成唯識論演祕 3.62

3.62

詳曰：餘釋有違，理如前破，因生後果。今略答云：以落謝因生後果，因無後果可不生。現因體用既非無，後果有因起何失？餘難類思。

Detailed analysis says: The other explanation has flaws, as refuted above with respect to a cause producing a subsequent fruit. Now I briefly answer: If a ceased cause produced a subsequent fruit, then when the cause is absent the subsequent fruit might indeed not arise. But since the substance and function of the present cause are not non-existent, what fault is there in the subsequent fruit having a cause and arising? Other objections may be considered by analogy.