俱舍論頌疏論本 1.22

1.22

The author of the treatise evaluates them, saying: "Because Dharmatrāta posits transformation of dharmas, he should be placed among the Sāṃkhya non-Buddhists, for the Sāṃkhya school holds that dharmas undergo transformation. As for what Ghoṣaka established, the temporal characteristics are conflated, since all three times would possess the characteristics of all three times. In what Buddhadeva established, the times are also conflated, for within the dharmas of a single time, all three times would be present: since the past time contains many moments, the earlier and later moments should be called past and future, and the middle one called the present; the future and present would likewise follow suit. Therefore, among these four, the third, Vasumitra, established the times best." According to the Sautrāntika school, past and future have no substantial reality; only the present time exists. Now, when examining the fundamental tenets upon which Vasubandhu composed this treatise, there are two kinds: First, the explicit tenet, which is the Sarvāstivāda. Hence a verse below says: "The principles settled by the Kaśmīra [masters] are well established; / I largely rely upon them to explain the Abhidharma." Since it says that he relies upon them to explain the *Abhidharmakośa*, we know that this treatise takes the Sarvāstivāda school as its explicit tenet. Second, the implicit tenet, which is the Sautrāntika. Hence a verse below says: "Because what the Sautrāntikas state does not contradict reason." Throughout this treatise, he mostly uses the Sautrāntika to refute the Sarvāstivāda; hence we know that what Vasubandhu intended in his heart takes the Sautrāntika as its tenet. Such are the differences above. The second section, clarifying the fundamental doctrine, is concluded.