成唯識論演祕 3.10

3.10

Detailed analysis says: This logic is not necessarily the case. Although they posit that two, four, or three dharmas exist simultaneously, all are simply within a single moment and termed 'destruction in an instant'. If one says that it is not accepted because there are many dharmas occurring together in one moment, then when a seed gives rise to an active [dharma] there are three dharmas occurring together, and the seed ought not to be a seed. If one says that because they posit a sequential order they are therefore not seeds, while this might exclude the Sthavira and Sarvāstivāda's single moment, do they divide time? How can they be excluded? The text of the treatise only excludes dharmas that are permanent and unchanging; how could their two, four, or three [dharmas] be permanent and unchanging? Because of this, it does not necessarily exclude their arising and the rest; however, it is also logically tenable to exclude them as an incidental point.