anye punar mahāmate tīrthakaradṛṣṭayo rūpakāraṇasaṃsthānābhiniveśābhiniviṣṭā ākāśabhāvāparicchedakuśalā rūpam ākāśabhāvavigataṃ paricchedaṃ dṛṣṭvā vikalpayanti |
ākāśam eva ca mahāmate rūpam | rūpabhūtānupraveśān mahāmate rūpam evākāśam |
ādheyādhāravyayasthānabhāvena mahāmate rūpākāśakāraṇayoḥ pravibhāgaḥ pratyetavyaḥ |
bhūtāni mahāmate pravartamānāni parasparasvalakṣaṇabhedabhinnāni ākāśe cāpratiṣṭhitāni | na ca teṣv ākāśaṃ nāsti |
evam eva śaśasya viṣāṇaṃ mahāmate goviṣāṇam apekṣya bhavati |
goviṣāṇaṃ punar mahāmate aṇuśo vibhajyamānaṃ punar apy aṇavo vibhajyamānā aṇutvalakṣaṇe nāvatiṣṭhante |
tasya kim apekṣya nāstitvaṃ bhavati? athānyad apekṣya (54*) vastu, tad apy evaṃdharmi ||
大慧。虚空是色。隨入色種。(5)大慧。色是虚空。
持所持處所建立性。色空(6)事分別當知。
大慧。四大種生時自相各別。
亦(7)不住虚空。非彼無虚空。
如是大慧。觀牛(8)有角故兔無角。
大慧。有牛角者*析爲微塵。(9)又分別微塵刹那不住。
彼何所觀故而言(10)無耶。若言觀餘物者。彼法亦然
Again, Mahāmati, there are other philosophers affected with erroneous views, who are attached to such notions as form, cause, and figure; not fully understanding the nature of space and seeing that space is disjoined from form, they proceed to discriminate about their separate existences.
But, Mahāmati, space is form, and, Mahāmati, as space penetrates into form, form is space.
To establish the relation of supporting and supported, Mahāmati, there obtains the separation of the two, space and form.
Mahāmati, when the elements begin to evolve [a world] they are distinguishable one from another; they do not abide in space, and space is not non-existent in them.
It is the same with the hare's horns, Mahāmati, whose non-existence is asserted in reference to the bull's horns.
But, Mahāmati, when the bull's horns are analysed to their minutest atoms, which in turn are further analysed, there is after all nothing to be known as atoms.
The non-existence of what, is to be affirmed in reference to what? As to the other things, too, this reasoning from reference (54) does not hold true.