俱舍論疏 20.21

20.21

論「由此教理至二世實有」，結自宗也。詳薩婆多過、未體有，不同現在之有。過、未體無，不同兔角之無。若同現在，應非過、未；若如兔角，即應不能作境生心。《正理論》云「謂立去、來非如現有，亦非如彼馬角等無。」又云：「為境生覺是真有相。」譬喻論言「旋火輪、我二覺生時，境非有故。若一切覺皆有所緣，是則應無勝解作意。又諸世間夢中翳目兩月識等，境非有故。」《正理》救云「謂輪覺生，非全無境。即火㷮色速於餘方周旋而生，為此覺境，然火㷮色體實非輪。而覺生時謂為輪者，是覺於境行相顛倒，非此輪覺緣無境生。我覺亦應准此而釋，謂此我覺即緣色等蘊為境故，唯有行相，非我謂我顛倒而生，非謂所緣亦有顛倒。勝解作意准此應起，謂瑜伽師見少相已，自勝解力，於所見中起廣行相生如是覺，此覺即緣諸蘊為境。住空閑者作如是言：如是相生是勝定果，謂勝定力於定位中引廣相生。如所變化夢緣過去曾所更境，如人夢中見兔有角，曾於異處見兔、見角，今於夢中由心惛倒，謂於一處和合追憶，由根有翳取境不明，故於境中起顛倒解。行相雖倒，境實非無。以翳目人要有色處見種種色，非全無色，異此則應無色處見。謂眼識生但見一月，由根變異發識不明，迷亂覺生謂有多月。非謂此覺緣非有生，即以月輪為所緣境。若不爾者，無處應見。既無月處此識不生，故此即緣月輪為境。」更有立破，恐繁不述。

On the Śāstra's statement: "Due to this scriptural authority and reasoning […] the two time periods are real existents": this concludes their own school's position. Upon detailed inspection, the Sarvāstivādin position that past and future exist substantially differs from the existence of the present; and the lack of substantiality in past and future differs from the non-existence of a rabbit's horns. If it were the same as the present, it would not be past or future; if it were like a rabbit's horns, it could not serve as an object generating mind. The Nyāyānusāra states: "Establishing the past and future is not like present existence, nor is it like the non-existence of a horse's horns and the like." It also states: "To serve as an object generating awareness is the characteristic of true existence." The Dārṣṭāntikas say: "When the two awarenesses of a fire-wheel and of a self arise, their objects do not exist. If all awarenesses possessed an object, then there would be no application of resolute intention. Furthermore, regarding dreams, clouded vision, and the consciousness of two moons in the mundane world, their objects do not exist." The Nyāyānusāra defends: "The arising of the awareness of a wheel is not entirely without an object. It is the color of the burning fire itself, moving rapidly in circles across other spaces, that serves as the object of this awareness; yet the substance of the burning fire's color is not actually a wheel. When the awareness arises thinking it is a wheel, it is an inversion in the awareness's aspect regarding the object, not that this wheel-awareness arises cognizing a non-existent object. The awareness of a self should be explained in accordance with this: this awareness of a self takes the aggregates such as matter as its object; there is only an aspect, an inverted arising of taking the non-self as self, not that the cognitive object itself is non-existent. The application of resolute intention should be understood to arise accordingly: a yogin, having seen a minor mark, through the power of his own resolute intention generates a vast aspect regarding what has been seen and gives rise to such an awareness; this awareness takes the aggregates as its cognitive object. Those who abide in secluded wilderness say: 'The arising of such marks is the fruit of superior samādhi, meaning that the power of superior samādhi in the state of concentration induces the arising of vast marks.' Just as transformations in dreams cognize objects previously experienced in the past—as when a person dreams of seeing a rabbit with horns, having previously seen a rabbit in one place and horns in another, now in a dream, due to mental confusion, recalls them combined in a single place—so because of cataracts on the sensory organ one grasps objects unclearly, and therefore gives rise to an inverted comprehension regarding the object. Although the aspect is inverted, the object is not non-existent. For a person with clouded vision must see various colors in a place where color exists, not entirely without color; otherwise, they would see them in a place without color. When eye-consciousness arises, it sees only a single moon; through impairment of the sense faculty, the consciousness produced is unclear, and a confused awareness arises thinking there are multiple moons. It is not that this awareness arises cognizing a non-existent thing; it takes the lunar disc itself as its cognitive object. If it were not so, it would be seen where there is no moon. Since this consciousness does not arise where there is no moon, it takes the lunar disc itself as its object." As there are further arguments and refutations, I will not elaborate for fear of prolixity.