金光明最勝王經疏 4.438

4.438

贊曰：結也。雙結前二。若已生法，亦非是因緣生。若未生生者，亦非是因緣之所生。故既非因緣生，即無名無相，譬所不及，此即法界故。法界與遍計及依他性俱不一異，言無名無相。亦應云不生不滅，乃至自性涅槃，但顯略爾。此中比量，若已生法應不待因生，體已生故，如過去等。若未生法，應立宗云：諸未生法應不可得生宗，以非有故，因。無名無相故，亦得是因。諸非有者皆不可得生，如兔角等。諸無名相者皆不可得生，如真如等。又《十二門論》云「若不生法生，一切不生法皆應生，一切凡夫未生阿耨菩提皆應生。又不壞法阿羅漢煩惱不生而生。」此說不退法羅漢應起煩惱。又云：兔馬等角不生而生。是事不然，是故不應說不生而生。《顯揚論》第九、《瑜伽論》第六，及《廣百論》第四等，皆悉有破，恐煩不引。此上破妄，即依遍計五蘊即現法界，未說依他；下喻及合方顯依他能現法界。

Commentary: The conclusion. It concludes both of the preceding two together. If it is an already arisen phenomenon, it is also not produced by causes and conditions. If it is that which has not yet arisen that arises, it is also not produced by causes and conditions. Because it is neither produced by causes and conditions, it is therefore without name and without mark, beyond the reach of analogy—this is precisely the dharmadhātu. The dharmadhātu is neither identical to nor different from both the parikalpita and the paratantra natures, and is said to be without name and without mark. It should also be said to be neither arising nor ceasing, up to svabhāvanirvāṇa; it is merely stated briefly here. As for the inference here: if it is an already arisen phenomenon, it should not depend on a cause to arise, because its entity has already arisen, like the past and so forth. If it is a phenomenon not yet arisen, the thesis should be stated as: all phenomena not yet arisen should be unobtainable to arise (thesis); because they are non-existent (reason). Because they are without name and mark can also serve as the reason. Whatever is non-existent is entirely unobtainable to arise, like the horns of a hare and so forth (example). Whatever is without name and mark is entirely unobtainable to arise, like tathatā and so forth. Furthermore, the Dvādaśanikāyaśāstra says: "If unarisen phenomena arose, all unarisen phenomena should arise: the unarisen anuttarabodhi of all ordinary persons should arise. Moreover, the unarisen afflictions of an arhat of indestructible dharma would arise." This means that an arhat of non-retrogressing dharma should give rise to afflictions. It also says: "Horns on hares, horses, and so forth, being unarisen, would arise." This is not so; therefore one should not say that what is unarisen arises. The ninth fascicle of the Prakaraṇāryavācā, the sixth fascicle of the Yogācārabhūmi, and the fourth fascicle of the Śataśāstravaipulya, and so forth, all contain refutations, which are not cited here for fear of verbosity. The above refutes delusion, whereby relying on the parikalpita five skandhas, the dharmadhātu is manifested, but it has not yet discussed the paratantra; below, the analogy and the application will finally reveal that the paratantra can manifest the dharmadhātu.