成唯識論了義燈 3.2

3.2

The treatise says: "There are three conditioned characteristics of the conditioned..." fully explained as in the commentary. However, according to the *Vibhāṣā*, fascicle 38: Just as the Dārṣṭāntikas hold that all conditioned characteristics are subsumed under the skandha of non-concurrent formations, which is slightly similar to the Mahāyāna, this refers to the original teachers of the Sautrāntika. Yet whether [they are] separate from consciousness or not separate from consciousness is refuted by analogy below. The Vibhajyavādins say that these characterizing marks are all unconditioned. The Dharmaguptakas say that the three characteristics are conditioned, while the characteristic of cessation is unconditioned. Those who establish them as unconditioned are not what is refuted here. They will only be refuted by analogy below under the unconditioned. Although these [schools] establish them as conditioned characteristics, they are not non-concurrent formations, because the proposition and conclusion in the text of the treatise solely refute non-concurrent formations. Some say that since they have already been refuted by others, they are not refuted here. I now say this is not so. It is not that because others have already refuted them, they are not refuted here; for all non-concurrent formations were already refuted by the Sautrāntikas, yet they are refuted again here. Or, although they are unconditioned, nevertheless they serve as characterizing marks; now the meaning of characterizing marks is refuted, and below the meaning of the unconditioned is refuted. Both sections being refuted does not conflict with principle either. What is spoken by śramaṇas of similar continuity—that the arising, staying, aging, and impermanence of material phenomena have materiality as their essence, up to the arising, staying, aging, and impermanence of consciousness phenomena having consciousness as their essence—is refuted by analogy below and not refuted separately. If it were not so, since the essence of matter and mind is just matter and mind, there would be the fault of proving what is already accepted. The Sautrāntika masters establish—according to what the *Vibhāṣā* says—the four characteristics of a single lifetime in common with the Mahāyāna. The Sarvāstivādin masters say: "They are solely characteristics of generic resemblance (sabhāgatā), not conditioned characteristics." This meaning says: the four characteristics of a single lifetime only serve as characterizing marks for generic resemblance, not characteristics of all conditioned phenomena, because all conditioned phenomena, moment by moment, possess all four characteristics; thus the Sarvāstivādins do not accept [it]. Basing oneself on the sūtras to establish the four characteristics of a single lifetime is not precluded according to conventional truth. The *Vibhāṣā*, fascicle 38, provides multiple alternate explanations; other aspects are as distinguished in various treatises.