成唯識論述記 4.692

4.692

述曰：懸謂懸遠，隔謂隔絕，謂答薩婆多言：汝許有去、來，然我實不許。設許有者，且行在現在，色果在未來，或是一劫，或一劫餘，經八萬等，業、果相望，時分懸隔無緣義。故因既不得成，如何能感果，如外法等非異熟因？又行不緣識位中色，無異熟識可名果識支，如何俱色說行能感名緣於識？又若感於識位中色名之為懸，若感後時名色位識名之為隔，俱無緣義。答經部言：設許行支能感色者，未來非有，猶若龜毛。時分懸隔，勢非隣近，如何說行能為識緣？故但說熏名行緣識，非謂感也。又懸、隔別，如前已說。准此總應言：懸故無緣義，隔故無緣義，無果識可名識支，即無緣義，三文合也。此等文意極為深遠，諸論所未詳，群賢所未究。

The Commentary states: 'Far apart' (xuān) means distantly separated; 'isolated' (gé) means severed. This replies to the Sarvāstivādins, saying: you accept that past and future exist, but I truly do not accept it. Even granting that they exist: karmic formations reside in the present, while the fruit of form resides in the future—separated by one kalpa, or more than one kalpa, spanning eighty thousand [kalpas], etc. When karma and fruit are viewed in relation to each other, they are temporally far apart and isolated, so there is no meaning of conditioning. Since the cause cannot be established, how can it induce the fruit—just as external things and so forth are not retribution causes? Furthermore, karmic formations do not condition the matter in the stage of consciousness; and without a retribution consciousness that could be termed the 'fruit consciousness link,' how can one speak of karmic formations being able to induce the accompanying matter and call it 'conditioning consciousness'? Moreover, if inducing the matter in the stage of consciousness is called 'far apart,' and if inducing the consciousness in the subsequent stage of name-and-form is called 'isolated,' in both cases there is no meaning of conditioning. Replying to the Sautrāntikas, we say: even granting that the link of karmic formations could induce matter, the future is non-existent, just like a turtle's hair. Being temporally far apart and isolated, their force is not proximate; how can one say that karmic formations can be the condition for consciousness? Therefore, it is only perfuming that is meant by 'karmic formations conditioning consciousness,' not inducing. Furthermore, 'far apart' and 'isolated' are distinct, as explained before. Based on this, one should summarize: because they are far apart, there is no meaning of conditioning; because they are isolated, there is no meaning of conditioning; and because there is no fruit consciousness that could be named the consciousness link, there is no meaning of conditioning—combining the three statements. The meaning of these passages is exceedingly profound and far-reaching, not detailed by the various treatises, nor exhausted by the assembly of sages.