成唯識論述記 3.618

3.618

述曰：此下有三，初牒說一切有部、正量等，難破彼宗執；二、破上座部師；三、破經部。初文有十，此即初也，有部、正量等，彼皆過、未有體性故。此意難言，若如我等過、未有體，未來續故不斷，往過去故不常，汝過去無，可許非常，未來既無，後法應斷，現不住故，當無體故，如是豈成緣起正理。

The Commentary states: From here below there are three parts: first, stating the Sarvāstivāda, Saṃmatīya, and others, challenging and refuting the attachments of their schools; second, refuting the masters of the Sthaviravāda; third, refuting the Sautrāntika. The first text has ten sections, of which this is the first. The Sarvāstivāda, Saṃmatīya, and others all hold that the past and future have essential nature. The intention of this challenge is to say: If, as we hold, the past and future have substance, then because the future continues [the present] there is no discontinuity, and because [the present] passes into the past there is no permanence. For you, the past does not exist, so you may allow "not permanent"; but since the future does not exist, subsequent dharmas must be discontinuous, because the present does not abide and the future lacks substance. In this way, how could the correct principle of dependent origination be established?