Aspects of Mahayana Buddhism and its Relation to Hinayana c7.s3.t20.6

c7.s3.t20.6

In this connection the Sautrāntikas mention the opinion of Sthavira Śrīlābha, also a Sautrāntika teacher, who interpreted the pratisamkhyā-nirodha as the future non-origin of passions due to knowledge (prajñā), and the apratisamkhyā-nirodha as the future non-origin of duḥkha, i.e., of existence due to the disappearance of passions and not directly due to knowledge. The former, it is said, refers to sopādiśeṣa- and the latter to anupādiśeṣa-nirvāṇadhātu.¹ The Sautrāntikas did not approve of the distinction made by Śrīlābha between Pratisamkhyā and Apratisamkhyā. According to them, the future non-origin of duḥkha implies pratisamkhyā; so, in fact, apratisamkhya-nirodha is included in the pratisamkhyā-nirodha.