知？為隨他故不可無，不能違緣故無力也。四決定是有，有力不待緣。所以知以外緣未至，性不改，自成故。五觀因緣是空，無力待緣。所以知者，為待外緣唯，顯親因非有，無力能生果也。六如引顯自果是有，有力待緣。所以知？得外緣時，唯顯自因得自果故。問：此因緣六義分齊云何？答：今言賴緣者，但取因事之外增上等三緣，不取自因六義互相發。所以者？其六義者同是理法，對因事顯；廢生因事，六義不能自互發成。但外三緣各有理事，故得對顯因果之義。若爾，六義不應總別相成。答：六義六相共成者，六相有二義：一順理、二順事。此二義中，順理義顯、順事義微。其四緣事，二義同上，但順事義增、順理義微。所以知？因緣生果法起迷義顯，為此論主別將六相照令入理，故知四緣順事增也。所以知總別順理義增者，為辨六相令見心入理。問：何以得知但總別六義得順理增，不取於事？答：論主簡事不具六相，唯約義辨，故知也。上二微義，思之可解。今因緣內各有六義，故說別有勝用能感於果。問：如論說「非他作自因生，非自作緣生故。」既言非他，云何但取勝力生果？答：此舉不生，形取勝力。若不形奪，勝力不成，令此奪中偏取一邊勝力，屬上論主自因觀。今此通取二力，不能生義分在其中，准上六義思之可解。有一別空，入後觀門至當分別。此即治前獨因感果執。業藉緣造，後感果時不賴緣發。此執何失？答：若廢於緣，自因勝力並皆不成。此即俗諦觀，即以緣生理事及智為觀體。此依經辨。三釋文者，因即通親疎四種緣也，故云因緣能生行，故知也。釋名可解，此依論辨。又依小乘，六因四緣；若依三乘，即十因、二十因等；若依一乘，即隨法辨因，為一一因緣理事各別與法界等。今六因義，唯一乘能窮，此約別教說也。

Eighth, regarding the contemplation of causal conditions: the three sections are the same as above. First, that which is to be cured: this refers to positing that a single cause has the power to produce effects, such as grasping that the cause of primordial nature (prakṛti) can produce the twenty-five principles (tattvas). This body and the like arise from causal conditions; the deluded do not understand and deem them made by prakṛti, which is the view of attachment to precepts and vows. Second, the contemplation approach of that upon which it relies: the three natures are the same as above. In the principle of arising from causal conditions, the cause has a determinate function and the condition has the capacity to bring forth the effect; only then do dharmas arise. If there were only the power of the cause without the condition's capacity to bring forth the effect, the six meanings of the cause would not be manifest before us. What are the six meanings? First, perishing moment by moment: this perishing is empty, having power without depending on external conditions. Why does it have power without depending on conditions? Because before the substance of the cause encounters conditional facts, it shifts and moves of itself. Second, co-existence: it is empty, having power while depending on conditions. Why? Because upon obtaining external conditions, it merely reveals that its substance is empty, and together they accomplish power and function. Third, following along until the limit of the remedy: it is existent, lacking power while depending on conditions. How is this known? Because it follows others, it cannot be non-existent; and because it cannot go against conditions, it lacks power. Fourth, determination: it is existent, having power without depending on conditions. How is this known? Because before external conditions arrive, its nature does not alter and is accomplished of itself. Fifth, contemplating causal conditions: it is empty, lacking power while depending on conditions. How is this known? Because depending on external conditions, it merely reveals that the proximate cause is not existent, lacking the power to produce the effect. Sixth, manifesting its own effect as an inducement: it is existent, having power while depending on conditions. How is this known? Because when it obtains external conditions, it merely reveals that its own cause obtains its own effect. Question: What is the scope of these six meanings of causal conditions? Answer: When we now speak of 'relying on conditions', this takes only the three conditions—such as the sovereign condition—outside of the causal fact, and does not take the six meanings of one's own cause as mutually generating each other. Why? Because those six meanings are equally the dharmas of principle, revealed in relation to the causal fact; if the fact of the productive cause were discarded, the six meanings could not mutually generate and accomplish each other. It is merely that the external three conditions each have principle and phenomena, so they can reveal the meaning of cause and effect in mutual relation. If so, the six meanings should not accomplish each other as universal and particular. Answer: As for the six meanings and six characteristics mutually accomplishing [dharmas], the six characteristics have two senses: first, conforming to principle; second, conforming to phenomena. Of these two senses, that of conforming to principle is apparent, while that of conforming to phenomena is subtle. For the facts of the four conditions, the two senses are as above, but that of conforming to phenomena is prominent, while that of conforming to principle is subtle. How is this known? Because in the dharmas produced from causal conditions the meaning of confusion arising is evident, the treatise master separately took the six characteristics to illuminate them and cause entry into principle; hence we know that the four conditions have prominent conformity to phenomena. How is it known that the universal and particular have prominent conformity to principle? Because he explained the six characteristics to make the discerning mind enter principle. Question: How is it known that only the universal and particular six meanings achieve prominent conformity to principle, and do not take phenomena? Answer: Because the treatise master excluded phenomena from being fully endowed with the six characteristics and explained them solely in terms of meaning; hence we know it. The above two subtle meanings can be understood upon reflection. Now within causal conditions, each possesses the six meanings; therefore it is said that there is separately a superior function capable of producing the effect. Question: As the treatise states: 'Not made by another, it arises from its own cause; not made by itself, because it arises from conditions.' Since it says 'not made by another', why does it solely take superior power to produce the effect? Answer: This posits non-arising to set against and take the superior power. If it did not set against and subvert, the superior power would not be accomplished; causing one to singularly take the superior power of one side within this subversion belongs to the treatise master's contemplation of self-cause above. Here, it comprehensively takes both powers, and the meaning of inability to produce is partially included therein; one may understand this upon reflection according to the six meanings above. There is a distinct emptiness which will enter into the subsequent contemplation door, where it will be distinguished when the time comes. This precisely remedies the previous attachment that an isolated cause produces the effect—that karma is created relying on conditions, but when it later produces an effect, it does not rely on conditions to be brought forth. What is the fault of this attachment? Answer: If conditions are discarded, the superior power of one's own cause is entirely unaccomplished. This is precisely the contemplation of conventional truth, taking the principle, phenomena, and wisdom of conditioned arising as the contemplation's substance. This is explained according to the sūtra. Third, explaining the text: 'cause' pervades the four kinds of conditions, both proximate and remote; hence it says that causal conditions can produce formations, as is known. The explanation of the terms can be understood; this is explained according to the treatise. Furthermore, according to the Hīnayāna, there are six causes and four conditions; according to the Triyāna, there are ten causes, twenty causes, and so forth; according to the Ekayāna, causes are explained according to the respective dharma, because the principle and phenomena of each and every causal condition are distinct and coextensive with the dharmadhātu. The meaning of the six causes here can only be fathomed by the Ekayāna; this is stated according to the distinct teaching.