俱舍論記 6.61

6.61

「此依俱有至故無有過」者，論主答。言無時非因者，此依俱有、相應、異熟三因。以親辨果通三世故，故無有過。故《婆沙》通云「有說：彼依俱有因作論，以俱有因遍有為法，親能辨果通三世故。有說：彼依相應、俱有二因作論，以此二因俱遍三性，親能辨果通三世故。有說：彼依相應、俱有、異熟三因作論，以此三因親能辨果通三世故。有：說彼依相應、俱有、異熟、能作四因作論，以此四因通三世故。有說：彼依五因作論，除能作因，遍一切法皆不遮故。此中有說除遍行因，體用狹故。應說彼依六因作論，因名所表通六因故。」准彼《婆沙》總有七說，此論當第三不正義。彼論第七說為正，隨作論者意樂說故。又《婆沙》正義家能作因中有因緣，即是生等五因。問：未來既無同類因，《婆沙》正義云何依六因作論？解云：未來雖無，而彼意說能為因後無時非因，或約正生位定能為因，依此密說無時非因。

"This is based on the coexistent... therefore there is no fault": this is the author's answer. When it says "at no time is it not a cause," this is based on the three causes: coexistent (sahabhū-hetu), associated (samprayuktaka-hetu), and ripening (vipāka-hetu). Because their direct accomplishment of a result extends through the three periods of time, there is no fault. Thus the Mahāvibhāṣā resolves it, stating: "Some say: that treatise is composed based on the coexistent cause, because the coexistent cause pervades conditioned phenomena, and its direct accomplishment of a result extends through the three periods of time. Some say: it is composed based on the two causes, associated and coexistent, because these two causes both pervade the three natures [wholesome, unwholesome, indeterminate], and their direct accomplishment of a result extends through the three periods of time. Some say: it is composed based on the three causes: associated, coexistent, and ripening, because the direct accomplishment of a result by these three causes extends through the three periods of time. Some say: it is composed based on the four causes: associated, coexistent, ripening, and efficient (kāraṇa-hetu), because these four causes extend through the three periods of time. Some say: it is composed based on five causes, excluding the efficient cause, because it pervades all phenomena and is unobstructed in all. Among these, some say that the omnipresent cause (sarvatraga-hetu) is excluded, because its substantial application is narrow. It should be said that it is composed based on the six causes, because the name 'cause' denotes all six causes." According to that Mahāvibhāṣā, there are seven views in total; this present treatise adopts the third, non-standard opinion. In that treatise [the Mahāvibhāṣā], the seventh view is the standard one, because it was stated according to the preference of the composer of the treatise. Furthermore, for the proponent of the standard opinion in the Mahāvibhāṣā, the causal condition (hetu-pratyaya) within the efficient cause comprises the five causes such as arising (janma). Question: Since the future has no cause of the same type (sabhāga-hetu), how can the Mahāvibhāṣā's standard opinion compose the treatise based on the six causes? Answer: Although it does not exist in the future, its intention is to say that after it is able to act as a cause, at no time is it not a cause; or, with reference to the state of arising, it is determined to be able to act as a cause, and it is on this implicit ground that it says at no time is it not a cause.