[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [成唯識論了義燈](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832) › 3.15 # 成唯識論了義燈 3.15 成唯識論了義燈 3.15 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.15](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.3.15) 答：且據種子，顯過去界，影彰於現，如未與果。種子相續，名現在界，不唯種子，獨名現在。如十八界通三世故。或但說種，以恒相續，因名界增。或復現行，亦得名種，能生果故。如第八會，十因、二因種子之言，故實種現，皆有滅相。由觀現法，有酬前用，假說曾滅，故說滅相在過去世。以法謝已，滅相方顯。據實於現，由有當滅，亦名為滅。即如論文，表此後無假立。滅相猶如壞苦，樂滅方有。然說樂受，亦名壞苦，謂壞時苦故，現法亦爾。當必滅故，說過去者。此時顯故。異他宗故，約世分故。故五十二云：何故世尊但說三種，一生；二滅；三住異？答：由一切行三世所顯故，從未來世本無而生。是故世尊由未來世，於有為法說，生有為相。乃至由過去世，於有為法說滅有為相。現在世法，二相所顯，謂住及異。既於現立住、異二相，明生未來，滅在過去，約世義分。據實假義，得通三世。不爾，四相不遍有為，現、未無，滅應非無常。五十二云：復次，無常差別，亦有多種，謂：壞滅無常、生起無常、變易無常、散壞無常、當有無常、現墮無常。若一切行，生已尋滅，名壞滅無常。本無今有，名生起無常。異相行起，名變易無常。離散退失，名散壞無常，即四無常。在未來時，名當有無常。正現前時，名現墮無常。准此故知得通三世，以重釋前四相差別故，又釋唯現，以無別過、未，依現立三故。雖實依現，義通三世，無不遍失。 > Answer: For now, it is based on seeds to reveal the past dhātu, which implicitly illuminates the present, just as seeds that have not yet given their fruit and continue in series are called the present dhātu; it is not that seeds alone are uniquely called the present. This is because, as with the eighteen dhātus, they pertain to all three times. Or it may be that only seeds are mentioned because they continuously proceed in series, and being causes, their realm is prominent. Or again, actual dharmas (samudācāra) may also be termed 'seeds' because they can produce fruit. This is just as in the eighth assembly \[of the treatise\], where there is mention of seeds in terms of the ten causes and the two causes; therefore, in reality, both seeds and actual dharmas possess the characteristic of cessation. Because by observing a present dharma there is a function that repays what came before, one metaphorically speaks of a past cessation; hence it is said that the characteristic of cessation resides in the past time. For only after a dharma has passed away does the characteristic of cessation become manifest. In reality, with respect to the present, because there is an impending cessation, it is also designated as cessation. This is just as the text of the treatise states: it is metaphorically established to indicate that this \[dharma\] will not exist afterward. The characteristic of cessation is just like the suffering of change (vipariṇāma-duḥkhatā), which exists only when pleasure ceases; yet pleasurable sensation is also called the suffering of change, meaning it is suffering when it changes—the present dharma is also like this. Because it must inevitably cease, the reason it is said to belong to the past is that at that time it is manifest, to differentiate it from other schools, and because it is distinguished according to time. Therefore, fascicle fifty-two states: 'Why did the World-Honoured One teach only three kinds: first, arising; second, cessation; and third, duration-and-alteration?' Answer: 'Because all conditioned phenomena are manifested by the three times: from the future time, being originally nonexistent, they arise. Therefore, based on the future time, the World-Honoured One taught the conditioned characteristic of arising with respect to conditioned dharmas; and so on, up to: based on the past time, he taught the conditioned characteristic of cessation with respect to conditioned dharmas. Dharmas of the present time are manifested by two characteristics, namely duration and alteration.' Since duration and alteration are established in the present, it is clear that arising is in the future and cessation is in the past, distinguishing them according to the meaning of the times. In reality, according to metaphorical sense, they can pertain to all three times. Otherwise, the four characteristics would not pervade conditioned phenomena, and being nonexistent in the present and future, cessation would not be impermanence. Fascicle fifty-two states: 'Furthermore, the distinctions of impermanence are also manifold, namely: impermanence of destruction and cessation, impermanence of origination, impermanence of transformation, impermanence of dispersion and destruction, impermanence of future existence, and impermanence of present occurrence. If all conditioned phenomena, having arisen, immediately cease, this is called the impermanence of destruction and cessation. What was originally nonexistent and now exists is called the impermanence of origination. The arising of conditioned phenomena with differentiated characteristics is called the impermanence of transformation. Dispersion and falling away is called the impermanence of dispersion and destruction. These are the four impermanences. When in the future, it is called the impermanence of future existence. When directly present, it is called the impermanence of present occurrence.' Following this, we know that they can pertain to all three times, because it re-explains the distinctions among the preceding four characteristics. Furthermore, it is explained as only present because there are no separate past and future, and the three are established based on the present. Although in reality based on the present, in meaning they pertain to all three times, so there is no fault of lack of pervasion. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.14](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.3.14) - [Next: 3.16](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.3.16) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832~en-mt.3.15) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.3.15](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.3.15) · Pramāṇa