「一切智者」(sarvajña) 一詞常被用來當作佛陀的別名使用，意指無所不知、無所不曉的全知者。所謂的全知，大乘佛教時期特別指一剎那中認識一切之超感官智能。不過，此中的「一切」有可能是抽象真理也可能是具體的現象事物。「一切智者」之思想，廣泛見於印度宗教哲學裡。認為天啟的「吠陀」才是唯一權威的彌曼沙學派 (Mīmāmsā) 大思想家鳩摩利羅 (Kumarila ca. 650-700)等人，反對人類可以作為「一切智者」認識一切存在，對佛教「佛陀是一切智者」之主張提出強烈攻擊。寂護 (Śāntaraksita ca. 725-788) 之《真實綱要》(Tattvasaṃgraha )與其徒弟蓮華戒 (Kamalaśīla ca. 740-795) 之《真實綱要難語釋》( Tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā) 第26章中，對彌曼沙學派的諸多非難展開細緻的答辯與論證。他們書中登場的一切智者類型極為豐富，說是集大乘佛教大成也不為過。本稿以《真實綱要難語釋》對《真實綱要》3627 偈的注釋之譯注為主，並進行若干考察。3627 偈的注釋裡，蓮華戒分別從唯識學派「有形象有知識論」(sakaravijbanavada) 和「無形象知識論」(Nirakarajñānzvāda) 二個分派的觀點，闡述一切智者如何認識無限事物。為了說明無概念分別的一切智者之知，可以正確地認識無限所知，蓮華戒也述及「後得清淨世間智」的概念知在一切智者認識過程中扮演的重要功能。本稿在校稿的同時，針對3627 偈與注釋之間所產生的主題焦點上的落差，進行分析，並對兩類的「後得清淨世間智」以及一切智者與「所知障」的關係等等，提出獨自的觀察。
The term "all-knowing" (sarvajña), meaning omniscience, is often used as an alias for the Buddha. In Mahāyana Buddhism, the word "omniscience" refers specifically to the extrasensory capability which apprehends everything in a single moment. Here, "everything" may refer to abstract truth or specific phenomena. In fact, the idea of omniscient being is widely encountered in various religious philosophical systems in India. Kumārila (ca. 650-700), a great thinker from Mīmāṃsā school, as well as others who thought that the "Vedas" was a divine revelation and therefore the only authoritative scripture, opposed the idea that human beings can become omniscient and thus strongly criticized the Buddhists for claiming that the Buddha was omniscient. Śāntarakṣita (ca. 725- 788) and his student, Kamalaśīla (ca. 740-795), in the 26th chapter of their books Tattvasaṃgraha and Tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā respectively, have provided detailed answers to the questions and counter-arguments against the criticisms from Mīmāṃsā school. The variety of omniscient beings which appears in their books is extremely rich, and it is not an exaggeration to view these books as comprehensive collections of omniscient beings described in Mahayana Buddhism. The aim of this paper is to provide an annotation to the section of Tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā which comments on stanza 3627 of Tattvasaṃgraha, and to carry out investigation of its content. In his commentary on stanza 3627 of Tattvasaṃgraha, Kamalaśīla explains how omniscient beings come to know infinite things (vastvananta), from the point of view of the two sects of Vijñānavādin, the Sākārajñānavāda and the Nirākārajñānavāda. In order to illustrate that the wisdom of omniscient beings that is non-conceptual (nirvikalpa) can correctly apprehend infinite knowable, Kamalaśīla also mentions about the function of "pure worldly knowledge that comes about subsequent to non-conceptual perception" (tatpṛṣṭhalabdhaśuddhalaukikajñāna) during the process of knowing performed by omniscient beings. Along with the annotation, this paper also examines the contextual and focal differences between stanza 3627 and its commentary. Moreover, the two kinds of tatpṛṣṭhalabdhaśuddhalaukikajñāna, as well as the relationship between omniscient beings and the "obscuration to the knowable" (jñeyāvaraṇa) are also being discussed.