瑜伽論記 2.196

2.196

世親說：言此四說中，第一、執法有轉變故，應置數論外道朋中；第二、所立世相雜亂，三世皆有三世相故，人於妻愛貪現行時，於餘境貪唯有成就，現無貪起，何義為同；第四、所立前後，相待一世法中，應有三世，謂過去世前後剎那，應名去來中為現在，未來現在類亦應然，故此四中第三最善，以約作用位有差別，彼謂諸法作用未有名為未來，有作用時名為現在，作用已滅名為過去，非體有殊。

Vasubandhu says: Among these four explanations, the first adheres to dharmas undergoing transformation, so it should be placed in the camp of the Sāṃkhya non-Buddhists. The second establishes characteristics of the times that are confused and mixed, because all three times would have the characteristics of all three times; when a man’s lust is actively present toward his wife, he merely possesses lust toward other objects [in potentia] without active lust arising—in what sense are they identical? The fourth establishes mutual relativity of prior and posterior, whereby within the dharmas of a single time there would be all three times, that is, the preceding and succeeding moments of the past time should be called the past and future, and the middle called the present; the future and present would likewise be analogous. Therefore, among these four, the third is best, because the distinction of states is made in terms of activity (kāritra). He maintains that when dharmas have not yet possessed activity, they are called future; when they possess activity, they are called present; when their activity has ceased, they are called past, without their substance being different.