觀緣門第三
Contemplation of Conditions, Chapter 3
釋此門四義同前：初辨名者，發果為緣，觀緣無性，故以為門。二、來意者，前於因中求生不得，今於緣中求亦無生，故次來也。又以多門遣執盡故，又顯觸途皆無生故。三、明品中所明者，謂推求四緣皆無生理，是所宗也。四、釋文中五：初、標宗；二、破有；三、破無；四、破緣；五、類遣。初中諸法是果及緣，皆不成故也。二、破有中三：初、舉頌略標；二、出彼緣相；三、徵破明空。初中先立頌，後略釋。頌中，上半奪破，下半結呵。又上半顯理，下半徵情。略釋中，一一緣是廣，和合是略。此二門中，求有生不可得也。二、辨緣相中二：先問後答。答中先頌後釋。頌中，上半案定，下半列名。以外道立神我為第五緣，故此無也。釋中二：先列名，後釋相。釋相中釋四緣則為四，此中各有三義，謂標、釋、結。初中「因緣」者，以因為緣，故云因。此則因即緣故名因緣，非是親疏並舉名為因緣。謂所從生者，顯親生義也。又此從生是果法，體是有為，故三世攝耳。二中「法已滅」者，前心法謝滅也。「次第生」者，由前心心法雖謝滅，然有開避引導之力，令後心法無間而生，故云次第生。與次第法為緣，故名也。新翻名等無間緣也。此唯心法有，餘皆無也。三中「緣」者，所緣也。以所緣法緣起，能緣心心法等，故名緣。則所緣為緣，故云緣緣，新名所緣緣。釋中所念，則是所緣理實，但起心、心法為身、語二業，依止思法上立，故亦通舉三業耳。四中以此法於彼法有增上勝力，故云增上。增上即緣，故云增上緣。此有二種：一、不相礙增上；二、勝力助成增上。此文通二，據後而說。第三、徵破明空，於中五：初、總標；二、別徵；三、雙責；四、結無；五、結宗。別中，初以緣奪因，明因中無；二，以因奪緣，明緣中無；三、「若於」下，雙徵責；四、「是故」下，結無；五、「如是一一」下，結正徵情。一一是別責，故廣也；和合是總徵，故略也。三、破無中三：先立頌，頌中上半牒外計、下半以非緣並破，後釋顯。謂外意云：緣中略廣求雖不得，何妨此果從四緣生？破意云：既緣與非緣同是無果，而得從緣出，何得不從非緣出耶？立量等，可知。三、「是故」下，結無生。四、破緣中二：先標宗，謂生果故名緣，果既不生，何得有緣？後釋，「先緣後果者」，此是案情求理破，謂若先緣無，果是誰緣？故非也。第五、類遣中三：先類結有為空；二、無為空；三、我空。是故三空除二我也。
I will now explain the four aspects of this chapter, matching the previous structure. First, defining the name: it takes the arising of results as the conditional basis, and observes that conditions themselves lack inherent nature—this is why it is called a "gate" (approach). Second, the purpose of its coming: earlier, in examining causes, no arising was found; now, examining conditions, no arising is found either, so this follows. Moreover, through various approaches, all clinging is eliminated, and it shows that wherever one turns, nothing truly arises. Third, clarifying what the chapter teaches: it investigates the four conditions and shows they all lack inherent arising—this is its core teaching. Fourth, explaining the text in five parts: first, stating the thesis; second, refuting existence; third, refuting non-existence; fourth, refuting conditions; fifth, extending the refutation by analogy. In the first part, all phenomena, whether fruits or conditions, are shown to be untenable. In the second part, refuting existence, there are three sections: first, presenting verses as a brief outline; second, describing the nature of conditions; third, questioning and refuting to reveal emptiness. In the first section, the verse is established first, followed by a brief explanation. In the verse, the first half demolishes and refutes, the second half concludes with a scolding. Also, the first half reveals principle, the second half questions emotional attachment. In the brief explanation, each condition is the broad approach, while "combined" is the brief one. In these two approaches, the arising of existence cannot be found. In the second section, describing conditions, there are two parts: first a question, then an answer. In the answer, first a verse, then explanation. In the verse, the first half establishes the premise, the second half lists the names. Because outsiders posit a "self" as a fifth condition, it is absent here. In the explanation, there are two parts: first listing the names, then explaining their characteristics. Explaining the characteristics of the four conditions yields four parts, each with three aspects: labeling, explaining, and concluding. In the first, "causal condition": because the cause serves as a condition, it is called "causal." This means the cause itself is the condition, hence "causal condition"—not that both near and far causes are jointly called causal conditions. "That from which it arises" indicates the meaning of direct generation. Moreover, what arises from this is the fruit, whose essence is conditioned, so it falls within the three time periods. In the second, "immediately preceding condition": "dharma already ceased" refers to the previous mind and mental factors having passed away. "Arising successively" means that although the preceding mind and mental factors have ceased, they possess the power of opening the way and guiding, enabling the subsequent mind and mental factors to arise without interval—hence "arising successively." It serves as a condition for the succeeding dharma, so it is named thus. The new translation calls it "equal-immediacy condition." This applies only to mental phenomena; others do not have it. In the third, "object condition": "object" refers to what is cognized. Because the cognized object causes the arising of the cognizing mind and mental factors, it is called a condition. Thus, the cognized object serves as the condition, hence "object condition"; the new name is "cognitive object condition." In the explanation, "what is thought of" is the actual object. However, since the arising of mind and mental factors forms the basis for bodily and verbal actions, which are established upon volitional thought, it is also mentioned broadly as covering the three kinds of action. In the fourth, "predominant condition": because this dharma has superior power over that dharma, it is called "predominant." Predominance itself is the condition, hence "predominant condition." This has two kinds: first, the predominance of non-obstruction; second, the predominance of superior power assisting accomplishment. The text covers both but leans toward the latter. In the third section, questioning and refuting to reveal emptiness, there are five parts: first, general statement; second, individual questioning; third, dual reproach; fourth, concluding non-existence; fifth, concluding the thesis. In the individual questioning, first, conditions override the cause, showing absence in the cause; second, the cause overrides conditions, showing absence in conditions; third, starting with "if," dual questioning and reproach; fourth, starting with "therefore," concluding non-existence; fifth, starting with "thus one by one," concluding the refutation of attachment. "One by one" is individual refutation, hence broad; "combined" is general questioning, hence brief. In the third part, refuting non-existence, there are three sections: first, presenting the verse; in the verse, the first half cites the externalist view, the second half refutes by equating with non-conditions; then the explanation follows. The externalist meaning is: although seeking in conditions broadly or briefly yields nothing, what prevents this fruit from arising from the four conditions? The refutation's meaning is: since conditions and non-conditions equally lack a fruit, yet you claim it arises from conditions—why would it not equally arise from non-conditions? Establishing the syllogism and so forth can be understood. Third, starting with "therefore," concluding non-arising. In the fourth part, refuting conditions, there are two sections: first, stating the thesis—if something is called a condition because it produces a fruit, but since no fruit is produced, how can any condition exist? Then the explanation: "condition first, fruit later"—this is a refutation that examines the reasoning based on emotional attachment. If the condition exists first, whose condition is it before the fruit arises? Therefore it is invalid. In the fifth part, extending the refutation by analogy, there are three sections: first, extending the refutation to conclude conditioned phenomena are empty; second, unconditioned phenomena are empty; third, the self is empty. Thus, the three emptinesses eliminate the two kinds of self-views.