瑜伽師地論略纂 3.31

3.31

concerning the seven meanings: first it states the seven objections, and then restates them to refute them individually. Altogether there are four Sarvāstivādins. In the Kośa, fascicle 20, the verse says: "Herein there are four kinds: / Differences of mode (bhāva), characteristic (lakṣaṇa), state (avasthā), and relativity (anyathātva); / The third, based on function (kāritra), / Is the most excellent in establishing the temporal periods." Dharmatrāta says: "The periods differ by mode. When a dharma traverses the periods, its mode differs, not its substance. Just as when gold is made into a vessel, the shape differs but the material is the same; and as milk becomes curd, the taste is abandoned while the color remains. A dharma flows from the future into the present and from the present enters the past; it merely abandons and acquires modes, not abandoning or acquiring substance." Ghoṣaka says: "The periods differ by characteristic. When a dharma traverses the periods, the past is precisely conjoined with the past characteristic, yet is not called separated from the present and future characteristics; the future is precisely conjoined with the future characteristic, yet is not called separated from the past and present characteristics; the present is precisely conjoined with the present characteristic, yet is not called separated from the past characteristic. Just as being attached to one wife does not mean one is separated from lust toward other concubines." Vasumitra says: "The periods differ by state. When a dharma traverses the periods, the substance is the same but the states differ. Just as moving a single counting-stick, when placed at the ones place it is called one, at the hundreds place it is called a hundred, and at the thousands place it is called a thousand." Buddhadeva says: "The periods differ by relativity. When a dharma traverses the periods, it is relative to before and after that different designations are established. Just as a single woman is called a mother and called a daughter." Vasubandhu says: "Among these four explanations, the first assertion is identical to the non-Buddhist Sāṃkhya. The second asserts that in separation each has all three characteristics; just as when attached to a wife, lust is presently arisen, while toward the others it is merely possessed—what meaning makes them the same? The fourth asserts that a single period should contain all three periods; just as in the past period, prior and subsequent moments should be called past, future, and present; the same applies to the future, because the mutual relativity is the same. Therefore, the third is the most excellent explanation, because it differentiates based on a dharma's function being not yet arisen, presently arisen, or already ceased." Now, in these seven meanings: the first question about coming attacks Dharmatrāta's meaning of difference of mode; the fourth, objecting to activity (karman), refutes Vasumitra's position of the Master of Function who posits difference of state; the sixth, different characteristics, refutes Buddhadeva's position of the Master of Relativity; the fourth and seventh, having a present share, refute Ghoṣaka's meaning of difference of characteristic; the remaining three are hypothetical refutations and not the tenets of this school proper. The refutation of these four masters is as explained in the Kośa. Chapter 51 of the Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī relates them as six assertions, the import of the text being largely the same.