注大乘入楞伽經 8.25

8.25

The fourth [section] cites and explains the refutation of the first [kind of impermanence]: impermanence in which things are discarded upon initial creation. What the non-Buddhists posit does not go beyond three ways in which things serve as producers: mutually, individually, and collectively. As for the statement 'it is not that the primary elements mutually exceed the primary elements, because they are distinct,' it means that solidity, wetness, and the rest originally have no self-nature, and their functions mutually conflict; they cannot reciprocally produce form. Therefore, the refutation states 'because they are distinct.' As the verse below says, 'The primary elements have no self-nature,' and also says, 'The primary elements mutually conflict; how could they produce form?' As for the statement 'nor do they produce through their individual characteristics, because there is no difference,' 'individual' means solitary. It means that the nature of the primary elements is originally unarisen; they cannot arise singly to produce form. Therefore, the refutation states 'because there is no difference.' As the verse below says, 'The primary elements are originally unarisen, hence there is no produced form.' As for the statement 'nor do they produce collectively, because they are separated,' 'collectively' means concordant combination. The nature of the four primary elements is inherently discordant and mutually destructive—just as water cannot tolerate fire—so how could they collectively produce form? Therefore, the refutation states 'because they are separated.' As the verse below says, 'Fire burns form, water rots it, and wind can scatter and destroy it; how could form come to be produced?' 'One should know that this is not impermanence upon initial creation' concludes the refutation.