瑜伽論記 2.307

2.307

若是法自體者，離彼殺生，不能感得自所愛果等者，汝說呪方體是善者，善法則應自感愛果，何顯待殺生後待呪力轉殺非法，以為正法方感樂果，不應道理。下結文中有五故字，因故者結前非法，後果因故，譬喻故者結前喻伏毒呪，不決定故者結遍行，餘二可知。

Under "If it were the intrinsic nature of the dharma, without that killing, it could not bring about its own desired fruit...": you say that the nature of the incantation's formula is wholesome; a wholesome dharma should then bring about its desired fruit on its own. How is it evident that it depends on killing, and then on the power of the incantation to transform the unrighteous act of killing into the True Dharma before it can bring about a pleasant fruit? This is unreasonable. In the concluding text below, there are five occurrences of the word "because" (hetu): "because of the cause" concludes the preceding non-dharma being the cause of the subsequent fruit; "because of the simile" concludes the preceding simile of the poison-subduing incantation; "because of being indeterminate" concludes the pervasive action; the remaining two can be understood accordingly.