成唯識論演祕 1.420

1.420

答：傳三釋，一云：彼宗空有二種，謂常、無常。常非諦攝，以無為故，亦猶佛法無為不在蘊中攝，故論指常空而以為喻。二云：即此一量合破二宗，常遍之因別屬勝、數遍，唯數論常遍，俱對勝論師宗。三云：如因明法因、喻不極，更作比量而成立之；今此亦爾，先成空常，後將為喻。量云：汝所執虛空應非轉變無常；許遍故；如汝神我等。

Answer: Three explanations are transmitted. The first says: That school has two kinds of space: permanent and impermanent. Permanent [space] is not subsumed within the realities (*tattva*), because it is unconditioned—just as in the Buddha's teaching the unconditioned is not subsumed within the aggregates (*skandha*). Therefore, the Treatise refers to permanent space as the example. The second says: This single syllogism refutes both schools together. The reason 'permanent and omnipresent' applies separately to Vaiśeṣika and Sāṃkhya: 'omnipresent' applies only to the Sāṃkhya, while 'permanent and omnipresent' both apply to the Vaiśeṣika school. The third says: Just as in the rules of logic (*hetuvidyā*), when a reason or an example is not mutually admitted (*aprasiddha*), one further constructs an inference to establish it; here it is also like this: one first establishes that space is permanent, and afterwards uses it as an example. The syllogism runs: The space posited by you should not be transformational and impermanent; because you admit it is omnipresent; like your spirit (*puruṣa*), and so forth.