心不相應行「得法」之研究

部派思想中，「心不相應行」（cittaviprayuktasamskara）「得、非得」（prapti, aprapti）的抽象、模糊特性，讓人不易理解。說一切有部（Sarvastivadin）主張「得」是實有，受到譬喻者（Darstantika）、經部（Sautrantika）等批評。本稿試著從論師對「得」實有性的論證，以及諸論師所提出「得」的作用說，探究有部主張「得」是實有的原由。內文先探討心不相應行法的形成，並透過論書中心不相應行的位置，了解為什麼心不相應行會成為「五位」之一，接著討論「得」與「非得」的成立。又，面對其他部派的批評，有部如何從教證主張「得」的實有性；並從諸論師如何依「用」證「體」，探究有部成立「得」的必要性。最後，綜合討論「得」的諸作用說。研究結果得知，早期佛教雖然沒有安立「得」法，但是契經中「得」的用法，大多用在聖道的獲得，啟發了有部「得」法的成立。部派時代，「得」從聖道的果得、斷惑的證滅（擇滅，pratisamkhya-nirodha），已經延伸擴大到與有情自身的任何一法，只要是與有情成為有關的任何一切法，就不能沒有「得」作為彼此的關係體。婆沙師從四教證及「得」的作用，闡明「得」的實有性，主張「建立因」（vyavasthahetu）－建立聖者、異生差別，悟入（Skandhila）表示「稱說因」，眾賢（Samghabhadra）提出「不失法因」（dharmavipranasakarana）及「智幖幟」（jnanacihna）二因說。「建立因」說和眾賢的二因說，到底有所不同。從「存在」作用來說，「建立因」是透過認識手段說明「得」存在本身，「不失法因」則是透過有部宗說「三世實有」，強調「得」恆與有情法俱生。其次，從「認識」作用來說，「建立因」說旨在強調「有情具有聖法」之事實，優先考量凡聖建立的根據；而「智幖幟」－「於彼（能得法）中有此（所得法）」，則是強調諸法繫屬的關係。事實上，除了「不失法因」，這些「得」的諸作用說有一個共同點，即依「認識」作用說明「得」的實有性（存在）。悟入的「稱說因」、Dipakara的「建立說」和眾賢的「智幖幟」，都是從認識「有情具有法」（果）之事實，來說明「得」（因）的實有性，作法與有部傳統「建立因」無異。

關鍵字

心不相應行；得；非得；建立因；不失法因；智幖幟；稱說因

並列摘要

The properties of ＂acquisition＂ (prapti) and ＂non-acquisition＂ (aprapti) listed in the dharma-category named ＂conditionings disjoined from thought＂ (cittaviprayuktasamskara) are rather abstruse and difficult to understand terms. The Sarvastivada school's view that ＂acquisition＂ has real existence was rejected by other schools such as the Darstantika and Sautrantika. Thus what follows aims at exploring the reasons why the Sarvastivada persisted in upholding this view. The article begins with a discussion of the formation of the ＂conditionings disjoined from thought＂ as one of the five dharma-categories of the Sarvastivada school. It then discusses the formation of ＂acquisition＂ and ＂non-acquisition＂, arriving at the conclusion that the Sarvastivada school argued for the real existence of ＂acquisition＂ by appealing to its functions. The article ends with a discussion of these particular functions that are at stake. In the author's analysis, the argument for the real existence of the property of ＂acquisition＂ put forward by the Vaibhasika scholars is based on the following characteristics assigned to such property: 1. it functions as a cause for establishing the distinction between the noble ones and ordinary worldlings; 2. it functions as cause for claiming that the pudgala is endowed with properties; 3. it functions as a device for not losing the properties that have been acquired by a dharma; 4. it functions as a mark of knowledge.