The two Significant Controversies within the Sarvāstivāda school of Buddhism
One big controversy in Sarvāstivāda philosophy was about how our existence stays the same even though everything around us constantly changes. The Sarvāstivāda group struggled with this idea. They thought there must be something unchanging (called pudgala) within us even though other things change. But the Theravāda group disagreed, believing that our identity changes along with everything else.
Another controversy in Sarvāstivāda philosophy was about time. Sarvāstivādins believed in tri-temporal existence, meaning that they thought everything exists in three time periods: past, present, and future. They argued that even though things change over time, their essential nature (svabhāva) stays the same. This idea, called sarvāstitva, suggested that things have a permanent essence that remains unchanged despite temporal changes. However, not all Buddhist schools agreed with this concept.
The two Significant Controversies within the Sarvāstivāda scho
Sarvāstivāda in fact rejects pudgala, a doctrine originated by Vāsīputrīya and its derivative sects Dharmottarīya, the Bhadrayaniya, the Saṃmitīya and the Shannagarika. Both Theravada and Sarvāstivāda analyze the five aggregates into the indivisible dharma that has their intrinsic nature or svabhāva. Sarvāstivāda analyzes existence into 75 dhamma that hold their own intrinsic nature whereas Theravada defines the existence into 82. It is the Madhyamika that refutes the existence of svabhāva on the argument of emptiness or sunyata, a doctrine premised on condition-arising.
In explaining the continuity of life stream in the rebirth process which are conditioned arising and with momentary existence, Sarvāstivāda developed the doctrine of tri-temporal existence in explaining the existence. According to Sarvāstivāda, each dharma has two aspects namely the empirical aspect which exists only in the present and the metaphysical aspect with its unique intrinsic nature, unchanging, permanent and has its own substance exist
in all the three periods. While Pudgalavin explains the continuity of life in the rebirth cycle with the doctrine of pudgala, Sarvāstivāda advocates the tri-temporal existence to explain the continuity of existence. In Sarvāstivāda, although a dharma undergoes temporal changes on the horizon of past, present and future, its svabhāva never changes. The existence or real does not refer to our conventional understanding as to a physical existence or an incident that we usually relate to. The real or existence is an ontological argument and is seen from the ultimate truth perspective. The mark of existence or real refers to being capable of serving as an object of generating cognition (buddhi). In fact, anything that can generate cognition is real in this context. For example, the illusory perception of a double-moon has its object of the single moon; an object thus generates cognition of the double moon.