俱舍論疏 20.46

20.46

"The Śāstra says: […] sometimes present and sometimes absent": this explains the three characters "what hinders activity" in the opening line of the verse. "If it is said that the self-nature of dharmas is permanently existent": this takes up the Sarvāstivāda thesis. "It should be able to produce activity at all times": this challenges the Sarvāstivāda. If you hold that having activity is called present, and lacking activity is called past or future, activity relies upon the substantial entity; since the substantial entity is permanently existent, activity should likewise be so—what hinders this activity so that it is sometimes present and sometimes absent?