金光明最勝王經疏 4.430

4.430

贊曰：此非未生生。初立宗、「何故」下舉因。《十二門論》云「若未生而生，未生名未有，云何能自生？」此意因緣未生即體是無，無自不能生，何能生他？此破去來實有論。彼論復云「復次若因中無果而果生，諸因相即不成。何以故？諸因若無，法何能作？何能成？若無作無成，云何名為因？」此意言因必須對果，果既無體，對誰名能作能成？既無能作能成，何得名因？

Commentary: This refutes arising from that which has not yet arisen. First, setting forth the thesis; from "why is that" downwards, adducing the reason. The Dvādaśanikāyaśāstra says: "If that which has not yet arisen arises, / not yet arisen means not yet existing: / how could it produce itself?" The meaning is that if the causes and conditions have not yet arisen, its entity is non-existent; being non-existent, it cannot produce itself, so how could it produce another? This refutes the theory of the real existence of past and future. That treatise further says: "Furthermore, if the effect does not exist in the cause and the effect arises, the marks of causes are not established. Why is that? If the causes are non-existent, how could the phenomenon be made? How could it be accomplished? If there is neither making nor accomplishing, how can they be called causes?" The meaning of this is that a cause must correspond to an effect; since the effect has no entity, with respect to what would it be called that which can make or accomplish? Since there is neither that which can make nor that which can accomplish, how can it be called a cause?