成唯識論述記 3.116

3.116

述曰：下明因果。能熏生種，種生現時，如小乘俱有因與俱有法為其因，故以種望現能熏心等，更互皆得，即約同時士用果說。本種與現，唯作因緣；現行望新種，亦唯因緣；偏望為因緣，非說現行與本有種為因緣也。此以大乘俱有因與相似，言如俱有因是因緣攝，非大乘中許彼現行俱有因法是因緣義，《顯揚》破故。然《攝論》第三亦說為因緣，即是本識，同此無妨，如彼俱有因，體不成俱時為因故；以彼俱有因義，亦有現行，不能熏故，下四緣中自當料簡。

The Commentary states: Below, cause and effect are explained. When the perfuming factors produce seeds, and the seeds produce actual manifestations, it is like the coexistent cause (sahabhū-hetu) in the Hīnayāna being the cause for coexistent phenomena; hence, viewing seeds in relation to the actual manifestations of the perfuming mind and so forth, they mutually obtain each other, which is stated in terms of simultaneous virile fruit (puruṣakāra-phala). The original seeds and the actual manifestations function only as causal conditions (hetu-pratyaya); actual manifestations in relation to new seeds are also only causal conditions; they are causal conditions only when viewed unilaterally, not to say that actual manifestations are causal conditions for originally existent seeds. This is because the coexistent cause in the Mahāyāna resembles [that of the Hīnayāna], so it is said that being like a coexistent cause is subsumed under causal conditions; it is not that the Mahāyāna accepts that their actual manifest phenomena of coexistent cause have the meaning of causal conditions, because the Prakaraṇāryavācā refutes this. However, the third fascicle of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha also states that it is a causal condition, namely the root consciousness, which is consistent with this without conflict, because like their coexistent cause, its entity cannot serve as a cause simultaneously; for according to their meaning of coexistent cause, there are also actual manifestations, which cannot perfume; below, under the four conditions, this will be distinguished naturally.