大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 9.13

9.13

Regarding the Commentary's "The four simultaneous characteristics: cessation marks subsequent non-existence": this is the seventh [contrast], the meaning of "successive" in the distinction between simultaneous and successive regarding the four characteristics. The second fascicle of the Cheng weishi lun states: "Yet conditioned phenomena, through the power of causes and conditions, were originally non-existent and now exist, provisionally exist and return to non-existence; to mark their difference from the unconditioned, the four characteristics are provisionally established (this introduces the thesis). Originally non-existent and now existent: the state of existence is called arising. Pausing temporarily in the state of arising is called abiding. When abiding differs between prior and subsequent, the name 'change' is further established. Provisionally existent and returning to non-existence: the time of non-existence is called cessation (this clarifies the characteristics individually). Because the first three are existent, they are together in the present; because the last one is non-existent, it is in the past (distinguishing it from the Hīnayāna view that arising is in the future while the remaining three are in the present). How can a non-existent phenomenon be a characteristic of conditioned phenomena (the objection)? Marking this subsequent non-existence, what fault is there in it being a characteristic (the general answer)? Arising marks that an existent phenomenon was previously non-existent; cessation marks that an existent phenomenon is subsequently non-existent; change marks that this phenomenon is not static; abiding marks that this phenomenon temporarily has function (this explains the marking function individually). Therefore, although these four characteristics are all called marks with respect to conditioned phenomena, their markings are different. These four characteristics are provisionally established based on a single moment (this concludes)." Now the Commentary merely raises cessation because this single phrase alone differs from dharmatā, as it does not allow simultaneity.