翻譯名義集 2.186

2.186

【舜若多】沇（音究）疏云：「未見誠釋，應是主空神。」《入楞伽》云「剎尼迦者，名之為空。或呿（丘庶）提，秦云虛空。」《纂要》云：「但無麁相之身，亦有微妙之色。故云如來光中，映令暫見。」又《涅槃》明虛空喻，乃立三義：一、無變易，亘古騰今，時移俗化，唯此虛空，常無變易。故南本三十三云：「虛空無故，非三世攝；佛性常故，非三世攝。善男子！如來已得三菩提所有佛性，一切佛法，常無變易，以是義故，非三世攝。二、無邊際，物分表裏，空無內外，故無邊際。」三十二云：「我為眾生得開解故，說言佛性非內非外。何以故？凡夫眾生，或言佛性住五陰中，如器中有果。或言離陰而有，猶如虛空。是故如來說於中道。眾生佛性，非內六入，非外六入，內、外合故，名為中道。」三、無罣礙，物體質礙，空性虛通。故三十三云：「如世間中，無罣礙處，名為虛空。如來得三菩提已，於一切法無有罣礙，故言佛性猶如虛空。」無著云：「喻虛空者，有三因緣：一，遍一切處，謂於住不住相中福生故。二，寬廣，高大殊勝故。三，無盡，究竟不窮故。」淨覺云：「應以遍喻於假，寬喻於空，無盡喻中。」又《楞嚴》云：「縱令虛空，亦有名貌；虛空是名，顯色是貌。」孤山釋曰：「如《涅槃》說空有四名，謂虛空、無所有、不動、無礙也。」貌，謂體貌。如《雜集論》說空一顯色，沇疏釋曰：「小乘以明暗為體，大乘以空一顯色，及極逈色為體（上見空名顯色，下見空名逈色）。」《維摩疏》「問：『此虛空譬，豈有但空、不可得空之殊？』答：『空尚不一，何得有二？若約緣盡相顯，非不有殊。如大乘經論有破虛空之義，即可以譬但空，顯不可得空。』」記釋緣盡等者，謂雲霧暗緣盡，虛空明相顯時，或見萬象，或但見空，可以喻但、不但二種真也。今問：「虛空、空界，二名同異？」答：「《顯宗論》云：『內外竅隙，名空界；光暗竅隙，顯色差別，名虛空界。』經言：『虛空無色、無見、無對，當何所依？然藉光明顯了。又說於色，得離染時，斷虛空界。』《俱舍》云：『竅隙名空界，謂人身中諸骨節間，腹藏諸孔穴之空也。』《成實論》云：『四大圍空，有識在中，故名為人。此以能依身中，空名空界，所依境內，空名虛空。』」問：「虛空無邊，遍一切處。《光明》安云虛空分界，尚可盡邊？」答：「如《楞嚴》云：『當知虛空生汝心內，猶如片雲點太清裏。』是則眾生計乎妄想，太虛絕於靈照；既迷妄以成空，故背覺而有限。如天親說有分別及無分別，皆名為識。有分別名識識，無分別名似塵識。如《楞嚴》，想澄成國土，即似塵識；知覺乃眾生，即是識識。今述頌曰：『虛空生我心，我心廣無際；咄哉迷中人，云何自拘繫！』」

[Śūnyatā] The commentary by Yan (pronounced *jiu*) says: "I have not yet seen an authoritative explanation; it must be the spirit presiding over space." The *Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra* says: "*Kṣaṇika* means empty. Or *khata* (pronounced *qiu-shu*), which the Qin translates as empty space." The *Zuanyao* says: "It merely lacks a body of gross characteristics, but also possesses subtle form. Hence it is said that within the light of the Tathāgata, it is made visible momentarily by reflection." Furthermore, the *Nirvāṇa-sūtra* clarifies the analogy of empty space by establishing three meanings: First, being changeless: extending through antiquity into the present, while times shift and worldly customs alter, this empty space alone is eternally changeless. Hence, the southern edition's Chapter 33 says: "Because empty space is non-existent, it is not subsumed under the three times; because Buddha-nature is eternal, it is not subsumed under the three times. Good sons! The Buddha-nature possessed by the Tathāgata who has attained samyaksambodhi, and all Buddha-dharmas, are eternally changeless; by this meaning, they are not subsumed under the three times. Second, having no boundaries: material things divide into exterior and interior, but space has neither inside nor outside, and is therefore boundless." Chapter 32 says: "So that sentient beings might gain awakening and understanding, I said that Buddha-nature is neither internal nor external. Why is this? Ordinary sentient beings sometimes say that Buddha-nature resides within the five skandhas, like fruit within a vessel. Or they say that it exists apart from the skandhas, like empty space. Therefore, the Tathāgata speaks of the Middle Way. The Buddha-nature of sentient beings is neither the six internal bases nor the six external bases; the conjunction of internal and external is termed the Middle Way." Third, being unhindered: material objects are obstructive in nature, but the nature of space is unobstructed and open. Hence Chapter 33 says: "As in the world, a place without hindrance is called empty space. The Tathāgata, having attained samyaksambodhi, is unobstructed regarding all dharmas; hence it is said that Buddha-nature is like empty space." Asaṅga says: "The analogy to empty space has three reasons: 1. It pervades all places, meaning that merit arises in characteristics of abiding and non-abiding. 2. It is expansive, because it is lofty, vast, and supreme. 3. It is inexhaustible, because it is ultimately without end." Jingjue says: "Pervasiveness should be used as an analogy for the provisional; expansiveness as an analogy for the empty; and inexhaustibility as an analogy for the middle." Furthermore, the *Śūraṅgama-sūtra* says: "Even empty space has a name and an appearance; 'empty space' is its name, and manifest color is its appearance." Gushan explains: "As the *Nirvāṇa-sūtra* states, space has four names: empty space, non-existence, immobility, and unobstructedness." "Appearance" means the appearance of its substance. As the *Abhidharmasamuccaya-vyākhyā* speaks of space being a single manifest color, Yan's commentary explains: "The Hīnayāna takes light and darkness as its substance; the Mahāyāna takes space as a single manifest color and as supreme remote color to be its substance (seeing space above is called manifest color, seeing space below is called remote color)." The *Vimalakīrti-bhāṣya* asks: "'Does this analogy of empty space have the distinction between mere emptiness and unobtainable emptiness?' Answer: 'Space is not even one, how could it be two? If spoken of in terms of conditions coming to an end and characteristics becoming manifest, it is not that there is no distinction. For instance, Mahāyāna sūtras and treatises have the doctrine of refuting empty space; this can serve as an analogy for mere emptiness, revealing unobtainable emptiness.'" The subcommentary explaining "conditions coming to an end," etc., means that when the dark conditions of clouds and fog are exhausted and the bright characteristics of empty space become manifest, one either sees the myriad phenomena or merely sees space; this can illustrate the two kinds of truth: the mere and the non-mere. Now it is asked: "Are the two names 'empty space' (*ākāśa*) and 'space-element' (*ākāśa-dhātu*) the same or different?" Answer: "The *Abhidharma-samayapradīpikā* says: 'Internal and external apertures and cavities are called the space-element; the difference in manifest colors between the apertures of light and darkness is called the realm of empty space.' A sūtra says: 'Empty space has no form, no visibility, and no resistance; upon what does it depend? Yet it relies on light to become apparent. It is also said that when one attains detachment from form, one severs the realm of empty space.' The *Abhidharmakośa* says: 'Apertures are called the space-element, meaning the spaces between the various bones and joints and the various cavities of the internal organs within the human body.' The *Tattvasiddhi-śāstra* says: 'When the four great elements surround empty space and consciousness is present within, it is called a human being. Here, the space within the dependent body is called the space-element, while the space within the objective domain that is depended upon is called empty space.'" Question: "Empty space is boundless and pervades all places. Why does the *Suvarṇaprabhāsa-sūtra* say that the divisions of empty space can still come to an end?" Answer: "As the *Śūraṅgama-sūtra* says: 'You should know that empty space arises within your mind just like a wisp of cloud dotting the vast blue sky.' This means that sentient beings grasp at false thoughts, and the vast expanse of space is cut off from spiritual illumination; having become confused and deluded so that emptiness is formed, they turn their backs on enlightenment and are therefore limited. As Vasubandhu said, having conceptualization and lacking conceptualization are both called consciousness. That which has conceptualization is called consciousness of consciousness; that which lacks conceptualization is called consciousness resembling dust. As in the *Śūraṅgama-sūtra*, when thoughts settle they become lands—this is consciousness resembling dust; perceptual awareness is sentient beings—this is consciousness of consciousness. Now I state this verse: 'Empty space arises in my mind; / My mind is expansive without bounds. / Alas, you people amid delusion, / Why bind and restrain yourselves?'"