中觀論疏 9.16

9.16

「復次」下，第五一異門破。偈上半牒一非一、下半牒異非異。所以不破者，〈因果品〉已有標釋竟，故此中但非也。問：一異與前合離門何異？答：上明離異，若合通一異，長行釋一中有二過：初異相故就境、次種種分別約智。破異中亦有二過：初無有兩體，別是奪破。若異，得成在東邊、壞居西面；不亦無因，故縱其是異，則壞不壞成，故成非壞因。故云無因也。

From "Furthermore" onward is the fifth refutation, the gate of identity and difference. The first half of the verse takes up identity and negates identity; the second half takes up difference and negates difference. The reason it does not elaborate a refutation is that the "Chapter on Cause and Effect" already set forth and explained it completely, so here it merely negates. Question: How do identity and difference differ from the earlier gate of union and separation? Answer: Above it explained separation and difference; union covers both identity and difference. The prose explanation of identity contains two errors: first, the characteristic of difference, which pertains to the object; next, various discriminations, which pertain to knowledge. In refuting difference there are also two errors: first, there are not two entities, which is a direct refutation by denial. If they were different, coming-to-be could be in the east and dissolution could reside in the west; it would also be without a cause, so conceding that they are different, dissolution would not dissolve coming-to-be, and thus coming-to-be would not be the cause of dissolution. Hence it says "without cause."