大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 69.74

69.74

疏「三不可見」者，釋無形相。「世人見者但見空一顯色」者，《雜集》第一云「云何建立色蘊？謂諸所有色，若四大種、若四大種所造色者。謂眼等五根、色聲香味觸所攝一分，及法處所攝色。」次釋色云「色者，謂四大種所造、眼根所了義，謂青黃赤白、長短方圓、麁細高下、若正不正、光影明暗、煙雲塵霧、逈色表色、空一顯色。此復三種，謂妙、不妙、俱相違色。此青等二十五色建立，由六種因，謂相故、安立故、損益故、作所依故、作相故、莊嚴故，如其次第」。四十八云「逈色者，謂離餘礙觸方所可得空一顯色者，謂上所見青等顯色。」釋曰：若《智論》說上空，謂作青白，彯色見故。又依小乘毘曇宗，空有二種：一是有為，除色為空。二是無為，本來常無。有為可見，故今世人同共見之；無為不可見故，今說言不可見相。《成實論》中，虛空唯一，不可眼見。世人見者，但見空中光明之色，想心於中知無實物，作虛空解，便謂見空，其實不見。《涅槃經》中同《成實》說，廣破虛空有為可見。今此經疏，符不可見。

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'Third, imperceptibility': this explains the absence of physical shape. Regarding 'What worldly people see is merely the solitary apparent colour of space': the first fascicle of the Samuccaya states: 'How is the form aggregate established? It refers to all forms, whether the four great elements or forms derived from the four great elements. That is, the five sense faculties such as the eye, one portion subsumed under visible forms, sounds, odours, tastes, and tangibles, and forms subsumed under the sphere of mental objects.' It next explains visible form, stating: 'Form refers to what is derived from the four great elements and cognised by the eye faculty: namely, blue, yellow, red, white; long, short, square, round; coarse, subtle, high, low; regular, irregular; light, shadow, bright, dark; smoke, cloud, dust, fog; distant colour, manifestative colour, and the solitary apparent colour of space. These again are of three kinds: exquisite, non-exquisite, and intermediate. The establishment of these twenty-five forms such as blue and so forth is due to six causes: namely, characteristic, establishment, harm and benefit, serving as basis, performing characteristics, and adornment, respectively in that order.' Fascicle 48 states: 'Distant colour refers to that which is obtained apart from other obstructing tangible locations. Solitary apparent colour of space refers to the apparent colours such as blue seen above.' As an explanation: in the *Mahāprajñāpāramitōpadeśa*, the sky above is described as appearing blue-white, being seen as a distant colour. Furthermore, according to the Hīnayāna Abhidharma school, space is of two kinds: first, conditioned [space], which is space produced by the removal of form; second, unconditioned [space], which is fundamentally and eternally nonexistent [as form]. Conditioned [space] is visible, and therefore worldly people collectively see it; unconditioned [space] is invisible, and so now it is described as having the characteristic of imperceptibility. In the *Tattvasiddhi-śāstra*, space is unitary and cannot be seen by the eye; what worldly people see is merely the light and colour in the sky, while their conceptual mind cognises therein that there is no real substance, conceives it as empty space, and forthwith claims to have seen space, though in reality they do not see it. In the *Nirvāṇa-sūtra*, in agreement with what the *Tattvasiddhi* says, it extensively refutes the view that space is conditioned and visible. Here, this sūtra and its commentary accord with its being imperceptible.