俱舍論疏 13.26

13.26

論「待因謂果至有性等故」，論主破也。待因之法必是其果，「滅無非果故不待因，既不待因纔生即滅。若初無滅後亦應然。以後與初有性等故」者，若法待因，因無未滅。既不待因，何得前時不滅後即滅耶？

Treatise: "That which depends on a cause is an effect […] because their nature of existence is equal, and so on." This is the author's refutation. A dharma that depends on a cause must be an effect. "Cessation is non-existent and not an effect, and therefore does not depend on a cause; since it does not depend on a cause, it perishes as soon as it is born. If there were no cessation initially, it should be likewise later, because the later and the initial are equal in their nature of existence, and so on." If a dharma depends on a cause, while the cause is absent it does not perish. Since it does not depend on a cause, how could it not perish at the earlier time, but perish later?