十二門論宗致義記 2.7

2.7

釋此門四義同前：初辨名者，發果為緣，觀緣無性，故以為門。二、來意者，前於因中求生不得，今於緣中求亦無生，故次來也。又以多門遣執盡故，又顯觸途皆無生故。三、明品中所明者，謂推求四緣皆無生理，是所宗也。四、釋文中五：初、標宗；二、破有；三、破無；四、破緣；五、類遣。初中諸法是果及緣，皆不成故也。二、破有中三：初、舉頌略標；二、出彼緣相；三、徵破明空。初中先立頌，後略釋。頌中，上半奪破，下半結呵。又上半顯理，下半徵情。略釋中，一一緣是廣，和合是略。此二門中，求有生不可得也。二、辨緣相中二：先問後答。答中先頌後釋。頌中，上半案定，下半列名。以外道立神我為第五緣，故此無也。釋中二：先列名，後釋相。釋相中釋四緣則為四，此中各有三義，謂標、釋、結。初中「因緣」者，以因為緣，故云因。此則因即緣故名因緣，非是親疏並舉名為因緣。謂所從生者，顯親生義也。又此從生是果法，體是有為，故三世攝耳。二中「法已滅」者，前心法謝滅也。「次第生」者，由前心心法雖謝滅，然有開避引導之力，令後心法無間而生，故云次第生。與次第法為緣，故名也。新翻名等無間緣也。此唯心法有，餘皆無也。三中「緣」者，所緣也。以所緣法緣起，能緣心心法等，故名緣。則所緣為緣，故云緣緣，新名所緣緣。釋中所念，則是所緣理實，但起心、心法為身、語二業，依止思法上立，故亦通舉三業耳。四中以此法於彼法有增上勝力，故云增上。增上即緣，故云增上緣。此有二種：一、不相礙增上；二、勝力助成增上。此文通二，據後而說。第三、徵破明空，於中五：初、總標；二、別徵；三、雙責；四、結無；五、結宗。別中，初以緣奪因，明因中無；二，以因奪緣，明緣中無；三、「若於」下，雙徵責；四、「是故」下，結無；五、「如是一一」下，結正徵情。一一是別責，故廣也；和合是總徵，故略也。三、破無中三：先立頌，頌中上半牒外計、下半以非緣並破，後釋顯。謂外意云：緣中略廣求雖不得，何妨此果從四緣生？破意云：既緣與非緣同是無果，而得從緣出，何得不從非緣出耶？立量等，可知。三、「是故」下，結無生。四、破緣中二：先標宗，謂生果故名緣，果既不生，何得有緣？後釋，「先緣後果者」，此是案情求理破，謂若先緣無，果是誰緣？故非也。第五、類遣中三：先類結有為空；二、無為空；三、我空。是故三空除二我也。

The four meanings in explaining this gate are the same as before: First, distinguishing the name: bringing forth an effect is a condition (pratyaya); contemplating that conditions lack intrinsic nature is therefore taken as the gate. Second, the reason for its appearance: previously, when seeking production within causes it could not be found; now, when seeking within conditions there is also no production, hence it follows next. Furthermore, it is because attachments are completely eliminated through multiple gates, and also to show that wherever one touches the path, all is unproduced. Third, clarifying what is elucidated in the chapter: namely, investigating that the four conditions are all devoid of any principle of production is what is held as the thesis. Fourth, in explaining the text, there are five parts: 1. stating the thesis; 2. refuting existence; 3. refuting non-existence; 4. refuting conditions; 5. eliminating by extension. In the first, all dharmas are effects and conditions, which are both unestablished. Second, in refuting existence, there are three parts: 1. presenting the verse to state it briefly; 2. setting forth the characteristics of those conditions; 3. critically refuting them to clarify emptiness. In the first part, the verse is first established, followed by a brief explanation. In the verse, the first half refutes by deprivation, and the second half concludes with rebuke. Alternatively, the first half reveals the principle, and the second half cross-examines subjective views. In the brief explanation, each single condition is broad, while their combination is brief. Within these two gates, seeking the production of existence is impossible. Second, in distinguishing the characteristics of conditions, there are two parts: first a question, then an answer. In the answer, first is the verse, then the explanation. In the verse, the first half settles the matter, and the second half enumerates the names. Because non-Buddhists posit the spiritual self (ātman) as a fifth condition, it is absent here. In the explanation, there are two parts: first, enumerating the names; second, explaining the characteristics. In explaining the characteristics, explaining the four conditions consists of four parts, each having three aspects: heading, explanation, and conclusion. In the first, 'cause condition' (hetu-pratyaya) means taking the cause as a condition, hence it is called 'cause'. Here, the cause is itself the condition, hence it is called 'cause condition'; it is not that direct and indirect are both cited to name it cause condition. Saying 'that from which [something] is produced' reveals the sense of directly producing. Furthermore, this which is produced from it is an effect-dharma, its essence being conditioned, and thus it is subsumed under the three times. In the second, 'the dharma having ceased' refers to the prior mental dharma passing away and ceasing. 'Produced in sequence' means: although the prior mind and mental factors have passed away and ceased, they have the power to vacate and guide, causing the subsequent mental dharmas to be produced without interruption; hence it says 'produced in sequence'. Because it serves as a condition for sequential dharmas, it is so named. In the new translation it is named the immediately preceding condition (samanantara-pratyaya). This exists only for mental dharmas; all others lack it. In the third, 'condition' means the objective referent (ālambana). Because objective referent dharmas condition the arising of the cognitive mind, mental factors, and so forth, they are called conditions. Thus, taking the objective referent as a condition is called the condition of objective referent (ālambana-pratyaya); the new name is the objective referent condition (ālambana-pratyaya). 'That which is recollected' in the explanation is the objective referent in principle; in reality, it merely gives rise to mind and mental factors, which are established based on the volition-dharma as the two karmas of body and speech, and therefore it generally encompasses all three karmas. In the fourth, because this dharma has predominant, superior power toward that dharma, it is called 'predominant'. The predominant is itself the condition, hence it is called 'predominant condition' (adhipati-pratyaya). This has two kinds: 1. non-obstructive predominance; 2. superior-power auxiliary predominance. This text encompasses both, but is stated according to the latter. Third, critically refuting them to clarify emptiness. Within this, there are five parts: 1. general statement; 2. separate examination; 3. dual cross-examination; 4. concluding non-existence; 5. concluding the thesis. In the separate [examination], first, deprivation of the cause by the condition clarifies that it is non-existent in the cause; second, deprivation of the condition by the cause clarifies that it is non-existent in the condition; third, from 'If in' onward, dual cross-examination; fourth, from 'Therefore' onward, concluding non-existence; fifth, from 'In this way, each single' onward, concluding by directly cross-examining subjective views. 'Each single' is a separate cross-examination, hence broad; 'combination' is a general examination, hence brief. Third, in refuting non-existence, there are three parts: first, establishing the verse, in which the first half cites the outsider's claim, and the second half refutes it alongside non-conditions; then the explanation reveals it. That is, the outsider's intention is: 'Although seeking [the effect] within conditions briefly or broadly fails, what prevents this effect from being produced from the four conditions?' The refuting intention is: 'Since conditions and non-conditions equally lack the effect, yet it can emerge from conditions, why should it not emerge from non-conditions?' The establishment of the syllogism and the rest can be known. Third, from 'Therefore' onward, concluding non-production. Fourth, in refuting conditions, there are two parts: first, stating the thesis, meaning that because they produce an effect they are called conditions; since the effect is not produced, how could there be conditions? Next, in the explanation, 'if the condition is first and the effect is later' is a refutation by pursuing principle based on subjective views, meaning: if the condition is first and lacks [the effect], of what is it a condition? Therefore it is not [a condition]. Fifth, in eliminating by extension, there are three parts: first, concluding that conditioned [dharmas] are empty by extension; second, that unconditioned [dharmas] are empty; third, that the self is empty. Therefore, the three emptinesses eliminate the two selves.