瑜伽師地論略纂 3.34

3.34

Among the remaining three analogical refutations, "There is furthermore the fault of confusion of intrinsic nature" demonstrates the fault of confusion in the seventh [thesis] of having a present part. Since the future already possesses a present part, it should be the present, because it possesses a present part, just like the present. The objection regarding the present is also like this; hence confusion ensues. Regarding its characteristics being complete, one should establish the formal proof: The future's characteristics should be complete, because of possessing the characteristics of another part, like the present. Or: The present's characteristics should not be complete, because of possessing the characteristics of another part, just like the future. The objection regarding distinct characteristics has a formal proof identical to this. Second, in concluding the preceding, there are nine occurrences of the word "therefore". "Specific characteristics" concludes the preceding oneness and difference of the specific characteristics of the three time periods. "Common characteristics" concludes the preceding permanence and impermanence of the three time periods, because they are shared by the three time periods. The remaining seven are precisely the previous seven objections concerning the three time periods. Second, their cross-examination in response.