瑜伽師地論略纂 16.28

16.28

"If the object of antidote does not exist, having perished there is arising": this means that if the delusion that is the object of antidote does not exist, when the unhindered path and the delusion have both perished, the liberation path arises. Because these—the object of antidote and the antidote—undergo perishing and arising, it should be known that they have an opposing counterpart, and hence are impermanent. Another explanation states: 'If the dharma' refers to the dharmas of the truth of the path (mārgasatya). 'If the object of antidote exists' means that prior to the vajropamasamādhi, down to the darśanamārga, because delusion still exists, it is called 'the object of antidote exists'. The path and so forth prior to the vajropamasamādhi are called 'having arisen, they do not perish' because they arise repeatedly and are presently able to arise; later, at the time of the vajropamasamādhi, all delusions are absent, which is called 'if the object of antidote does not exist'. When the path previously attained has perished, the subsequent path of the consummate fruit arises; hence it is said 'having perished, there is arising'. Because this truth of the path involves arising and perishing, it is called impermanent; the unconditioned is not like this, and is therefore permanent. This solely distinguishes the truth of the path. If one does not explain it in terms of prior to the vajropamasamādhi, etc., then since in the Mahāyāna [remedies and delusions] cannot coexist, how could the object of antidote exist and having arisen not perish, with path and delusion coexisting? In "among feelings and causal conditions": contact is the causal condition of craving; taking it as a condition gives rise to craving, grasping, and so forth, so that future existence arises.