金光明最勝王經疏 6.132

6.132

下有二釋。初明雜染緣起，即是依流轉生死次第；後「此滅故彼滅」下明清淨緣起，即是依還滅斷除次第。然二類緣起各有順逆二種觀行，此各依順說，影彰二逆觀。初中復二：初別標、「所謂」下別釋。此初也。準《雜集論》第四，說有三緣生：一無作緣生、二無常緣生、三勢用緣生。初二緣生通一切有為，第三緣生約有情法。然諸處文多約十二緣起支辨，是根本故。言此有故彼有等者，如次初二。《對法》云「此有故彼有者，明無作緣生義。唯由有緣故果法得有，非緣有實作用能生果法。此為破諸外道橫執大梵神我有實作用能為物因故，云非緣有實作用能生果法。亦破外道無因妄計故，云此有故彼有。此生故彼生者，明無常緣生義。非無生法為因故，少所生法而得成立。此破外道常法為因能生諸法，亦遮未來。化地部等執有十二緣起支無為，能令緣起生無雜亂故，云亦非無生法為因故，少所生法而得成立。言甚深者，有五種，云因甚深故、相甚深故、生甚深故、住甚深故、轉甚深故，是甚深義。」廣如彼釋。

Below there are two explanations. First, explaining the conditioned arising of defilement, which is according to the sequence of saṃsāric transmigration; afterwards, from "This ceasing, that ceases" onward, explaining the conditioned arising of purity, which is according to the sequence of cessation and eradication in reversal. However, each of the two kinds of conditioned arising has both forward and reverse contemplations; here, they are each stated according to the forward [sequence], implicitly revealing the two reverse contemplations. In the first, there are again two parts: first, a distinct presentation; from "namely" onward, a distinct explanation. This is the first. Following the fourth [fascicle] of the Samuccaya, it is said that there are three kinds of conditioned arising: first, effortless (akartṛka) conditioned arising; second, impermanent (anitya) conditioned arising; third, efficacious (samartha) conditioned arising. The first two conditioned arisings apply generally to all conditioned phenomena; the third conditioned arising pertains to the phenomena of sentient beings. However, the texts in various places mostly analyze them in terms of the twelve branches of conditioned arising, because they are fundamental. The words "This existing, that exists" and so on correspond to the first two respectively. The Abhidharma[-samuccaya] says: "'This existing, that exists' clarifies the meaning of effortless conditioned arising. It is only because the condition exists that the fruit exists; it is not that the condition has any real agency capable of producing the fruit. This is to refute the errant clinging of various non-Buddhists that the Great Brahmā or the divine self has real agency capable of being the cause of things; hence it is said that it is not that the condition has real agency capable of producing the fruit. It also refutes the mistaken supposition of non-Buddhists that there is no cause; hence it is said, 'This existing, that exists.' 'This arising, that arises' clarifies the meaning of impermanent conditioned arising. It is not with an unproduced phenomenon as cause that any produced phenomenon is established. This refutes the non-Buddhists' [claim] that an eternal phenomenon as cause can produce phenomena; it also precludes the future. Because schools such as the Mahīśāsakas hold that there is an unconditioned nature of the twelve branches of conditioned arising that can cause conditioned arising to arise without confusion, it is therefore said that it is also not with an unproduced phenomenon as cause that any produced phenomenon is established. As for the term 'profound', there are five kinds: the cause is profound, the characteristic is profound, the arising is profound, the abiding is profound, and the transformation is profound; these are the meanings of profound." It is explained at length as in that [treatise].