“ ‘This is the perfection of generosity. This is the perfection of ethical discipline. This is the perfection of tolerance. This is the perfection of perseverance. This is the perfection of meditative concentration. This is the perfection of wisdom. This is the emptiness of internal phenomena. This is the emptiness of external phenomena. This is the emptiness of external and internal phenomena. This is the emptiness of emptiness. This is the emptiness of great extent. This is the emptiness of ultimate reality. This is the emptiness of conditioned phenomena. This is the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena. This is the emptiness of the unlimited. This is the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end. This is the emptiness of nonexclusion. This is the emptiness of inherent nature. This is the emptiness of all phenomena. This is the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics. This is the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended. This is the emptiness of nonentities. This is the emptiness of essential nature. This is the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities. These are the four applications of mindfulness. These are the four correct exertions. These are the four supports for miraculous ability. These are the five faculties. These are the five powers. These are the seven branches of enlightenment. This is the noble eightfold path. These are the four truths of the noble ones. These are the four meditative concentrations. These are the four immeasurable attitudes. These are the four formless absorptions. These are the eight liberations. These are the nine serial steps of meditative absorption. These are the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation. These are the extrasensory powers. These are the meditative stabilities. These are the dhāraṇī gateways. These are the ten powers of the tathāgatas. These are the four fearlessnesses. These are the four kinds of exact knowledge. This is great compassion. These are the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas. This is the fruit of having entered the stream. This is the fruit of once-returner. This is the fruit of non-returner. This is arhatship. This is individual enlightenment. This is the knowledge of the aspects of the path, and this is all-aspect omniscience,’ well then, has the reality of phenomena as it pertains to phenomena not been disturbed by the Blessed Lord?”
“Blessed Lord,” asked Subhūti, “if the Blessed One has taught the reality of phenomena and given expression to phenomena through names and signs so that others might comprehend, how then, Blessed Lord, when all phenomena are without names and without signs, have you given expression to them through names and signs?”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “this giving expression is not the names, is not the signs, and is not fixation. On the contrary, Subhūti, it merely gives expression to the state of suffering but without fixation on the names and the signs. Subhūti, the tathāgatas and the śrāvakas of the tathāgatas do not become fixated on names or signs. Subhūti, if they were to become fixated on names or become fixated on signs, emptiness would also be fixated on emptiness, signlessness would also be fixated on signlessness, wishlessness would also be fixated on wishlessness, the real nature would also be fixated on the real nature, the very limit of reality would also be fixated on the very limit of reality, the realm of phenomena would also be fixated on the realm of phenomena, and the unconditioned would also be fixated on the unconditioned. But since all these phenomena are simply mere words, they do not dwell in the mere words. So it is, Subhūti, that bodhisattva great beings should continue to abide in the mere names and signs, practicing the perfection of wisdom, but they should not fixate on them.”
Subhūti asked, “Blessed Lord, if all these conditioned phenomena are simply mere names and signs, for what purpose do bodhisattva great beings set their minds on enlightenment, and having set their minds on enlightenment, experience the many kinds of conditioned phenomena; engage in the conduct of a bodhisattva, and while engaging in the conduct of a bodhisattva give away various gifts, maintain ethical discipline, make a practice of tolerance, undertake perseverance, become absorbed in meditative stability, and cultivate wisdom; practice the emptiness of internal phenomena, practice the emptiness of external phenomena, practice the emptiness of external and internal phenomena, practice the emptiness of emptiness, practice the emptiness of great extent, practice the emptiness of ultimate reality, practice the emptiness of conditioned phenomena, practice the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena, practice the emptiness of the unlimited, practice the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end, practice the emptiness of nonexclusion, practice the emptiness of inherent nature, practice the emptiness of all phenomena, practice the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics, practice the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended, practice the emptiness of nonentities, practice the emptiness of essential nature, and practice the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities; practice the applications of mindfulness, practice the correct exertions, practice the supports for miraculous ability, practice the faculties, practice the powers, practice the branches of enlightenment, and practice the noble eightfold path; practice the four truths of the noble ones, practice the four meditative concentrations, practice the four immeasurable attitudes, practice the four formless absorptions, practice the eight liberations, practice the nine serial steps of meditative absorption, practice the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation, practice the extrasensory powers, practice the meditative stabilities, and practice the dhāraṇī gateways; and practice the ten powers of the tathāgatas, practice the four fearlessnesses, practice the four kinds of exact knowledge, practice great loving kindness, practice great compassion, and practice the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas?”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “you have said, ‘If all these conditioned phenomena are simply mere names and signs, well then, for what purpose do bodhisattva great beings engage in the conduct of a bodhisattva?’ In this regard, Subhūti, it is because all conditioned phenomena are simply merely names and signs, which is to say, it is because names are indeed empty of names, and signs are indeed empty of signs that bodhisattva great beings therefore engage in the conduct of a bodhisattva and attain all-aspect omniscience; that, having attained all-aspect omniscience, they turn the wheel of the Dharma; and that, having turned the wheel of the Dharma, they bring beings to final nirvāṇa in the three vehicles. But in those names and signs, an arising, a perishing, a lasting, and a lasting and changing into something else is not apprehended.”
“Blessed Lord, do you say ‘all-aspect omniscience, all-aspect omniscience’?” asked Subhūti.
“Subhūti, I do say ‘all-aspect omniscience, all-aspect omniscience’,” replied the Blessed One.
“Blessed Lord,” asked Subhūti, “since the Tathāgata has spoken of omniscience, and the Tathāgata has also spoken briefly of the knowledge of the aspects of the path, and spoken of all-aspect omniscience, what, Blessed Lord, is the distinction, what is the difference, and what is the aspect1117 of these three types of omniscience?”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “take that which is called ‘omniscience’ with śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, take ‘the knowledge of the aspects of the path’ with bodhisattva great beings, and take ‘all-aspect omniscience’ with the tathāgatas, arhats, perfectly complete buddhas.”
Subhūti asked, “Blessed Lord, why take ‘omniscience’ with śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, why take ‘the knowledge of the aspects of the path’ with bodhisattva great beings, and why take ‘all-aspect omniscience’ with the tathāgatas?”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas know merely all the outer and inner phenomena, as many as there are, but not on all the paths.
“Subhūti, you also said, ‘Why take “the knowledge of the aspects of the path” with bodhisattva great beings?’ In this regard, Subhūti, it is because bodhisattva great beings should practice all paths, and bodhisattva great beings should know all paths, that is to say, they should fully complete whatever paths of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas that there are, and whatever paths of bodhisattvas that there are, all of them. Through those paths they must carry out the activities of the paths, but they do not actualize the very limit of reality.”
Subhūti said, “Blessed Lord, if bodhisattva great beings seek to complete the path of the buddhas in that manner, in that case, they will actualize the very limit of reality.”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “without having refined a buddhafield and without having brought beings to maturity, those bodhisattva great beings will not actualize the very limit of reality.”
“Blessed Lord, do bodhisattva great beings, established on the path, actualize the very limit of reality?” asked Subhūti.
“No,” replied the Blessed One.
“In that case, Blessed Lord, do they do so established on that which is not the path?” asked Subhūti.
“No,” replied the Blessed One.
“In that case, Blessed Lord, do they do so established on that which is the path and also not the path?” asked Subhūti.
“No,” replied the Blessed One.
“In that case, Blessed Lord, do they do so established on that which is neither the path nor not the path?” asked Subhūti.
“No,” replied the Blessed One.
“Blessed Lord, how then will bodhisattva great beings actualize the very limit of reality?” asked Subhūti.
The Blessed One asked in return, “Subhūti, do you think that by being established on the path your mind, without grasping, has been liberated from contamination?”
“No, Blessed Lord,” said Subhūti.
“In that case, Subhūti, by being established on that which is not the path?” asked the Blessed One.
“No, Blessed Lord,” replied Subhūti.
“In that case, Subhūti, by being established on that which is the path and also not the path?” asked the Blessed One.
“No, Blessed Lord,” replied Subhūti.
“No, Blessed Lord,” replied Subhūti. “Blessed Lord, my mind, without grasping, has not been liberated from contamination by being established anywhere at all. Blessed Lord, my mind has been liberated by not being established anywhere at all.”
“In the same way, Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “bodhisattva great beings should actualize the very limit of reality without being established anywhere at all.
“As for ‘all-aspect omniscience, all-aspect omniscience,’ of which I have spoken, it is called ‘all-aspect omniscience’ because of one aspect, which is to say, it is called ‘all-aspect omniscience’ because of the aspect of peace. Subhūti, it is also because the tathāgatas have comprehended those characters, those indications, and those signs by means of which characters, which indications, and which signs phenomena are expressed, which is therefore called ‘all-aspect omniscience.’ ”
Subhūti asked, “Blessed Lord, among these three types of omniscience called ‘omniscience, the knowledge of the aspects of the path, and all-aspect omniscience’ is there a difference in the form of the afflicted mental states that have been abandoned such that it is said, ‘Through this all have been abandoned without residue, and through this all have1118 been abandoned without residue’?”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “there is no difference in the afflicted mental states that have been abandoned. However, the tathāgatas have abandoned all the connecting propensities, while the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas have not abandoned all the connecting propensities.”
“Blessed Lord, have all those śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas abandoned afflicted mental states without attaining the unconditioned?”1119 asked Subhūti.
“No, they have not,” replied the Blessed One.
“Blessed Lord, can a difference be apprehended in the unconditioned?” asked Subhūti.
“No, it cannot,” replied the Blessed One.
“Blessed Lord,” asked Subhūti, “if it cannot be apprehended, why then did the Blessed One say, ‘They have abandoned all the connecting propensities. They have not abandoned all the connecting propensities’?”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “it is true that the connecting propensities are indeed not afflicted mental states, but there are aspects of the bodies and aspects of the speech of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas to do with desire, hatred, and delusion. The connecting propensities do not harm them even though they are shared in common with all simple, ordinary persons. On the other hand, they are entirely and utterly in all respects not present and not apprehended in the tathāgatas, arhats, perfectly complete buddhas.”
Then the venerable Subhūti asked the Blessed One, “Blessed Lord, if the path is indeed nonexistent, and nirvāṇa is also nonexistent, in that case, why is it explained that ‘these have entered the stream, these are once-returners, these are non-returners, these are arhats, these are pratyekabuddhas, these are bodhisattva great beings, and these are tathāgata, arhat, perfectly complete buddhas’?”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “all of them—those who have entered the stream, once-returners, non-returners, arhats, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattva great beings, and tathāgata, arhat, perfectly complete buddhas—are categorized on the basis of the unconditioned.”1120
Subhūti asked, “Blessed Lord, does the unconditioned make the distinction,1121 ‘These have entered the stream, these are once-returners, these are non-returners, these are arhats, these are pratyekabuddhas, these are bodhisattva great beings, and these are tathāgata, arhat, perfectly complete buddhas’?”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “the unconditioned does not make distinctions, but still, taking speech as the standard,1122 they are spoken about, even though, ultimately, they cannot be distinguished. If you ask why, it is because in that [unconditioned] there is no designation within the range of speech, but still a future limit is designated for those by whom a limit has not been cut off. Subhūti, when all phenomena are empty of defining characteristics, a past limit cannot be apprehended, so how could a future limit be apprehended? That is impossible. Subhūti, because those beings do not know that all phenomena are empty of defining characteristics, I have taught them, ‘This is the past limit,’ and ‘This is the future limit.’ In all phenomena, which are empty of defining characteristics, a past limit and a future limit cannot be apprehended. So it is, Subhūti, that they should practice the perfection of wisdom with all phenomena empty of defining characteristics. Having practiced all phenomena that are empty of their own defining characteristics, they do not become fixated on any inner or outer phenomena, or on conditioned or unconditioned phenomena, or on the attributes of the śrāvakas, the attributes of the pratyekabuddhas, or the attributes of the buddhas.”
The Blessed One having said this, the venerable Subhūti then asked him, “Blessed Lord, when you speak of ‘the perfection of wisdom, the perfection of wisdom,’ why do you speak of ‘the perfection of wisdom’?”1123
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “it is spoken of as the ‘perfection of wisdom’ because this perfection of wisdom has attained the ultimate perfection of all attributes.1124 Moreover, Subhūti, it is spoken of as the ‘perfection of wisdom’ because through this perfection of wisdom the śrāvakas, the pratyekabuddhas, the bodhisattva great beings, and the tathāgatas, arhats, perfectly complete buddhas all have gone to the other side,1125 and will go to the other side of all phenomena. Moreover, Subhūti, it is spoken of as the ‘perfection of wisdom’ because through this perfection of wisdom, the supreme practice of all phenomena is differentiated, and among all those phenomena saṃsāra is not apprehended.1126 Moreover, Subhūti, it is spoken of as the ‘perfection of wisdom’ because in this wisdom that has gone to the other side,1127 the real nature is included, the very limit of reality is also included, and the realm of phenomena is also included.
“Moreover, Subhūti, this perfection of wisdom is neither conjoined with nor disjoined from anything, it is neither possible to indicate nor impossible to indicate, and it is neither impeded nor unimpeded. If you ask why, it is because this perfection of wisdom is immaterial, impossible to indicate, unimpeded, and has only one defining characteristic, which is to say, it is without a defining characteristic.
“Moreover, Subhūti, this perfection of wisdom gives rise to the entirety of inspired eloquence and the entirety of illumination with respect to all phenomena, and this perfection of wisdom, Subhūti, cannot be cut or stolen by Māra, or the gods belonging to the māra class, up to or persons who are in the vehicles of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, or rival tīrthikas and evil associates. They cannot cut this perfection of wisdom of the bodhisattva great beings. If you ask why, it is because they all cannot be apprehended in this perfection of wisdom because of the emptiness of defining characteristics. Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings should practice the meaning of1128 this perfection of wisdom in this manner.
“Moreover, Subhūti, by practicing the meaning of this profound perfection of wisdom, bodhisattva great beings should practice the meaning of impermanence, should practice the meaning of suffering, and should practice the meaning of nonself; they should practice the meaning of the knowledge of suffering, should practice the meaning of the knowledge of the origin, should practice the meaning of the knowledge of cessation, and should practice the meaning of the knowledge of the path; and they should practice the meaning of the knowledge of the extinction of contaminants, should practice the meaning of the knowledge that contaminants will not arise again, should practice the meaning of the knowledge of phenomena, should practice the meaning of subsequent knowledge, should practice the meaning of the knowledge of the conventional, should practice the meaning of the knowledge of mastery,1129 and should practice the meaning of the knowledge of sounds as they are. Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings should practice the meaning of the perfection of wisdom in that manner.”
“Blessed Lord, if meaning and nonmeaning are not apprehended in this profound perfection of wisdom, in that case how should bodhisattva great beings practice the meaning of this profound perfection of wisdom?” asked Subhūti.
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “bodhisattva great beings practicing this profound perfection of wisdom should practice in the following manner: They should not practice with the notion that ‘desire is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘hatred is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘delusion is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘desire, hatred, and delusion are meaningful,’ or ‘are meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘wrong view is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of the self is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of a being is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of a life is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of one who lives is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of a person is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of an individual is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of one born of Manu is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of a child of Manu is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of an agent is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of an instigator of an agent is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of an experiencer is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of an instigator of an experiencer is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of a motivator is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of an inciter is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of a knower is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me’; and should not practice with the notion that ‘the view of a viewer is meaningful,’ or ‘is meaningless to me,’ up to they should not practice with the notion that all the various views ‘are meaningful,’ or ‘are meaningless to me.’ If you ask why, it is because the real nature of desire, hatred, and delusion is not meaningful and is not meaningless to anything at all. The real nature of the various views is not meaningful and is not meaningless to anything at all.
“They should not practice with the notion that ‘physical forms are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘physical forms are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘feelings are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘feelings are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘perceptions are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘perceptions are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘formative predispositions are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘formative predispositions are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘consciousness is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘consciousness is meaningless to me.’
“They should not practice with the notion that ‘the eyes are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the eyes are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the ears are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the ears are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the nose is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the nose is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the tongue is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the tongue is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the body is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the body is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the mental faculty is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the mental faculty is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘sights are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘sights are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘sounds are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘sounds are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘odors are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘odors are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘tastes are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘tastes are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘tangibles are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘tangibles are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘mental phenomena are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘mental phenomena are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘visual consciousness is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘visual consciousness is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘auditory consciousness is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘auditory consciousness is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘olfactory consciousness is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘olfactory consciousness is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘gustatory consciousness is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘gustatory consciousness is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘tactile consciousness is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘tactile consciousness is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘mental consciousness is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘mental consciousness is meaningless to me.’
“They should not practice with the notion that ‘visually compounded sensory contact is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘visually compounded sensory contact is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘aurally compounded sensory contact is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘aurally compounded sensory contact is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘nasally compounded sensory contact is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘nasally compounded sensory contact is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘lingually compounded sensory contact is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘lingually compounded sensory contact is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘corporeally compounded sensory contact is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘corporeally compounded sensory contact is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘mentally compounded sensory contact is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘mentally compounded sensory contact is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are meaningless to me.’
“They should not practice with the notion that ‘the earth element is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the earth element is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the water element is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the water element is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the fire element is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the fire element is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the wind element is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the wind element is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the space element is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the space element is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the consciousness element is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the consciousness element is meaningless to me.’
“They should not practice with the notion that ‘ignorance is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘ignorance is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘formative predispositions are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘formative predispositions are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘consciousness is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘consciousness is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘name and form are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘name and form are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the six sense fields are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the six sense fields are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘sensory contact is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘sensory contact is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘sensation is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘sensation is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘craving is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘craving is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘grasping is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘grasping is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the rebirth process is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the rebirth process is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘birth is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘birth is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘aging and death is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘aging and death is meaningless to me.’
“They should not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of generosity is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of generosity is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of ethical discipline is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of ethical discipline is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of tolerance is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of tolerance is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of perseverance is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of perseverance is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of meditative concentration is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of meditative concentration is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of wisdom is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of wisdom is meaningless to me.’
“They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of internal phenomena is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of internal phenomena is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of external phenomena is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of external phenomena is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of emptiness is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of emptiness is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of great extent is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of great extent is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of ultimate reality is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of ultimate reality is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of the unlimited is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of the unlimited is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of nonexclusion is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of nonexclusion is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of inherent existence is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of inherent existence is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of all phenomena is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of all phenomena is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of nonentities is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of nonentities is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of essential nature is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of essential nature is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is meaningless to me.’
“They should not practice with the notion that ‘the applications of mindfulness are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the applications of mindfulness are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the correct exertions are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the correct exertions are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the supports for miraculous ability are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the supports for miraculous ability are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the faculties are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the faculties are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the powers are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the powers are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the branches of enlightenment are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the branches of enlightenment are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the noble eightfold path is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the noble eightfold path is meaningless to me.’
“They should not practice with the notion that ‘the truths of the noble ones are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the truths of the noble ones are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the meditative concentrations are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the meditative concentrations are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the immeasurable attitudes are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the immeasurable attitudes are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the formless absorptions are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the formless absorptions are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the eight liberations are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the eight liberations are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the extrasensory powers are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the extrasensory powers are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the meditative stabilities are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the meditative stabilities are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the dhāraṇī gateways are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the dhāraṇī gateways are meaningless to me.’
“They should not practice with the notion that ‘the ten powers of the tathāgatas are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the ten powers of the tathāgatas are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the four fearlessnesses are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the four fearlessnesses are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the four kinds of exact knowledge are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the four kinds of exact knowledge are meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘great loving kindness is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘great loving kindness is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘great compassion is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘great compassion is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are meaningless to me.’
“They should not practice with the notion that ‘the fruit of having entered the stream is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the fruit of having entered the stream is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the fruit of once-returner is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the fruit of once-returner is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the fruit of non-returner is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the fruit of non-returner is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘arhatship is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘arhatship is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘individual enlightenment is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘individual enlightenment is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘the knowledge of the aspects of the path is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘the knowledge of the aspects of the path is meaningless to me.’ They should not practice with the notion that ‘unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment is meaningful to me,’ and should not practice with the notion that ‘unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment is meaningless to me.’
“If you ask why, Subhūti, it is because the tathāgatas, arhats, perfectly complete buddhas, having fully awakened to unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment, do not apprehend any phenomenon at all that might be meaningful or might be meaningless.
“Moreover, Subhūti, whether the tathāgatas appear1130 or whether the tathāgatas do not appear, the reality of phenomena as it pertains to phenomena, and the abiding nature of phenomena, remains, and the realm of phenomena remains. It does not make anything meaningful and does not make anything meaningless. Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings, having relinquished the meaningful and the meaningless in that manner, should practice the perfection of wisdom.”
“Blessed Lord,” asked Subhūti, “for what reason is the perfection of wisdom not meaningful and not meaningless to anything?”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “it is because, regarding the perfection of wisdom, there is nothing to be done for the reality of phenomena as it pertains to conditioned phenomena and unconditioned phenomena. Therefore, the perfection of wisdom is not meaningful and is not meaningless to anything.”
“Blessed Lord, in that case, is the unconditioned not meaningful for all the buddhas and noble śrāvakas of the buddhas?” asked Subhūti.
“The unconditioned is indeed meaningful for all the buddhas and noble śrāvakas of the buddhas, but it is not established for their benefit or harm,” replied the Blessed One. “To illustrate, Subhūti, the real nature of space is not established for the benefit or harm of anything at all. In the same way, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom of the bodhisattva great beings is also not established for the benefit or harm of any phenomenon at all.”
“Blessed Lord, in that case, do bodhisattva great beings, having trained in the unconditioned perfection of wisdom, not attain all-aspect omniscience?” asked Subhūti.
“It is so, Subhūti, it is so,” replied the Blessed One. “Having trained in this profound perfection of wisdom, bodhisattva great beings do attain all-aspect omniscience, but not by way of a duality.”
“Blessed Lord, does a nondual phenomenon attain a nondual phenomenon?” asked Subhūti.
“No,” replied the Blessed One.
“In that case, does a dual phenomenon attain a dual phenomenon?” asked Subhūti?”
“No,” replied the Blessed One.
“In that case, how is it attained?” asked Subhūti.
The Blessed One replied, “It is attained when a dual phenomenon or a nondual phenomenon is indeed not apprehended. If you ask why, it is because not apprehending—the attainment—is neither attained through apprehending nor attained through not apprehending.”
This completes the fifty-third chapter from “The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines.”