俱舍論疏 4.228

4.228

「論曰至各有三得」，此明三世門也。言三得者，有其二義：一三世得不據在法前後，雖是法前仍名未來，雖是法後仍名過去。二法前、法後、法俱三得不據世別，雖是過去仍名法後，雖是未來仍名法前。今此中言三世各三者，是據三世分得為三，不據法前後也。過去法有三世得者，如過去世有一善心，橫望今日，已前所有得起，若在法前、法俱、法後皆名過去。即如今日現起剎那名現在得，此現在剎那後所有得名未來得，其過去世法於未來無前得。得無決定，隨起說前後故。若現世法得，即法前名過去，法俱名現在，法後名未來。若未來世法得，法前通三得，法後、法俱唯未來。《婆沙》一百五十八明法前、法俱、法後得不同。此文明三世得。然就法辨得，即有四種，謂法前、法俱、法後，非法前法俱法後。若能得辨法，即有六種：一唯有法俱得，如異熟生等，由力劣故。二唯有法前得，謂如見道三類智邊修世俗智，畢竟不生故。三唯有法俱得及法後得，如別解脫戒等，無逆得故。四唯有俱得及法前得，如道類忍等，即此剎那時捨故。五具有法前、法俱、法後三得，如所餘善、不善等，有逆得、追成，行三世故。六有非法前、法後、法俱得，謂得二滅，所得法無三世故。必無有法唯有法後得，以可得法至現在時必有得故。如道類忍唯有法前、法俱者，以不定故。若現起者、若未來者皆容有二得，不應言各有一得及定有二得。若爾，同四行相隨從義過。若定法俱，過如後述。

"The Śāstra says: […] each has three kinds of possession." This explains the heading of the three time periods. Stating that there are "three kinds of possession" contains two meanings: First, the three kinds of possession across the three time periods do not depend on being before or after the dharma: even though it is prior to the dharma, it is still called future; even though it is subsequent to the dharma, it is still called past. Second, the three kinds of possession—prior to the dharma, subsequent to the dharma, and simultaneous with the dharma—do not depend on the division of the time periods: even though it is past, it is still called subsequent to the dharma; even though it is future, it is still called prior to the dharma. Here, when it states that each of the three time periods has three kinds, it is based on dividing possession into three according to the three time periods, not according to being prior or subsequent to the dharma. When a past dharma has three kinds of temporal possession: for example, when there was a wholesome mind in the past, viewing it across to today, all possessions that arose prior to it, whether prior to the dharma, simultaneous with the dharma, or subsequent to the dharma, are all called past. The moment currently arising today is called present possession; all possessions after this present moment are called future possession. For a dharma of the past, there is no prior possession in the future. Possession is not fixed, for it is spoken of as prior or subsequent in accordance with its arising. If it is the possession of a present dharma, then prior to the dharma is past, simultaneous with the dharma is present, and subsequent to the dharma is future. If it is the possession of a future dharma, prior to the dharma encompasses three kinds of possession, while subsequent to the dharma and simultaneous with the dharma are exclusively future. Vibhāṣā 158 explains the differences of possession prior to the dharma, simultaneous with the dharma, and subsequent to the dharma. This text explains possession in the three time periods. However, when possession is distinguished in terms of the dharma [possessed], there are four kinds: prior to the dharma, simultaneous with the dharma, subsequent to the dharma, and not prior to, simultaneous with, nor subsequent to the dharma. When distinguishing dharmas in terms of the possessing [possession], there are six kinds: First, having only simultaneous possession, as with what is arisen from vipāka and so forth, because their power is weak. Second, having only prior possession, as with conventional cognition cultivated in the vicinity of the three consecutive cognitions of the path of seeing, because it never arises. Third, having only simultaneous possession and subsequent possession, as with prātimokṣa-saṃvara and so forth, because there is no retro-possession. Fourth, having only simultaneous possession and prior possession, as with the path-consecutive-receptivity (mārgānvayajñānakṣānti) and so forth, because it is abandoned at that very moment. Fifth, completely possessing all three kinds of possession—prior to the dharma, simultaneous with the dharma, and subsequent to the dharma—as with the remaining wholesome, unwholesome, and other [dharmas], because they have retro-possession and retroactive acquisition, moving through the three time periods. Sixth, having possession that is not prior to, subsequent to, or simultaneous with the dharma, which refers to the possession of the two cessations, because the dharma possessed does not belong to the three time periods. There is definitely no dharma that has only subsequent possession, because when an obtainable dharma reaches the present, it necessarily has possession. Like the path-consecutive-receptivity having only prior and simultaneous [possession], this is because it is not fixed. Whether currently arising or future, both allow for two kinds of possession; one should not say that each has one kind of possession, nor that they definitively have two kinds of possession. If that were so, it would incur the fault of the meaning of concordance with the four aspects. If it were definitively simultaneous with the dharma, the fault would be as described later.