大智度論 梵志品Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · The Brahmin Ascetic
梵志品：外道梵志來求佛短，帝釋誦念般若故外道遙遶而去；惡魔化兵欲壞菩薩意亦不得便；諸天化華願般若久住、自誓守護受持者，視是人即是佛、若次佛；般若與一切智不二不別（經＋論）
這一品是從一場來勢洶洶、卻悄無聲息就散了的挑釁講起的。一群外道梵志來到佛所，存心要挑佛的短處。帝釋在座，心裡一動，便誦念起他從佛那裡受來的般若波羅蜜——他篤定：只要般若一誦，這些梵志「終不能中道作礙、斷說般若波羅蜜」。果然，那群外道遠遠地繞了佛一圈，就沿原路退走了。舍利弗看得納悶：這是什麼緣故？佛告訴他，這正是帝釋誦念般若的力量；而更深的緣故是——三千大千世界的四天王天乃至阿迦尼吒天、聲聞、辟支佛、諸菩薩，乃至十方諸佛，都在守護這般若，「是諸天、人皆從般若波羅蜜中生故」。連佛、菩薩、諸天都是從般若中生的，所以任誰持著惡意來說般若時，都得不著便。隨後惡魔也來試——化出四種兵要壞菩薩受記之心，帝釋一眼看破：這排場太不尋常，「頻婆娑羅王四種兵所不類，波斯匿王四種兵亦不類」，人間哪有這樣的兵？他又誦念般若，那魔也就「漸漸復道還去」。魔與外道之不得便，是同一個道理。
挑釁散去，接著是一片化華如雨的誓願。四天王乃至阿迦尼吒諸天化作天華散在佛上，齊願「般若波羅蜜久住閻浮提」——因為般若若久住，佛寶、法寶、僧寶便都隨之住而不滅。諸天更在佛前自誓：凡有善男子、善女人受持般若乃至正憶念，「我等視是人即是佛、若次佛」，所以要常常擁護他。這一句「即是佛、若次佛」是有分量的：論主後面點明，「如佛」者，是住阿鞞跋致、得無生法忍乃至十地的法性身菩薩；「次佛」者，是還在肉身、卻已能宣說般若及其正義的菩薩。受持般若的人，德便齊於這二等，所以諸天守護他，如同守護佛。
而這一品真正的眼，是帝釋接下來向佛說出、又當即被佛印可的一句話。帝釋說：諸佛的一切智，應當從般若中求；般若，也應當從一切智中求。何以故？「般若波羅蜜不異一切智，一切智不異般若波羅蜜；般若波羅蜜、一切智，不二不別。」佛立刻應和：「如是！如是！憍尸迦！諸佛一切智即是般若波羅蜜，般若波羅蜜即是一切智」——因為諸佛的一切智，正是從般若中生的。這「不二不別」四字，是本品收束一切的樞紐：受持般若的人所以「即是佛、若次佛」，正因他握住的般若，與諸佛究竟的一切智不二不別。
到論主釋曰，先回頭把那場挑釁的底細講透，再用一個譬喻把「不二不別」四字釘牢。外道為什麼敢來難問？因為他們聽說佛講「諸法畢竟空、無所有」，以為抓著了破綻，要來破這「空論」——論主一句斷了他們：「譬如狂人欲中傷虛空，徒自疲苦！」虛空無可傷，畢竟清淨的般若也無過罪可出。有人問：外道既來，何不直去，偏要繞佛一圈才走？論主答：是般若神力在遠處已把他們降伏了，他們自知「來而空去」怕被人看作怯弱，才假裝供養、繞佛而退。舍利弗本也是梵志出身，見同類空來空去，心生一點憐愍，佛便告訴他實情：這些梵志「乃至無一念善心，但持惡意，邪見著心，欲求諸法定相，是故不中度」——「譬如必死之病，雖有良醫、神藥，不能救濟」。機既不受，法不能度，這不是般若的力量不夠，是那顆心閉著。最後論主用一個最日常的譬喻收住全品：乳變成酪，離了乳就沒有酪，可也不能說乳「就是」酪；般若變成一切種智，離了般若就沒有一切種智，可也不能說般若「就是」一切種智。般若與一切種智，一個作生因、一個作說因，「因果不相離故言『不二不別』」——不是一，也不是異；因果相即，而不相濫。這一味乳與一味酪之間的分寸，就是這一品要人握住的般若之眼。
This chapter begins from a provocation that came on in force and dispersed without a sound. A crowd of brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths come to where the Buddha is, intent on finding fault with him. Śakra, seated in the assembly, is stirred in his mind and begins to recite the prajñāpāramitā he received from the Buddha, certain that once prajñā is recited these ascetics ‘will never be able to make an obstacle midway or cut off the teaching of prajñāpāramitā’. And indeed those of the outside paths circle the Buddha once at a distance and withdraw the way they came. Śāriputra watches, puzzled: what is the reason for this? The Buddha tells him that this is exactly the power of Śakra's reciting prajñā; and the deeper reason is that the gods of the three-thousand great-thousand world from the heavens of the Four Heavenly Kings up to the Akaniṣṭha heaven, the śrāvakas, the pratyekabuddhas, the bodhisattvas, and even the buddhas of the ten directions all guard this prajñā, ‘because all these gods and humans are born from within prajñāpāramitā’. Even the buddhas, the bodhisattvas, and the gods are born from prajñā, and so whoever comes with evil intent while prajñā is being taught can find no opening. Then the evil Māra too makes his trial, conjuring the four kinds of troops to break the bodhisattvas' mind of receiving the prediction; Śakra sees through it at a glance: this display is too far out of the ordinary, ‘it is not like the four kinds of troops of King Bimbisāra, nor like the four kinds of troops of King Prasenajit’; where in the human world are there troops like these? He again recites prajñā, and that Māra too ‘gradually turns back along the road and goes away’. That Māra and those of the outside paths alike find no opening is one and the same principle.
The provocation dispersed, there follows a rain of conjured flowers and vows. The Four Heavenly Kings and on up to the Akaniṣṭha gods conjure heavenly flowers and scatter them over the Buddha, vowing together ‘may prajñāpāramitā long abide in Jambudvīpa’, for if prajñā long abides, the Buddha Jewel, the Dharma Jewel, and the Saṅgha Jewel all abide with it and do not perish. The gods further vow before the Buddha: whenever a good man or good woman receives and upholds prajñā and so on up to rightly recollects it, ‘we regard this person as being the Buddha, or as next to a Buddha’, and therefore we will always protect him. This phrase ‘being the Buddha, or next to a Buddha’ carries weight: the treatise-author later makes it clear that ‘as a Buddha’ means the bodhisattva of the Dharma-nature body who abides in avaivartika, has attained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, and so on up to the tenth ground; ‘next to a Buddha’ means the bodhisattva still in a fleshly body who can nevertheless expound prajñā and its right meaning. The person who receives and upholds prajñā is equal in virtue to these two ranks, and so the gods guard him as they guard a Buddha.
But the true eye of this chapter is a sentence Śakra next speaks to the Buddha, and which the Buddha at once seals. Śakra says: the omniscience of the buddhas should be sought from within prajñā; and prajñā should be sought from within omniscience. Why? ‘Prajñāpāramitā is not different from omniscience, and omniscience is not different from prajñāpāramitā; prajñāpāramitā and omniscience are not two and not different.’ The Buddha immediately answers in accord: ‘Just so! Just so! Kauśika! The omniscience of the buddhas is prajñāpāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā is omniscience’, because the omniscience of the buddhas is born precisely from prajñā. These words, ‘not two and not different’, are the pivot on which the whole chapter gathers: the reason the person who receives and upholds prajñā is ‘being the Buddha, or next to a Buddha’ is that the prajñā he holds is not two and not different from the ultimate omniscience of the buddhas.
When the treatise-author comes to explain, he first turns back to lay bare the inside story of that provocation, and then with one simile nails down the words ‘not two and not different’. Why did those of the outside paths dare to come and press their questions? Because they had heard that the Buddha taught that ‘all dharmas are ultimately empty, without anything existent’, and thought they had caught a flaw and could come to break this ‘doctrine of emptiness’; the treatise-author cuts them off in one sentence: ‘it is like a madman who wishes to wound empty space and only wearies and pains himself!’ Space cannot be wounded, and in the ultimately pure prajñā there is no fault to be found. Someone asks: since those of the outside paths came, why did they not simply leave, but insisted on circling the Buddha once before going? The treatise-author answers: the spiritual power of prajñā had already subdued them from afar; knowing that ‘having come, they were leaving empty-handed’, and fearing to be taken for cowards, they feigned an offering and withdrew after circling the Buddha. Śāriputra had himself been born a brahmin ascetic, and seeing those of his own kind come empty and go empty, he felt a moment's pity; the Buddha tells him the truth: these ascetics ‘have not so much as a single thought of a wholesome mind, but hold only evil intent, with wrong views clinging to their minds, seeking a fixed mark in dharmas, and therefore they are not fit to be delivered’; ‘it is like a fatal sickness which, though there be a good physician and divine medicine, cannot be saved’. When the capacity does not receive, the Dharma cannot deliver; this is not that the power of prajñā is insufficient but that that mind is shut. Finally the treatise-author closes the whole chapter with the most everyday of similes: milk becomes curd, and apart from milk there is no curd, yet one cannot say that milk ‘is’ curd; prajñā becomes omniscience of all kinds, and apart from prajñā there is no omniscience of all kinds, yet one cannot say that prajñā ‘is’ omniscience of all kinds. Prajñā and omniscience of all kinds, the one as the cause that gives birth, the other as the cause that is spoken of: ‘because cause and result are not apart from each other, it is said “not two and not different”’, neither one nor different; cause and result are identical to each other and yet not confused with each other. The measure between this one taste of milk and this one taste of curd is the eye of prajñā that this chapter asks one to hold.
卷58 〔T25 0470a15〕
大智度論釋梵志品第三十五 【經】 爾時，諸外道梵志來向佛所，欲求佛短。是時釋提桓因心念：「是諸外道梵志來向佛所，欲求佛短；我今當誦念從佛所受般若波羅蜜，是諸外道梵志等終不能中道作礙、斷說般若波羅蜜。」釋提桓因作是念已，即誦般若波羅蜜。是時諸外道梵志遙遶佛，復道還去。 時舍利弗心念：「是中何因緣，諸外道梵志遙遶佛，復道還去？」 佛知舍利弗心念，告舍利弗：「是釋提桓因誦念般若波羅蜜，以是因緣故，諸外道梵志遙繞佛，復道還去。舍利弗！我不見是諸外道梵志一念善心；是諸外道梵志但持惡心來，欲求索佛短。舍利弗！我不見說般若波羅蜜時，一切世間若天、若魔、若梵、若沙門眾、婆羅門眾中有持惡意來能得〔T25 0470b〕短者！何以故？舍利弗！是三千大千世界中，諸四天王天乃至阿迦尼吒天、諸聲聞、辟支佛、諸菩薩摩訶薩等守護是般若波羅蜜。所以者何？是諸天、人皆從般若波羅蜜中生故。 「復次，舍利弗！十方如恒河沙等世界中，諸佛及聲聞、辟支佛、菩薩摩訶薩、諸天、龍、鬼神等皆守護是般若波羅蜜。所以者何？是諸佛等皆從般若波羅蜜中生故。」 爾時，惡魔心念：「今佛四眾現前集會，亦有欲界、色界諸天子，是中必有菩薩摩訶薩受記當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。我寧可至佛所，破壞其意。」 是時，惡魔化作四種兵，來至佛所。爾時，釋提桓因心念：「是四種兵，或是惡魔化作，欲來向佛。何以故？是四種兵嚴飾，頻婆娑羅王四種兵所不類，波斯匿王四種兵亦不類，諸釋子四種兵、諸梨唱四種兵皆亦不類。是惡魔長夜索佛便，欲惱眾生，我寧可誦念般若波羅蜜。」釋提桓因即時誦念般若波羅蜜，惡魔如所誦聞，漸漸復道還去。 爾時，會中四天王諸天子乃至阿迦尼吒諸天子化作天華，於虛空中而散佛上，作是言：「世尊！願令般若波羅蜜久住閻浮提！所以者何？閻浮提人受持般若波羅蜜，隨所住時，佛寶住不滅，法寶、僧寶亦住不滅。」 爾時，十方如恒河沙等世界中諸天亦皆散華，作是言：「世尊！願令般若波羅蜜久住閻浮提！若般若波羅蜜久住，佛、法、僧亦當久住，亦分別知菩薩摩訶薩道。復次，所在住處，有善男子、善女人書持般若波羅蜜經卷，是處則為照明，已離眾冥。」 佛告釋提桓因等諸〔T25 0470c〕天子：「如是！如是！憍尸迦及諸天子！閻浮提人受持般若波羅蜜，隨所住時，佛寶如是住，法寶、僧寶亦如是住；乃至所住在處，善男子、善女人有書持般若波羅蜜經卷，是處則為照明，已離眾冥。」 爾時，諸天子化作天華散佛上，作是言：「世尊！若有善男子、善女人受持般若波羅蜜，乃至正憶念，魔、若魔天不能得其便。世尊！我等亦當擁護是善男子、善女人！何以故？若善男子、善女人受持般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，我等視是人即是佛、若次佛。」 是時，釋提桓因白佛言：「世尊！善男子、善女人受持般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念者，當知是人先世於佛所作功德，多親近供養諸佛，為善知識所護。世尊！諸佛一切智應當從般若波羅蜜中求，般若波羅蜜亦當從一切智中求！所以者何？般若波羅蜜不異一切智，一切智不異般若波羅蜜；般若波羅蜜、一切智，不二不別。是故我等視是人即是佛、若次佛。」 佛告釋提桓因：「如是！如是！憍尸迦！諸佛一切智即是般若波羅蜜，般若波羅蜜即是一切智。何以故？憍尸迦！諸佛一切智，從般若波羅蜜中生。般若波羅蜜不異一切智，一切智不異般若波羅蜜；般若波羅蜜、一切智，不二不別。」 【論】 釋曰： 上品中說，聞、受般若者，魔、若魔民、外道梵志不得其便；今欲現證驗故，以威神感致眾魔及諸外道。 是以外道梵志作是念：「佛在耆闍崛山中說般若波羅蜜，所謂諸法畢竟空、無所有，以引致十方眾生。我等共往難問，破此空論；其論若破，佛則自退，我等〔T25 0471a〕還得如本。」是諸外道但有邪見、惡心、憍慢故來，欲出是畢竟清淨般若波羅蜜過罪。譬如狂人欲中傷虛空，徒自疲苦！ 爾時，帝釋如佛教，受持般若，外道不能得便。今欲驗實，令人信知故。帝釋無量福德成就，以天利根，深信般若，即時誦念，得般若力故，外道遙繞佛，復道而去。 問曰： 何以不直還，方遶佛而去？ 答曰： 以般若神力故，於遠處降伏，作是念：「佛眾威德甚大，我等今往，徒自困辱，無所成辦；我等今若遙見直去，人當謂我等怯弱，來而空去。」以是故，詐現供養繞佛，復道而去。 舍利弗本是梵志，見諸外道遠處而去，心少憐愍，不能以小事故入三昧求知，作是念：「此諸外道何因緣來，竟不蒙度而空還去？」 佛言：「是般若波羅蜜力。」 舍利弗意念：「佛以般若波羅蜜無事不濟，云何令此外道空來而去？」 佛知舍利弗所念，語舍利弗：「是諸梵志乃至無一念善心，但持惡意，邪見著心，欲求諸法定相，是故不中度。」譬如必死之病，雖有良醫、神藥，不能救濟。 「舍利弗！說般若波羅蜜時，非但此梵志，一切世間人，持惡心來，不能得便。何以故？一切諸佛及諸菩薩、諸天常守護般若故。所以者何？諸佛、菩薩、天人作是念：『我等皆從般若生故。』」 魔來欲難問破壞，亦如是。 是時，會中諸天子先聞般若功德，今見證驗，心大歡喜，化華供養，作是願：「令般若波羅蜜久住閻浮提！」是事如下廣說。佛即印可。 諸天於佛前自誓言：「行者若聞、受般若〔T25 0471b〕波羅蜜，乃至正憶念，我等常當守護！所以者何？我等視是人如佛、若次佛。」 「如佛」者，法性身，住阿鞞跋致，得無生法忍，乃至十地。「次佛」者，肉身菩薩能說般若波羅蜜及其正義。 爾時，帝釋以先世因緣所集功德智慧，讚是菩薩；此中更說讚歎因緣。 「諸佛一切種智應從般若中求」者，菩薩行般若波羅蜜具足故，得佛時，般若變成一切種智，故言「一切種智當從般若中求」。 佛能說般若波羅蜜，故言「般若波羅蜜當從一切智中求」。 譬如乳變為酪，離乳無酪，亦不得言乳即是酪；般若波羅蜜變為一切種智，離般若亦無一切種智，亦不得言般若即是一切種智。般若與一切種智作生因，一切種智與般若作說因，因果不相離故言「不二不別」。
《大智度論》卷58 · T25n1509 0470a15–0471b17
The canonical text stands in Chinese only. This edition renders the essence, the plain reading, the exposition and the apparatus into English — never the sūtra itself. Switch to 漢讀本 or 並行雙語 above to read it.
外道梵志來求佛短，帝釋誦念般若，外道遙遶佛而去
那時，眾多外道梵志來到佛所在的地方，想要尋求佛的過失、挑佛的短處。這時釋提桓因（帝釋，忉利天的天主）心中念道：這些外道梵志來到佛所，想挑佛的短處；我如今應當誦念從佛那裡所領受的般若波羅蜜，這些外道梵志終究不能中途作出障礙、斷絕佛宣說般若波羅蜜。釋提桓因這樣想過之後，隨即誦念般若波羅蜜。這時眾多外道梵志遠遠地繞佛一圈，便循原路退回去了。
舍利弗問其因緣，佛答般若威力——天人皆從般若中生故守護
那時，舍利弗心中念道：這裡是什麼因緣，使眾多外道梵志遠遠繞佛，便循原路退回去？
佛知道舍利弗心中的念頭，告訴舍利弗：這是釋提桓因誦念般若波羅蜜，以這因緣的緣故，眾多外道梵志才遠遠繞佛，循原路退回去。舍利弗！我不見這些外道梵志有一念的善心；這些外道梵志只是懷著惡心而來，想要尋求挑佛的短處。舍利弗！我不見在宣說般若波羅蜜時，一切世間之中，無論是天、是魔、是梵天、是沙門眾、是婆羅門眾，有誰懷著惡意前來而能挑得短處的！為什麼呢？舍利弗！這三千大千世界中，諸四天王天乃至色究竟的阿迦尼吒天、諸聲聞、辟支佛、諸菩薩摩訶薩等，都守護這般若波羅蜜。所以是什麼緣故？因為這些諸天與人，都是從般若波羅蜜中出生的緣故。
再者，舍利弗！十方如恒河沙那樣多的世界中，諸佛以及聲聞、辟支佛、菩薩摩訶薩、諸天、龍、鬼神等，都守護這般若波羅蜜。所以是什麼緣故？因為這些諸佛等，都是從般若波羅蜜中出生的緣故。
惡魔化作四種兵來壞菩薩意，帝釋覺其偽而誦念，魔漸還去
那時，惡魔心中念道：如今佛的四眾（比丘、比丘尼、優婆塞、優婆夷）正當面集會，也有欲界、色界的諸天子，這當中必定有菩薩摩訶薩蒙佛授記、當得無上正等正覺（阿耨多羅三藐三菩提）。我寧可到佛所在的地方，破壞他的心意。
這時，惡魔變化作四種兵（象兵、馬兵、車兵、步兵），來到佛所。那時，釋提桓因心中念道：這四種兵，或許是惡魔所變化，想來向佛。為什麼呢？這四種兵的嚴整裝飾，與頻婆娑羅王的四種兵不相類似，與波斯匿王的四種兵也不相類似，與諸釋子的四種兵、諸梨唱（離車族）的四種兵，也全都不相類似。這惡魔長夜以來一直尋覓佛的短處，想要惱亂眾生，我寧可誦念般若波羅蜜。釋提桓因即時誦念般若波羅蜜，惡魔隨著所誦、所聞的般若之聲，漸漸循原路退回去了。
諸天化天華散佛，願般若久住閻浮提——般若住故三寶不滅、書卷照明
那時，會中四天王的諸天子乃至阿迦尼吒的諸天子，變化作天上的華，在虛空中散在佛身上，這樣說道：世尊！願使般若波羅蜜長久住於閻浮提（南贍部洲，即人間世界）！所以是什麼緣故？閻浮提的人受持般若波羅蜜，隨其住世之時，佛寶住世不滅，法寶、僧寶也住世不滅。
那時，十方如恒河沙那樣多的世界中的諸天，也都散華，這樣說道：世尊！願使般若波羅蜜長久住於閻浮提！若般若波羅蜜長久住世，佛、法、僧也當長久住世，也能分別了知菩薩摩訶薩之道。再者，凡所在的住處，有善男子、善女人書寫執持般若波羅蜜的經卷，這地方便成為照明之處，已然遠離種種昏冥。
佛告訴釋提桓因等諸天子：正是這樣！正是這樣！憍尸迦（帝釋的本姓）以及諸天子！閻浮提的人受持般若波羅蜜，隨其住世之時，佛寶如此住世，法寶、僧寶也如此住世；乃至凡所住的地方，善男子、善女人有書寫執持般若波羅蜜經卷的，這地方便成為照明之處，已然遠離種種昏冥。
諸天化華誓護受持者——視是人即是佛、若次佛
那時，諸天子變化作天華散在佛身上，這樣說道：世尊！若有善男子、善女人受持般若波羅蜜，乃至正確地憶念，魔或魔天都不能得其方便（乘隙加害）。世尊！我們也當擁護這善男子、善女人！為什麼呢？若善男子、善女人受持般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，我們看待這人便如同是佛、或是次於佛的人。
帝釋述般若與一切智不二不別，佛親印可
這時，釋提桓因對佛說：世尊！受持般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念的善男子、善女人，應當知道這人先世曾在佛所修作功德，多親近供養諸佛，為善知識所護持。世尊！諸佛的一切智應當從般若波羅蜜中尋求，般若波羅蜜也應當從一切智中尋求！所以是什麼緣故？般若波羅蜜不異於一切智，一切智不異於般若波羅蜜；般若波羅蜜與一切智，不二不別。因此我們看待這人便如同是佛、或是次於佛的人。
佛告訴釋提桓因：正是這樣！正是這樣！憍尸迦！諸佛的一切智即是般若波羅蜜，般若波羅蜜即是一切智。為什麼呢？憍尸迦！諸佛的一切智，是從般若波羅蜜中出生的。般若波羅蜜不異於一切智，一切智不異於般若波羅蜜；般若波羅蜜與一切智，不二不別。
以下是論釋。
論主釋：上品已說魔外道不得便，今品乃現前證驗
論主釋道：上一品（勸受持品）中說過，聽聞、領受般若的人，魔、或魔民、外道梵志都不能得其方便；如今是想要當面顯現、驗證這件事的緣故，便以威神之力感召引致眾魔以及諸外道（前來，好當場見他們不得便）。
外道邪見來難畢竟空論——如狂人欲傷虛空徒自疲苦
因此外道梵志這樣想道：佛在耆闍崛山（靈鷲山）中宣說般若波羅蜜，所謂諸法畢竟空、無所有，用以引導招致十方眾生。我們一同前往詰難質問，破斥這空論；他的論若被破了，佛便自然退敗，我們也就回復到本來（的聲勢地位）。這些外道只是懷著邪見、惡心、憍慢而來，想要挑出這畢竟清淨的般若波羅蜜的過失罪咎。這譬如狂人想要中傷虛空，只是白白使自己疲累辛苦罷了！
帝釋受持誦念、外道遙繞而去——為驗其實令人信知
那時，帝釋依照佛的教導，受持般若，外道便不能得其方便。如今是想要驗證其真實、使人信服知曉的緣故（才有此一番示現）。帝釋成就無量福德，以天人的利根，深信般若，即時誦念，得般若之力的緣故，外道便遠遠繞佛，循原路退去。
問答一：何以不直去而遶佛——般若神力於遠處降伏、詐現供養以掩怯弱
有人問：外道為什麼不直接退回，反而繞佛而去呢？
論主回答：因為般若神力的緣故，在遠處便已降伏了他們，外道這樣想道：佛的大眾威德極大，我們如今前往，只是白白自取困辱，一無所成；我們如今若遠遠望見便直接離去，人們當說我們怯懦軟弱，來了卻空手而去。因為這緣故，才詐作供養的樣子繞佛，循原路退去。
舍利弗本是梵志，見外道空還心生憐愍，問佛因緣
舍利弗本來是梵志出身，見眾外道遠遠而去，心中略生憐愍，卻不能為了這樣的小事而入三昧去求知（其中緣由），便這樣想道：這些外道是什麼因緣而來，竟不蒙受度化便空手退回去？
佛說：這是般若波羅蜜之力。
舍利弗心中念道：佛以般若波羅蜜無事不能濟成，為什麼卻令這外道空來而去（不加度化）？
佛答：外道無一念善心、著邪見求定相故不堪度——如必死之病良醫不救
佛知道舍利弗所念，告訴舍利弗：這些梵志乃至沒有一念的善心，只是懷著惡意，邪見執著於心，想要尋求諸法的定相（實有固定之相），因此不堪度化。這譬如必死的病，雖然有良醫、神效之藥，也不能救活。
舍利弗！宣說般若波羅蜜時，不只是這些梵志，一切世間之人，懷著惡心前來，都不能得其方便。為什麼呢？因為一切諸佛以及諸菩薩、諸天常守護般若的緣故。所以是什麼緣故？諸佛、菩薩、天人這樣想道：我們都是從般若出生的，所以（守護般若）。
魔前來想要詰難、破壞般若，也是如此（不能得便）。
諸天見證驗歡喜化華、自誓守護受持者
這時，會中諸天子先前已聽聞般若的功德，如今親見驗證，心中大為歡喜，變化作華供養，這樣發願：願令般若波羅蜜長久住於閻浮提！這件事如下文詳細解說。佛便印可。
諸天在佛前自己發誓說：修行者若聽聞、領受般若波羅蜜，乃至正憶念，我們常當守護！所以是什麼緣故？我們看待這人如同是佛、或是次於佛的人。
「如佛」「次佛」義——法性身住不退乃至十地，肉身菩薩能說般若正義
所謂「如佛」的人，是指法性身的菩薩，住於阿鞞跋致（不退轉之位），得無生法忍，乃至登於十地。所謂「次佛」的人，是指肉身菩薩，能宣說般若波羅蜜以及它的正確義理。
帝釋讚菩薩，釋『一切種智從般若中求』『般若從一切智中求』二義
那時，帝釋以先世因緣所積集的功德智慧，讚歎這菩薩；這裡再說出讚歎的因緣。
所謂「諸佛一切種智應從般若中求」，是因為菩薩修行般若波羅蜜圓滿具足的緣故，證得佛位時，般若便轉變成一切種智，所以說「一切種智當從般若中求」。
因為佛能宣說般若波羅蜜，所以說「般若波羅蜜當從一切智中求」。
乳酪喻——般若與一切種智因果不相離故不二不別
這譬如乳變為酪，離開乳便沒有酪，卻也不能說乳即是酪；般若波羅蜜變為一切種智，離開般若便也沒有一切種智，卻也不能說般若即是一切種智。般若與一切種智作為出生之因（生因），一切種智與般若作為宣說之因（說因），因與果不相分離的緣故，所以說「不二不別」。
Brahmin Ascetics of the Outsiders' Paths Come Seeking the Buddha's Faults; Śakra Recites Prajñā, and Those of the Outside Paths Circle the Buddha at a Distance and Depart
At that time a great many brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths came to where the Buddha was, wishing to seek out the Buddha's faults and pick at the Buddha's shortcomings. Then Śakra Devānām Indra (Śakra, lord of the gods of the Trāyastriṃśa heaven) thought in his mind: these brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths have come to where the Buddha is, wishing to pick at the Buddha's shortcomings; I ought now to recite the prajñāpāramitā (the perfection of wisdom) that I received from the Buddha, and these brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths will in the end be unable to make an obstacle midway and cut off the Buddha's proclaiming of prajñāpāramitā. Having thought thus, Śakra Devānām Indra at once recited prajñāpāramitā. Then the many brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths circled the Buddha once at a distance, and went back by the way they had come.
Śāriputra Asks the Cause and Condition, and the Buddha Answers with the Majestic Power of Prajñā—Because Gods and Humans Are All Born from Prajñā, They Guard It
At that time Śāriputra thought in his mind: what cause and condition is there here, that the many brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths circle the Buddha at a distance and then go back by the way they had come?
The Buddha, knowing the thought in Śāriputra's mind, told Śāriputra: this is Śakra Devānām Indra reciting prajñāpāramitā; because of this cause and condition the many brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths circled the Buddha at a distance and went back by the way they had come. Śāriputra! I do not see in these brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths a single thought of wholesome mind; these brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths came only harbouring evil minds, wishing to seek out and pick at the Buddha's shortcomings. Śāriputra! I do not see, at the time when prajñāpāramitā is being proclaimed, anyone in all the world—whether gods, or Māra, or the Brahmā gods, or the assembly of śramaṇas, or the assembly of brahmins—who comes harbouring evil intent and is able to find a shortcoming! Why? Śāriputra! Within this three-thousand great-thousand world, the heavens of the Four Heavenly Kings and so on up to the Akaniṣṭha heaven, the Heaven of Ultimate Form, the śrāvakas, the pratyekabuddhas, the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, and the like, all guard this prajñāpāramitā. For what reason? Because these gods and humans are all born from within prajñāpāramitā.
Again, Śāriputra! In the worlds of the ten directions as many as the sands of the Ganges, the buddhas, together with the śrāvakas, the pratyekabuddhas, the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, the gods, the nāgas, the ghosts and spirits, and the like, all guard this prajñāpāramitā. For what reason? Because these buddhas and the rest are all born from within prajñāpāramitā.
Evil Māra Conjures the Four Kinds of Troops to Ruin the Bodhisattvas' Resolve; Śakra Perceives the Counterfeit and Recites, and Māra Gradually Goes Back
At that time evil Māra thought in his mind: now the Buddha's fourfold assembly (bhikṣus, bhikṣuṇīs, upāsakas, and upāsikās) is gathered before him face to face, and there are also the gods of the desire realm and the form realm; among them there must be bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who have received the prediction from the Buddha that they will attain unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening (anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi). I had better go to where the Buddha is and ruin his resolve.
Then evil Māra conjured the four kinds of troops (elephant troops, cavalry, chariot troops, and infantry) and came to where the Buddha was. At that time Śakra Devānām Indra thought in his mind: these four kinds of troops may be a conjuration of evil Māra, wishing to come toward the Buddha. Why? The array and adornment of these four kinds of troops are not like the four kinds of troops of King Bimbisāra, nor are they like the four kinds of troops of King Prasenajit, and they are wholly unlike the four kinds of troops of the Śākyans and the four kinds of troops of the Lichang (the Licchavi clan). This evil Māra has all through the long night been seeking the Buddha's shortcomings, wishing to trouble and disturb beings; I had better recite prajñāpāramitā. Śakra Devānām Indra at once recited prajñāpāramitā, and evil Māra, following the sound of prajñā as it was recited and heard, gradually went back by the way he had come.
The Gods Conjure Heavenly Flowers and Scatter Them on the Buddha, Wishing That Prajñā Long Abide in Jambudvīpa—Because Prajñā Abides, the Three Jewels Do Not Perish, and the Written Scroll Gives Illumination
At that time the gods of the Four Heavenly Kings in the assembly, and so on up to the gods of Akaniṣṭha, conjured heavenly flowers and scattered them in the sky over the Buddha's body, speaking thus: World-Honored One! May prajñāpāramitā long abide in Jambudvīpa (the southern Jambu continent, that is, the world of humans)! For what reason? As long as the people of Jambudvīpa receive and uphold prajñāpāramitā and it abides in the world, the Buddha Jewel abides in the world and does not perish, and the Dharma Jewel and the Saṅgha Jewel likewise abide in the world and do not perish.
At that time the gods in the worlds of the ten directions as many as the sands of the Ganges also all scattered flowers, speaking thus: World-Honored One! May prajñāpāramitā long abide in Jambudvīpa! If prajñāpāramitā long abides in the world, the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha will also long abide in the world, and the path of the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas can also be distinguished and known. Again, wherever there is a dwelling-place in which good men and good women write out and hold the scroll of the sūtra of prajñāpāramitā, that place becomes a place of illumination, already far removed from all kinds of darkness and gloom.
The Buddha told Śakra Devānām Indra and the gods: Just so! Just so! Kauśika (Śakra's original clan name), and you gods! As long as the people of Jambudvīpa receive and uphold prajñāpāramitā and it abides in the world, the Buddha Jewel so abides in the world, and the Dharma Jewel and the Saṅgha Jewel likewise so abide in the world; and so on up to: wherever the place of dwelling, if good men and good women write out and hold the scroll of the sūtra of prajñāpāramitā, that place becomes a place of illumination, already far removed from all kinds of darkness and gloom.
The Gods Conjure Flowers and Vow to Guard Those Who Receive and Uphold It—They Regard This Person as Being the Buddha, or as Next to a Buddha
At that time the gods conjured heavenly flowers and scattered them over the Buddha's body, speaking thus: World-Honored One! If there are good men and good women who receive and uphold prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it, neither Māra nor Māra's gods can gain an opening against them (seize a chance to do them harm). World-Honored One! We too shall protect and guard these good men and good women! Why? If good men and good women receive and uphold prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it, we regard this person as a Buddha, or as one next to a Buddha.
Śakra Declares That Prajñā and Omniscience Are Not Two and Not Different, and the Buddha Himself Seals It
Then Śakra Devānām Indra said to the Buddha: World-Honored One! Of the good men and good women who receive and uphold prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it, one should know that in former lives these people made merit in the presence of buddhas, drew near to and made offerings to many buddhas, and were protected by good friends. World-Honored One! The omniscience of the buddhas ought to be sought from within prajñāpāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā too ought to be sought from within omniscience! For what reason? Prajñāpāramitā is not different from omniscience, and omniscience is not different from prajñāpāramitā; prajñāpāramitā and omniscience are not two and not different. Therefore we regard this person as a Buddha, or as one next to a Buddha.
The Buddha told Śakra Devānām Indra: Just so! Just so! Kauśika! The omniscience of the buddhas is precisely prajñāpāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā is precisely omniscience. Why? Kauśika! The omniscience of the buddhas is born from within prajñāpāramitā. Prajñāpāramitā is not different from omniscience, and omniscience is not different from prajñāpāramitā; prajñāpāramitā and omniscience are not two and not different.
What follows is the treatise's explanation.
The Treatise-Author Explains: The Previous Chapter Said That Māra and Those of the Outside Paths Cannot Gain an Opening; This Chapter Now Gives the Proof Before Their Eyes
The treatise-author explains: in the previous chapter ("Exhortation to Receive and Uphold") it was said that against those who hear and receive prajñā, neither Māra, nor Māra's people, nor brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths can gain an opening; now, because he wishes to display and prove this matter face to face, by majestic spiritual power the host of Māras and those of the outside paths are summoned and drawn in (to come, so that it may be seen on the spot that they gain no opening).
Those of the Outside Paths Come with Wrong Views to Attack the Teaching of Ultimate Emptiness—Like a Madman Wishing to Wound Empty Space, Only Wearying and Tormenting Himself in Vain
Therefore the brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths thought thus: the Buddha, on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa (Vulture Peak), proclaims prajñāpāramitā—that is, that all dharmas are ultimately empty and without anything existent—and with it draws in and attracts the beings of the ten directions. Let us go together to challenge and question him and refute this teaching of emptiness; if his teaching is refuted, the Buddha will of himself be defeated, and we shall return to what we were before (in standing and position). These people of the outside paths come only harbouring wrong views, evil minds, and arrogance, wishing to find fault and blame in this ultimately pure prajñāpāramitā. It is like a madman wishing to wound empty space: he only wearies and torments himself in vain!
Śakra Receives, Upholds, and Recites, and Those of the Outside Paths Circle at a Distance and Depart—To Prove Its Truth and Make People Believe and Know
At that time Śakra, in accordance with the Buddha's teaching, received and upheld prajñā, and those of the outside paths could not gain an opening. Now it is because he wishes to prove its truth and to make people believe and know (that this display takes place). Śakra, having accomplished immeasurable merit, with the keen faculties of a god, deeply believed in prajñā and at once recited it; because he gained the power of prajñā, those of the outside paths circled the Buddha at a distance and went back by the way they had come.
Question and Answer One: Why Do They Circle the Buddha Instead of Going Straight Back?—The Spiritual Power of Prajñā Subdues Them from Afar, and They Feign Offering to Cover Their Timidity
Someone asks: why did those of the outside paths not simply go straight back, but instead circled the Buddha and departed?
The treatise-author answers: because of the spiritual power of prajñā, they were already subdued from afar, and those of the outside paths thought thus: the majestic virtue of the Buddha's great assembly is exceedingly great; if we go there now, we shall only bring humiliation on ourselves in vain and accomplish nothing at all; if we now, seeing it from afar, simply leave directly, people will say we are cowardly and weak, that we came and went away empty-handed. For this reason they feigned the manner of making offerings, circled the Buddha, and went back by the way they had come.
Śāriputra Was Originally a Brahmin Ascetic; Seeing Those of the Outside Paths Go Back Empty, He Feels Pity and Asks the Buddha the Cause and Condition
Śāriputra was originally a brahmin ascetic by birth; seeing those of the outside paths go away at a distance, a little pity arose in his mind, yet he could not, for so small a matter, enter samādhi to seek to know (the reason for it), and so he thought thus: what cause and condition brought these people of the outside paths here, that they go back empty-handed without receiving deliverance?
The Buddha said: this is the power of prajñāpāramitā.
Śāriputra thought in his mind: by prajñāpāramitā there is no matter the Buddha cannot accomplish; why then does he let these people of the outside paths come in vain and go away (without delivering them)?
The Buddha Answers: Those of the Outside Paths Have Not a Single Thought of Wholesome Mind, Cling to Wrong Views, and Seek Fixed Marks, and So Are Not Fit to Be Delivered—Like a Fatal Sickness a Good Physician Cannot Cure
The Buddha, knowing what Śāriputra was thinking, told Śāriputra: these brahmin ascetics have not even a single thought of wholesome mind; they harbour only evil intent, wrong views cling to their minds, and they wish to seek a fixed mark in dharmas (a truly existent, fixed mark); therefore they are not fit to be delivered. It is like a fatal sickness: although there are good physicians and medicines of wondrous effect, it cannot be cured.
Śāriputra! When prajñāpāramitā is being proclaimed, it is not only these brahmin ascetics: all the people of the world who come harbouring evil minds are unable to gain an opening. Why? Because all the buddhas, together with the bodhisattvas and the gods, constantly guard prajñā. For what reason? The buddhas, bodhisattvas, gods, and humans think thus: we are all born from prajñā, and therefore (we guard prajñā).
When Māra comes wishing to challenge and destroy prajñā, it is likewise (he cannot gain an opening).
The Gods, Seeing the Proof, Rejoice and Conjure Flowers, and Vow of Themselves to Guard Those Who Receive and Uphold It
Then the gods in the assembly, having earlier heard the merits of prajñā and now seeing the proof with their own eyes, rejoiced greatly in their minds, conjured flowers as an offering, and made this wish: may prajñāpāramitā long abide in Jambudvīpa! This matter is explained in detail in the text below. The Buddha then sealed it.
The gods, before the Buddha, vowed of themselves, saying: if a practitioner hears and receives prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollects it, we shall constantly guard him! For what reason? We regard this person as a Buddha, or as one next to a Buddha.
The Meaning of ‘As a Buddha’ and ‘Next to a Buddha’—The Dharma-Nature Body Abiding at Non-retrogression and on up to the Ten Grounds; the Bodhisattva in a Fleshly Body Who Can Expound the Right Meaning of Prajñā
The person spoken of as 「如佛」 tr. "as a Buddha" is the bodhisattva of the Dharma-nature body, who abides at avaivartika (the position of non-retrogression), has attained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, and so on up to has ascended the ten grounds. The person spoken of as 「次佛」 tr. "next to a Buddha" is a bodhisattva in a fleshly body who is able to proclaim prajñāpāramitā together with its right meaning.
Śakra Praises the Bodhisattva; Explaining the Two Meanings ‘Omniscience of All Kinds Is Sought from Within Prajñā’ and ‘Prajñā Is Sought from Within Omniscience’
At that time Śakra, with the merit and wisdom gathered through the causes and conditions of his former lives, praises this bodhisattva; here the causes and conditions of the praise are further set out.
What is called 「諸佛一切種智應從般若中求」 tr. "the omniscience of all kinds of the buddhas ought to be sought from within prajñā" is because the bodhisattva practises prajñāpāramitā to full completion, so that when he attains buddhahood, prajñā transforms into the omniscience of all kinds; therefore it is said 「一切種智當從般若中求」 tr. "the omniscience of all kinds should be sought from within prajñā".
Because the Buddha is able to proclaim prajñāpāramitā, it is said 「般若波羅蜜當從一切智中求」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā should be sought from within omniscience".
The Simile of Milk and Curd—Because Prajñā and the Omniscience of All Kinds Are Not Separate as Cause and Result, They Are Not Two and Not Different
It is like milk changing into curd: apart from milk there is no curd, and yet one cannot say that milk is curd; prajñāpāramitā changes into the omniscience of all kinds: apart from prajñā there is likewise no omniscience of all kinds, and yet one cannot say that prajñā is the omniscience of all kinds. Prajñā serves the omniscience of all kinds as the cause of its coming to birth (the cause that gives birth); the omniscience of all kinds serves prajñā as the cause of its being proclaimed (the cause that is spoken of); because cause and result are not separate from each other, it is said 「不二不別」 tr. "not two and not different".
梵志品：外道與惡魔何以皆不得便，諸天何以化華誓護受持般若之人而視之如佛、若次佛，般若與一切智又何以不二不別
在問什麼
這一品的品名叫「梵志品」（所釋的《大品》同品，本論宋本與所釋經之底本又作『遣異品』，二名交叉互見，實為異名同品，非別是一品，其源流出處詳考據層）。「梵志」是外道出家修行之人的通稱；一品便從外道梵志來向佛求短說起，故以「梵志」標目。這一品緊接上一品〈勸受持品〉而來：上品說『聞受般若者，魔、外道不得其便』，只是懸說其理；本品則把這理當場搬到眼前，讓外道與惡魔各來一試，一一現前見其不得便，是上品之「說」轉為本品之「證驗」。
一品的骨架，環繞著三重『不得便』與其果報而展開。底下壓著幾個難處。第一，外道梵志懷惡心來求佛短，何以帝釋一誦般若，他們便只能遙遶而去、不得作礙？惡魔化四種兵來壞菩薩之意，又何以不得便？佛既無事不濟，何以竟不度化這空來的外道？第二，諸天何以化天華、發誓願，要護持般若久住閻浮提、守護受持之人，乃至「視是人即是佛、若次佛」——這「如佛」「次佛」二名，各指何等人？第三，也是全品義理最深的一問：帝釋與佛何以再三說『般若波羅蜜不異一切智，一切智不異般若波羅蜜，不二不別』——若既是「即是」，何以又立生因、說因而以乳酪為喻？這幾問，正是本品經、論要逐一交代的。
逐段解明
一、外道求短、帝釋誦念、外道遙遶而去。 論主釋經，先明本品緣起。眾多外道梵志懷惡心來向佛所，欲挑佛之短。帝釋念及，即誦念從佛所受的般若波羅蜜，作此護念：由受持般若之力故，這些外道梵志終不能中途作出障礙、斷絕佛之說般若。帝釋一誦，外道果然只能遠遠遶佛、循原路而去，一無所施。此段立起全品的第一重『不得便』——受持般若便是外道邪難所不能中的一道屏障，也點明帝釋為此番證驗的關鍵人物。
二、佛答無一念善心、一切世間持惡意者皆不得便。 舍利弗問外道遙遶而去之因緣，佛答以帝釋誦念般若之力，並直指外道之病根：我不見這些外道梵志有一念善心，他們但持惡心來欲求佛短。由此推廣：說般若之時，一切世間若天、若魔、若梵、若沙門婆羅門眾，凡持惡意來者，無一能挑得短處。此段把『外道不得便』一事，從個別外道擴為一條通則——非般若怯於邪難，乃邪心本自不能中於般若。
三、諸天二乘菩薩守護般若——皆從般若中生故。 佛續答持惡者何以皆不得便，歸到守護之眾與守護之由。其一，三千大千世界中四天王天乃至阿迦尼吒天、諸聲聞、辟支佛、諸菩薩摩訶薩皆守護般若，何以故？因這些諸天與人皆從般若波羅蜜中生。其二，更推及十方如恒河沙世界中諸佛及二乘、菩薩、諸天龍鬼神皆守護般若，何以故？因這些諸佛等亦皆從般若中生。「從般若生」故「守護般若」，此一句是全段之眼：般若既是聖凡出生之母，守護母法便是守護自身之所自出，故守護之眾遍於十方三乘。
四、惡魔化四種兵、帝釋覺其偽而誦念。 外道之後，換惡魔來試。惡魔見佛四眾集會、其中必有菩薩蒙記當得菩提，遂欲破壞其受記之意，化作四種兵來至佛所。帝釋審其嚴飾非人間頻婆娑羅、波斯匿諸王及釋子、梨唱之兵所能類，斷定是惡魔久欲索佛便、惱亂眾生所化，於是誦念般若，惡魔隨誦聞之聲漸漸退去。此段是第二重『不得便』——連惡魔傾其兵眾之力，亦不能壞一菩薩受記之心，般若之現前威神於此再驗。
五、諸天化華願般若久住——三寶不滅、書卷照明。 二試既畢，眾天轉為讚願。四天王乃至阿迦尼吒諸天子化天華散佛上，願般若久住閻浮提，其由是：閻浮提人受持般若、隨其住時，佛寶、法寶、僧寶皆住不滅。十方諸天亦散華同願，並增二義：般若久住則三寶久住、亦分別知菩薩之道；凡有善男子善女人書持般若經卷之處，其處即為照明、已離眾冥。此段明般若住世乃三寶住世之所繫、經卷所在即破闇之光，是諸天發願護持的道理所在。
六、諸天誓護受持者——魔不得便、視即是佛若次佛。 諸天再化華散佛，自陳護持之誓與其所以：善男子善女人受持般若乃至正憶念者，魔若魔天不能得其便，我等亦當擁護。何以如此看重此人？因受持般若乃至正憶念故，「我等視是人即是佛、若次佛」。此段把守護之對境從『般若法』移到『持法之人』，並以『即佛、次佛』四字定此人之分量——持般若者所以可貴，正因其身荷佛法之所寄。
七、般若與一切智不二不別——帝釋述、佛印可。 這是經段義理的結穴。帝釋更申其義：受持般若者先世於佛所作功德、多供養諸佛、為善知識所護；諸佛一切智應從般若中求，般若亦當從一切智中求。何以互求？『般若波羅蜜不異一切智，一切智不異般若波羅蜜，不二不別』故。佛親印可，重宣諸佛一切智即是般若、般若即是一切智，一切智從般若中生。一述一印，把『般若即一切智』立為本品之定義，為下文論釋之生因說因、乳酪之喻張本。
八、論釋開端——上品懸說、今品現證驗。 【論】釋先總攝經意，點出本品與上品之關係：上〈勸受持〉品已說『聞受般若者魔、魔民、外道不得其便』，然彼但是懸說其理；今品乃欲當面現前驗證此理，故以威神之力感召引致眾魔及諸外道前來，使之各試而各見其不得便。此段是論主為一品所作的定位——本品性格在「驗」不在「說」，讀者當以「現證驗」三字貫串全品。
九、外道邪見難畢竟空——如狂人傷虛空徒自疲苦。 論釋外道來難之心與其必敗之勢。外道作念：佛在耆闍崛山說般若、謂諸法畢竟空無所有以引十方眾生，我等共往難破此空論，論破則佛自退。論主判其但有邪見、惡心、憍慢而來，欲挑這畢竟清淨般若之過罪，遂設一喻：譬如狂人欲中傷虛空，徒自疲苦。畢竟空如虛空無可傷處，邪難如刀無可著力，此喻把『外道何以必不得便』一義說得極顯——不是般若強辯勝之，而是邪難本無可施之地。
十、帝釋受持誦念、外道遙繞——為驗實令人信知。 論釋帝釋一節之作用。帝釋依佛所教受持般若，外道即不能得便；此番所以令外道遙繞而去者，正為驗其實、令人信知般若之力真實不虛。論並補明帝釋之所以能爾：無量福德成就、以天之利根深信般若，即時誦念、得般若力故，外道乃遙繞復道而去。此段明帝釋非徒誦而已，其誦有福德利根深信為地，故般若之力得以現前。
十一、問答一：何以不直去而遶佛——遠處降伏、詐現供養掩其怯弱。 論設一問：外道既不得便，何以不直還而反遶佛乃去？論答：以般若神力於遠處已降伏之，外道自念佛眾威德甚大，往亦徒自困辱、無所成辦；若遙見便直去，人將謂我等怯弱、來而空去，於是詐現供養之狀繞佛而後去。此問答發明外道遶佛之曲折心行——遶佛非有敬，乃降伏之餘勉強粉飾，其怯弱正於此可見。
十二、佛答外道不蒙度之由——無善心求定相如必死之病。 論釋舍利弗一段。舍利弗本是梵志出身，見外道空還心生憐愍，念其何以不蒙度而去；佛以「是般若波羅蜜力」答之。舍利弗復疑：佛以般若無事不濟，何以令外道空來而去？佛答：這些梵志乃至無一念善心，但持惡意、邪見著心、欲求諸法定相，是故不堪度化，譬如必死之病，雖有良醫神藥不能救濟。論復推廣：非但此梵志，一切世間持惡心來者皆不得便，因諸佛菩薩諸天常守護般若、皆自念從般若生故；魔來難問破壞，亦同此理不得便。此段把『不度』之責歸於外道自絕善根，非般若不濟——如藥不救必死之病，過不在藥。
十三、諸天見證驗歡喜化華、自誓守護。 論釋諸天化華誓護一節。會中諸天子先已聞般若功德，今親見證驗、心大歡喜，化華供養、願般若久住閻浮提，佛即印可。諸天遂於佛前自誓：行者若聞受般若乃至正憶念，我等常當守護，所以者何？我等視是人如佛、若次佛。此段明諸天之護持非徒信而發，乃『先聞、今見』信與驗相合而後誓，其誓有見證為據，故格外懇切。
十四、「如佛」「次佛」義——法性身與肉身菩薩之別。 論釋諸天所云「如佛、若次佛」二名之分際。「如佛」者，謂法性身之菩薩，住阿鞞跋致不退之位、得無生法忍、乃至登於十地；此位近佛，故稱「如佛」。「次佛」者，謂肉身菩薩，雖未及法性身之階，然能宣說般若波羅蜜及其正義，紹隆佛種，故稱『次於佛』。此段把「即是佛、若次佛」一句析為二等，明諸天所重之人有淺深二品，然同以荷般若、傳般若為其可貴之所在。
十五、帝釋讚菩薩、釋二「求」義——一切種智從般若求、般若從一切智求。 論釋帝釋以先世因緣所集功德智慧讚歎菩薩，並分疏經中互求二語。「諸佛一切種智應從般若中求」者，謂菩薩行般若具足故，得佛時般若即變成一切種智，是故一切種智當從般若中求——就因中求果。「般若波羅蜜當從一切智中求」者，謂佛能說般若波羅蜜，是故般若當從一切智中求——就果上有能說之般若。此段辨二「求」各有所向，非同語重出：一就般若為因、一就一切智為說般若之處。
十六、乳酪喻——生因說因、因果不相離故不二不別。 論以乳酪之喻總結般若與一切種智之關係，答『既不二不別、何以又立二名互求』之疑。譬如乳變為酪，離乳則無酪，然亦不得言乳即是酪；般若變為一切種智，離般若則無一切種智，然亦不得言般若即是一切種智。般若與一切種智作生因、一切種智與般若作說因，因果雖有二名，然不相分離，故言「不二不別」。此喻把「即是」與『不即是』一時收攝：就因果不相離故言「不二」，就變與所變之名相故不得謂「即是」——般若與一切智之義，於此而圓。
不要讀錯
不要把『梵志品／遣異品』二名讀成兩品，或疑本品品序有錯。二名雖異，所指之品內容全同，只是本論與所釋經在各自傳本中一作「梵志」、一作『遣異』而交叉互見，屬異名同品，非別立一品、非品序錯位。以「梵志」標目者，取一品從外道梵志來求佛短說起之義；其名實之辨、諸本出處，屬考據層之事，義理上但依一品之文讀去即可。
不要把外道、惡魔之『不得便』讀成般若與之相角而勝之。論說得分明：般若如虛空，邪難如欲傷虛空之刀，本無可著力之處，故外道「徒自疲苦」；佛之不度外道，亦非般若不濟，乃外道無一念善心、如必死之病非良醫神藥所能救。若把般若讀成一種能勝邪破敵的法力，便把「畢竟清淨」『無可傷處』之義讀低了——不得便者，過在邪心自絕，不在般若逞強。
不要把『般若不異一切智、不二不別』讀成二者全無分際的一物，也不要因立生因、說因、乳酪之喻而疑其果真是二。論以乳酪喻雙關兩面：就因果不相離故言「不二不別」，不可執為二；就乳變酪、名相有異故不得言「乳即是酪」，不可混為一。般若是因位之智、一切種智是果位之智，因果一貫而位次宛然。執一則失其位次，執異則失其一貫，須雙離二執，方讀得「不二不別」四字的分寸。
修行作用
這一品把上品『魔外道不得其便』的懸說，當場搬到眼前作了一番現證驗。用功人最當領取的，是這一層信解：般若之能不受邪難、不為魔壞，不在它是一種可與外境相角的法力，而在它「畢竟清淨」『如虛空無可傷處』的實相本身。日用持誦之際，若把般若當作御難勝敵的符驗去求，便落回外道求佛短的同一路數；本品卻教人認得，持般若所以魔不得便，正因般若無隙可乘、邪心無處可著——用功處在自心之離邪著，不在向外求一種靈驗。
「即是佛、若次佛」一語，尤堪自省。諸天所以化華誓護受持般若之人，重的不是這人有何神異，而是他身荷般若、能傳般若正義。學這一段，便知受持般若之可貴，在於自身成了佛法之所寄——「如佛」是住不退、證無生的法性身，「次佛」是能說般若正義的肉身菩薩，二者同以荷法傳法為分量。用功人於此當發心：所貴者是把般若荷在身心、傳於正義，而非博一個『持經者』的外名。
般若與一切智「不二不別」而又互為生因、說因一義，可作觀行的準繩。修般若不是別求一個一切種智作果，果就在因中——「般若變成一切種智」，如乳之成酪，不離本因；然亦不可執因即果、坐失後際的圓成。用功人於此當識得：因地一念般若，已含果地一切種智之性，卻須行之具足、變之乃成——既不輕因、亦不躐果，方是「不二不別」落到用功上的分寸。
承衍
本品的骨幹，是一條由三重『不得便』串起的證驗之線：外道梵志懷惡來求佛短，帝釋誦念般若故遙遶而去；惡魔化四種兵欲壞菩薩受記之意，帝釋覺偽誦念故漸漸退去；一切世間持惡心來者，以諸佛菩薩諸天皆從般若生、常守護般若故，皆不得便。三驗既畢，諸天化天華、發誓願，願般若久住閻浮提以續三寶不滅，並自誓守護受持之人而「視是人即是佛、若次佛」；終以帝釋與佛互明『般若不異一切智、不二不別』，論以生因說因、乳酪之喻收束。論釋則於『上品懸說、今品現證驗』立一品之定位，於『如狂人傷虛空』明邪難之必不得便，於『如必死之病良醫不救』判佛不度外道之責在邪心自絕，於乳酪一喻圓「不二不別」之義。一品之義，總在『邪魔不得便、諸天誓護持、般若即一切智』一事。
『如佛、次佛』與『般若即一切智』二義，尤可附帶一提，見其承衍之跡。守護、擁護受持般若之人而許以近佛之位，並非本品始有；般若與一切智、一切種智相即而互為因果之義，亦自前品累論而來，至本品乃借外道、惡魔現證驗之機，把『守護受持者』與『般若即一切智』二線一時收攏，並以乳酪之喻為此相即之義立一定說。讀者可合觀前後諸品，以見般若『所守護、所出生、所歸極』一貫之脈（其承衍起訖、諸品出處，詳考據層）。
The Brahmin Ascetic: Why Do Those of the Outside Paths and the Evil Māra Alike Find No Opening; Why Do the Gods Conjure Flowers and Vow to Protect Those Who Receive and Uphold Prajñā, Regarding Them as a Buddha or as Next to a Buddha; and Why Are Prajñā and Omniscience Not Two and Not Different?
What Is Being Asked
This chapter’s name is 「梵志品」 tr. "the chapter The Brahmin Ascetic" (the same chapter of the Larger Sūtra that it explains is also titled ‘Dispelling the Divergent’ in this treatise’s Song edition and in the base text of the sūtra it explains; the two names cross and appear in each other’s transmissions, and are in fact different names for the same chapter, not a separate chapter; their sources and origins are examined in detail in the Apparatus). 「梵志」 tr. "brahmin ascetic" is the general name for those of the outsiders’ paths who have left home to practise; since the chapter begins from brahmin ascetics of the outsiders’ paths coming to the Buddha to seek out his faults, it takes 「梵志」 tr. "brahmin ascetic" as its heading. This chapter follows directly on the previous chapter, "Exhortation to Receive and Uphold": the previous chapter said ‘for one who hears and receives prajñā, Māra and those of the outside paths find no opening,’ but only stated the principle in advance, in the abstract; this chapter brings that principle right before one’s eyes on the spot, letting those of the outside paths and the evil Māra each come to make a trial, so that one sees, present before one, one by one, that they find no opening—the previous chapter’s 「說」 tr. "stating" turns into this chapter’s 「證驗」 tr. "verification."
The chapter’s framework unfolds around three layers of ‘finding no opening’ and their results. Beneath it lie several difficulties. First: the brahmin ascetics of the outsiders’ paths, harbouring evil minds, come to seek out the Buddha’s faults—why is it that as soon as Śakra recites prajñā, they can only circle the Buddha at a distance and leave, unable to make an obstacle? The evil Māra conjures the four kinds of troops, intending to break the bodhisattvas’ intent—why does he too find no opening? And since there is nothing the Buddha does not accomplish, why does he not, after all, deliver these people of the outside paths who came in vain? Second: why do the gods conjure heavenly flowers and make vows, wishing to protect and uphold prajñā so that it long abides in Jambudvīpa, and to guard those who receive and uphold it, even to the point of 「視是人即是佛、若次佛」 tr. "regarding this person as being the Buddha, or as next to a Buddha"—these two names, 「如佛」 tr. "as a Buddha" and 「次佛」 tr. "next to a Buddha," each refer to what kind of person? Third, and the question of deepest doctrinal meaning in the whole chapter: why do Śakra and the Buddha say again and again ‘prajñāpāramitā is not different from omniscience, omniscience is not different from prajñāpāramitā; they are not two and not different’—if it already 「即是」 tr. "is" the other, why then set up the cause that gives birth and the cause that is spoken of, and take milk and curd as a simile? These questions are exactly what the sūtra and the treatise of this chapter must account for one by one.
Passage by Passage
1. Those of the outside paths seek faults, Śakra recites, and those of the outside paths circle at a distance and leave. In explaining the sūtra, the treatise-author first makes clear how this chapter arises. Many brahmin ascetics of the outsiders’ paths, harbouring evil minds, come to where the Buddha is, wishing to pick out the Buddha’s faults. Śakra, thinking of this, at once recites the prajñāpāramitā he received from the Buddha, and makes this protective thought: by the power of receiving and upholding prajñā, these brahmin ascetics will never be able to make an obstacle midway and cut off the Buddha’s teaching of prajñā. Once Śakra recites, those of the outside paths indeed can only circle the Buddha at a distance and go away along the road they came, having accomplished nothing. This passage establishes the chapter’s first layer of ‘finding no opening’—receiving and upholding prajñā is itself a screen against which the wrong challenges of those of the outside paths cannot strike home; and it also points to Śakra as the key figure in this verification.
2. The Buddha answers: they have not a single thought of a wholesome mind, and all in the world who hold evil intent find no opening. Śāriputra asks about the causes and conditions of the outside paths’ circling at a distance and leaving; the Buddha answers with the power of Śakra’s reciting prajñā, and points directly to the root of the outside paths’ sickness: I do not see in these brahmin ascetics a single thought of a wholesome mind; they only hold evil minds and come wishing to seek out the Buddha’s faults. From this it is extended: when prajñā is being taught, of all in the world—whether gods, Māras, Brahmās, or assemblies of śramaṇas and brahmins—whoever comes holding evil intent, not one is able to pick out a fault. This passage widens the single matter of ‘those of the outside paths find no opening’ from particular people of the outside paths into a general rule—it is not that prajñā shrinks from wrong challenges, but that the wrong mind by its very nature cannot strike home against prajñā.
3. The gods, the two vehicles, and the bodhisattvas guard prajñā—because all are born from within prajñā. The Buddha continues to answer why all who hold evil find no opening, bringing it back to the assembly that guards and the reason for guarding. First: in the three-thousand great-thousand world, the gods from the heavens of the Four Heavenly Kings up to the Akaniṣṭha heaven, the śrāvakas, the pratyekabuddhas, and the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas all guard prajñā. Why? Because these gods and humans are all born from within prajñāpāramitā. Second: it is further extended to the buddhas of worlds of the ten directions as many as the sands of the Ganges, together with the two vehicles, the bodhisattvas, and the gods, nāgas, ghosts, and spirits—all guard prajñā. Why? Because these buddhas and the rest are also all born from within prajñā. Because 「從般若生」 tr. "born from prajñā," therefore 「守護般若」 tr. "guarding prajñā"—this one sentence is the eye of the whole passage: since prajñā is the mother from which sages and ordinary beings are born, to guard the mother-dharma is to guard that from which one oneself has come forth, and so the assembly that guards it pervades the ten directions and the three vehicles.
4. The evil Māra conjures the four kinds of troops; Śakra perceives the deception and recites. After those of the outside paths, the evil Māra comes in turn to make a trial. The evil Māra sees the Buddha’s fourfold assembly gathered, and that among them there must be bodhisattvas who have received the prediction that they will attain awakening; so, wishing to break their intent of receiving the prediction, he conjures the four kinds of troops and comes to where the Buddha is. Śakra examines their array and adornment and finds that they are not of a kind with the troops of the human kings, King Bimbisāra and King Prasenajit, nor with those of the Śākyans or the Licchavis; he concludes that they are conjured by the evil Māra, who has long wished to seek an opening against the Buddha and to trouble beings, and so he recites prajñā; and the evil Māra, as he hears the sound of the recitation, gradually withdraws. This passage is the second layer of ‘finding no opening’—even when the evil Māra pours out the whole strength of his troops, he cannot break the mind of a single bodhisattva who has received the prediction; the present, awesome spiritual power of prajñā is here verified again.
5. The gods conjure flowers and wish that prajñā long abide—the Three Jewels do not perish, and the scrolls give illumination. The two trials completed, the gods turn to praise and vows. The gods from the Four Heavenly Kings up to the Akaniṣṭha heaven conjure heavenly flowers and scatter them over the Buddha, wishing that prajñā long abide in Jambudvīpa; the reason is: when the people of Jambudvīpa receive and uphold prajñā, for as long as it abides, the Buddha Jewel, the Dharma Jewel, and the Saṅgha Jewel all abide and do not perish. The gods of the ten directions also scatter flowers with the same wish, and add two meanings: if prajñā long abides, the Three Jewels long abide, and the path of the bodhisattva is also known distinctly; and wherever a good man or good woman writes out and upholds the scroll of the prajñā sūtra, that place is illumined and already free of all darkness. This passage makes clear that prajñā’s abiding in the world is what the abiding of the Three Jewels in the world depends upon, and that wherever the scroll is, there is a light that breaks the darkness—this is where the reason lies for the gods’ vowing to protect and uphold it.
6. The gods vow to protect those who receive and uphold it—Māra finds no opening, and they regard such a one as being the Buddha, or as next to a Buddha. The gods again conjure flowers and scatter them over the Buddha, and themselves set out their vow of protection and its reason: when a good man or good woman receives and upholds prajñā and so on up to rightly recollects it, Māra or the gods of Māra cannot find an opening, and we too shall protect them. Why do they value this person so highly? Because, owing to receiving and upholding prajñā and so on up to rightly recollecting it, 「我等視是人即是佛、若次佛」 tr. "we regard this person as being the Buddha, or as next to a Buddha." This passage moves the object of guarding from ‘the dharma of prajñā’ to ‘the person who holds the dharma,’ and with the four words ‘being the Buddha, next to a Buddha’ fixes this person’s weight—the reason the one who holds prajñā is precious is exactly that his person is where the Buddha’s Dharma is lodged.
7. Prajñā and omniscience are not two and not different—Śakra declares it, the Buddha seals it. This is where the doctrinal meaning of the sūtra portion ties its knot. Śakra further extends its meaning: one who receives and upholds prajñā has in former lives made merit in the presence of buddhas, made many offerings to the buddhas, and been protected by good friends; the omniscience of the buddhas should be sought from within prajñā, and prajñā too should be sought from within omniscience. Why seek each from the other? Because ‘prajñāpāramitā is not different from omniscience, omniscience is not different from prajñāpāramitā; they are not two and not different.’ The Buddha himself seals it, restating that the omniscience of the buddhas is prajñā, that prajñā is omniscience, and that omniscience is born from within prajñā. One declaring, one sealing—together they establish ‘prajñā is omniscience’ as this chapter’s definition, and lay the ground for the treatise’s later explanation of the cause that gives birth and the cause that is spoken of, and for the simile of milk and curd.
8. The opening of the treatise’s explanation—the previous chapter stated it in the abstract, this chapter verifies it in the present. The explanation in the treatise portion first gathers up the meaning of the sūtra as a whole, and points out this chapter’s relation to the previous one: the previous chapter, "Exhortation to Receive and Uphold," already said ‘for one who hears and receives prajñā, Māra, Māra’s people, and those of the outside paths find no opening,’ but that only stated the principle in the abstract; this chapter wishes to verify the principle face to face, in the present, and so by the power of awesome spirit it draws the hosts of Māra and those of the outside paths to come forward, so that each makes a trial and each sees that it finds no opening. This passage is the treatise-author’s placing of the chapter as a whole—the character of this chapter lies in 「驗」 tr. "verifying," not in 「說」 tr. "stating," and the reader should take the words 「現證驗」 tr. "verification in the present" as the thread running through the whole chapter.
9. Those of the outside paths, with wrong views, challenge ultimate emptiness—like a madman wounding empty space, who only wearies and pains himself. The treatise explains the minds with which those of the outside paths came to challenge and the certainty of their defeat. Those of the outside paths thought: the Buddha, on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa, teaches prajñā, saying that all dharmas are ultimately empty and without anything existent, and so draws the beings of the ten directions; let us go together and challenge and break this doctrine of emptiness, and once the doctrine is broken, the Buddha will withdraw of himself. The treatise-author judges that they come with nothing but wrong views, evil minds, and arrogance, wishing to pick out faults in this ultimately pure prajñā, and so sets out a simile: it is like a madman wishing to wound empty space, who only wearies and pains himself. Ultimate emptiness is like empty space, with no place that can be wounded; wrong challenges are like a knife with nowhere to apply its force. This simile makes the single meaning ‘why those of the outside paths are sure to find no opening’ exceedingly plain—it is not that prajñā defeats them by strong argument, but that wrong challenges have from the start no ground on which to act.
10. Śakra receives, upholds, and recites; those of the outside paths circle at a distance—to verify its reality and make people believe and know. The treatise explains the function of the section about Śakra. Śakra receives and upholds prajñā as the Buddha taught, and those of the outside paths then cannot find an opening; the reason he makes those of the outside paths circle at a distance and go on this occasion is precisely to verify its reality and make people believe and know that the power of prajñā is real and not false. The treatise also supplies why Śakra is able to do so: he has accomplished immeasurable merit, and with the sharp faculties of a god he deeply believes in prajñā; he recites it at once and gains the power of prajñā, and so those of the outside paths circle at a distance and go back along the road. This passage makes clear that Śakra does not merely recite; his recitation has merit, sharp faculties, and deep faith as its ground, and so the power of prajñā can become present.
11. Question and answer one: why not leave directly rather than circle the Buddha?—subdued from afar, they feign an offering to cover their cowardice. The treatise sets up a question: since those of the outside paths could find no opening, why did they not go straight back, but instead circle the Buddha before leaving? The treatise answers: by the spiritual power of prajñā they had already been subdued from afar; those of the outside paths thought to themselves that the awesome virtue of the Buddha’s assembly was very great, and that going on would only bring themselves distress and disgrace and accomplish nothing; if they left directly on seeing it from afar, people would say they were cowards who had come and gone away empty, and so they feigned the appearance of making an offering, circled the Buddha, and then left. This question and answer brings to light the twists in the outside paths’ minds as they circle the Buddha—the circling is not reverence, but a forced embellishment left over from being subdued, and their cowardice can be seen precisely here.
12. The Buddha answers why those of the outside paths are not delivered—without a wholesome mind, seeking a fixed mark, like a fatal sickness. The treatise explains the passage about Śāriputra. Śāriputra had originally been a brahmin ascetic; seeing those of the outside paths going back empty, he felt pity for them and wondered why they left without being delivered; the Buddha answered him with 「是般若波羅蜜力」 tr. "this is the power of prajñāpāramitā." Śāriputra doubted further: since with prajñā there is nothing the Buddha does not accomplish, why does he let those of the outside paths come empty and go away? The Buddha answered: these brahmin ascetics have not so much as a single thought of a wholesome mind; they hold only evil intent, with wrong views clinging to their minds, wishing to seek a fixed mark in dharmas, and therefore they are not fit to be delivered—like a fatal sickness which, though there be a good physician and divine medicine, cannot be saved. The treatise further extends it: not only these brahmin ascetics—all in the world who come with evil minds find no opening, because the buddhas, the bodhisattvas, and the gods constantly guard prajñā, each being mindful that they are born from prajñā; when Māra comes to challenge, question, and destroy, by the same principle he finds no opening. This passage lays the blame for ‘not delivering’ on the outside paths’ own cutting off of their wholesome roots, not on any insufficiency of prajñā—as when medicine does not save one with a fatal sickness, the fault is not in the medicine.
13. The gods, seeing the verification, rejoice, conjure flowers, and themselves vow to guard. The treatise explains the section of the gods conjuring flowers and vowing to protect. The gods in the assembly had already heard of the merits of prajñā; now, seeing its verification with their own eyes, their minds greatly rejoice; they conjure flowers as an offering and wish that prajñā long abide in Jambudvīpa, and the Buddha seals it. The gods then vow for themselves before the Buddha: if a practitioner hears and receives prajñā and so on up to rightly recollects it, we shall always guard him. Why is this? We regard this person as a Buddha, or as next to a Buddha. This passage makes clear that the gods’ protection does not issue from faith alone, but is a vow made after ‘first hearing, now seeing,’ faith and verification uniting; their vow has witnessed evidence as its ground, and so it is especially earnest.
14. The meaning of 「如佛」 tr. "as a Buddha" and 「次佛」 tr. "next to a Buddha" —the difference between the Dharma-nature body and the bodhisattva in a fleshly body. The treatise explains the boundary between the two names the gods spoke of, 「如佛、若次佛」 tr. "as a Buddha, or next to a Buddha." 「如佛」 tr. "As a Buddha" refers to the bodhisattva of the Dharma-nature body, who abides in the non-retrogressing rank of avaivartika, has attained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, and so on up to ascending the ten grounds; this rank is near the Buddha, and so it is called 「如佛」 tr. "as a Buddha." 「次佛」 tr. "Next to a Buddha" refers to a bodhisattva in a fleshly body who, though he has not yet reached the stage of the Dharma-nature body, is nevertheless able to expound prajñāpāramitā and its right meaning and to carry on and make flourish the lineage of the Buddha, and so is called ‘next to the Buddha.’ This passage analyses the phrase 「即是佛、若次佛」 tr. "being the Buddha, or next to a Buddha" into two grades, making clear that the persons the gods value come in two classes, shallower and deeper, yet both are precious for the same thing: bearing prajñā and transmitting prajñā.
15. Śakra praises the bodhisattva, and the two meanings of 「求」 tr. "seeking" are explained—omniscience of all kinds is sought from prajñā, prajñā is sought from omniscience. The treatise explains Śakra’s praise of the bodhisattva by the merit and wisdom gathered through causes and conditions in former lives, and sorts out the two phrases in the sūtra about seeking each from the other. 「諸佛一切種智應從般若中求」 tr. "The omniscience of all kinds of the buddhas should be sought from within prajñā" means: because the bodhisattva practises prajñā to completion, on attaining buddhahood prajñā changes into omniscience of all kinds, and therefore omniscience of all kinds should be sought from within prajñā—this is seeking the result within the cause. 「般若波羅蜜當從一切智中求」 tr. "Prajñāpāramitā should be sought from within omniscience" means: the Buddha is able to expound prajñāpāramitā, and therefore prajñā should be sought from within omniscience—this is that, on the side of the result, there is the prajñā that can be expounded. This passage distinguishes that the two 「求」 tr. "seekings" each have their own direction and are not the same words repeated: one takes prajñā as the cause, the other takes omniscience as the place where prajñā is expounded.
16. The simile of milk and curd—the cause that gives birth and the cause that is spoken of: because cause and result are not apart from each other, they are not two and not different. With the simile of milk and curd the treatise concludes the relation between prajñā and omniscience of all kinds, answering the doubt ‘if they are not two and not different, why set up two names that seek each from the other?’ It is like milk changing into curd: apart from milk there is no curd, yet one also cannot say that milk is curd; prajñā changes into omniscience of all kinds: apart from prajñā there is no omniscience of all kinds, yet one also cannot say that prajñā is omniscience of all kinds. Prajñā acts for omniscience of all kinds as the cause that gives birth, and omniscience of all kinds acts for prajñā as the cause that is spoken of; though cause and result have two names, they are not separated from each other, and so it is said 「不二不別」 tr. "not two and not different." This simile gathers in 「即是」 tr. "is" and ‘is not’ at a single stroke: because cause and result are not apart from each other, it is said 「不二」 tr. "not two"; because of the difference in name and mark between what changes and what it changes into, one cannot call it 「即是」 tr. "is"—the meaning of prajñā and omniscience is here made complete.
Do Not Misread
Do not read the two names ‘The Brahmin Ascetic / Dispelling the Divergent’ as two chapters, or suspect that the order of this chapter is wrong. Though the two names differ, the chapter they refer to is wholly the same in content; it is only that this treatise and the sūtra it explains, in their respective transmitted texts, have one 「梵志」 tr. "brahmin ascetic" and the other ‘dispelling the divergent,’ crossing and appearing in each other—a case of different names for the same chapter, not a separately established chapter and not a displacement of chapter order. That it takes 「梵志」 tr. "brahmin ascetic" as its heading takes the sense that the chapter begins from brahmin ascetics of the outsiders’ paths coming to seek out the Buddha’s faults; the discrimination of its name and reality, and the sources in the various texts, are matters for the Apparatus; for the doctrinal meaning one need only read on according to the text of the chapter.
Do not read the outside paths’ and the evil Māra’s ‘finding no opening’ as prajñā contending with them and defeating them. The treatise says it plainly: prajñā is like empty space, and wrong challenges are like a knife wishing to wound empty space, with from the start no place to apply its force, and so those of the outside paths 「徒自疲苦」 tr. "only weary and pain themselves"; the Buddha’s not delivering those of the outside paths is likewise not an insufficiency of prajñā, but because those of the outside paths have not a single thought of a wholesome mind, like a fatal sickness that no good physician or divine medicine can save. If one reads prajñā as a kind of dharma-power able to conquer the wrong and break enemies, one reads the meaning of 「畢竟清淨」 tr. "ultimately pure" and ‘no place that can be wounded’ too low—in finding no opening, the fault lies in the wrong mind cutting itself off, not in prajñā flexing its strength.
Do not read ‘prajñā is not different from omniscience, not two and not different’ as the two being a single thing with no boundary at all between them; and do not, because the cause that gives birth, the cause that is spoken of, and the simile of milk and curd are set up, suspect that they really are two. The treatise’s simile of milk and curd bears on both sides at once: because cause and result are not apart from each other, it is said 「不二不別」 tr. "not two and not different," and they cannot be clung to as two; because milk changes into curd and name and mark differ, one cannot say 「乳即是酪」 tr. "milk is curd," and they cannot be merged into one. Prajñā is knowledge at the stage of the cause; omniscience of all kinds is knowledge at the stage of the result; cause and result are one continuity, and yet the ranks are distinctly present. Clinging to oneness loses the ranks; clinging to difference loses the continuity; one must leave both clingings together to read the measure of the words 「不二不別」 tr. "not two and not different."
Bearing on Practice
This chapter takes the previous chapter’s abstract statement, ‘Māra and those of the outside paths find no opening,’ and brings it right before one’s eyes on the spot as a verification in the present. What one who applies effort should most take up is this layer of faith and understanding: prajñā’s ability not to be affected by wrong challenges and not to be destroyed by Māra does not lie in its being a kind of dharma-power that can contend with outer things, but in the real mark itself, 「畢竟清淨」 tr. "ultimately pure," ‘like empty space, with no place that can be wounded.’ In the moments of daily upholding and recitation, if one seeks prajñā as a talisman for warding off difficulties and conquering enemies, one falls back onto the very same road as those of the outside paths who sought out the Buddha’s faults; this chapter instead teaches one to recognise that the reason Māra finds no opening in one who holds prajñā is exactly that prajñā has no gap to exploit and the wrong mind has nowhere to attach—the place to apply effort is in one’s own mind leaving wrong clinging, not in seeking some efficacy outside.
The phrase 「即是佛、若次佛」 tr. "being the Buddha, or next to a Buddha" is especially fit for self-examination. What the gods value, in conjuring flowers and vowing to protect the one who receives and upholds prajñā, is not any marvel in this person, but that he bears prajñā in his person and can transmit the right meaning of prajñā. Studying this passage, one knows that what is precious in receiving and upholding prajñā is that one’s own person has become the place where the Buddha’s Dharma is lodged—「如佛」 tr. "as a Buddha" is the Dharma-nature body that abides in non-retrogression and has realised non-arising; 「次佛」 tr. "next to a Buddha" is the bodhisattva in a fleshly body who can expound the right meaning of prajñā; both take bearing the Dharma and transmitting the Dharma as their weight. One who applies effort should here arouse the mind: what is precious is to bear prajñā in body and mind and to transmit it in its right meaning, not to win the outward name of ‘one who upholds the sūtra.’
The meaning that prajñā and omniscience are 「不二不別」 tr. "not two and not different" and yet act for each other as the cause that gives birth and the cause that is spoken of can serve as a plumb-line for contemplative practice. Cultivating prajñā is not seeking some separate omniscience of all kinds as a result; the result lies within the cause—「般若變成一切種智」 tr. "prajñā changes into omniscience of all kinds," as milk becomes curd, not apart from its original cause; yet one also must not cling to the cause as being the result and sit idle, losing the full accomplishment at the later limit. One who applies effort should here recognise: a single thought of prajñā at the ground of the cause already contains the nature of omniscience of all kinds at the ground of the result, yet it must be practised to completion and only through change is it accomplished—neither slighting the cause nor skipping ahead to the result: this is the measure of 「不二不別」 tr. "not two and not different" as it comes down to applying effort.
Further Resonances
The backbone of this chapter is a single thread of verification strung together by three layers of ‘finding no opening’: the brahmin ascetics of the outsiders’ paths come harbouring evil to seek out the Buddha’s faults, and because Śakra recites prajñā they circle at a distance and go; the evil Māra conjures the four kinds of troops, wishing to break the bodhisattvas’ intent of receiving the prediction, and because Śakra perceives the deception and recites, he gradually withdraws; all in the world who come with evil minds, because the buddhas, the bodhisattvas, and the gods are all born from prajñā and constantly guard prajñā, all find no opening. The three verifications completed, the gods conjure heavenly flowers and make vows, wishing that prajñā long abide in Jambudvīpa so that the Three Jewels continue without perishing, and themselves vow to guard those who receive and uphold it, and 「視是人即是佛、若次佛」 tr. "regard this person as being the Buddha, or as next to a Buddha"; it ends with Śakra and the Buddha making clear to each other that ‘prajñā is not different from omniscience; they are not two and not different,’ and the treatise closes it with the cause that gives birth, the cause that is spoken of, and the simile of milk and curd. The treatise’s explanation, for its part, establishes the placing of the chapter in ‘the previous chapter stated it in the abstract, this chapter verifies it in the present’; makes clear by ‘like a madman wounding empty space’ that wrong challenges are sure to find no opening; judges by ‘like a fatal sickness that a good physician does not save’ that the blame for the Buddha’s not delivering those of the outside paths lies in the wrong mind cutting itself off; and completes the meaning of 「不二不別」 tr. "not two and not different" with the single simile of milk and curd. The meaning of the whole chapter lies altogether in one matter: ‘the wrong and Māra find no opening, the gods vow to protect and uphold, prajñā is omniscience.’
The two meanings ‘as a Buddha, next to a Buddha’ and ‘prajñā is omniscience’ may especially be mentioned in passing, so as to see the traces of their further resonances. Guarding and protecting those who receive and uphold prajñā and granting them a rank near the Buddha does not begin only with this chapter; the meaning that prajñā and omniscience, omniscience of all kinds, are identical to each other and are cause and result for each other also comes from the accumulated discussion of the preceding chapters; in this chapter, taking the occasion of the outside paths’ and the evil Māra’s verification in the present, the two threads ‘guarding those who receive and uphold’ and ‘prajñā is omniscience’ are gathered together at once, and the simile of milk and curd establishes a settled account of this identity. The reader may view together the chapters before and after, to see the single continuous vein of prajñā as ‘that which is guarded, that which gives birth, that to which all returns as its ultimate’ (the beginning and end of its further resonances and the sources in the various chapters are detailed in the Apparatus).
考據Apparatus
一、科判
本品在《大智度論》釋《大品般若》之次第中屬〈釋餘品〉一段，繫卷五十八，為前品〈勸受持品第三十四〉之同卷次品。前品〈勸受持品〉別起卷五十八之殼、具二行署名（「聖者龍樹造」「後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什譯」）；本品則於同卷五十八內部續起，不重署名——品身 jhead〔T25 0470a15〕即含品名全稱「大智度論釋梵志品第三十五」，其下無獨立之 mulu 元素緊鄰起 lb，緊接前品訖界「如是得今世、後世功德」句之後。此「同卷承續、不重署名」型與前品〈述誠品〉同型，而異於前品〈勸受持品〉之「別起卷殼、具署名」型，據實誌之。
本品訖界〔T25 0471b17〕為次品〈阿難稱譽品〉之起處，同卷五十八內部之品界（非卷訖，訖界前無 fun="close" 卷閉標籤，回搜品內 fun="close" 計數為零），品身正文終於「因果不相離故言『不二不別』」句〔T25 0471b15〕，次品隨即於同卷續起。
品內結構一【經】一【論】交替，全品作一單元讀之，不拆（純漢字一千九百三十五，尚不及分拆之量）。【經】〔T25 0470a16〕外道梵志來求佛短、帝釋誦念般若而外道遙遶佛去、佛告舍利弗以般若威力（諸天人皆從般若中生故）、惡魔化四種兵而帝釋覺偽誦念退之、四天王乃至阿迦尼吒諸天化天華散佛誓願般若久住、諸天自誓擁護受持者、帝釋述般若不異一切智而佛印可；論〔T25 0470c24〕以「釋曰」開篇，配以問答一番，逐段釋經之疑難。本品一經一論之數，較前品〈勸受持品〉之問答四番簡，屬敘事型品（經段占篇幅較大，經、論篇幅相近），據底本各自定，不沿他品格局。
品內二標籤皆恰在塊首，無鑲嵌型過渡。【經】標籤繫〔T25 0470a16〕，緊接品題之後、經文首句「爾時，諸外道梵志來向佛所」之前，獨立成塊。【論】標籤繫〔T25 0470c24〕，獨立成塊，塊首緊接「釋曰」。論之說者結構，本品以問答一番為骨——問①〔T25 0471a07〕「何以不直還，方遶佛而去？」／答①〔T25 0471a08〕「以般若神力故，於遠處降伏……」，逐一配對，無孤問孤答；此為全品唯一問答（回搜品內「問曰」一見、「答曰」一見），較前品〈勸受持品〉之四番問答簡明。
二、術語考
梵志（外道梵志）。 品名之樞語。「梵志」者，本謂志求梵行、婆羅門修行之通稱，本品用為欲求佛短之外道之目——經首「爾時，諸外道梵志來向佛所，欲求佛短」〔T25 0470a16〕。論釋復點出舍利弗與此輩之因緣——「舍利弗本是梵志」〔T25 0471a12〕，故見諸外道空來空去而「心少憐愍」。品名「梵志」即取此經首求短之外道立名（品名異讀「遣異」則取「遣除異見／外道」之義，見第四目）。
般若波羅蜜不異一切智（不二不別）。 本品義理之樞。帝釋自陳、佛復印可之一句——「般若波羅蜜不異一切智，一切智不異般若波羅蜜；般若波羅蜜、一切智，不二不別。」〔T25 0470c10（帝釋）／0470c18（佛印可）〕。「一切智」即薩婆若，諸佛究竟之智；般若與一切智「不二不別」者，非謂二名一體無別，乃謂二者互為生因、說因、因果不相離（論釋以乳酪喻辨之，見第三目）。此「不異／不二不別」句經、論再三申之，為本品收束之所歸。
「如佛」·「次佛」（法性身·肉身菩薩）。 論釋諸天「視是人如佛、若次佛」一語之定義性解說。「如佛」者，「法性身，住阿鞞跋致，得無生法忍，乃至十地」〔T25 0471b02〕——謂已住不退轉地、得無生法忍乃至十地之法性身菩薩，其德如佛。「次佛」者，「肉身菩薩能說般若波羅蜜及其正義」〔T25 0471b04〕——謂猶居肉身、而能宣說般若及其正義之菩薩，德次於佛。二名分判受持般若者之二等，為諸天誓願擁護之義理依據。
三、譬喻與故事
《大智度論》以譬喻著稱，本品之要喻有三，皆落論釋一段，而以「乳酪喻」為收束全品之樞喻。
狂人傷虛空喻。 論釋外道邪見來難之徒勞——外道謂佛說「諸法畢竟空、無所有」，欲共往難問破此空論，論主斷之曰「譬如狂人欲中傷虛空，徒自疲苦！」〔T25 0471a02〕。虛空無可傷，喻畢竟清淨之般若無過罪可出；狂人自苦，喻外道持邪見惡心來難之徒自困辱。此喻明外道求短終不得便之所以然。
必死之病良醫神藥喻。 論釋佛答舍利弗「外道何以空來而去」之疑——「是諸梵志乃至無一念善心，但持惡意，邪見著心，欲求諸法定相，是故不中度」〔T25 0471a18〕，繼以喻結之：「譬如必死之病，雖有良醫、神藥，不能救濟。」〔T25 0471a20〕。必死之病喻外道邪見著心、無一念善之機，良醫神藥喻佛與般若之力；病既必死，藥不能救，喻機既不受，法不能度——此般若度化「應機而度、不強度無機」之如實辨，非般若力有所不逮。
乳酪喻（本品樞喻·收束全品）。 論末以此喻收束「般若不異一切智、不二不別」之義——「譬如乳變為酪，離乳無酪，亦不得言乳即是酪；般若波羅蜜變為一切種智，離般若亦無一切種智，亦不得言般若即是一切種智。」〔T25 0471b10〕。乳變為酪者，喻菩薩行般若具足、得佛時般若變成一切種智；離乳無酪者，喻離般若則無一切種智（故不異、不別）；不得言乳即是酪者，喻不得逕言般若即是一切種智（故非一）。論主由此判「般若與一切種智作生因，一切種智與般若作說因，因果不相離故」〔T25 0471b14〕言「不二不別」——非一非異，因果相即而不相濫。此喻為本品義理之總樞，收攝經、論再三申說之「不二不別」句。
四、所釋經文
品名四造交叉對稱網：梵志品／遣異品（異名同品·並錄不判）。 本品品名於本論與所釋經兩側各呈「梵志品／遣異品」二造之異讀，且兩側之底本與異本恰成交叉對稱，為本品第一須辨之事，逐一據底本誌之。
其一，本論（T25n1509）側。卷端 jhead「大智度論釋梵志品第三十五」〔T25 0470a15〕，底本（大正／麗藏 lem）作「梵志品」；而其品題句下有校記——「梵志品【大】｜遣異品【宋】」〔T25 0470a15〕——即本論宋本於此品題本位直書「遣異品」。此為同一部論書內部兩品名並存之直接 byte 證據（本論底本「梵志」／宋本「遣異」）。
其二，所釋經（T223）側。後秦鳩摩羅什譯《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》此品題，底本（lem）作「遣異品」〔T08 0287a26 mulu「35 遣異品」〕；而其 head 內另有 inline 校記「丹梵志品」——即 T223 之丹本於同位直書「梵志品」。此為所釋經一側兩品名並存之直接 byte 證據（T223 底本「遣異」／丹本「梵志」）。
其三，交叉格局。合觀兩側四造——本論底本＝梵志品／本論宋本＝遣異品；T223 底本＝遣異品／T223 丹本＝梵志品——兩部經論各自之兩種傳本異讀互相對稱吻合（本論底本＝T223 丹本作「梵志」，本論宋本＝T223 底本作「遣異」），構成罕見之「雙向雙讀交叉印證」。此對稱格局較前品〈勸受持品〉之「本論內部四本一致對底本」單向型更強，為異名同品之強證。
其四，古德疏之第三佐證。吉藏《大品經義疏》（X24n0451）用「遣異品第三十五」〔X24n0451 0270a13〕（同 T223 底本名「遣異」，非本論底本名「梵志」）——延續前諸品所誌「古德疏依所釋經／多數 witness 命名而非依本論底本命名」之模式，本品為該觀察之第五個連續實例（前卷〈滅諍亂品〉、前品〈寶塔校量品〉、〈述誠品〉、〈勸受持品〉、本品）。
其五，判定與本版之裁。兩側四造，其別在「梵志（求短之外道）／遣異（遣除異見）」之取義不同，而內容完全對位（同一品之異譯／異抄，情節、人物、次第逐一相應，見下全量牒經）——判為「異名同品」，非品序錯位、非合併、非拆分。前品〈勸受持品〉考據所誌「品序內容分歧（品三十五起·誌錄俟品三十五考據）」，以此交叉對稱格局結案：其分歧屬「異名」類，非品序安排之分歧。本版品名從本論底本作「梵志品」（本版品名主軸為本論底本，既定之裁，有底本依據，本目不翻案）；「遣異品」諸名皆逐字保留於對讀敘述，並錄不判。
品次 off-by-one（延續品二十七以來既定現象·續查）。 所釋經 T223 此品之 mulu 屬性標序作三十六而顯文題「35 遣異品」〔T08 0287a26〕，屬性較顯文多算一位——延續品二十七以來所釋經電子藏本之既定品次離軌現象（標序＝顯文加一）。下品 T223 mulu 標序三十七、顯文「36 尊導品」〔T08 0288a14〕，延續同一機制。另誌：T223 側另見一組重複之 mulu 標序三十七（顯文「37 法稱品」，落〔T08 0290b09〕），為 T223 mulu 自身內部之另一計數異常（標序三十七兩見），與本品之 off-by-one 機制不同源，如實誌錄供後品考據，本目不展開解。本論一側，品三十五 mulu 顯文品次「三十五」與品次表 n=35 一致，下品〈阿難稱譽品〉本論亦無離軌——此屬所釋經電子藏本單方之結構性現象，本論一側未見，據實誌錄。
品序後續分歧（誌錄交後品·不判）。 本品訖界之後，兩側次品名亦異：本論之次品為〈阿難稱譽品〉〔T25 0471b17〕，而 T223／X24 之次品為〈尊導品第三十六〉〔T08 0288a14 mulu「36 尊導品」／X24n0451 0270c21〕。此為兩側品序安排之續行差異，本目職權止於品三十五，僅據實誌其精確落 loc，俟後品考據查證其性質，誌錄不判。
全量牒經對讀（兩側對勘·本品型為雙向對稱）。 本論一段【經】文（剝品題／【經】標籤後之連續漢字流，〔T25 0470a16 起至 0470c24 前，本論側 han-only 約一千零八十字〕）與所釋經全品〈遣異品〉〔T08 0287a26 起 head 後至 0288a14 前〕逐句對校，開篇即逐字幾近同文——「爾時，諸外道異學梵志來向佛所，欲求佛短」（T223，多「異學」二字）對「爾時，諸外道梵志來向佛所，欲求佛短」（本論）——其後帝釋誦念般若、外道遙繞佛去、惡魔化四種兵、頻婆娑羅／波斯匿／諸釋子／諸梨唱四種兵皆不類、諸天化華散佛、如佛／次佛諸核心情節、人物、次第逐一對應，未見情節缺失或錯位。所釋經此品無【論】層，本論論釋部分為【論】層論體之結構性擴增，非異文。本品之核心兩側對勘證據來自兩側各自之內部 witness 分裂且交叉對稱吻合（品名四造之交叉，見上）——屬較前品「本論內部四本一致對底本」單向型更強之「雙向對稱型」，如實記錄。所釋經 T223 側於本品對讀範圍（〔T08 0287a26–0288a14〕）內之 <app> witness 條目計三十三條，本目未逐條展開（核心異文已由四造交叉取得高置信度），據實誌其統計數供覆核（見第八目）。
五、般若義眼
本品之眼，在「般若波羅蜜不異一切智、不二不別」一義之全幅展開——受持般若者所以「即是佛、若次佛」，正因般若與諸佛究竟之一切智不二不別。其義可約為四重。
其一，外道／惡魔不得便，皆因諸天人佛皆從般若中生。經以帝釋誦念般若、外道「終不能中道作礙、斷說般若波羅蜜」〔T25 0470a19〕起，佛告舍利弗其所以然——「是三千大千世界中，諸四天王天乃至阿迦尼吒天、諸聲聞、辟支佛、諸菩薩摩訶薩等守護是般若波羅蜜」，其故在「是諸天、人皆從般若波羅蜜中生故」〔T25 0470b04〕；復推及十方，「諸佛……皆守護是般若波羅蜜」，其故在「是諸佛等皆從般若波羅蜜中生故」〔T25 0470b07〕。守護之理由層層歸於「皆從般若中生」——般若為佛、菩薩、諸天之所從生，故一切持惡意來者終不得其便。惡魔化四種兵欲壞菩薩受記之意，帝釋覺其偽（「頻婆娑羅王四種兵所不類，波斯匿王四種兵亦不類，諸釋子四種兵、諸梨唱四種兵皆亦不類」〔T25 0470b14〕）而誦念般若，魔亦「漸漸復道還去」——魔外道不得便，同一理。
其二，諸天化華誓願、視受持者即是佛若次佛。四天王乃至阿迦尼吒諸天化天華散佛，願「般若波羅蜜久住閻浮提」〔T25 0470b21〕，以「閻浮提人受持般若波羅蜜，隨所住時，佛寶住不滅，法寶、僧寶亦住不滅」故——般若久住則三寶隨之久住。諸天復自誓擁護受持般若乃至正憶念之善男子善女人，「我等視是人即是佛、若次佛」〔T25 0470c10〕——受持般若者，其德齊於「如佛」（法性身菩薩）「次佛」（肉身能說般若之菩薩，見第二目），故諸天守護如守護佛。
其三，般若不異一切智，不二不別（本品之樞義）。帝釋白佛「諸佛一切智應當從般若波羅蜜中求，般若波羅蜜亦當從一切智中求」，其故在「般若波羅蜜不異一切智，一切智不異般若波羅蜜；般若波羅蜜、一切智，不二不別」〔T25 0470c16〕；佛即印可——「如是！如是！憍尸迦！諸佛一切智即是般若波羅蜜，般若波羅蜜即是一切智」〔T25 0470c19〕，並點其所以然「諸佛一切智，從般若波羅蜜中生」。般若與一切智，因位（般若）果位（一切智）之別而不二不別，此諸天所以「視是人即是佛、若次佛」之義理根據，亦本品收束之所歸。
其四，「不二不別」之因果辨（乳酪喻之義眼）。論釋不逕以「不異」為一體無別，而以生因、說因辨之——「菩薩行般若波羅蜜具足故，得佛時，般若變成一切種智」〔T25 0471b07〕，故「一切種智當從般若中求」；「佛能說般若波羅蜜」〔T25 0471b09〕，故「般若波羅蜜當從一切智中求」。般若與一切種智互為生因、說因，「因果不相離故言『不二不別』」〔T25 0471b15〕（乳酪喻見第三目）。此「非一非異、因果相即而不相濫」之辨，為般若與一切智關係之如實定——不落「即是」（一）、亦不落「異」（別），此本品義理之最精處。
六、諸家異釋
《大智度論》本無逐文全疏之傳統，古德引釋率屬據實偏倚。本品古德覆讀有二型：釋所釋經之吉藏疏存完整專章且科判細密，品名之釋、品旨之科與本品經論相應；釋論之慧影疏斷層不覆本卷。此目誌錄其所疏所引與本品之對應，不判各家詮釋高下。
吉藏《大品經義疏》（X24n0451）。 於本品之逐文疏，起〔X24n0451 0270a13〕（品題「遣異品第三十五」，緊接前品〈勸持品〉訖界之後），迄〔X24n0451 0270c21〕前（次品〈尊導品第三十六〉起前），覆本品經論全篇。吉藏全文用「遣異品」名（同 T223 底本，不用本論底本「梵志品」，見第四目）。其可誌者二。其一，品旨三果之科——「此品明三果，謂人不得便，魔不得便，魔諸天守護。」〔X24n0451 0270a14〕：吉藏判本品明「三果」，逐一對應本品經文之三大情節（外道求短不得便、惡魔化兵求便不得便、諸天守護誓願），內容判無誤，屬「三果證驗」科判定位，與前品〈勸持品〉之「五果格量」大科相接續。其二，設問析異——吉藏復設「此品得三果，與上何異」之問而自答，明本品乃「現證驗事」（前品已明其理、本品乃現其驗），與本論論釋開篇「今欲現證驗故」〔T25 0470c25〕之判正相呼應。吉藏疏對本品覆蓋完整，三果科判、證驗之辨二項，對義疏具直接引用價值。
慧影《大智度論疏》（X46n0791）。 為釋本論之唯一古疏，僅殘卷存世；卷十七訖釋論卷四十五、卷二十一起釋論卷五十九，本品所繫之論卷五十八正落於此二卷之間之缺口內，慧影疏現存諸卷完全未覆本品。全庫回搜「梵志品」「遣異品」等本品獨有詞串，於本品段落皆零命中——慧影疏殘卷不覆本品，延續前諸品所誌之結論，據實誌錄。
均正《大乘四論玄義》（X46n0784）。 全書回搜「梵志品」「遣異品」諸串，本品皆零命中——與前諸品情形相同，本品未見均正之具名徵引，據實誌其闕，不強求。
本論自釋。 本品〈梵志品〉之名於本論全書中無品外自我互證材料，據實記錄。
近代著述（依例排除）。 凡近代學者之釋，依例排除，不採為古德權威、不引入義理徵引。
七、互讀與承衍
本品之義脈，前後相承者有三，皆此目所誌，不代定讀。
其一，「魔外道不得便」義之承衍鏈（承前品·現證驗）。前品〈勸受持品〉論釋已說「聞、受般若者，魔、若魔民、外道梵志不得其便」，本品論釋開篇即承此而曰「上品中說，聞、受般若者，魔、若魔民、外道梵志不得其便；今欲現證驗故，以威神感致眾魔及諸外道」〔T25 0470c24〕——前品明其理、本品現其驗（外道求短不得便、惡魔化兵求便不得便），此本論品品義脈相貫、承前起後之明證，與吉藏「此品明證驗事」之判相合（見第六目）。
其二，「如佛／次佛」義之承衍（承品三十線·誌錄不判）。本品「視是人即是佛、若次佛」及其論釋「如佛者法性身……次佛者肉身菩薩」〔T25 0471b02〕，與前諸品所立「受持般若者德齊菩薩／近佛」一線相承（法性身住阿鞞跋致乃至十地之判，屬般若道位義之下貫）；此屬本論義脈之承引，本目誌其迹，不代定其為單一經句之結構斷言。
其三，寶庫掛鏈（穩定徵引·軟引）。本品「般若波羅蜜不異一切智……不二不別」及乳酪喻之因果相即義，為般若與一切智（薩婆若）相即一義之經論所本，落穩定徵引〔T25n1509 梵志品·卷五十八〕；心經／唯識諸帙引本論處尚未定稿，故軟引，俟其逐字核存。此屬般若義下貫諸經之承衍，誌錄不判。
八、校本與版本說明
本品底本為《大智度論》卷五十八〔T25 0470a15–0471b15〕（品身正文終於〔T25 0471b15〕「因果不相離故言『不二不別』」句，次品〈阿難稱譽品〉起〔T25 0471b17〕，同卷五十八內部品界，非卷訖）；所釋經校本為《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》〈遣異品〉〔T08 0287a26 起〕；古德疏校本為吉藏《大品經義疏》（X24n0451，覆本品〔X24n0451 0270a13–0270c21〕前），慧影《大智度論疏》（X46n0791）殘卷不覆本品，均正《大乘四論玄義》（X46n0784）無徵引。異讀校記依大正校勘，涉大正底本與宋、元、明、宮、聖、石（石山寺本）諸本及麗藏（K）之異。
品名校記（四造之底據·本論宋本／T223 丹本專列）。 品首校記並陳品名之異文，其攸關者二。其一，本論品題校記〔T25 0470a15〕——「梵志品【大】｜遣異品【宋】」——本論底本二字「梵志」、宋本作「遣異」。其二，品題句下另有校記〔T25 0470a15〕——「五【大】｜五（經作遣異品）【明】｜五品【宮】」——明本於此並注「經作遣異品」，即明本校勘者已誌所釋經（T223）作「遣異品」，為四造交叉之旁證。此二則與 T223 側之底本「遣異」、丹本「梵志」（inline 校記）相合，即品名「梵志／遣異」四造交叉對稱之底據，用於第四目品名之判——如實並錄，不強加調解。
CBETA 補字校記（麗藏 K 本校「可」為「何」·專列）。 論釋問①句首有一補字校記〔T25 0471a07〕——「何（K14n0549_p1078c19）【CB】【麗-CB】｜可【大】」——即大正底本作「可」，CBETA 依麗藏（K14n0549）校訂改讀「何」，問句由此定作「何以不直還」。此為錨點 note 之特殊格式（校記自身標注麗藏頁碼出處），異於一般異本讀法之並列，故專列。正文從 CBETA／麗藏校訂讀法「何」，據實誌其校勘來源。
校勘總帳（四十八條全量對帳·底本原樣）。 下依工作底本檔末原樣傳錄——本品自身錨點校記四十三條（own），另品內／跨品 refrain 遞歸重引五條（star）：其中三條品內重引（回指本品自身之 canonical note），另二條跨品外引（〔T25 0470b05〕「世界／國土」、〔T25 0470b24〕「世界／國土」皆 star 回指品三十四範圍之 note(0468026)，跨品共用同一 canonical note，異於前品〈勸受持品〉之 star 全數品內，本品之 star 有跨品外引，據實標明）；異本讀法並列保存，正文仍從現行底本讀法：
- 〔T25 0470a15〕梵志品【大】｜遣異品【宋】（品名四造之核心·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0470a15〕五【大】｜五（經作遣異品）【明】｜五品【宮】
- 〔T25 0470a19〕說【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0470a21〕遶【大】｜達【聖】
- 〔T25 0470a23〕（star·品內重引→note(0470a21)）遶【大】｜達【聖】
- 〔T25 0470a27〕但【大】｜〔－〕【宮】【聖】
- 〔T25 0470a27〕求【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】
- 〔T25 0470a27〕佛【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0470b03〕等【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】
- 〔T25 0470b05〕（star·跨品外引→note(0468026)·品三十四範圍）世界【大】｜國土【石】
- 〔T25 0470b06〕摩訶薩、諸天、龍、鬼神等皆守護是般若波羅蜜。所以者何【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0470b10〕受【大】｜授【明】
- 〔T25 0470b11〕寧【大】｜曼【聖】
- 〔T25 0470b14〕種【大】｜〔－〕【石】
- 〔T25 0470b15〕兵【大】｜兵所不類【石】
- 〔T25 0470b16〕唱【大】｜昌【元】【明】【石】
- 〔T25 0470b17〕（star·品內重引→note(0470b11)）寧【大】｜曼【聖】
- 〔T25 0470b18〕如【大】｜聞其【石】
- 〔T25 0470b18〕聞【大】｜〔－〕【石】
- 〔T25 0470b19〕漸【大】｜漸而退【石】
- 〔T25 0470b23〕住【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0470b24〕（star·跨品外引→note(0468026)·品三十四範圍·第二見）世界【大】｜國土【石】
- 〔T25 0470b25〕皆【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0470b29〕冥【大】｜難【聖】
- 〔T25 0470c03〕所【大】｜在所【石】
- 〔T25 0470c03〕住在【大】｜在住【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】
- 〔T25 0470c05〕眾冥【大】｜瞋【聖】
- 〔T25 0470c09〕若【大】｜〔－〕【宮】
- 〔T25 0470c12〕於【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0470c17〕二【大】｜一一【聖】
- 〔T25 0470c26〕感致【大】｜咸到【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a01〕如【大】｜知【宮】
- 〔T25 0471a03〕虛【大】｜處【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a05〕故【大】｜〔－〕【石】
- 〔T25 0471a07〕何（K14n0549_p1078c19）【CB】【麗-CB】｜可【大】（CBETA／麗藏補字·專列見上）
- 〔T25 0471a07〕方【大】｜乃【宮】
- 〔T25 0471a09〕威【大】｜滅【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a09〕困【大】｜內【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a11〕等怯【大】｜性法【宮】｜等法【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a13〕少【大】｜小【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a14〕求【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a16〕濟【大】｜齊【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a21〕（star·品內重引→note(0471a16)）濟【大】｜齊【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a25〕從【大】｜因【石】
- 〔T25 0471a26〕見【大】｜現【明】
- 〔T25 0471a29〕受【大】｜受持【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0471b02〕等【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0471b16〕別【大】｜別釋第卅四品四竟【石】（存疑·數字「卅四」與品序「三十五」不合，見下）
以上四十八條，與工作底本錨點校記之數機械相合（own 四十三條、star 五條，其中品內重引三、跨品外引二）。品名攸關之數處（品題〔0470a15〕本論宋本「遣異」、明本旁注「經作遣異品」、CBETA／麗藏〔0471a07〕補字「何」）已於上文專列，並與所釋經雙向對校（第四目）。
末條石本異讀存疑（誌錄不強解）。 校勘末條〔T25 0471b16〕「別【大】｜別釋第卅四品四竟【石】」——石本於本品末見「別釋第卅四品四竟」一句，其數字「卅四」與本品品序「三十五」不合。疑石本此句指前品（品三十四）之訖語誤植於此，或石本卷帙劃分與大正不同，如實誌錄此異常，本目未強解，俟後品考據或覆核。
所釋經 witness 統計（誌數供覆核）。 所釋經 T223 側於本品對讀範圍（〔T08 0287a26–0288a14〕）內之 <app> witness 條目計三十三條，本目未逐條展開（核心異文「遣異／梵志」已由四造交叉取得高置信度），據實誌其統計數，供覆核。
I. Structural Placement
Within the sequence in which the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa comments on the Larger Sūtra, this chapter belongs to the section of the Commentary on the Remaining Chapters and falls in Fascicle 58, as the next chapter within the same fascicle after the preceding chapter, "Exhortation to Receive and Uphold", Chapter 34. The preceding chapter, "Exhortation to Receive and Uphold", opens a separate fascicle shell for Fascicle 58 and carries the two-line signature (「聖者龍樹造」 tr. "composed by the noble Nāgārjuna" and 「後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什譯」 tr. "translated by the Tripiṭaka master Kumārajīva of Kucha, of the Later Qin"); this chapter continues within the same Fascicle 58 and does not repeat the signature—the chapter-body jhead (heading element)〔T25 0470a15〕 already contains the full chapter name, 「大智度論釋梵志品第三十五」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic, the Thirty-fifth", with no independent mulu (table-of-contents) element immediately adjoining the opening lb (line-break marker) below it, and it follows directly after the sentence that closes the preceding chapter, 「如是得今世、後世功德」 tr. "thus one obtains merit in this life and in later lives". This type, 「同卷承續、不重署名」 tr. "continuing within the same fascicle, not repeating the signature", is the same type as that of an earlier chapter, "Declaring the Truth", and differs from the type of the preceding chapter, "Exhortation to Receive and Uphold", 「別起卷殼、具署名」 tr. "opening a separate fascicle shell, carrying the signature"; this is recorded as it is.
The end boundary of this chapter〔T25 0471b17〕 is where the next chapter, "Ānanda's Praise", begins; it is a chapter boundary inside the same Fascicle 58 (not the end of the fascicle: before the boundary there is no fun="close" fascicle-closing tag, and a search back within the chapter for fun="close" counts zero). The main text of the chapter body ends at the sentence 「因果不相離故言『不二不別』」 tr. "because cause and result are not apart from each other, it is said ‘not two and not different’"〔T25 0471b15〕, and the next chapter immediately begins within the same fascicle.
Within the chapter there is one Sūtra section and one Treatise section in alternation; the whole chapter is read as a single unit and is not split (one thousand nine hundred and thirty-five Chinese characters in all, short of the size for splitting). The Sūtra〔T25 0470a16〕: the brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths come seeking the Buddha's faults; Śakra recites prajñā, and those of the outside paths circle the Buddha at a distance and go away; the Buddha tells Śāriputra that this is by the power of prajñā (because gods and humans are all born from within prajñā); evil Māra conjures the four kinds of troops, and Śakra, seeing through the deception, recites prajñā and turns him back; the Four Heavenly Kings and on up to the Akaniṣṭha gods conjure heavenly flowers, scatter them over the Buddha, and vow that prajñā may long abide; the gods vow of themselves to protect those who receive and uphold it; Śakra declares that prajñā is not different from omniscience, and the Buddha seals it. The Treatise〔T25 0470c24〕 opens with 「釋曰」 tr. "the explanation says" and, with one round of question and answer, explains the difficult points of the sūtra section by section. The count of one Sūtra and one Treatise in this chapter is simpler than the four rounds of question and answer of the preceding chapter, "Exhortation to Receive and Uphold"; it is a narrative-type chapter (the Sūtra section takes up a large share, Sūtra and Treatise being close in length), each fixed from the base text itself and not following the pattern of other chapters.
Both markers within the chapter stand exactly at the head of a block, with no embedded transition. The Sūtra marker is at〔T25 0470a16〕, immediately after the chapter title and before the first sentence of the sūtra text, 「爾時，諸外道梵志來向佛所」 tr. "At that time the brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths came to where the Buddha was", forming a block of its own. The Treatise marker is at〔T25 0470c24〕, forming a block of its own, the head of the block directly followed by 「釋曰」 tr. "the explanation says". As to the speaker structure of the Treatise, this chapter has a single round of question and answer as its backbone—Question ①〔T25 0471a07〕 「何以不直還，方遶佛而去？」 tr. "Why did they not simply go back, but circled the Buddha and only then went away?" / Answer ①〔T25 0471a08〕 「以般若神力故，於遠處降伏……」 tr. "Because of the spiritual power of prajñā, they were subdued from afar …", matched one to one, with no isolated question and no isolated answer; this is the only question and answer in the whole chapter (a search back within the chapter finds 「問曰」 tr. "Question" once and 「答曰」 tr. "Answer" once), simpler and clearer than the four rounds of question and answer of the preceding chapter, "Exhortation to Receive and Uphold".
II. Terms Examined
The brahmin ascetic (brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths). The pivotal word of the chapter name. 「梵志」 tr. "brahmin ascetic" is originally a general term for one who aspires to the pure conduct of Brahmā, a brahmin practitioner; this chapter uses it as the designation of those of the outside paths who wish to seek out the Buddha's faults—the opening of the sūtra: 「爾時，諸外道梵志來向佛所，欲求佛短」 tr. "At that time the brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths came to where the Buddha was, wishing to seek out the Buddha's faults"〔T25 0470a16〕. The Treatise further points out Śāriputra's connection with such people—「舍利弗本是梵志」 tr. "Śāriputra was originally a brahmin ascetic"〔T25 0471a12〕—and so, seeing those of the outside paths come empty and go empty, 「心少憐愍」 tr. "his mind felt a little pity". The chapter name 「梵志」 tr. "brahmin ascetic" is taken from these fault-seekers of the outside paths at the opening of the sūtra (the variant chapter name 「遣異」 tr. "dispelling the divergent" takes the sense of 「遣除異見／外道」 tr. "dispelling divergent views / those of the outside paths"; see Section IV).
Prajñāpāramitā is not different from omniscience (not two and not different). The pivot of the chapter's meaning. The sentence that Śakra declares of himself and that the Buddha then seals—「般若波羅蜜不異一切智，一切智不異般若波羅蜜；般若波羅蜜、一切智，不二不別。」 tr. "Prajñāpāramitā is not different from omniscience, and omniscience is not different from prajñāpāramitā; prajñāpāramitā and omniscience are not two and not different."〔T25 0470c10 (Śakra) / 0470c18 (the Buddha's seal)〕. 「一切智」 tr. "omniscience" is sarvajñā, the ultimate knowledge of the buddhas. That prajñā and omniscience are 「不二不別」 tr. "not two and not different" does not mean that the two names are one substance without any distinction; it means that the two are to each other the cause that gives birth and the cause that is spoken of, cause and result not apart from each other (the Treatise distinguishes this by the simile of milk and curd; see Section III). This phrase, 「不異／不二不別」 tr. "not different / not two and not different", is stated again and again by the sūtra and the treatise, and is where the chapter comes to its close.
「如佛」 tr. "as a Buddha" · 「次佛」 tr. "next to a Buddha" (the Dharma-nature body · the bodhisattva in a fleshly body). The Treatise's defining explanation of the gods' words 「視是人如佛、若次佛」 tr. "regard this person as a Buddha, or as next to a Buddha". 「如佛」 tr. "As a Buddha" means 「法性身，住阿鞞跋致，得無生法忍，乃至十地」 tr. "the Dharma-nature body, abiding as avaivartika, having attained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, and so on up to the ten grounds"〔T25 0471b02〕—the bodhisattva of the Dharma-nature body who already abides in the ground of non-retrogression and has attained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas and so on up to the ten grounds, whose virtue is like a Buddha's. 「次佛」 tr. "Next to a Buddha" means 「肉身菩薩能說般若波羅蜜及其正義」 tr. "a bodhisattva in a fleshly body who can expound prajñāpāramitā and its right meaning"〔T25 0471b04〕—a bodhisattva still dwelling in a fleshly body yet able to proclaim prajñā and its right meaning, whose virtue is next to a Buddha's. The two names divide those who receive and uphold prajñā into two grades, and are the doctrinal ground of the gods' vow to protect them.
III. Similes and Stories
The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa is known for its similes. This chapter has three principal similes, all falling within the one Treatise section, and 「乳酪喻」 tr. "the simile of milk and curd" is the pivotal simile that closes the whole chapter.
The simile of the madman wounding space. The Treatise explains the futility of the outside paths' coming, with wrong views, to dispute. Those of the outside paths say that the Buddha teaches 「諸法畢竟空、無所有」 tr. "all dharmas are ultimately empty, without anything existent", and wish to go together to question him and break this doctrine of emptiness; the treatise-author cuts them off: 「譬如狂人欲中傷虛空，徒自疲苦！」 tr. "It is like a madman who wishes to wound empty space: he only wearies and pains himself!"〔T25 0471a02〕. Space cannot be wounded: a simile for the ultimately pure prajñā, in which no fault can be brought out; the madman pains himself: a simile for those of the outside paths who, holding wrong views and evil minds, come to dispute and only bring trouble and disgrace upon themselves. This simile makes clear why those of the outside paths who seek faults never find an opening.
The simile of a fatal sickness, a good physician, and divine medicine. The Treatise explains the Buddha's answer to Śāriputra's doubt, 「外道何以空來而去」 tr. "why did those of the outside paths come in vain and go away?"—「是諸梵志乃至無一念善心，但持惡意，邪見著心，欲求諸法定相，是故不中度」 tr. "these brahmin ascetics have not so much as a single thought of a wholesome mind; they hold only evil intent, with wrong views clinging to their minds, seeking a fixed mark in dharmas; therefore they are not fit to be delivered"〔T25 0471a18〕—and then concludes with a simile: 「譬如必死之病，雖有良醫、神藥，不能救濟。」 tr. "It is like a fatal sickness: though there be a good physician and divine medicine, it cannot be saved."〔T25 0471a20〕. The fatal sickness is a simile for the capacity of those of the outside paths, with wrong views clinging to their minds and not a single wholesome thought; the good physician and divine medicine, for the power of the Buddha and of prajñā. Since the sickness is certainly fatal, the medicine cannot save: a simile for this, that when the capacity does not receive, the Dharma cannot deliver. This is a true account of prajñā's delivering, 「應機而度、不強度無機」 tr. "delivering in response to capacity, not forcibly delivering where there is no capacity"; it is not that the power of prajñā falls short.
The simile of milk and curd (the pivotal simile of the chapter · closing the whole chapter). At the end of the Treatise this simile closes the meaning 「般若不異一切智、不二不別」 tr. "prajñā is not different from omniscience, not two and not different"—「譬如乳變為酪，離乳無酪，亦不得言乳即是酪；般若波羅蜜變為一切種智，離般若亦無一切種智，亦不得言般若即是一切種智。」 tr. "It is like milk changing into curd: apart from milk there is no curd, and yet one cannot say that milk is curd; prajñāpāramitā changes into omniscience of all kinds: apart from prajñā there is likewise no omniscience of all kinds, and yet one cannot say that prajñā is omniscience of all kinds."〔T25 0471b10〕. Milk changing into curd is a simile for this: when the bodhisattva's practice of prajñā is complete, on attaining buddhahood prajñā changes into omniscience of all kinds. Apart from milk there is no curd: apart from prajñā there is no omniscience of all kinds (hence not different, not distinct). One cannot say that milk is curd: one cannot say outright that prajñā is omniscience of all kinds (hence not one). From this the treatise-author judges 「般若與一切種智作生因，一切種智與般若作說因，因果不相離故」 tr. "prajñā acts as the cause that gives birth to omniscience of all kinds, and omniscience of all kinds acts as the cause that is spoken of for prajñā; because cause and result are not apart from each other"〔T25 0471b14〕, and says 「不二不別」 tr. "not two and not different"—neither one nor different, cause and result identical with each other and yet not confused. This simile is the overall pivot of the chapter's meaning, gathering up the phrase 「不二不別」 tr. "not two and not different" that the sūtra and the treatise state again and again.
IV. The Sūtra Passage Explained
The four-way crossed symmetrical network of chapter names: Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic / Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent (variant names of the same chapter · recorded side by side without judgement). The name of this chapter appears on both sides, in this treatise and in the sūtra explained, in the two variant forms 「梵志品／遣異品」 tr. "Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic / Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent", and the base texts and variant texts of the two sides form an exact crossed symmetry. This is the first matter of the chapter that needs to be sorted out, and it is recorded point by point from the base text.
First, the side of this treatise (T25n1509). The fascicle-head jhead reads 「大智度論釋梵志品第三十五」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic, the Thirty-fifth"〔T25 0470a15〕, the base text (the Taishō / Korean canon lemma) reading 「梵志品」 tr. "Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic"; and under this chapter title there is a collation note—「梵志品【大】｜遣異品【宋】」 tr. "‘Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic’ in the Taishō; ‘Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent’ in the Song"〔T25 0470a15〕—that is, the Song edition of this treatise writes 「遣異品」 tr. "Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent" directly in the very place of the chapter title. This is direct byte evidence of two chapter names coexisting within one and the same treatise (this treatise's base text 「梵志」 tr. "brahmin ascetic" / its Song edition 「遣異」 tr. "dispelling the divergent").
Second, the side of the sūtra explained (T223). The title of this chapter in the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra translated by Kumārajīva of the Later Qin reads, in the base text (the lemma), 「遣異品」 tr. "Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent"〔T08 0287a26 mulu 「35 遣異品」 tr. "35 Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent"〕; and within its head there is also an inline collation note, 「丹梵志品」 tr. "Khitan: Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic"—that is, the Khitan edition of T223 writes 「梵志品」 tr. "Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic" directly in the same place. This is direct byte evidence of two chapter names coexisting on the side of the sūtra explained (T223's base text 「遣異」 tr. "dispelling the divergent" / its Khitan edition 「梵志」 tr. "brahmin ascetic").
Third, the crossed pattern. Taking the four forms of the two sides together—this treatise's base text = Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic / this treatise's Song edition = Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent; T223's base text = Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent / T223's Khitan edition = Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic—the two variant readings in the two transmissions of each of the two texts correspond to each other symmetrically (this treatise's base text = T223's Khitan edition, reading 「梵志」 tr. "brahmin ascetic"; this treatise's Song edition = T223's base text, reading 「遣異」 tr. "dispelling the divergent"), forming a rare 「雙向雙讀交叉印證」 tr. "two-way, two-reading crossed mutual evidence". This symmetrical pattern is stronger than the one-directional type of the preceding chapter, "Exhortation to Receive and Uphold", 「本論內部四本一致對底本」 tr. "four texts within this treatise agreeing against the base text", and is strong evidence of variant names for the same chapter.
Fourth, third supporting evidence from the ancient masters' commentaries. Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra (X24n0451) uses 「遣異品第三十五」 tr. "Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent, the Thirty-fifth"〔X24n0451 0270a13〕 (the same as T223's base-text name 「遣異」 tr. "dispelling the divergent", not this treatise's base-text name 「梵志」 tr. "brahmin ascetic")—continuing the pattern recorded in the preceding chapters, 「古德疏依所釋經／多數 witness 命名而非依本論底本命名」 tr. "the ancient masters' commentaries name chapters after the sūtra explained / the majority of witnesses, not after this treatise's base text"; this chapter is the fifth consecutive instance of that observation ("Quelling Strife" in the preceding fascicle, and the preceding chapters "Weighing the Jewelled Stūpa", "Declaring the Truth", "Exhortation to Receive and Uphold", and this chapter).
Fifth, the decision and the ruling for this edition. Of the four forms on the two sides, the difference lies in the sense taken, 「梵志（求短之外道）／遣異（遣除異見）」 tr. "brahmin ascetic (those of the outside paths who seek faults) / dispelling the divergent (dispelling divergent views)", while the content corresponds completely (variant translations / variant copies of one and the same chapter, the plot, the persons, and the order corresponding one by one; see the full comparative reading below)—it is judged to be 「異名同品」 tr. "variant names of the same chapter", not a displacement of chapter order, not a merging, not a splitting. The 「品序內容分歧（品三十五起·誌錄俟品三十五考據）」 tr. "divergence of chapter order and content (from Chapter 35 on · recorded and left to the collation of Chapter 35)" recorded in the apparatus of the preceding chapter, "Exhortation to Receive and Uphold", is closed by this crossed symmetrical pattern: the divergence belongs to the class of 「異名」 tr. "variant names", not to a divergence in the arrangement of chapter order. In this edition the chapter name follows this treatise's base text, 「梵志品」 tr. "Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic" (the main axis for the chapter names of this edition is this treatise's base text, a ruling already fixed in the edition's principles, resting on byte evidence in the base text ; this section does not reopen it); the name 「遣異品」 tr. "Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent" and its forms are all kept word for word in the comparative narrative, recorded side by side without judgement.
Chapter-number off-by-one (continuing the established phenomenon since Chapter 27 · further check). In the sūtra explained, T223, the mulu attribute ordinal for this chapter is thirty-six, while the displayed title is 「35 遣異品」 tr. "35 Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent"〔T08 0287a26〕: the attribute counts one place more than the displayed text—a continuation of the established misalignment of chapter numbering in the electronic canon text of the sūtra explained since Chapter 27 (ordinal = displayed number plus one). For the next chapter, T223's mulu ordinal is thirty-seven and the displayed text 「36 尊導品」 tr. "36 Chapter on the Honoured Guide"〔T08 0288a14〕, continuing the same mechanism. Additionally recorded here: on the T223 side there is also a duplicated mulu ordinal thirty-seven (displayed 「37 法稱品」 tr. "37 Chapter on the Praise of the Dharma", at〔T08 0290b09〕), a further counting anomaly internal to T223's mulu itself (the ordinal thirty-seven appearing twice), not of the same origin as this chapter's off-by-one mechanism; it is recorded as it is for the attention of the research on later chapters, and this section does not unfold it. On this treatise's side, the displayed chapter number 「三十五」 tr. "thirty-five" in the mulu of Chapter 35 agrees with n=35 in the chapter-order table, and for the next chapter, "Ānanda's Praise", this treatise likewise shows no misalignment—this is a structural phenomenon of the electronic canon text of the sūtra explained alone, not seen on this treatise's side; recorded as it is.
Later divergence of chapter order (recorded and handed to later chapters · without judgement). After this chapter's end boundary, the next chapters on the two sides are also differently named: this treatise's next chapter is "Ānanda's Praise"〔T25 0471b17〕, while in T223 / X24 the next chapter is "Chapter on the Honoured Guide, the Thirty-sixth"〔T08 0288a14 mulu 「36 尊導品」 tr. "36 Chapter on the Honoured Guide" / X24n0451 0270c21〕. This is a continuing difference in the arrangement of chapter order on the two sides; the remit of this section ends at Chapter 35, and it only records the exact loci as they are, handing the investigation of the nature of the difference to the research on later chapters; recorded without judgement.
Full comparative reading of the cited sūtra (two-sided collation · this chapter is of the two-way symmetrical type). The one Sūtra section of this treatise (the continuous stream of Chinese characters left after stripping the chapter title and the Sūtra marker,〔T25 0470a16 up to before 0470c24; on this treatise's side, about one thousand and eighty Chinese characters only〕) was collated sentence by sentence against the whole chapter "Dispelling the Divergent" of the sūtra explained〔T08 0287a26, from after the head up to before 0288a14〕. At the opening the wording is almost identical, word for word—「爾時，諸外道異學梵志來向佛所，欲求佛短」 tr. "At that time the brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths and of divergent learning came to where the Buddha was, wishing to seek out the Buddha's faults" (T223, with the two additional characters 「異學」 tr. "divergent learning") against 「爾時，諸外道梵志來向佛所，欲求佛短」 tr. "At that time the brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths came to where the Buddha was, wishing to seek out the Buddha's faults" (this treatise)—and thereafter Śakra's reciting of prajñā, the outside paths' circling the Buddha and going away, evil Māra's conjuring of the four kinds of troops, the four kinds of troops of Bimbisāra / Prasenajit / the Śākyans / the Licchavis all being unlike them, the gods' conjuring of flowers and scattering them over the Buddha, as a Buddha / next to a Buddha, and the other core plots, persons, and order all correspond one by one, with no missing or displaced episode. The sūtra explained has no Treatise layer for this chapter; the Treatise portion of this treatise is a structural expansion belonging to the treatise layer, not a textual variant. The core evidence of the two-sided collation for this chapter comes from the internal splits of witnesses on each side and their crossed symmetrical agreement (the crossing of the four forms of the chapter name; see above)—stronger than the preceding chapter's one-directional type, 「本論內部四本一致對底本」 tr. "four texts within this treatise agreeing against the base text", it is of the 「雙向對稱型」 tr. "two-way symmetrical type", and is recorded as it is. On the T223 side, within the range of this chapter's comparative reading (〔T08 0287a26–0288a14〕), the <app> witness entries number thirty-three; this section does not unfold them entry by entry (the core variant having already reached high confidence through the four-way crossing), and records their count as it is for further review (see Section VIII).
V. The Prajñā Eye
The eye of this chapter lies in the full unfolding of the one meaning 「般若波羅蜜不異一切智、不二不別」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is not different from omniscience, not two and not different"—the reason one who receives and upholds prajñā 「即是佛、若次佛」 tr. "is the Buddha, or next to a Buddha" is precisely that prajñā and the ultimate omniscience of the buddhas are not two and not different. Its meaning can be summed up in four layers.
First, those of the outside paths and Māra find no opening, because gods, humans, and buddhas are all born from within prajñā. The sūtra begins with Śakra reciting prajñā so that those of the outside paths 「終不能中道作礙、斷說般若波羅蜜」 tr. "will never be able to make an obstacle midway or cut off the teaching of prajñāpāramitā"〔T25 0470a19〕, and the Buddha tells Śāriputra why—「是三千大千世界中，諸四天王天乃至阿迦尼吒天、諸聲聞、辟支佛、諸菩薩摩訶薩等守護是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "in this three-thousand great-thousand world, the gods of the heavens of the Four Heavenly Kings and on up to the Akaniṣṭha heaven, the śrāvakas, the pratyekabuddhas, the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, and the rest guard this prajñāpāramitā", the reason lying in 「是諸天、人皆從般若波羅蜜中生故」 tr. "because all these gods and humans are born from within prajñāpāramitā"〔T25 0470b04〕; it extends further to the ten directions, 「諸佛……皆守護是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the buddhas … all guard this prajñāpāramitā", the reason lying in 「是諸佛等皆從般若波羅蜜中生故」 tr. "because these buddhas and the rest are all born from within prajñāpāramitā"〔T25 0470b07〕. The reason for the protection returns layer upon layer to 「皆從般若中生」 tr. "all are born from within prajñā"—prajñā is that from which buddhas, bodhisattvas, and gods are born, and so all who come with evil intent never find their opening. Evil Māra conjures the four kinds of troops, wishing to break the bodhisattvas' intent of receiving the prediction; Śakra sees through the deception (「頻婆娑羅王四種兵所不類，波斯匿王四種兵亦不類，諸釋子四種兵、諸梨唱四種兵皆亦不類」 tr. "they are not like the four kinds of troops of King Bimbisāra, nor like the four kinds of troops of King Prasenajit, and the four kinds of troops of the Śākyans and the four kinds of troops of the Licchavis are none of them like these either"〔T25 0470b14〕) and recites prajñā, and Māra too 「漸漸復道還去」 tr. "gradually turned back along the road and went away"—that Māra and those of the outside paths find no opening is one and the same principle.
Second, the gods conjure flowers and make vows, and regard the one who receives and upholds as the Buddha or as next to a Buddha. The Four Heavenly Kings and on up to the Akaniṣṭha gods conjure heavenly flowers and scatter them over the Buddha, vowing 「般若波羅蜜久住閻浮提」 tr. "may prajñāpāramitā long abide in Jambudvīpa"〔T25 0470b21〕, because 「閻浮提人受持般若波羅蜜，隨所住時，佛寶住不滅，法寶、僧寶亦住不滅」 tr. "when the people of Jambudvīpa receive and uphold prajñāpāramitā, for as long as it abides, the Buddha Jewel abides and does not perish, and the Dharma Jewel and the Saṅgha Jewel likewise abide and do not perish"—if prajñā long abides, the Three Jewels long abide along with it. The gods further vow of themselves to protect the good men and good women who receive and uphold prajñā and so on up to rightly recollect it: 「我等視是人即是佛、若次佛」 tr. "we regard this person as being the Buddha, or as next to a Buddha"〔T25 0470c10〕—one who receives and upholds prajñā is equal in virtue to 「如佛」 tr. "as a Buddha" (the bodhisattva of the Dharma-nature body) and 「次佛」 tr. "next to a Buddha" (the bodhisattva in a fleshly body who can expound prajñā; see Section II), and so the gods protect such a person as they protect a Buddha.
Third, prajñā is not different from omniscience, not two and not different (the pivotal meaning of the chapter). Śakra says to the Buddha 「諸佛一切智應當從般若波羅蜜中求，般若波羅蜜亦當從一切智中求」 tr. "the omniscience of the buddhas should be sought from within prajñāpāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā should likewise be sought from within omniscience", the reason lying in 「般若波羅蜜不異一切智，一切智不異般若波羅蜜；般若波羅蜜、一切智，不二不別」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is not different from omniscience, and omniscience is not different from prajñāpāramitā; prajñāpāramitā and omniscience are not two and not different"〔T25 0470c16〕; the Buddha seals it at once—「如是！如是！憍尸迦！諸佛一切智即是般若波羅蜜，般若波羅蜜即是一切智」 tr. "Just so! Just so! Kauśika! The omniscience of the buddhas is prajñāpāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā is omniscience"〔T25 0470c19〕—and points out why: 「諸佛一切智，從般若波羅蜜中生」 tr. "the omniscience of the buddhas is born from within prajñāpāramitā". Prajñā and omniscience, though distinguished as the stage of the cause (prajñā) and the stage of the result (omniscience), are not two and not different; this is the doctrinal ground on which the gods 「視是人即是佛、若次佛」 tr. "regard this person as being the Buddha, or as next to a Buddha", and it is also where the chapter comes to its close.
Fourth, the causal distinction within 「不二不別」 tr. "not two and not different" (the eye of the simile of milk and curd). The Treatise does not take 「不異」 tr. "not different" outright as one substance without distinction, but distinguishes it by the cause that gives birth and the cause that is spoken of—「菩薩行般若波羅蜜具足故，得佛時，般若變成一切種智」 tr. "because the bodhisattva's practice of prajñāpāramitā is complete, on attaining buddhahood prajñā changes into omniscience of all kinds"〔T25 0471b07〕, and therefore 「一切種智當從般若中求」 tr. "omniscience of all kinds should be sought from within prajñā"; 「佛能說般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the Buddha can expound prajñāpāramitā"〔T25 0471b09〕, and therefore 「般若波羅蜜當從一切智中求」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā should be sought from within omniscience". Prajñā and omniscience of all kinds are to each other the cause that gives birth and the cause that is spoken of: 「因果不相離故言『不二不別』」 tr. "because cause and result are not apart from each other, it is said ‘not two and not different’"〔T25 0471b15〕 (for the simile of milk and curd see Section III). This distinction, 「非一非異、因果相即而不相濫」 tr. "neither one nor different; cause and result identical with each other and yet not confused", is the true determination of the relation between prajñā and omniscience—falling neither into 「即是」 tr. "is" (one) nor into 「異」 tr. "different" (distinct); this is the finest point of the chapter's meaning.
VI. Divergent Readings of the Masters
The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa has no tradition of a complete line-by-line commentary; the ancient masters' citations and explanations lean wherever the material happens to fall. The ancient masters' rereading of this chapter is of two types: Jizang's commentary, which explains the sūtra being explained, preserves a complete dedicated section with a detailed structural division, and its explanation of the chapter name and its division of the chapter's purport correspond to the sūtra and treatise of this chapter; Huiying's commentary, which explains the treatise, is broken off and does not cover this fascicle. This section records the correspondence between what each commented on or cited and this chapter, and does not judge the relative merit of the interpretations.
Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra (X24n0451). Its line-by-line commentary on this chapter begins at〔X24n0451 0270a13〕 (the chapter title 「遣異品第三十五」 tr. "Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent, the Thirty-fifth", immediately after the end of the preceding chapter, "Exhorting to Uphold") and runs up to before〔X24n0451 0270c21〕 (before the start of the next chapter, "Chapter on the Honoured Guide, the Thirty-sixth"), covering the whole of this chapter's sūtra and treatise. Throughout, Jizang uses the name 「遣異品」 tr. "Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent" (the same as T223's base text, not this treatise's base-text 「梵志品」 tr. "Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic"; see Section IV). Two points are worth recording. First, the division of the chapter's purport into three fruits—「此品明三果，謂人不得便，魔不得便，魔諸天守護。」 tr. "This chapter makes clear three fruits, namely: humans find no opening; Māra finds no opening; [against] Māra the gods guard and protect."〔X24n0451 0270a14〕: Jizang judges that this chapter makes clear 「三果」 tr. "three fruits", corresponding one by one to the three great episodes of the chapter's sūtra text (those of the outside paths seek faults and find no opening; evil Māra conjures troops seeking an opening and finds none; the gods guard and make vows); the content is judged accurate, and belongs to a placement of the structural division as 「三果證驗」 tr. "the verification of the three fruits", continuing the great division of 「五果格量」 tr. "the weighing of the five fruits" in the preceding chapter, "Exhorting to Uphold". Second, a posed question analysing the difference—Jizang further poses the question 「此品得三果，與上何異」 tr. "this chapter obtains three fruits: how does it differ from what is above?" and answers it himself, making clear that this chapter is 「現證驗事」 tr. "the matter of manifest verification" (the preceding chapter having made clear the principle, this chapter showing its verification), which corresponds exactly to the judgement at the opening of this treatise's Treatise section, 「今欲現證驗故」 tr. "now, because it wishes to show manifest verification"〔T25 0470c25〕. Jizang's commentary covers this chapter completely; its two items, the division into three fruits and the distinction of verification, are of direct value for citation in the Exposition.
Huiying's Commentary (X46n0791). It is the only ancient commentary explaining this treatise, and survives only in fragmentary fascicles; Fascicle 17 ends at the treatise's Fascicle 45, and Fascicle 21 begins at the treatise's Fascicle 59; Fascicle 58 of the treatise, to which this chapter belongs, falls exactly within the gap between these two fascicles, and the surviving fascicles of Huiying's commentary do not cover this chapter at all. A search back through the whole corpus for word-strings unique to this chapter, such as 「梵志品」 tr. "Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic" and 「遣異品」 tr. "Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent", yields zero hits for the passages of this chapter—the fragmentary fascicles of Huiying's commentary do not cover this chapter, continuing the conclusion recorded for the preceding chapters; recorded as it is.
Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises (X46n0784). A search back through the whole book for the strings 「梵志品」 tr. "Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic" and 「遣異品」 tr. "Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent" yields zero hits for this chapter—as in the preceding chapters, no citation of this chapter by name is found in Junzheng; the absence is recorded as it is, and nothing is forced.
The treatise's own explanation (self-check). For the name of this chapter, "The Brahmin Ascetic", there is no material within the whole treatise, outside the chapter itself, that corroborates it; recorded as it is.
Recent writings (excluded by rule). Any explanation by recent authors is excluded by rule: it is neither taken as an ancient-master authority nor brought into the doctrinal citations.
VII. Cross-reading and Further Resonances
On the line of meaning of this chapter, three points carry on before and after; all are recorded in this section, and no reading is fixed on anyone's behalf.
First, the chain of further resonance of the meaning 「魔外道不得便」 tr. "Māra and those of the outside paths find no opening" (carrying on from the preceding chapter · manifest verification). The Treatise of the preceding chapter, "Exhortation to Receive and Uphold", had already said 「聞、受般若者，魔、若魔民、外道梵志不得其便」 tr. "for those who hear and receive prajñā, Māra, or Māra's people, or the brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths cannot find their opening"; this chapter's Treatise carries this on at its very opening, saying 「上品中說，聞、受般若者，魔、若魔民、外道梵志不得其便；今欲現證驗故，以威神感致眾魔及諸外道」 tr. "In the chapter above it was said that for those who hear and receive prajñā, Māra, or Māra's people, or the brahmin ascetics of the outsiders' paths cannot find their opening; now, because it wishes to show manifest verification, by majestic spiritual power the hosts of Māra and those of the outside paths are drawn to come"〔T25 0470c24〕—the preceding chapter makes clear the principle, and this chapter shows its verification (those of the outside paths seek faults and find no opening; evil Māra conjures troops seeking an opening and finds none). This is clear evidence of the chapters of this treatise running through one another in meaning, carrying on what came before and opening what follows, and it agrees with Jizang's judgement, 「此品明證驗事」 tr. "this chapter makes clear the matter of verification" (see Section VI).
Second, the further resonance of the meaning 「如佛／次佛」 tr. "as a Buddha / next to a Buddha" (carrying on the line from Chapter 30 · recorded without judgement). This chapter's 「視是人即是佛、若次佛」 tr. "regard this person as being the Buddha, or as next to a Buddha" and its Treatise's 「如佛者法性身……次佛者肉身菩薩」 tr. "‘as a Buddha’ means the Dharma-nature body … ‘next to a Buddha’ means a bodhisattva in a fleshly body"〔T25 0471b02〕 carry on the line set up in the preceding chapters, 「受持般若者德齊菩薩／近佛」 tr. "one who receives and upholds prajñā is equal in virtue to a bodhisattva / is near to a Buddha" (the judgement of the Dharma-nature body abiding as avaivartika and so on up to the ten grounds belongs to the downward continuation of the meaning of the stages of the path of prajñā); this belongs to the treatise's carrying on of its own line of meaning, and this section records its traces without fixing it, on anyone's behalf, as a structural assertion about a single sentence of the sūtra.
Third, the link to the treasury (stable citation · soft citation). This chapter's 「般若波羅蜜不異一切智……不二不別」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is not different from omniscience … not two and not different", together with the meaning of cause and result identical with each other in the simile of milk and curd, is the scriptural and treatise basis for the one meaning that prajñā and omniscience (sarvajñā) are identical with each other, fixed by the stable citation〔T25n1509 Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic · Fascicle 58〕; the places where the Heart Sūtra and the Consciousness-only mirror cite this treatise are not yet finalised, so the reference is soft, pending word-for-word verification. This belongs to the further resonance of the meaning of prajñā carrying on down into the sūtras; recorded without judgement.
VIII. Witnesses and Editions
The base text of this chapter is Fascicle 58 of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa〔T25 0470a15–0471b15〕 (the main text of the chapter body ends at〔T25 0471b15〕 at the sentence 「因果不相離故言『不二不別』」 tr. "because cause and result are not apart from each other, it is said ‘not two and not different’", and the next chapter, "Ānanda's Praise", begins at〔T25 0471b17〕, a chapter boundary within Fascicle 58, not the end of the fascicle); the collation text for the sūtra explained is the chapter "Dispelling the Divergent" of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra〔T08 0287a26 onward〕; the ancient-master commentary text for collation is Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra (X24n0451, covering this chapter at〔X24n0451 0270a13–0270c21〕, up to before the latter locus); the fragmentary fascicles of Huiying's Commentary (X46n0791) do not cover this chapter, and Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises (X46n0784) has no citation of it. The variant collation notes follow the Taishō collation, covering differences between the Taishō base text and the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace editions, the Shōgozō manuscript, and the Ishiyama text (the Ishiyama-dera manuscript), as well as the Korean canon (K).
Collation notes on the chapter name (the evidential basis for the four forms · this treatise's Song edition / T223's Khitan edition listed separately). The collation notes at the head of the chapter set out variants of the chapter name, two of which bear on the matter. First, the collation note on this treatise's chapter title〔T25 0470a15〕—「梵志品【大】｜遣異品【宋】」 tr. "‘Chapter on the Brahmin Ascetic’ in the Taishō; ‘Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent’ in the Song"—this treatise's base text has, in two characters, 「梵志」 tr. "brahmin ascetic", and the Song edition reads 「遣異」 tr. "dispelling the divergent". Second, under the chapter title there is a further collation note〔T25 0470a15〕—「五【大】｜五（經作遣異品）【明】｜五品【宮】」 tr. "‘five’ in the Taishō; ‘five (the sūtra reads Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent)’ in the Ming; ‘five, chapter’ in the Palace"—the Ming edition here adds the note 「經作遣異品」 tr. "the sūtra reads ‘Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent’", that is, the Ming editors had already recorded that the sūtra explained (T223) reads 「遣異品」 tr. "Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent", which is supporting evidence for the four-way crossing. These two notes agree with T223's base-text 「遣異」 tr. "dispelling the divergent" and Khitan-edition 「梵志」 tr. "brahmin ascetic" (an inline collation note), and are the evidential basis for the crossed symmetry of the four forms of the chapter name, 「梵志／遣異」 tr. "brahmin ascetic / dispelling the divergent", used for the decision on the chapter name in Section IV—recorded side by side as they are, with no reconciliation forced upon them.
The CBETA supplied-character collation note (the Korean canon K text collating 「可」 tr. "can" as 「何」 tr. "what" · listed separately). At the head of the sentence of Question ① in the Treatise there is a supplied-character collation note〔T25 0471a07〕—「何（K14n0549_p1078c19）【CB】【麗-CB】｜可【大】」 tr. "‘what’ (with its Korean canon page reference) in CBETA and in the Korean canon as corrected by CBETA; ‘can’ in the Taishō"—that is, the Taishō base text reads 「可」 tr. "can", and CBETA, collating from the Korean canon (K14n0549), corrects the reading to 「何」 tr. "what", by which the question is fixed as 「何以不直還」 tr. "why did they not simply go back". This is a special format of anchor note (the collation note itself marks the Korean canon page as its source), different from the ordinary side-by-side listing of variant readings, and so it is listed separately. The main text follows the CBETA / Korean canon corrected reading 「何」 tr. "what", and its collation source is recorded as it is.
Complete ledger of collation notes (all forty-eight entries reconciled · transcribed as they stand). Below, transcribed in their original form from the end of the working base text: forty-three anchor collation notes belonging to this chapter itself (own), and a further five refrain re-citations within the chapter or across chapters (star)—of which three are re-citations within the chapter (pointing back to this chapter's own canonical note), and two are cross-chapter external citations (〔T25 0470b05〕 「世界／國土」 tr. "world / land" and〔T25 0470b24〕 「世界／國土」 tr. "world / land" are both star entries pointing back to note(0468026), within the range of Chapter 34, sharing one canonical note across chapters; unlike the preceding chapter, "Exhortation to Receive and Uphold", whose star entries all lie within the chapter, this chapter's star entries include cross-chapter external citations, marked as they are). The readings of the variant texts are preserved side by side, while the main text still follows the reading of the current base text:
- 〔T25 0470a15〕梵志品【大】｜遣異品【宋】(the core of the four forms of the chapter name · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0470a15〕五【大】｜五（經作遣異品）【明】｜五品【宮】
- 〔T25 0470a19〕說【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0470a21〕遶【大】｜達【聖】
- 〔T25 0470a23〕(star · re-cited within the chapter → note(0470a21)) 遶【大】｜達【聖】
- 〔T25 0470a27〕但【大】｜〔－〕【宮】【聖】
- 〔T25 0470a27〕求【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】
- 〔T25 0470a27〕佛【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0470b03〕等【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】
- 〔T25 0470b05〕(star · cited from outside the chapter → note(0468026) · within the range of Chapter 34) 世界【大】｜國土【石】
- 〔T25 0470b06〕摩訶薩、諸天、龍、鬼神等皆守護是般若波羅蜜。所以者何【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0470b10〕受【大】｜授【明】
- 〔T25 0470b11〕寧【大】｜曼【聖】
- 〔T25 0470b14〕種【大】｜〔－〕【石】
- 〔T25 0470b15〕兵【大】｜兵所不類【石】
- 〔T25 0470b16〕唱【大】｜昌【元】【明】【石】
- 〔T25 0470b17〕(star · re-cited within the chapter → note(0470b11)) 寧【大】｜曼【聖】
- 〔T25 0470b18〕如【大】｜聞其【石】
- 〔T25 0470b18〕聞【大】｜〔－〕【石】
- 〔T25 0470b19〕漸【大】｜漸而退【石】
- 〔T25 0470b23〕住【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0470b24〕(star · cited from outside the chapter → note(0468026) · within the range of Chapter 34 · second occurrence) 世界【大】｜國土【石】
- 〔T25 0470b25〕皆【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0470b29〕冥【大】｜難【聖】
- 〔T25 0470c03〕所【大】｜在所【石】
- 〔T25 0470c03〕住在【大】｜在住【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】
- 〔T25 0470c05〕眾冥【大】｜瞋【聖】
- 〔T25 0470c09〕若【大】｜〔－〕【宮】
- 〔T25 0470c12〕於【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0470c17〕二【大】｜一一【聖】
- 〔T25 0470c26〕感致【大】｜咸到【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a01〕如【大】｜知【宮】
- 〔T25 0471a03〕虛【大】｜處【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a05〕故【大】｜〔－〕【石】
- 〔T25 0471a07〕何（K14n0549_p1078c19）【CB】【麗-CB】｜可【大】(CBETA / Korean canon supplied character · listed separately above)
- 〔T25 0471a07〕方【大】｜乃【宮】
- 〔T25 0471a09〕威【大】｜滅【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a09〕困【大】｜內【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a11〕等怯【大】｜性法【宮】｜等法【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a13〕少【大】｜小【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a14〕求【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a16〕濟【大】｜齊【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a21〕(star · re-cited within the chapter → note(0471a16)) 濟【大】｜齊【聖】
- 〔T25 0471a25〕從【大】｜因【石】
- 〔T25 0471a26〕見【大】｜現【明】
- 〔T25 0471a29〕受【大】｜受持【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0471b02〕等【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0471b16〕別【大】｜別釋第卅四品四竟【石】(doubtful · the number 「卅四」 tr. "thirty-four" does not agree with the chapter order 「三十五」 tr. "thirty-five"; see below)
The above forty-eight entries agree mechanically with the count of anchor collation notes in the working base text (forty-three own, five star, of which three are re-citations within the chapter and two are cross-chapter external citations). The several places bearing on the chapter name (the chapter title〔0470a15〕, where this treatise's Song edition reads 「遣異」 tr. "dispelling the divergent" and the Ming edition adds the note 「經作遣異品」 tr. "the sūtra reads ‘Chapter on Dispelling the Divergent’"; the CBETA / Korean canon supplied character at〔0471a07〕, 「何」 tr. "what") are listed separately above and collated two-way with the sūtra explained (Section IV).
Doubt about the last Ishiyama variant (recorded, with no forced explanation). The last collation entry,〔T25 0471b16〕 「別【大】｜別釋第卅四品四竟【石】」 tr. "‘different’ in the Taishō; ‘different. The explanation of the thirty-fourth chapter, four, is finished’ in the Ishiyama"—the Ishiyama text shows at the end of this chapter the sentence 「別釋第卅四品四竟」 tr. "the explanation of the thirty-fourth chapter, four, is finished", whose number 「卅四」 tr. "thirty-four" does not agree with this chapter's place in the order, 「三十五」 tr. "thirty-five". It is suspected either that this sentence in the Ishiyama text is the closing formula of the preceding chapter (Chapter 34) misplaced here, or that the Ishiyama text divides its fascicles differently from the Taishō; this anomaly is recorded as it is, this section does not force an explanation, and it is handed on to the research on later chapters or to further review.
Witness count for the sūtra explained (the number recorded for further review). On the T223 side, within the range of this chapter's comparative reading (〔T08 0287a26–0288a14〕), the <app> witness entries number thirty-three; this section does not unfold them entry by entry (the core variant, 「遣異／梵志」 tr. "dispelling the divergent / brahmin ascetic", having already reached high confidence through the four-way crossing), and records their count as it is for further review.