SN 22.62: What is meant by "scope of language"?

What is the message of this sutta? > At Sāvatthī. > > “Mendicants, there are these three scopes of language, terminology, > and descriptions. They’re uncorrupted, as they have been since the > beginning. They’re not being corrupted now, nor will they be. Sensible > ascetics and brahmins don’t look down on them. What three? When form > has passed, ceased, and perished, its designation, label, and > description is ‘was’. It’s not ‘is’ or ‘will be’. > > When feeling … > > perception … choices … > > consciousness has passed, ceased, and perished, its designation, > label, and description is ‘was’. It’s not ‘is’ or ‘will be’. > > When form is not yet born, and has not yet appeared, its designation, > label, and description is ‘will be’. It’s not ‘is’ or ‘was’. > > When feeling … > > perception … choices … > > consciousness is not yet born, and has not yet appeared, its > designation, label, and description is ‘will be’. It’s not ‘is’ or > ‘was’. > > When form has been born, and has appeared, its designation, label, and > description is ‘is’. It’s not ‘was’ or ‘will be’. > > When feeling … > > perception … choices … > > consciousness has been born, and has appeared, its designation, label, > and description is ‘is’. It’s not ‘was’ or ‘will be’. > > These are the three scopes of language, terminology, and descriptions. > They’re uncorrupted, as they have been since the beginning. They’re > not being corrupted now, nor will they be. Sensible ascetics and > brahmins don’t look down on them. Even those wanderers of the past, > Vassa and Bhañña of Ukkalā, who taught the doctrines of no-cause, > inaction, and nihilism, didn’t imagine that these three scopes of > language should be criticized or rejected. Why is that? For fear of > being blamed, criticized, and faulted.”