“If they do not engage with grasping, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that grasping is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that grasping is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that grasping is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that grasping is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because grasping that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the rebirth process, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the rebirth process is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the rebirth process is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the rebirth process is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the rebirth process is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the rebirth process that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with birth, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that birth is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that birth is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that birth is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that birth is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because birth that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with aging and death, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that aging and death are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that aging and death are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that aging and death are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that aging and death are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because aging and death that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the perfection of generosity, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of generosity is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of generosity is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of generosity is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of generosity is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the perfection of generosity that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the perfection of ethical discipline, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of ethical discipline is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of ethical discipline is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of ethical discipline is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of ethical discipline is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the perfection of ethical discipline that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the perfection of tolerance, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of tolerance is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of tolerance is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of tolerance is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of tolerance is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the perfection of tolerance that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the perfection of perseverance, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of perseverance is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of perseverance is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of perseverance is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of perseverance is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the perfection of perseverance that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the perfection of meditative concentration, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of meditative concentration is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of meditative concentration is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of meditative concentration is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of meditative concentration is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the perfection of meditative concentration that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the perfection of wisdom, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of wisdom is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of wisdom is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of wisdom is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of wisdom is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the perfection of wisdom that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of internal phenomena, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of internal phenomena that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of external phenomena, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external phenomena is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external phenomena is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external phenomena is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external phenomena is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of external phenomena that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of external and internal phenomena, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of external and internal phenomena that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of emptiness, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of emptiness is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of emptiness is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of emptiness is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of emptiness is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of emptiness that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of great extent, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of great extent is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of great extent is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of great extent is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of great extent is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of great extent that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of ultimate reality, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of ultimate reality is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of ultimate reality is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of ultimate reality is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of ultimate reality is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of ultimate reality that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of conditioned phenomena, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of conditioned phenomena that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of the unlimited, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of the unlimited is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of the unlimited is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of the unlimited is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of the unlimited is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of the unlimited that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of nonexclusion, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonexclusion is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonexclusion is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonexclusion is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonexclusion is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of nonexclusion that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of inherent nature, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of inherent nature is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of inherent nature is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of inherent nature is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of inherent nature is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of inherent nature that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of all phenomena, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of all phenomena is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of all phenomena is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of all phenomena is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of all phenomena is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of all phenomena that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of nonentities, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonentities is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonentities is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonentities is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonentities is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of nonentities that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of essential nature, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of essential nature is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of essential nature is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of essential nature is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of essential nature is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of essential nature that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the applications of mindfulness, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the applications of mindfulness are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the applications of mindfulness are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the applications of mindfulness are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the applications of mindfulness are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the applications of mindfulness that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the correct exertions, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the correct exertions are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the correct exertions are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the correct exertions are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the correct exertions are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the correct exertions that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the supports for miraculous ability, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the supports for miraculous ability are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the supports for miraculous ability are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the supports for miraculous ability are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the supports for miraculous ability are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the supports for miraculous ability that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the faculties, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the faculties are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the faculties are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the faculties are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the faculties are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the faculties that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the powers, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the powers are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the powers are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the powers are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the powers are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the powers that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the branches of enlightenment, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the branches of enlightenment are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the branches of enlightenment are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the branches of enlightenment are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the branches of enlightenment are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the branches of enlightenment that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the noble eightfold path, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the noble eightfold path is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the noble eightfold path is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the noble eightfold path is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the noble eightfold path is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the noble eightfold path that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the truths of the noble ones, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the truths of the noble ones are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the truths of the noble ones are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the truths of the noble ones are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the truths of the noble ones are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the truths of the noble ones that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the meditative concentrations, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the meditative concentrations are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the meditative concentrations are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the meditative concentrations are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the meditative concentrations are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the meditative concentrations that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the immeasurable attitudes, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the immeasurable attitudes are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the immeasurable attitudes are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the immeasurable attitudes are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the immeasurable attitudes are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the immeasurable attitudes that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the formless absorptions, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the formless absorptions are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the formless absorptions are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the formless absorptions are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the formless absorptions are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the formless absorptions that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the eight liberations, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the eight liberations are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the eight liberations are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the eight liberations are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the eight liberations are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the eight liberations that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the nine serial steps of meditative absorption, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the nine serial steps of meditative absorption that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the extrasensory powers, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the extrasensory powers are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the extrasensory powers are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the extrasensory powers are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the extrasensory powers are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the extrasensory powers that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the meditative stabilities, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the meditative stabilities are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the meditative stabilities are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the meditative stabilities are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the meditative stabilities are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the meditative stabilities that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the dhāraṇī gateways, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the dhāraṇī gateways are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the dhāraṇī gateways are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the dhāraṇī gateways are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the dhāraṇī gateways are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the dhāraṇī gateways that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the ten powers of the tathāgatas, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the ten powers of the tathāgatas are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the ten powers of the tathāgatas are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the ten powers of the tathāgatas are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the ten powers of the tathāgatas are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the powers of the tathāgatas that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the fearlessnesses, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the fearlessnesses are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the fearlessnesses are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the fearlessnesses are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the fearlessnesses are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the fearlessnesses that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the kinds of exact knowledge, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the kinds of exact knowledge are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the kinds of exact knowledge are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the kinds of exact knowledge are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the kinds of exact knowledge are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the kinds of exact knowledge that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with great loving kindness, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that great loving kindness is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that great loving kindness is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that great loving kindness is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that great loving kindness is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because great loving kindness that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with great compassion, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that great compassion is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that great compassion is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that great compassion is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that great compassion is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because great compassion that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with knowledge of all the dharmas, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that knowledge of all the dharmas is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that knowledge of all the dharmas is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that knowledge of all the dharmas is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that knowledge of all the dharmas is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because knowledge of all the dharmas that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the knowledge of aspects of the path, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the knowledge of aspects of the path is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the knowledge of aspects of the path is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the knowledge of aspects of the path is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the knowledge of aspects of the path is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the knowledge of aspects of the path that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with all-aspect omniscience, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that all-aspect omniscience is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that all-aspect omniscience is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that all-aspect omniscience is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that all-aspect omniscience is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because all-aspect omniscience that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“Moreover, Subhūti, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that physical forms are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘physical forms that are unperfected and perfected are not physical forms,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that feelings are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘feelings that are unperfected and perfected are not feelings,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that perceptions are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘perceptions that are unperfected and perfected are not perceptions,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that formative predispositions are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘formative predispositions that are unperfected and perfected are not formative predispositions,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that consciousness is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘consciousness that is unperfected and perfected is not consciousness,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“If they do not practice with the notion that the eyes are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the eyes that are unperfected and perfected are not the eyes,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the ears are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the ears that are unperfected and perfected are not the ears,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the nose is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the nose that is unperfected and perfected is not the nose,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the tongue is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the tongue that is unperfected and perfected is not the tongue,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the body is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the body that is unperfected and perfected is not the body,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the mental faculty is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the mental faculty that is unperfected and perfected is not the mental faculty,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.