仁王般若經疏 1.129

1.129

於恒河沙三千大千國土（乃至）不如於此經中起一念信者，此正舉校量。初明財施三千；後皆得七賢四果下，明法施四果。不如於此經中起一念信者，無所得般若信，勝前有所得財法二施也。何況解一句者，信心尚過，何況解句義也。言句非句者，句無句相故也，亦無非句相，故非非句。又云：句非句者，文字性離也；非非句者，非前二句也。般若非句句非般若者，般若是智、句是文，文智皆無所有，故云般若非句句非般若也。般若亦非菩薩者，人法殊別也，此是無別之別也。

From "If in trisāhasra-mahāsāhasra-lokadhātus as numerous as the sands of the Ganges... it would not equal arousing a single thought-moment of faith in this sūtra", this directly presents the comparison of measurements. First, it clarifies material giving in the trisāhasra; next, from "causing them all to attain the seven worthies and the four fruits" onwards, it clarifies the Dharma-giving of the four fruits. As for "it would not equal arousing a single thought-moment of faith in this sūtra", the faith of prajñā of aprāptitva surpasses the previous two givings of material and Dharma with acquisition. As for "much less understanding a single phrase", even the mind of faith surpasses it, how much more so understanding the meaning of a phrase! Saying "a phrase is a non-phrase" is because a phrase has no mark of a phrase; nor is there a mark of a non-phrase, hence it is "not a non-phrase". Moreover, it is said: "a phrase is a non-phrase" means that characters are intrinsically detached; "not a non-phrase" means it is not the previous two clauses. As for "prajñā is not a phrase and a phrase is not prajñā", prajñā is wisdom and a phrase is text; both text and wisdom are non-existent, hence it says "prajñā is not a phrase and a phrase is not prajñā". As for "prajñā is also not a bodhisattva", person and dharma are distinct; this is a distinction that is no distinction.