Two theories of time existed within the schools of Early Buddhism in India. One of these，held by the `Sarvastivada` and the `Sautrantikah` Schools, regarded "`ksana`" or the present moment as having continuity; in a sense，this was a theory of substantiality of past and future. The other theory, adpoted by the `Mahasanghikah` School，proclaimed that there was no past or future，that there was only the present; this is a theory of insubstantiality of past and future.
The `Vidya-matra-siddhi Sastra` accepted the time concept of the `Mahasanghikah` School and said that，in the contamination of karmic seeds, cause and effect existed simultaneously. However，some scholars, such as Prasenajit and Nanda, followed the view of substantiality of past and future，and contended in their theory of karmic seed- contamination that cause and effect did not exist at the same time，a theory that was refuted by the `Sastra`.
The author of this paper has discovered that the theory of simultaneity of cause and effect as advocated in the `Vidya-matra-siddhi Sastra` would entail the conclusion that `Alayavijnana` was not morally neutral，and this conclusion would contradict the `Sastra's` own reasoning. In order to avoid the self-contradiction，the author suggests that followers of the `Sastra` abandon the simultaneity theory in favor of the opposite view.