華嚴五十要問答 2.20

2.20

問：菩薩初起修行，先觀如實因果，成入道方便。其義云何？答：凡佛法大綱有其二種，所謂真、俗，隨順觀世諦則入第一義故。觀相云何？法有多門，且依同時如實互為因果義。入因果義有二重。第一重內有三門：一明護分別過、二明其義、三明違之成過。初護義者，略依燈光及燋炷明之，身心諸事準之可解。問曰：燋炷生光炎耶？答：不也，炷從炎生故。又問：炎生炷耶？答：不也，炎從炷生故。又問：炎從炷生耶？答：不也，炎能生炷故。又問：炷從炎生耶？答：不也，炷能生炎故。又問：可是不生耶？答：不也，去炷炎隨無故。又問：生不生俱耶？答：不也，相違故。又問，非生非不生耶？答：不也，違其因果如實生理故。解第一門竟。第二義者，炷因生炎果，因是有義，由有力故。炎果從因生，是無義，依炷因生故。炎生其炷，返前可知。炎果從炷因生，是非有義，無體故。炷生光炎，炷因是非無義，為有力故。餘句準可知。第二門竟。第二違之成過者，若言炷因生，果亦可恒生，常能生炎果故、增益故。若言炷不生，亦可恒不生炎果，無因不有故、損減故。炎生炷，如前可知。若亦生不生，相違故。若言非生非不生，戲論故。餘義準之。第三門竟。第二重者，三門同前。第一門者，初約因明、後約果論。問：因是有耶？答：不也，果因故、緣成故。又問：因是無耶？答：不也，生果故。又問：因有無俱耶？答：不也，相違故。又問：非有無耶？答：不也，現見生果法故。二約果論者，問：果是有耶？答：不也，是他果無體故。又問：果是無耶？答：不也，由是果故。又問：亦有亦無耶？答：不也，一果故、不相違故。又問：非有非無耶？答：不也，現有果所生故。解第一門竟。第二義者，因是有義，由能生故。因是無義，果家因故、緣成故。因是亦有亦無義，因成故。因是非有非無義，隨定取一義不可得故。果義四門，準前知之。第二門竟。第三執成過者，問：因生果何失？答：若生者，亦可恒生，亦可恒不生，所以知之。若生者，即常生故。又若生者，現所有炎果是，能生炷因即無所生，故是斷也。又問：因不生果有何失？答：亦有二失。若炷因不生者，即光炎無因，故是常也。又若炷不生者，既炎無自生，因復不生，不可得有，故是斷也。亦生不生、非生非不生，準以思之，餘義準可知。又一切因有六種義：一空有力不待緣，念念滅故。二有有力不待緣，決定故。三有有力待緣，如引顯自果故。四無無力待緣，觀因緣故。五有無力待緣，隨逐至治際故。六無有力待緣，俱有力故。問：未知待緣待何緣？答：此待爐油水土等外緣，不取因事及自六義也。又經文云「因因亦因因，果果亦果果」者，簡別因果親疎有無力用分齊。初因者，親因也。復因者，緣因也。亦因因者，二因相由也。果果等者，準因二果相由成也。餘因果相望則無用耳。又增上緣望自增上果還為親因，故《雜集論》會疎緣入親因攝。又《成唯識論》因緣謂有為法，親辨自果。此體有二：一種子、二現行。種子者，謂本識中善染無記諸界地等功能差別，能引次後自類功能及起同時自類現果。此唯望彼是因緣現行者，謂七轉識及彼相應所變相見性界地等，除佛果善、極劣無記，餘熏本識生自類種。此唯望彼是因緣性。第八心品無所熏故，非簡所依，獨能熏故、極微圓故不熏成種。現行同類展轉相望皆非因緣，自種生故。一切異類展轉相望亦非因緣，不親生故。有說：異類同類現行展轉相望為因緣者。應知假說，或隨轉門。有唯說種是因緣性，彼依顯勝非盡理說，聖說轉識與阿賴耶展轉相望為因緣故。此顯因果親疎分齊極明善也。其六義及前因果理事相成，更以六法顯之，所謂：總，總成因果也。二別，義別成總故。三同，自同成總故。四異，諸義自異顯同故。五成，因果理事成故。六壞，諸義各住自法不移本性故。所述緣起竝悉遍通隨有事成，驗思可解耳。此文在三乘，一乘方究竟。何以故？稱法界故。

Question: When a bodhisattva first begins practice, they first contemplate actual causes and effects, establishing the skillful means for entering the path. What is the meaning of this?

Answer: Generally speaking, the main outline of the Buddha's Dharma has two types, namely the ultimate and the conventional; because conforming to the contemplation of the worldly truth allows entry into the primary meaning. What are the characteristics of this contemplation? Phenomena have many gates; here we briefly rely on the meaning of simultaneous, actual mutual causation.

Entering the meaning of cause and effect has two tiers. Within the first tier there are three gates: first, explaining the prevention of the error of conceptual discrimination; second, explaining its meaning; third, explaining how contravening it constitutes an error.

First, regarding the meaning of prevention: it is briefly explained by relying on the lamp-light and the burning wick; all bodily and mental matters can be understood by analogy to this. A question asks: Does the burning wick produce the glowing flame? Answer: No, because the wick is produced from the flame. It is asked again: Does the flame produce the wick? Answer: No, because the flame is produced from the wick. It is asked again: Is the flame produced from the wick? Answer: No, because the flame can produce the wick. It is asked again: Is the wick produced from the flame? Answer: No, because the wick can produce the flame. It is asked again: Can it be non-production? Answer: No, because when the wick is removed, the flame ceases accordingly. It is asked again: Are production and non-production both present? Answer: No, because they are mutually contradictory. It is asked again: Is it neither production nor non-production? Answer: No, because that contravenes the principle of the actual arising of causes and effects. The explanation of the first gate is concluded.

Second, regarding its meaning: The wick-cause producing the flame-effect—that the cause has the meaning of "existence" is because it has efficacy. That the flame-effect is produced from the cause has the meaning of "non-existence" because it is produced in dependence on the wick-cause. That the flame produces the wick can be understood in reverse to the above. That the flame-effect is produced from the wick-cause has the meaning of "non-existence" because it lacks an independent essence. That the wick produces the glowing flame—the wick-cause has the meaning of "non-non-existence" because it has efficacy. The remaining propositions can be understood by analogy. The second gate is concluded.

Third, regarding how contravening it constitutes an error: If one says that the wick-cause produces, then the effect could also be constantly produced, because it would always be able to produce the flame-effect, which is [the error of] superimposition. If one says that the wick does not produce, then it could also constantly not produce the flame-effect, because without a cause it would not exist, which is [the error of] deprecation. That the flame produces the wick can be understood as above. If it both produces and does not produce, they are mutually contradictory. If one says it neither produces nor does not produce, that is frivolous fabrication. The remaining meanings can be understood by analogy. The third gate is concluded.

Regarding the second tier: its three gates are the same as before. In the first gate, it is first explained in terms of the cause and subsequently discussed in terms of the effect. Question: Is the cause existent? Answer: No, because it is a cause relative to the effect, and because it is formed by conditions. It is asked again: Is the cause non-existent? Answer: No, because it produces the effect. It is asked again: Does the cause possess both existence and non-existence? Answer: No, because they are mutually contradictory. It is asked again: Is it neither existent nor non-existent? Answer: No, because one presently sees the phenomenon of producing an effect. Second, discussing it in terms of the effect: Question: Is the effect existent? Answer: No, because being the effect of another, it has no independent essence. It is asked again: Is the effect non-existent? Answer: No, because it is an effect. It is asked again: Is it both existent and non-existent? Answer: No, because it is a single effect, and because they are not contradictory. It is asked again: Is it neither existent nor non-existent? Answer: No, because it is what is presently produced by an existing effect. The explanation of the first gate is concluded.

Second, regarding its meaning: The cause has the meaning of "existence" because it can produce. The cause has the meaning of "non-existence" because it is the cause of the effect, and because it is formed by conditions. The cause has the meaning of "both existence and non-existence" because the cause is established. The cause has the meaning of "neither existence nor non-existence" because determinately grasping any single meaning is impossible. The four gates of the effect's meaning are known by analogy to the preceding. The second gate is concluded.

Third, regarding attachment constituting an error: Question: What fault is there if a cause produces an effect? Answer: If it produces, it could either constantly produce or constantly not produce; this is how it is known: If it produces, it would constantly produce. Furthermore, if it produces, the currently existing flame-effect is [present], and the wick-cause that can produce would then have nothing to produce, hence it is [the fault of] annihilationism. It is asked again: What fault is there if the cause does not produce the effect? Answer: There are likewise two faults. If the wick-cause does not produce, then the glowing flame is causeless, hence it is [the fault of] eternalism. Furthermore, if the wick does not produce, since the flame does not produce itself, and the cause again does not produce, it could not exist, hence it is [the fault of] annihilationism. Both producing and not producing, and neither producing nor not producing, should be reflected upon by analogy; the remaining meanings can be known by analogy.

Furthermore, all causes have six meanings: 1. Empty, efficacious, and not dependent on conditions, because it perishes moment to moment. 2. Existent, efficacious, and not dependent on conditions, because it is determinate. 3. Existent, efficacious, and dependent on conditions, as it induces and manifests its own effect. 4. Non-existent, inefficacious, and dependent on conditions, through observing causes and conditions. 5. Existent, inefficacious, and dependent on conditions, because it follows along until the stage of the antidote. 6. Non-existent, efficacious, and dependent on conditions, because both are efficacious. Question: One does not know what conditions it depends on when it depends on conditions? Answer: This depends on external conditions such as the lampstand, oil, water, and earth; it does not take the causal entity or its own six meanings.

Furthermore, as for the sūtra text saying, "The cause of a cause is also the cause of a cause; the effect of an effect is also the effect of an effect": this differentiates the boundaries of cause and effect, intimate and remote, existent and non-existent, efficacy and function. The first "cause" is the direct cause. The second "cause" is the conditioning cause. "Also the cause of a cause" means that the two causes are mutually dependent. "The effect of an effect" and so forth is established through the mutual dependence of the two effects by analogy to the cause. Apart from this, causes and effects in relation to one another have no function.

Furthermore, the sovereign condition in relation to its own sovereign fruit is also considered a direct cause; hence the *Abhidharmasamuccaya-vyākhyā* incorporates remote conditions into direct causes. Furthermore, the *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra* states that the cause-condition refers to conditioned phenomena that directly bring about their own effects. This entity has two types: 1. Seeds, 2. Manifest activity. "Seeds" refers to the different functional capacities—wholesome, defiled, and indeterminate—of the various realms and grounds within the *mūlavijñāna*, which are able to induce the immediately following functional capacity of their own kind and give rise to the simultaneous manifest effect of their own kind. These are cause-conditions solely in relation to them. "Manifest activity" refers to the seven evolving consciousnesses and the nature, realms, and grounds of the subjective and objective aspects transformed by them and their mental associates; with the exception of the wholesome fruits of buddhahood and extremely weak indeterminates, the rest perfume the *mūlavijñāna* to produce seeds of their own kind. These are natures of cause-conditions solely in relation to them. Because the mental associates of the eighth consciousness are not perfumed, they are not excluded as a support; because it alone can perfume and is extremely subtle and perfect, it does not perfume to form seeds. Homogeneous manifest activities in relation to one another are none of them cause-conditions, because they are produced from their own seeds. All heterogeneous manifest activities in relation to one another are also not cause-conditions, because they do not directly produce. Some say: Heterogeneous and homogeneous manifest activities in relation to one another are cause-conditions. One should know this is a metaphorical explanation, or a teaching given in accordance with provisional progression. Some say solely that seeds are the nature of cause-conditions; that relies on highlighting what is preeminent and does not exhaustively explain the principle, for the Noble One stated that the evolving consciousnesses and the *ālayavijñāna* in relation to one another are cause-conditions. This reveals the boundaries of cause and effect, intimate and remote, with utmost clarity and goodness.

These six meanings and the mutual establishment of principle and phenomena in cause and effect preceding them are further revealed through the six characteristics: namely, 1. Universality: universally establishing cause and effect. 2. Particularity: because the particular meanings establish universality. 3. Sameness: because their intrinsic sameness establishes universality. 4. Difference: because the various meanings are intrinsically different and manifest sameness. 5. Integration: because cause, effect, principle, and phenomena are integrated. 6. Disintegration: because the various meanings each abide in their own phenomenon without shifting from their original nature. The dependent origination explained here pervades and applies universally, being established in accordance with existent phenomena; it can be understood through examination and reflection. This text is in the triyāna, and only reaches culmination in the Ekayāna. Why? Because it accords with the dharmadhātu.