成唯識論述記 4.470

4.470

述曰：破薩婆多等。薩婆多言無心位中雖無有識，入定前識為識食體，有何過失？我過去有故。然彼起食用，唯過、現世，非未來世。今設遮之言未來也，今言不應爾。總非量云：定之前後去來有漏順益之識，非食體用；非現、常故；如空花等。彼宗不許無體用因，故但宗法。遮過去令無食體用，但遮未來食體。今設遮未來用，此是不許有體等難。

The Commentary states: This refutes the Sarvāstivādins and others. The Sarvāstivādin says: 'Although there is no consciousness in the mindless state, what fault is there in taking the consciousness prior to entering absorption as the substance of the nutriment of consciousness? For our past exists.' However, their arousal of nutriment's function occurs only in the past and present times, not in the future time. Here, provisionally precluding it, [the treatise] mentions the future. Now we say this should not be so. The overall syllogism is: The past and future sāsrava and beneficial consciousnesses before and after absorption are not the substance and function of nutriment (thesis); because they are neither present nor permanent (reason); like a sky-flower and so forth (example). Because that school does not accept the reason of 'lacking substance and function', only the property of the thesis is stated. Negating the past deprives it of the substance and function of nutriment; it only negates future nutriment's substance. Here, provisionally negating future function is an objection that does not grant real substance and so forth.