瑜伽師地論略纂 4.106

4.106

會此文云：《瑜伽論》說諸支相望無因緣者，依現愛、取，唯業有說。別聊簡云：無明望行，愛望於取，生望老死，有等無間及所緣緣。此以無色望無色支。有望於生，受望於愛，無等無間，有所緣緣。此以有色支望無色支。餘支相望，二俱非有。此文總說，彼文別顯，應如彼釋。　「有色望有色」者，謂名色中，色望五處，業有望色生，色生望色老死。「無色望有色」者，無明望色行，名望五處，無色生望色老死。此中不說非業有，故不說之。　此中且依隣近順次不相雜亂實緣起說，異此相望，為緣不定，諸聰慧者，如理應思。

Harmonising with this text, it says: when the *Yogācārabhūmi* says that there is no causal condition between the factors, it speaks relying on present craving and grasping, and solely on the 'existence' that is karma. To distinguish and clarify: between ignorance and volitional action, craving and grasping, and birth and old age and death, there are the immediately preceding condition and the objective condition. This is viewing non-material factors in relation to non-material factors. Between existence and birth, and feeling and craving, there is no immediately preceding condition, but there is an objective condition. This is viewing material factors in relation to non-material factors. For the remaining factors in relation to each other, neither is present. This text speaks generally, whereas that text clarifies in detail; one should interpret it according to the latter. 'Material in relation to material' refers, within name-and-form, to form in relation to the five bases, karmic existence in relation to material birth, and material birth in relation to material old age and death. 'Non-material in relation to material' refers to ignorance in relation to material volitional action, name in relation to the five bases, and non-material birth in relation to material old age and death. Here it does not speak of what is not karmic existence, and so does not mention them. Here it speaks provisionally relying on the actual dependent origination that is contiguous, in forward sequence, and unconfused. Viewing them in relation to each other otherwise, their functioning as conditions is variable; let the wise reflect on this thoroughly.