金光明最勝王經疏 4.424

4.424

贊曰：下釋所以。初假設外徵：何所以故不從因生？此假作執因中有果論及去來實有論徵。執有果論者，意說因中已有果竟，但從緣生或從緣顯。若如穀種，因中先無其果而後生穀，亦應生豆等。彼此本無，從因生故。若爾，即應從於一因生一切果。是故因中定已有果，但緣生顯。何所以故不從因緣生？若去來實有論徵意：三世法有，然未來世有生能生應生之法。若無生生不至現在，何所以故云不從因緣生？

Commentary: Below, the reason is explained. First, a provisional objection by an opponent is raised: For what reason do they not arise from causes? This provisionally formulates the objections of the theorist who clings to an effect existing in the cause and the theorist who clings to the real existence of past and future. The theorist who clings to the existence of the effect intends to say that the effect already completely exists within the cause, and merely arises from conditions or is made manifest from conditions. If, as with a grain seed, the effect did not beforehand exist in the cause and later the grain arose, it should also give rise to beans and so forth, because both [the grain and the beans] were originally non-existent and arise from causes. If that were so, then from a single cause all effects should arise. Therefore, within the cause the effect must certainly already exist, and it is merely manifested by conditions. For what reason [then] does it not arise from causes and conditions? As for the intention of the objection of the theorist who holds that past and future are real: the phenomena of the three times exist, and in the future time there is an arising that can produce the phenomena that ought to arise. If without that arising producing it, it would not reach the present, for what reason is it said that they do not arise from causes and conditions?