In this paper, I will explain a part of Bhaviveka's understanding of vyavahara-satya as expressed in the fifteenth chapter of his Prajñapradipa, which is one of the commentaries on Nagarjuna's Madhyamakakarika. Bhaviveka criticises one of the Sarvastivada school's theories that dharmas exist in the three time periods of past, present, and future. The main issue of their argument is whether knowledge has an object or not. The Sarvastivada school insists that knowledge must have an object. Therefore they define dharmas as having svabhava, i. e. a constant and unchanging nature existing in past, present, and future. But Bhaviveka recognizes the existence of objects of perception in his vyavaharasatya. Therefore he does not recognize the existence of objects in the past and future. He recognizes the existence of objects in the present only. His standpoint is similar to the logic in the Yogacarabhumi and the Sautrantika's idea in Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakosabhasya. Therefore Bhaviveka's understanding of vyavaharasatya follows the logic from the Yogacarabhumi and the Sautrantika's Abhidharmakosabhasya in its criticism of the Sarvastivada school's theory that dharmas exist in past, present, and future.