大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 67.43

67.43

In the commentary, from 'In the text there is also' downward, the second part explains the text. From 'This uses not arising from other' downward is the commentary explaining the treatise. The treatise says 'members' (youfen): fen means branch. From 'Second, not being made by oneself because of arising from conditions' is also the text of the treatise, and the rest is the commentary's explanation. The phrase 'not meaning the cause-condition among the four conditions' eliminates confusion. For ancient masters explained: ignorance viewed in relation to karmic formations lacks the meaning of cause-condition. When it is called cause-condition, there are two meanings: 1) one's own seed is the cause, and ignorance is the condition; these two are spoken together, hence called cause-condition. However, concealing this direct seed and revealing that superior condition, it is called the cause-condition of ignorance. 2) Merely that sovereign condition, viewed in relation to its own sovereign effect, is still the direct cause, and therefore ignorance is said to be the cause-condition of karmic formations. This explanation loses the intent, and hence is now eliminated. If taking the potent sovereign [condition] and setting aside the impotent sovereign [condition] as direct cause, in principle this would be acceptable, but it is still not a cause-condition; hence it loses the intent. When the commentary afterward treats the rest by analogy, it means the remaining branches as well as reverse contemplation. For forward contemplation already means non-arising from self or other; in reverse contemplation, how could there be a self or other to be ceased?