瑜伽師地論略纂 3.18

3.18

Regarding "The nature of existence is the obstructing condition," and so forth: "nature of existence" refers to having substantial nature. "Nature of effect" refers to what belongs to the cause—that is, the substance designated as an entity is called the nature of effect. Here we ask: Does having substance act as an obstructing condition, or does being an entity that is an effect act as an obstructing condition? If having substance is the obstructing condition, since substantial nature is permanently existent, its nature could never be manifested; being manifested would be like not yet being manifested, because it always has substance. The cause also always exists; why does it not act as an obstruction, while only the existence of the effect can act as an obstruction? The formal inference is: "The effect in your school should never be manifested; because it permanently has nature; just like [when it is] not yet manifested." "The substance of the cause in your school should also act as an obstruction; because its substance is permanently existent; just like the effect." Regarding "If you say that the nature of an effect is the obstructing condition": take a single phenomenon such as a sprout, which is both a cause and an effect; relative to the seed it is an effect, and relative to the stem it is a cause. Relative to the stem it does not obstruct, while relative to the cause it can obstruct; since the meaning of obstruction subsumes both manifestation and non-manifestation, this would mean that a single phenomenon is both manifested and unmanifested. One should formulate the inference: "The substance of the effect in your school should also not be manifested; because it has the substance of a cause; like the cause of the primal nature (prakṛti)." However, in their school the substance of the effect is exclusively manifested, which is why this objection is raised. Or: "The substance of your primal nature should also be the cause of the effect's manifestation; like the cause of a subsequent effect." Since they hold that a sprout is definitely manifested as a cause, this objection is established. Or: "The nature of the effect should not be an obstruction; because its substance is identical to the cause; like the cause." "The cause should also obstruct; because it is identical to the substance of the effect; like the effect." Hence it is said that a single phenomenon is both cause and effect.