瑜伽論記 3.267

3.267

八、生者，非有故者，謂非自作他作，若有自我作大梵等他作。便有生者故，緣無作用故者，謂非俱作。緣力所生故者，謂亦非無因生，對法云：諸法不自生，亦不從他生，亦不從共生，非不從二生，雖無作用緣而有功能緣可得故，非自生破我作，非他生破大自在天等不平等因生，非共生破薩婆多等作用義，非無因生者破無因論。彼云：若緣起理非自非他遣雙句者，猶為甚深，況忘四句，是故緣起最極甚深。中論云：諸法不自生，亦不從他生，不共不無因。彼解云：自性空故不自生，緣性空故非他生，自他空故不共生，法若有體可說有因無因，法性既空，何得說有有因無因，前三句破有因緣，第四句破無因緣。

Eighth, as for 'Because an agent of production is nonexistent': it means there is neither self-making nor making by another. If there were a self that makes, or an other that makes such as Mahābrahmā, then there would be an agent of production. 'Because conditions are without active functioning': it means there is not joint making. 'Because they are produced by the power of conditions': it means they are also not produced without cause. The Abhidharma states: 'Dharmas are not produced from themselves, nor are they produced from another, nor are they produced from both; nor are they produced without the two. Although conditions are without active functioning, conditions possessing causal efficacy are obtainable.' 'Not self-produced' refutes [the view of] an agent of self; 'not produced from another' refutes production from an unequal cause such as Maheśvara; 'not produced from both' refutes the doctrine of active functioning held by the Sarvāstivādins and others; 'not produced without cause' refutes the doctrine of causelessness. That [treatise] says: 'If the principle of dependent origination merely negates the two positions of