仁王經疏 1.34

1.34

Question: As for “one” and “time,” what is their essence? Answer: “One” is number; “time” is a period of time. In the Sarvāstivāda and Sautrāntika schools, there is no distinct dharma apart from them; they simply take the five aggregates as their nature, and within the categories of bases (āyatana) and elements (dhātu), they take the conditioned as their nature. Now, according to the Mahāyāna, there are in themselves two explanations: First, in Nāgārjuna’s school, number, time, and so forth all have no essence and are not subsumed under the three categories of aggregates, bases, and elements. Therefore, the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* says: “Phenomena such as number and time truly do not exist, because they are not subsumed under the aggregates, bases, or elements (持 is element, because it maintains its own nature).” Furthermore, that treatise says: “Time, direction, separation, union, oneness, difference, length, shortness, and names are things to which the ordinary mind clings, thinking they are real.” It is extensively explained as in that text. Second, in Maitreya’s school, number and time are nominal designations for states upon conditioned dharmas, being number and time among the twenty-four non-concomitant [formations]. Within the category of the five aggregates, they are subsumed under the aggregate of formations; within the category of elements and bases, they are the base of dharmas and element of dharmas, because they are the objects of mental consciousness. The *Buddhabhūmyupadeśa* says: “Time is a state nominally designated upon conditioned dharmas (explained in terms of the characteristics of dharmas), or it is an image of a state upon the mind (explained in terms of consciousness-only). Because it is collectively designated upon form, mind, and so forth, it is subsumed under the aggregate of non-concomitant formations.”