大般涅槃經集解 66.26

66.26

案僧亮曰：過去已滅，無故不可斷；未來未至，故不待言也。斷三世因名斷者，以現在一念善心為因，能生後善。今以邪見障此善心不得生故，名斷三世因也。僧宗曰：明斷三世善也。是故不名斷過去果者，若過去因感果已定，報在後生，此報當來必受，故不斷也。即此報家之因，因亦是定，亦不可斷也。文中略故，但言不斷果耳。過去之因感果在當，因體已滅，云何可斷耶？斷三世因名斷善根者，若現在有善，即是現善。此善應過去，即過去善也。現在之善，當來相續，即名未來善也。今以此身成一闡提，惡業現前，故現善應生不得生，即是斷現善也。此善若生，便謝過去。以不生故，故無所謝，即是斷過去善也。此當來種類，應續而不得續，即是斷未來也。從義而言，此之文略。何者？現善能感來果，今斷現不起，是則斷因。既曰斷因，果無從生，豈非斷果？亦應云斷果，以略故但舉因耳。寶亮曰：夫生善為理，皆三世中也。若過去曾起者，理不可斷。但約現在，遮未來故，謂之斷二世也。此中云斷三世因者，若現在所起之善，此善即謝在過去，為過去之因也。現在善發，由曾起之善力用相資也。未來善起，亦由現在為因，因故使種類相續也。今現在既斷，便是三世之中善因不起，故言斷三世因也。

Sengliang comments: The past has already ceased; because it does not exist, it cannot be severed. The future has not yet arrived, so it goes without saying. That severing the causes of the three times is called severing: taking a single present thought of good mind as the cause, it can produce subsequent good. Now, because wrong views obstruct this good mind so that it cannot arise, it is called severing the causes of the three times. Sengzong says: This clarifies severing the goodness of the three times. As for why it is not called severing the fruits of the past: if a past cause has already determined the fruition and retribution will be in a future rebirth, this retribution must certainly be received in the future, so it is not severed. The cause belonging to this very retribution is also fixed and cannot be severed. Because the text is abridged, it only says that fruits are not severed. A past cause bears fruit in the future; the substance of the cause has already perished—how could it be severed? That severing the causes of the three times is called severing the roots of goodness: if goodness exists in the present, it is present goodness. This goodness ought to pass into the past, so it is past goodness. Present goodness continuing into the future is called future goodness. Now, through this body one becomes an icchantika, and evil karma manifests; thus present goodness that ought to arise cannot arise, which is precisely severing present goodness. If this goodness were to arise, it would then pass into the past; because it does not arise, there is nothing that passes away, which is precisely severing past goodness. This continuation of future categories that ought to continue cannot continue, which is precisely severing the future. In terms of meaning, this text is abridged. Why? Present goodness can produce future fruits; now, severing the present so that it does not arise is severing the cause. Since it is called severing the cause, the fruit has nowhere from which to arise; how is this not severing the fruit? It should also be said to sever the fruit, but due to abridgment it only mentions the cause. Baoliang says: The principle of generating goodness is always within the three times. What previously arose in the past cannot in principle be severed. It is merely by reference to the present obstructing the future that it is called severing two times. What is called 'severing causes of the three times' here: if goodness is produced in the present, this goodness then passes into the past and serves as a past cause. The arising of present goodness relies on the cooperative efficacy of previously arisen goodness. The arising of future goodness also takes the present as cause, cause enabling the continuity of categories. Now that the present is severed, good causes within the three times do not arise; therefore it is said to sever causes of the three times.