中觀論疏 7.30

7.30

「復次」下，品第三段明無異故無合。即釋上破異之意。品稱破合而今破異者，意欲明無合故也。上半更開一異兩門明無合、下半結無合義。自有三義故無合，若是能合無所合，是所合即無能合；不爾則非能所，無有合。「異法不合」者，異則已成，不須復合。假使合者，是亦不然，如指一方合、三方不合，不合多故，應合為不合。

From "Furthermore" onward, this is the third section of the chapter, which explains that because there is no difference, there is no combination; that is, it explains the intent of the preceding refutation of difference. Although the chapter is entitled "Examination of Combination," it now refutes difference because its aim is to demonstrate that there is no combination. The first half of the verse again sets up the two gates of oneness and difference to explain that there is no combination; the second half concludes the meaning of the absence of combination. Inherently, for three reasons there is no combination: if there is an agent of combination, there is nothing to be combined; if there is that which is combined, there is no agent of combination; if not, then there is neither agent nor object, and there is no combination. As for "different things do not combine," if they are different, they are already established as distinct and need not combine again. Even if they were to combine, that too is not correct: for instance, when a finger touches on one side, its other three sides do not combine [with it]; because non-combination is greater, what should be combined is [actually] uncombined.