大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 65.8

65.8

疏「二所作業果是行支」者，於中四：一正釋經。二「而論」下，引論釋。三「此出」下，疏釋論。以名色通為生死之體，以無明等是行蘊等各別法故，各自有體。今行該通，故取通體以為其體。四「遠公」下，舉古釋義無所違。但引《婆沙》名色緣識。此名色在因中，識緣名色，是六處別名，則似名色與識有前後義。大乘亦有互相緣義。義則不然，因果之中皆二互相緣，此是因中互為緣義，如下當說。疏「三行依止下識支」，初舉論；二「彼即是行」下釋論。言「由行熏心」等者，行謂罪等三業。《唯識》云「此雖纔起，無間即滅，無義能招當異熟果。而熏本識起自功能，即此功能說為習氣，是業氣分熏習所成。揀當現業，故云習氣。如是熏習展轉相續，至成熟時招異熟果，此顯當果勝增上緣。」釋曰：但觀所引及下《瑜伽》疏文可知。

Regarding the Commentary's stating, "Second, that the fruit of karma performed is the link of formative activity (saṃskāra)": this comprises four parts. First, directly explaining the sūtra. Second, from "And the treatise..." onward, citing the treatise in explanation. Third, from "This presents..." onward, the Commentary explains the treatise. Because name-and-form pervades as the substance of saṃsāra, while ignorance (avidyā) and so forth are distinct dharmas such as the aggregate of formative forces, they each possess their own substance. Here, formative activity encompasses all, and therefore takes this all-pervading substance as its substance. Fourth, from "Master Yuan..." onward, adducing an ancient explanation showing there is no contradiction. It merely cites the Vibhāṣā's "name-and-form conditions consciousness." This name-and-form is within the cause, while "consciousness conditions name-and-form" is a different designation for the six sense-spheres (ṣaḍāyatana); thus it seems as if name-and-form and consciousness have an anterior and posterior sense. The Mahāyāna also holds that they condition each other. The meaning is not so: between cause and effect, both condition each other; this is the meaning of their mutually acting as conditions within the cause, as will be explained below.
Regarding the Commentary's stating, "Third, the support of formative activity... the link of consciousness (vijñāna)": first, it adduces the treatise; second, from "That is formative activity..." onward, it explains the treatise. Regarding the statement, "Due to formative activity perfuming the mind," and so forth: "formative activity" refers to the three kinds of karma, such as sinful [karma]. The Vijñaptimātratā[-siddhi] states: "Although this has only just arisen and immediately perishes without interval, lacking the capacity to directly summon the future vipāka-fruit, it perfumes the fundamental consciousness to give rise to its own function. This very function is called a latent predisposition (vāsanā); it is produced through the perfuming of karmic residual influence. It is distinguished from present karma, and is thus called a latent predisposition. Such perfuming continues in succession from one moment to the next, until at the time of maturation it summons the vipāka-fruit. This illustrates the superior predominant condition (adhipati-pratyaya) for the future fruit." The explanation says: This can be understood simply by examining the cited text and the passage from the Yogācāra commentary below.