俱舍論疏 6.9

6.9

The passage from the Śāstra starting with “The Śāstra says” up to “because they abide without obstructing” is the prose commentary. Within it there are two parts: first, the explanation that abiding simply without obstruction and arising with potency is termed an efficient cause (kāraṇa-hetu); second, other masters' explanation that all dharmas mutually possess efficacy and function. Within the first text, there are again two parts: first, explaining the verse text; second, analysis by questions and answers. In explaining the verse text, first the essence of the cause is clarified; second, the name of the cause is explained. This text clarifies the essence of the cause. However, positing the essence of the cause is of two kinds: first, positing its essence in general, which takes all dharmas as its essence; second, positing its essence relative to the fruit, [which is] “excepting itself, the rest are efficient [causes].” That is to say, excepting its own self-entity (svabhāva), all remaining [dharmas] are taken as its efficient cause, because when that [fruit] arises, they abide without obstructing. Question: If a dharma never arises at all, do all remaining dharmas, excepting its own self-entity, serve as causes for it or not? Answer: They serve as causes. If that causal dharma has not yet reached its already-arisen state, it is only a cause by nature (prakṛti-hetu). If it has reached its already-arisen state, it is a cause that grasps a fruit (phala-grahaṇa-hetu). If the fruit reaches arising, it is named a cause that gives a fruit (phala-dāna-hetu). Dharmas that do not arise have no cause that gives a fruit. The Nyāyānusāra states: “This efficient cause is briefly of two kinds: first, having the power to produce; second, merely being non-obstructing. When dharmas arise, excepting solely its own self-entity, all dharmas are taken as their efficient cause, because when that [dharma] arises, none act as an obstruction, and among them a minor portion has the power capable of producing. As, for instance, when an eye-consciousness arises, it takes the eye as its supporting cause, the visible form as its establishing cause, the eye-consciousness and so forth like seed-dharmas as its non-interrupting cause, the associated dharmas as its sustaining cause, the co-existent dharmas as its assisting cause, and the ear faculty and so forth as its abiding cause. These are collectively called efficient causes. Among them, one part is named a potent cause, because it possesses superior functional capacity capable of producing. The remaining parts are named impotent causes, because they merely abide without obstructing. Why is an entity’s own self-entity not an efficient cause for itself? Because an efficient cause is absent in its own self-entity. That is, the meaning of non-obstruction is the efficient cause, whereas a self-entity always constitutes an obstruction to itself. Furthermore, all dharmas do not depend on their own self-entities, for [otherwise] there would constantly occur diminution and so forth.” [Fabao] comments: If it depended on this very self-entity, since the self-entity is constantly existent, it should constantly come into being. If it depended on a second self-entity, since a second self-entity is constantly non-existent, there should constantly occur diminution and so forth. Other masters say: If a self-entity were the cause of its own self-entity, then ignorance would again take ignorance as its condition, and so forth. In a single instant, this very [dharma] would be the cause of this very [dharma], which would contradict the dharma-nature of dependent origination. Other masters say: In a self-entity, no function is seen with respect to itself; therefore it is not a cause or condition, just like a fingertip, a knife blade, the eye, and so forth.