俱舍論疏 1.84

1.84

論「於略所說至色於中行」，此即第四釋三無為。中有三：一釋虛空、二釋擇滅、三釋非擇滅。此即初也。列名未釋，名之為略。雖諸部立無為不同，此三無為諸部皆有。大乘加六，謂不動、想受滅及三性真如。大眾部等加六無為，謂四無色為四、八緣起支性、九聖道支性。化地部亦加六無為，四不動、五善法真如、六不善法真如、七無記法真如、八聖道支真如、九緣起真如。一切有部立三無為，然於其中，「虛空但以無礙為性」，簡餘法也。無礙之言簡於色法，色有礙故。「但以」之言，簡心、心所及不相應二種無為。此等諸法體雖無礙，同於虛空更有別體，非是但以無礙為性。「色於中行」者，釋虛空相也。色是礙法，於空中行，顯空無礙，於礙法中不得行故。無礙之法於空中行，不顯無礙，於礙法中亦得行故。《正理》釋云「虛空但以無礙為性。於中諸法最極顯現，故名虛空。是即無障以為其相，所有大種及造色聚，一切不能遍覆障故。或非所障亦非能障，是故說言無障為相。」准此論文，非能、所障者，簡空界色，雖無能障是所障故，但以無礙為性，與此論同。《婆沙》評曰「應作是說：實有虛空。以彼不知，即謂非有。由前教、理實有虛空。問：若爾，虛空有何作用？答：虛空無為，無有作用。然此能為種種虛空界作增上緣。種種空界能與種種大種作近增上緣，彼大種能與有對造色等作近增上緣，彼有對造色能與心心所作近增上緣。若無虛空，如是展轉因果次第皆不成立。勿有此失，是故虛空體相實有，不應撥無。」

The treatise says, "Among those briefly stated, up to: form moves within it." This is the fourth, explaining the three unconditioned [dharmas]. Within this there are three [parts]: 1. explaining space, 2. explaining analytical cessation, and 3. explaining non-analytical cessation. This is the first. Listing the names without yet explaining them is called 'brief'. Although the various schools differ in positing the unconditioned, these three unconditioned dharmas are held by all schools. The Mahāyāna adds six, namely: immobility, the cessation of ideation and feeling, and the True Suchness of the three natures. The Mahāsāṃghika and others add six unconditioned dharmas, namely: the four formless [attainments] as four, the eighth being the nature of the factors of conditioned arising, and the ninth being the nature of the factors of the noble path. The Mahīśāsaka also adds six unconditioned dharmas: fourth, immobility; fifth, the True Suchness of wholesome dharmas; sixth, the True Suchness of unwholesome dharmas; seventh, the True Suchness of indeterminate dharmas; eighth, the True Suchness of the factors of the noble path; and ninth, the True Suchness of conditioned arising. The Sarvāstivāda posits three unconditioned dharmas. However, among them, "space has only non-obstruction as its intrinsic nature" distinguishes it from other dharmas. The words 'non-obstruction' distinguish it from material dharmas, because form has obstruction. The words 'has only' distinguish it from mind, mental factors, and the two types of unassociated unconditioned dharmas. Although the nature of these dharmas is non-obstructive, like space they possess other distinct substances, and do not have only non-obstruction as their nature. "Form moves within it" explains the characteristic of space. Form is an obstructive dharma; moving in space demonstrates that space is non-obstructive, because it cannot move within obstructive dharmas. Non-obstructive dharmas moving in space do not demonstrate non-obstruction, because they can also move within obstructive dharmas. The Nyāyānusāra explains: "Space has only non-obstruction as its intrinsic nature. Dharmas within it are most distinctly manifested, hence it is called space. That is, it has absence of hindrance as its characteristic, because all primary elements and aggregates of derived form are entirely unable to completely cover and hinder it. Or, it is neither hindered nor hindering; therefore it is said that absence of hindrance is its characteristic." According to this passage of the treatise, 'neither hindering nor hindered' distinguishes it from the form of the space-element (ākāśa-dhātu): although unable to hinder, it is hindered; having only non-obstruction as its intrinsic nature is the same as in this treatise. The Vibhāṣā evaluates: "It should be stated: space is a real entity. Because they do not know it, they immediately call it non-existent. Through the aforementioned scriptural teachings and reasoning, space is a real entity. Question: If so, what function does space have? Answer: As an unconditioned dharma, space has no activity. However, it can serve as a dominant condition for various space-elements. Various space-elements can serve as proximate dominant conditions for various primary elements; those primary elements can serve as proximate dominant conditions for tangible derived forms and the like; those tangible derived forms can serve as proximate dominant conditions for the mind and mental factors. If space did not exist, such a sequential order of cause and effect would entirely fail to be established. To prevent this error, the substance and characteristics of space are real entities, and one should not reject their existence."