大般涅槃經義記 9.237

9.237

下約前喻以顯乳酪，於中有三：一顯正義、二破邪說、三舉說證成。「乳中酪性亦復如是」是顯正也，如前眼識非有非無。「若有說」下，是破邪也。邪說云何？立有之家以酪不從水中出生證乳定有。故今破之。先牒直非，「何以故」下釋以顯非。釋相如何？明乳與酪因果各別，水為乳因、乳為酪因。何得以水不能生酪，便言乳中定有酪性？文中有四：初「一切法異因異果」汎立道理。二「亦非」下，約就前理釋去邪執。亦非一因生一切果，是故一水不能生於乳酪二果。非一切果從一因生，是故乳酪二種之果不唯從於一水而生。三「如從」下，舉彼四緣生識不同，類顯乳酪。「如前四事生於眼識，不可從此生耳識」等，類水生乳，不得生酪。四「離方便」下，舉彼蘇酪生因不同，類顯乳酪云何類乎。蘇酪因別，此不生彼；乳酪因別，生乳之水不生於酪。文中初明蘇酪因別，「離於方便乳中得酪」酪因異蘇。所謂離於人功方便酪出生蘇，不得如是蘇因異酪。下約此別破其偏執，「智者不可見離方便從乳得酪，酪出生蘇亦應如是離方便得」。不可見乳從水草生，令酪亦爾從水草生。上來第二破其邪說。

Below, it reveals milk and curd with reference to the preceding analogy. In this there are three [parts]: first, revealing the correct meaning; second, refuting heterodox assertions; third, adducing teachings to corroborate and establish [it]. "The nature of curd in milk is also like this" reveals the correct, as the eye-consciousness before is neither existent nor non-existent. From "If someone says" below refutes the heterodox. What is the heterodox assertion? The proponents of existence use curd not being produced from water to prove that milk definitely possesses [it]. Therefore it is now refuted. First, citing [the view] and directly refuting it; from "Why?" below is the explanation to reveal its fallacy. What is the manner of explanation? It clarifies that milk and curd are distinct in cause and fruit: water is the cause of milk, and milk is the cause of curd. How can one, because water cannot produce curd, claim that the nature of curd definitely exists in milk? In the text there are four [points]: First, "all dharmas have distinct causes and distinct fruits" generally establishes the principle. Second, from "nor does" below applies the preceding principle to explain away the heterodox attachment: Nor does one cause produce all fruits, and therefore one water cannot produce the two fruits of milk and curd; nor do all fruits arise from one cause, and therefore the two kinds of fruits, milk and curd, do not arise solely from one water. Third, from "Just as from" below adduces the difference in the four conditions producing consciousness to reveal milk and curd by analogy: "Just as the preceding four things produce eye-consciousness, and ear-consciousness cannot be produced from these," and so forth, draws an analogy to water producing milk and not being able to produce curd. Fourth, from "apart from expedient means" below adduces the difference in the causes producing butter and curd to reveal milk and curd by analogy. How does it draw the analogy? Butter and curd have distinct causes, so this does not produce that; milk and curd have distinct causes, so the water that produces milk does not produce curd. In the text it first clarifies the distinct causes of butter and curd: "apart from expedient means, one obtains curd in milk," for the cause of curd is distinct from butter; as for producing fresh butter from curd apart from human expedient means, it cannot be like this, for the cause of butter is distinct from curd. Below, it refutes their one-sided attachment in reference to this distinction: "A wise person cannot, seeing that curd is obtained from milk apart from expedient means, [say that] fresh butter emerging from curd should also be obtained apart from expedient means like this." One cannot, seeing that milk is produced from water and grass, cause curd also to be produced from water and grass like that. The preceding is the second [part], refuting their heterodox assertion.