Whether Past and Future Exist
If only the present instant is real, how can a deed done years ago still bear fruit, and how can the mind know what is gone? The answer decides what a moment is.
The Kashmiri Vaibhāṣikas held that past and future factors exist as truly as present ones: the Buddha spoke of past form, every cognition needs an object, and a past deed must exist if it is to ripen. Vasubandhu reports their arguments with a sceptical 'so they say' and answers for the Sautrāntikas. A factor exists only in the instant it acts. What carries a deed forward is no lingering past thing but a stream of moments that changes, as a seed becomes sprout and fruit.
- time
- causation
- impermanence
- abhidharma
- classification
- scriptural interpretation
- scriptural authority
- buddhist epistemology
Enter a dialogue
- Your opponents say a deed done long ago must still exist, or it could never bear fruit. What carries it forward if the past is gone?
- Your verses teach, with the Kashmir school, that past and future exist, yet your prose keeps adding "so they say". Why doubt your own verses?
- Someone keeps returning to an old wrong they did, as if it were still there. In what sense is that deed still present?
- Every act of knowing needs an object, so your opponents argue that knowing a past event proves the past is still there. Where does that argument fail?
- On your account a thing exists only in the instant it acts. How can a world of single flashes still look solid and lasting?