成唯識論述記 4.674

4.674

The Commentary states: That treatise explains: it is not that past afflictions produce present afflictions, etc., because the Sautrāntika masters posit that past and future are non-existent. This treatise relies on that to directly refute the Sautrāntikas. The meaning of this text also incidentally refutes the Sarvāstivādins: because they hold that past and future exist, transitioning between realms and stages would be faultless [for them]. Now, stating that they are 'not substantial' analogously refutes [them as before]: regarding afflictions not arising after an undefiled mind, they say, 'Our school posits prāpti (possession).' Now we refute them, saying: [prāpti] is also not substantially existent, being the same as the past and future; because it was already refuted earlier; and by analogy with the section on purity below, prāpti and so forth are not substantial. Furthermore, in speaking of 'holding seeds,' prāpti was omitted and not mentioned because it directly refutes the Sautrāntikas. Suppose they rescue their position by saying: the various afflictions upon transitioning between realms and stages arise without a cause at a later time.