瑜伽師地論略纂 9.44

9.44

論云「即由如是現見增上作意力故，觀察變異無常性已」，此牒結前。乃至「應正比度」等以來，明諸色等諸大滅壞易知，剎那生滅難知，以微細故。今將欲辨，先發論端。「云何比度」以下，乃至「是故諸行必定應有剎那生滅」已來，明由有小微細生滅故，得有大變異生滅，非見小生滅等而知有大生滅等義。「從彼彼眾緣和合有故」下，至「生已不待滅壞因緣，自然滅壞」已來，明釋伏難，云滅有因緣。謂伏難云：不知生滅俱有因緣已不？今通云：此法由眾緣和合故有生，生即有因緣，不待因緣而自滅壞，即滅法無因緣也。

The treatise says: "Having thus observed the impermanence of alteration by the power of predominant manaskāra of direct perception"—this recapitulates and concludes the preceding. Up to "one should correctly infer," and so forth, it clarifies that while the gross destruction of the various forms and the like is easy to know, momentary arising and ceasing are difficult to know because they are subtle. Now, wishing to explain this, it first opens the topic. From "How does one infer?" down to "Therefore, conditioned formations must certainly have momentary arising and ceasing," it clarifies that because of the presence of minor, subtle arising and ceasing, there can be gross alterative arising and ceasing, not that one knows the existence of gross arising and ceasing from seeing minor arising and ceasing. From "Because they exist due to the combination of various conditions" down to "Having arisen, they perish naturally without waiting for conditions of destruction," it clarifies and resolves an implicit objection that ceasing has conditions. The implicit objection asks: "Is it known whether arising and ceasing both have conditions or not?" Now it resolves this: these dharmas have arising because of the combination of various conditions; arising thus has conditions, but [dharmas] perish naturally without waiting for conditions, meaning that the dharma of ceasing has no conditions.