English
Even though there is no fruit in the cause, it still arises from it. Here it is said: If it arises from the collection of causes and conditions themselves, if there is no fruit in the collection, then how does it arise from the collection itself? If the fruit arises from the collection of causes and conditions themselves, and if the collection itself does not have that fruit, then how can that which has no fruit arise from the collection itself? This is unreasonable. Why? Because it is unreasonable for nothing to arise. Furthermore, if there is fruit in the collection of causes and conditions, if there is a reason to hold onto the collection, then the collection itself cannot be held onto. If the collection of causes and conditions itself has the fruit, then, if the collection itself has the fruit, just as the eye sees form and the mind grasps phenomena, if there is a reason to hold onto it, then the collection itself cannot be held onto. Therefore, it is unreasonable to say that the collection itself has the fruit. Furthermore, if there is no fruit in the collection of causes and conditions, then the causes and conditions are the same as non-causes. If the collection of causes and conditions themselves do not have that fruit, then the causes and conditions are the same as those that are not causes and conditions, which is undesirable. Therefore, it is unreasonable to say that the collection itself produces a non-existent fruit. Here it is said that because the cause gives the fruit the cause and then disappears, even though the collection itself has no fruit, the fruit is still with the cause, and it will not become the fault as mentioned above. Here it is said: If the cause gives the fruit the cause and then disappears, then the nature of the cause that gives and the cause that disappears becomes two. If the cause gives the fruit the cause and then disappears, then the nature of the cause that gives and the cause that disappears becomes two, which is also undesirable. Therefore, it is unreasonable to say that the cause gives the fruit the cause and then disappears. Here it is said that the cause does not give the fruit the cause and then disappear, but
Chinese
就像这样，因停止之后立即产生果。这里说到：如果因对于果，没有给予因就停止，从因停止之后所生的，那个果就变成无因。如果因没有给予果就停止，那样从因停止之后所生的果就变成无因，那是不希望的。因此，因没有给予果就停止，这种说法是不合理的。这里说到：果与集合同时产生。这里说到：如果与集合同时，果也产生，产生者和所产生者，就会变成同一时间。如果集合和果仅仅是同时产生，那样产生者，也就是集合本身，和所产生者，也就是果，就像父和子一样，那些就会变成同一时间发生，那是不希望的。因此，果与集合同时产生，这种说法是不合理的。这里说到：果在集合之前就存在，那是后来集合产生才显现出来，就像灯和瓶子一样。这里说到：如果在集合之前，果已经产生，那么没有因和缘的果，就会变成无因而生。如果在集合之前果已经产生，那样没有因和缘的果，就会变成无因而生，那是不希望的，因为会变成很大的过失。因此，果在集合之前就存在，这种说法是不合理的。这里说到：因没有完全舍弃因的自性而停止，安住在果的自性中，从因完全转变而成果。这里说到：如果因停止就是果，因就会完全转变。先前产生的因，也会变成再次产生。
English
Just like that, the result arises immediately after the cause ceases. Here it is said: If the cause, for the result, ceases without giving the cause, then what is born from the cessation of the cause, that result becomes without cause. If the cause ceases without giving the cause to the result, then the result born from the cessation of the cause becomes without cause, which is not desirable. Therefore, the statement that the cause ceases without giving the cause to the result is unreasonable. Here it is said: The result arises simultaneously with the aggregate. Here it is said: If the result also arises simultaneously with the aggregate, then the producer and the produced will become simultaneous. If the aggregate and the result arise only simultaneously, then the producer, which is the aggregate itself, and the produced, which is the result, like father and son, those will become occurring at the same time, which is not desirable. Therefore, the statement that the result arises simultaneously with the aggregate is unreasonable. Here it is said: The result exists even before the aggregate, which is revealed later when the aggregate arises, like a lamp and a vase. Here it is said: If the result has already arisen before the aggregate, then the result without cause and conditions will become arising without cause. If the result has already arisen before the aggregate, then the result without cause and conditions will become arising without cause, which is not desirable, because it will become a great fault. Therefore, the statement that the result exists even before the aggregate is unreasonable. Here it is said: The cause, without completely abandoning the nature of the cause, ceases and abides in the nature of the result, and the result is accomplished from the complete transformation of the cause. Here it is said: If the cessation of the cause is the result, the cause will completely transform. The previously arisen cause will also become arising again.
Chinese
将会变成。另外，对于这个，认为因有两种，即俱生和先生的我。对于那个，先生的因本身也会变成再次产生。这里说，果早已存在，因灭 而产生。这里说，灭尽坏灭的，如何产生已生的果？因灭尽坏灭，已生的果以何种道理产生？这里说，那么果早已存在，因存在而产生。这里说，与果相关的因，存在又如何产生？与果相关的因存在，又以何种道理产生果？这里说，与果不相关的因产生果。这里说，如果它与果不相关，产生什么果？如果那个因与果不相关，它产生什么果呢？为什么呢？因为果未生且先前不存在，与因不相关。又，因通过见与不见，不产生果。对于这个，如果眼根是眼识的因，那么是见到它的色后产生眼识，还是未见到而产生呢？无论哪种都不合理。为什么呢？因为见到则变成无意义，未见到也是没有条件。这里说，因本身产生果，因为是果的因。这里说，对于这个，如果因产生果，那么是相遇后产生吗？果和因相遇，无论如何都不合理。如何呢？已灭的果与已灭的因，未生和已生，一起相遇是不存在的。已灭的果与已灭的因和未生一起相遇是不存在的，因为已灭和未生没有果和因。已灭的果和已生的因一起相遇也是不存在的，因为果不存在的缘
English
will become. Furthermore, regarding this, there are two types of causes considered: co-emergent and pre-existent self. Regarding that, the pre-existent cause itself would also become re-arisen. Here it is said: The fruit, already existing, is produced by the cessation of the cause. Here it is said: How does the fruit that is born arise from that which has ceased and perished? Since the cause has ceased and perished, by what reasoning does the born fruit arise? Here it is said: Well then, the fruit already exists, and the cause exists, thereby producing it. Here it is said: The cause that is related to the fruit, how does it produce even when it exists? The cause that is related to the fruit, even when it exists, by what reasoning does it produce the fruit? Here it is said: The cause that is unrelated to the fruit produces the fruit. Here it is said: If it is unrelated to the fruit, what fruit does it produce? If that cause is unrelated to the fruit, what fruit does it produce? Why is that? Because the fruit is unborn and did not exist before, it is unrelated to the cause. Furthermore, the cause does not produce the fruit through seeing or not seeing. Regarding this, if the eye faculty is the cause of eye consciousness, then does it produce eye consciousness after seeing its form, or does it produce it without seeing? Neither is reasonable. Why is that? Because seeing would become meaningless, and not seeing would also be without conditions. Here it is said: The cause itself produces the fruit, because it is the cause of the fruit. Here it is said: Regarding this, if the cause produces the fruit, then does it produce it after encountering it? The encounter between the fruit and the cause is never reasonable. How is it? The past fruit and the past cause, the unborn and the born, the encounter together does not exist. The past fruit and the past cause and the unborn encountering together does not exist, because the past and the future do not have fruit and cause. The past fruit and the born cause encountering together also does not exist, because the fruit does not exist.
Chinese
亦然。果未生，因未生，与已逝及已生，相遇之事终无有。果未生者，与因未生及已逝相遇之事终无有，因已逝及未来者，无果与因故。果未生者，与无因相遇之事亦终无有，因无果故。果已生，因已生，未生者与已逝，相遇之事终无有。果已生者，与因已生相遇之事终无有，因果二者同时生起相违故。果已生者，与因未生及已逝相遇之事亦终无有，因已逝及未来者，无因故。是故，三时之因与果相遇之事终无有，是故，因能生果，是果之因，凡如是言说皆非理。若无相遇之事，因如何生果？因其非有故。纵有相遇之事，因如何生果？因其已有故。复次，就因而言，另作分类观察，若以空果之因，如何能生果？因其果空故。譬如彼之外余物。若以不空果之因，如何能生果？因其果不空，譬如果之自性。复次，就果而言，另作分类观察，不空之果不生灭，不空之果亦不灭。不空者，亦不变为不灭及未生。 果生之前，以果之自性而空者，不生亦不灭，何以故？因其以自性而决定存在故。是故，果生之前，以果之自性而不空者
English
Likewise. An unarisen effect, an unarisen cause, The event of meeting with the past and the arisen, Never exists. An unarisen effect, the event of meeting with an unarisen cause and the past, never exists, Because the past and the future lack effects and causes. An unarisen effect, the event of meeting with a cause that does not exist also never exists, Because there is no effect. An arisen effect, an arisen cause, The unarisen and the past, The event of meeting never exists. An arisen effect, the event of meeting with an arisen cause never exists, Because the simultaneous arising of cause and effect is contradictory. An arisen effect, the event of meeting with an unarisen cause and the past also never exists, Because the past and the future lack causes. Therefore, the event of the causes and effects of the three times meeting never exists, therefore, the cause itself produces the effect, that it is the cause of the effect, all such statements are unreasonable. If there is no meeting, how does the cause produce the effect? Because it does not exist. Even if there is a meeting, how does the cause produce the effect? Because it already exists. Furthermore, considering the cause, another classification is examined, if with a cause empty of effect, how can it produce an effect? Because its effect is empty. For example, like something other than that. If with a cause not empty of effect, how can it produce an effect? Because its effect is not empty, like the nature of the effect. Furthermore, considering the effect, another classification is examined, a non-empty effect does not arise or cease, a non-empty effect also does not perish. That which is non-empty also does not become unperished and unborn. Before the arising of the effect, that which is empty by the nature of the effect does not arise or cease, why? Because it exists definitively by its own nature. Therefore, before the arising of the effect, that which is not empty by the nature of the effect