大乘義章 3.31

3.31

次就三世分別其相。過去之業，望三世法，得有四果，除解脫果，以解脫法不墮世故。現在之法，望現在法，得有二果，謂功用果及增上果。非前後故，無其報果及以依果。無解脫果，義同前釋。問曰：現在還望現在，無前後故，無後報果及依果者，過望過去，云何得有？釋言：過去還望過去，時中寬長，故得有之。現在望現，時中短促，所以不有。者現望未來，還有四果，除解脫果。未來之業，望未來法，得有三果，所謂報果、功用、增上，無其依果及解脫果。無解脫果，義在可知。以何義故無其依果？未來未起，無前後故。若爾，何故得有報果？釋言：有以。報因生果，異類相起。法雖在當，因果相分，故說有之。若論依果，同類相起。同類難分，要已起處得說依果。未來世中，因之與果同皆未起，難別前後，故無依果。若爾，何故有功用果及增上果？功用、增上不得前後而得有故（此七門竟）。

Next, their characteristics are distinguished with respect to the three times. Past karma, in relation to dharmas of the three times, can have four fruits, excluding the liberation fruit, because the dharma of liberation does not fall into the times. Present dharmas, in relation to present dharmas, can have two fruits, namely the efficacious fruit and the predominant fruit. Because there is no antecedent and subsequent, they lack the retribution fruit and the support fruit. The lack of the liberation fruit has the same meaning as previously explained. Question: If the present in relation to the present, lacking antecedent and subsequent, lacks the retribution fruit and support fruit, then why can the past in relation to the past have them? Explanation: When the past is related to the past, the span of time is broad and long, and therefore it can have them. When the present is related to the present, the span of time is brief and fleeting, which is why it does not have them. The present in relation to the future also has four fruits, excluding the liberation fruit. Future karma, in relation to future dharmas, can have three fruits, namely retribution fruit, efficacious [fruit], and predominant [fruit], lacking the support fruit and liberation fruit. That it lacks the liberation fruit is readily understood. For what reason does it lack the support fruit? Because what is future has not yet arisen, there is no antecedent and subsequent. If so, why can it have the retribution fruit? Explanation: There is a reason. When a retribution cause produces a fruit, they arise as different categories. Although the dharmas are in the future, cause and fruit are distinct in characteristic, and therefore it is said to have it. When discussing the support fruit, they arise from the same category. The same category is difficult to distinguish; only where they have already arisen can one speak of a support fruit. In the future time, cause and fruit alike have both not yet arisen and are difficult to distinguish as antecedent and subsequent; therefore there is no support fruit. If so, why are there the efficacious fruit and predominant fruit? Because the efficacious and predominant can exist without obtaining an antecedent and subsequent. (This concludes the seventh section.)