English
English version: 'If existence (birth) is like that, then that is not right. Furthermore, if transformation (change) is the result, then there should be transformation in the cause first. Why? Because according to your theory, the result should exist in the cause first. If the pot and other things exist first, then transformation should also exist first, and it should be visible, but in reality, it is not visible. Therefore, your statement that it is not seen because there is no transformation is not right. If you say that it cannot be called a result without transformation, then the result can never be obtained. Why? Because transformation did not exist before, and it should not exist afterward either, so the pot and other results can never be obtained. If you say that it is a result after transformation, then there was no result in the cause before, so it is uncertain: either there is a result in the cause first, or there is no result before.' Question: 'There is transformation beforehand, but it cannot be seen. Generally, things themselves exist but cannot be seen, such as some things that cannot be known because they are too close; some things that cannot be known because they are too far; some things that cannot be known because their roots are broken; some things that cannot be known because the mind is not focused; some things that cannot be known because of obstacles; some things that cannot be known because they are the same; some things that cannot be known because they are weak. Those that cannot be known because they are too close are like medicine in the eye. Those that cannot be known because they are too far are like birds flying high and far away in the sky. Those that cannot be known because their roots are broken are like the blind not seeing colors, the deaf not hearing sounds, the nose being blocked and not smelling fragrances, the tongue being numb and not tasting flavors, the body being numb and not feeling touch, and the mind being deranged and not knowing reality. Those that cannot be known because the mind is not focused are like the mind being on colors and not knowing sounds. Those that cannot be known because of obstacles are like the earth blocking great water and walls blocking outside things. Those that cannot be known because they are the same are like ink dots on black things. Those that cannot be known because they are weak are like the sound of bells and drums, and the sound of dusters cannot be heard. Those that cannot be known because they are subtle are like dust and other things that cannot be seen. Like these dharmas, although they exist, they cannot be known because of these eight causes. You say that transformation in the cause cannot be obtained and pots cannot be obtained, but that is not right. Why? Because these things, although they exist, cannot be obtained because of these eight causes.' Answer: 'Transformation (change) and the pot and other results are different from situations where things cannot be obtained because of eight causes. Why? If transformation (change) and the pot and other results cannot be obtained because they are too close, then they should be obtainable if they are a little further away;' --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
极远不可得者，小近应可得；若根坏不可得者，根净应可得；若心不住不可得者，心住应可得；若障不可得者，变法及瓶法无障应可得；若同不可得者，异时应可得；若胜不可得者，胜止应可得；若细微不可得者，而瓶等果粗应可得。若瓶细故不可得者，生已亦应不可得。何以故？生已、未生细相一故，生已、未生俱定有故。” 问曰：“未生时细，生已转粗，是故生已可得，未生不可得。” 答曰：“若尔者，因中则无果。何以故？因中无粗故。又、因中先无粗，若因中先有粗者，则不应言细，故不可得；今果是粗，汝言细故不可得，是粗不名为果。今果毕竟不应可得而果实可得，是故不以细故不可得。如是有法因中先有果，以八因缘故不可得，先因中有果，是事不然。 “复次，若因中先有果生者，是则因、因相坏，果、果相坏。何以故？如叠在缕，如果在器，但是住处，不名为因。何以故？缕、器非叠，果因故。若因坏，果亦坏，是故缕等非叠等因。因无故，果亦无。何以故？因因故有果成，因不成，果云何成？ “复次，若不作不名果，缕等因不能作叠等果。何以故？如缕等不以叠等住故能作叠等果，如是则无因无果。若因果俱无，则不应求因中若先有果、若先无果。 “复 现代汉语译本： 极远的事物不可能得到，稍微近一点的或许可以得到；如果根已经坏了不可能得到，根是干净的或许可以得到；如果心不住于一处不可能得到，心安住下来或许可以得到；如果有障碍不可能得到，转变方法或者瓶子的方法没有障碍或许可以得到；如果相同不可能得到，不同的时候或许可以得到；如果殊胜不可能得到，殊胜的止境或许可以得到；如果细微的事物不可能得到，像瓶子等粗大的结果或许可以得到。如果因为瓶子细微而不可得，那么产生之后也应该不可得。为什么呢？因为产生之后和未产生时的细微状态是一样的，产生之后和未产生时都是确定存在的。 问：‘未产生时是细微的，产生之后就转变为粗大的，所以产生之后可以得到，未产生时不可能得到。’ 答：‘如果这样说，那么因中就没有果。为什么呢？因为因中没有粗大的东西。而且，因中先前没有粗大的东西，如果因中先前有粗大的东西，那么就不应该说是细微的，所以不可能得到；现在果是粗大的，你说因为细微所以不可能得到，那么粗大的就不叫做果。现在果毕竟不应该可以得到，而果实却可以得到，所以不能因为细微就说不可能得到。像这样，有法认为因中先前有果，因为八种因缘的缘故不可能得到，先前因中有果，这件事是不成立的。 ‘再者，如果因中先前有果产生，那么因的因相就会坏灭，果的果相也会坏灭。为什么呢？就像折叠的布在丝线里，如果果在器皿里，那只是一个住处，不能叫做因。为什么呢？因为丝线、器皿不是折叠的布、果的因。如果因坏灭，果也会坏灭，所以丝线等不是折叠的布等的因。因没有了，果也没有了。为什么呢？因为因的缘故才有果的成就，因不成就，果怎么能成就？’ ‘再者，如果不造作就不能称为果，丝线等因不能造作折叠的布等果。为什么呢？如果丝线等不以折叠的布等住处就能造作折叠的布等果，这样就没有因也没有果。如果因果都没有，那么就不应该探求因中是先前有果还是先前没有果。’
English
English version: That which is extremely far away is unattainable, but that which is slightly closer may be attainable; if the root is damaged and unattainable, then a pure root may be attainable; if the mind is not dwelling, it is unattainable, but if the mind dwells, it may be attainable; if there is an obstruction, it is unattainable, but transforming the method or the method of the pot without obstruction may be attainable; if it is the same, it is unattainable, but at a different time it may be attainable; if it is superior, it is unattainable, but the cessation of superiority may be attainable; if it is subtle and unattainable, then coarse results such as pots may be attainable. If it is unattainable because the pot is subtle, then it should also be unattainable after it is produced. Why? Because the subtle state after production and before production is the same, and both after production and before production are definitely existent. Question: 'When not yet produced, it is subtle, but after production, it becomes coarse, therefore it can be attained after production, but it cannot be attained before production.' Answer: 'If that is the case, then there is no result in the cause. Why? Because there is no coarseness in the cause. Moreover, there was no coarseness in the cause before; if there was coarseness in the cause before, then it should not be said to be subtle, therefore it is unattainable; now the result is coarse, and you say it is unattainable because it is subtle, then the coarse is not called a result. Now the result should ultimately not be attainable, but the fruit is attainable, therefore it cannot be said to be unattainable because it is subtle. Like this, some doctrines hold that the result is present in the cause beforehand, but it is unattainable due to eight conditions; the result is present in the cause beforehand, this is not established.' 'Furthermore, if the result is produced in the cause beforehand, then the cause-aspect of the cause will be destroyed, and the result-aspect of the result will be destroyed. Why? Just like folded cloth in threads, if the result is in a vessel, it is only a dwelling place, and cannot be called a cause. Why? Because threads and vessels are not the cause of folded cloth and results. If the cause is destroyed, the result will also be destroyed, therefore threads etc. are not the cause of folded cloth etc. If there is no cause, there is no result. Why? Because the result is achieved due to the cause, if the cause is not achieved, how can the result be achieved?' 'Furthermore, if it is not made, it cannot be called a result; the cause of threads etc. cannot make the result of folded cloth etc. Why? If threads etc. can make the result of folded cloth etc. without dwelling in folded cloth etc., then there is neither cause nor result. If there is neither cause nor result, then one should not seek whether the result is present in the cause beforehand or not present in the cause beforehand.' --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
次，若因中有果而不可得，应有相现，如闻香知有华、闻声知有鸟、闻笑知有人、见烟知有火、见鹄知有池。如是因中若先有果，应有相现；今果体亦不可得，相亦不可得，如是当知因中先无果。 “复次，若因中先有果生，则不应言因缕有叠、因蒲有席。若因不作，他亦不作。如叠非缕所作，可从蒲作耶？若缕不作，蒲亦不作，可得言无所从作耶？若无所从作，则不名为果。若果无，因亦无，如先说。是故从因中先有果生，是则不然。 “复次，若果无所从作，则为是常，如涅槃性。若果是常，诸有为法则皆是常。何以故？一切有为法皆是果故。若一切法皆常，则无无常；若无无常，亦无有常。何以故？因常有无常、因无常有常，是故常无常二俱无者，是事不然。是故不得言因中先有果生。 “复次，若因中先有果生，则果更与异果作因，如叠与着为因，如席与障为因。如车与载为因，而实不与异果作因，是故不得言因中先有果生。若谓如地先有香，不以水洒，香则不发；果亦如是，若未有缘会，则不能作因。是事不然，何以故？如汝所说，可了时名果，瓶等物非果。何以故？可了是作，瓶等先有非作，是则以作为果。是故因中先有果生，是事不然。 “复次，了因但能显发，不能生物， 现代汉语译本： 其次，如果因中已经有果，但却无法得到，那么应该有相应的征兆显现，就像闻到香味就知道有花，听到声音就知道有鸟，听到笑声就知道有人，看到烟就知道有火，看到天鹅就知道有池塘。如果因中已经有果，就应该有征兆显现；现在果的本体也无法得到，征兆也无法得到，由此应当知道因中原本没有果。 其次，如果因中已经有果产生，那么就不应该说从线（缕）产生布（叠），从蒲草（蒲）产生席子（席）。如果因不产生作用，其他事物也不会产生作用。如果布不是线所做的，难道可以从蒲草做出来吗？如果线不产生作用，蒲草也不产生作用，难道可以说布没有从任何事物产生吗？如果没有从任何事物产生，那么就不能称之为果。如果没有果，那么也没有因，就像先前所说的那样。因此，从因中已经有果产生，这是不正确的。 其次，如果果没有从任何事物产生，那么它就是常，就像涅槃（Nirvana）的性质一样。如果果是常，那么所有有为法（Samskrta-dharma，指由因缘和合而生的事物）就都是常。为什么呢？因为一切有为法都是果。如果一切法都是常，那么就没有无常；如果没有无常，那么也没有常。为什么呢？因为常是因为无常而存在，无常是因为常而存在，因此常和无常两者都没有，这是不可能的。因此，不能说因中已经有果产生。 其次，如果因中已经有果产生，那么果会进一步与其他果作为因，就像布与穿着（着）作为因，就像席子与遮蔽（障）作为因，就像车与载运（载）作为因。但实际上果不会与其他果作为因，因此不能说因中已经有果产生。如果认为就像地中原本有香味，如果不洒水，香味就不会散发出来；果也是如此，如果没有因缘聚合，就不能作为因。这是不正确的，为什么呢？就像你所说的，可以被认识的时候才叫做果，瓶子等事物不是果。为什么呢？因为可以被认识是产生作用，瓶子等事物原本就有而不是产生作用，因此是以产生作用作为果。因此，因中已经有果产生，这是不正确的。 其次，了因（hetu-pratyaya，能帮助认识事物的因）只能显发事物，不能产生事物。