華嚴經探玄記 13.61

13.61

二約厭離有為中名第四非無因作，隨順有故。何故經中順無、論名順有？釋：經意以緣歸理說，論意以性從相說，各現別義，故作是說。又釋：論中順有，意顯無生，是故與經意亦不別。下別破無因。一縱破，謂應常生故；二奪破，謂恒不生故；三「此非佛法」下呵詰破，謂說無因最大邪見。「若爾」下結非無因。「是名」下釋說總結。言相諦者，相是前成答相也，諦是前二諦差別。

Second, within revulsion toward the conditioned, it is named the fourth: 'not made without a cause', because it conforms to existence. Why does the sūtra say conforming to nothing, while the treatise calls it conforming to existence? Explanation: the sūtra's intention speaks of returning from conditions to principle; the treatise's intention speaks of following marks from nature; each manifests a different meaning, hence they speak thus. Another explanation: 'conforming to existence' in the treatise intends to reveal non-production, and therefore does not differ from the sūtra's intention. Below, it separately refutes being uncaused. First is refutation by concession, meaning it should constantly be produced; second is refutation by deprivation, meaning it would constantly not be produced; third, below 'this is not the Buddhadharma', is refutation by reprimand, meaning that asserting causelessness is the greatest wrong view. Below 'if so', it concludes that it is not uncaused. Below 'this is named', it explains the exposition and summarizes. Stating 'marks and truths': 'marks' refers to the former marks of establishing and answering; 'truths' refers to the distinction between the two truths mentioned earlier.