大方廣佛華嚴經疏 40.10

40.10

第九生滅繫縛者，亦名似有若無。初一切智觀中明不共生，文中三：初順觀，經中但明無明為緣，縛行令行繫屬無明，斯則緣生而為不共者。論云「非二作，但隨順生故、無知者故、作時不住故。」意謂但行順無明，緣不得不生。互無知者，故非二作。若爾，但隨順生即是共生，何要知者？故末句云「既從緣生則念念不住，誰為共耶？」此同《對法》無作用故。又《中論》云「和合即無性，云何和合生？」次「無明滅」下逆觀，謂滅但滅於繫縛，既無共生，安有共滅？言有生滅，皆是繫縛。三類餘可知。二約大悲觀，謂彼外道異求非想天等為解脫者，菩薩觀之但是染縛，非是涅槃真淨之德。三約一切相智觀，明無始觀中隨順縛故而生，非有本也。

Ninth: the bondage of arising and cessation, also called "seeming to exist while being as if absent." First, within the contemplation of all-knowledge, it clarifies not arising from both. In the text there are three parts: First, in the forward contemplation, the sūtra merely clarifies ignorance as a condition, binding karmic formations so that karmic formations are bound and subordinate to ignorance; that this conditioned arising is not arising from both is because the treatise states: "It is not made by both, but merely arises in conformity [with conditions], because there is no knower, and because at the time of acting it does not abide." The meaning is that karmic formations merely conform to ignorance, and conditions cannot but arise. Since mutually neither has a knower, they are not made by both. If so, and merely arising in conformity is precisely arising from both, why is a knower required? Therefore the final phrase states: "Since it arises from conditions, then from moment to moment it does not abide; what could constitute 'both'?" This accords with the absence of agency in the Abhidharmasamuccaya. Furthermore, the Madhyamakaśāstra states: "Combination is precisely without self-nature; how could there be arising from combination?" Next, the reverse contemplation from "ignorance ceases" downward means that cessation merely ceases the bondage; since there is no arising from both, how could there be cessation from both? Saying there is arising and cessation are all bondage. Third, the analogies for the rest can be understood accordingly. Second, in terms of the contemplation of great compassion: when those non-Buddhists mistakenly seek the heaven of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, etc., as liberation, the bodhisattva contemplates that this is merely defiled bondage, not the true pure virtue of nirvāṇa. Third, in terms of the contemplation of the cognition of all aspects, it clarifies that in the contemplation of beginninglessness it arises due to conforming to bondage, not that it possesses a foundation.