成唯識論述記 2.898

2.898

述曰：此二相違，如何有漏為對治因？應無漏法為有漏因，今以理徵。若有漏生無漏，應無漏生有漏；許漏、無漏得相生故；如有漏善生於無漏。無漏既不得生於有漏，為相違者，如何有漏生於無漏？此初無漏許無因緣，亦有何妨？答曰：不然。佛說無一法非因緣生故，若無因生，便非釋種。立量云：汝初無漏心，應無漏種為因緣生；體是有為無漏法故；如後無漏法。

The Commentary states: These two are mutually contradictory; how could a tainted dharma be the cause of its antidote? An untainted dharma should then be the cause of a tainted dharma! We now examine it through reason: if tainted generates untainted, untainted should generate tainted, since you admit tainted and untainted can generate each other, just as tainted wholesome generates untainted. Since untainted cannot generate tainted because they are mutually contradictory, how could tainted generate untainted? If one asks: What harm is there in admitting that this first untainted [state] lacks a cause and condition? We reply: It is not so. For the Buddha taught that not a single dharma arises without a cause and condition; if it arose without a cause, it would not belong to the Śākyan lineage. We establish the syllogism: Your first untainted mind must arise with an untainted seed as its cause and condition; because its substance is a conditioned untainted dharma; like subsequent untainted dharmas.