Then the Blessed One addressed the venerable Subhūti: “Subhūti, commencing with the perfection of wisdom, you should be inspired to tell bodhisattva great beings how bodhisattva great beings will become emancipated in the perfection of wisdom!”

Thereupon, those bodhisattva great beings, those great śrāvakas, and those gods who were present thought, “Will this venerable Subhūti teach the perfection of wisdom to these bodhisattva great beings through the armor of the strength and force just of his own wisdom and inspired speech, or will he teach it through the power of the Buddha?”

Through the power of the Buddha, the venerable Subhūti knew in his own mind the thoughts in the minds of those bodhisattva great beings, those śrāvakas, and those gods, and he said to the venerable Śāradvatīputra, “Venerable Śāradvatīputra, whatever the śrāvakas of the Blessed One say, whatever they teach, whatever they expound, it is the power of the Tathāgata. None of the doctrines that the Tathāgata have taught go against the nature of reality. It is in this way that these noble children will train in the doctrines he teaches and actualize the nature of reality. Śāradvatīputra, it is the Tathāgata himself who through skillful means teaches the perfection of wisdom to bodhisattva great beings. However, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, this teaching of the perfection of wisdom to bodhisattva great beings is not within the capacity of any śrāvakas or pratyekabuddhas.”

Then the venerable Subhūti asked the Blessed One, “Blessed Lord, you have spoken of ‘bodhisattvas, bodhisattvas,’ yet what is it that has the designation bodhisattva or perfection of wisdom? Blessed Lord, I do not observe any such thing that is called ‘bodhisattva’ or ‘perfection of wisdom.’ Blessed Lord, since I do not observe such a ‘bodhisattva,’ such a ‘perfection of wisdom,’ or even such a term as ‘bodhisattva,’ what bodhisattva great being should I instruct and teach, and in what perfection of wisdom?”

The Blessed One replied to the venerable Subhūti, “Subhūti, it is like this: the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, and the term ‘bodhisattva’ are all just names. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“Subhūti, it is like this: the name used to refer to a being, for instance, is just a designation. Besides its assignment by convention to be a mere name or symbol, something that is a designation neither arises nor ceases. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“The self, life forms, living beings, life, living creatures, individuals, human beings, people, agents, actors, petitioners, instigators, experiencers, instigators of experience, knowers, and viewers are all just designations. Besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, things that are designations neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“In the same way, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, and the term ‘bodhisattva’ are all just designations. Besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, things that are designations neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“Subhūti, it is like this: the name used to refer to inner physical form, for instance, is no more than just a designation for something. Besides its assignment by convention to be a mere name or symbol, a designation for something neither arises nor ceases. That name does not exist inside, does not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“Subhūti, the terms feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are no more than just designations for things. Besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, designations for things neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“In the same way, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, the term ‘bodhisattva’ and all those phenomena are no more than just designations for things. Besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, designations for things neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“Subhūti, the eyes is no more than just a designation for something. That designation for something is like this: besides its assignment by convention to be a mere name or symbol for the eyes, it neither arises nor ceases. That name does not exist inside, does not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“Subhūti, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body, and the mental faculty are no more than just designations for things. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols for the mental faculty [and so forth], they neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“Subhūti, sights is no more than just a designation for things. A designation for things is like this: besides its assignment by convention to be a mere name or symbol for sights, it neither arises nor ceases. That name does not exist inside, does not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“In the same way, Subhūti, sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena are no more than just designations for things. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols for mental phenomena [and so forth], they neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“Subhūti, the sensory element of the eyes is no more than just a designation for something. That designation for something is like this: besides its assignment by convention to be a mere name or symbol for the sensory element of the eyes, it neither arises nor ceases. That name does not exist inside, does not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“Subhūti, the sensory element of sights is no more than just a designation for something. That designation for something is like this: besides its assignment by convention to be a mere name or symbol for the sensory element of sights, it neither arises nor ceases. That name does not exist inside, does not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“Subhūti, the sensory element of visual consciousness is no more than just a designation for something. That designation for something is like this: besides its assignment by convention to be a mere name or symbol for the sensory element of visual consciousness, it neither arises nor ceases. That name does not exist inside, does not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“Subhūti, the sensory element of the ears, the sensory element of sounds, the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the sensory element of the nose, the sensory element of odors, the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the sensory element of the tongue, the sensory element of tastes, the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the sensory element of the body, the sensory element of touch, the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the sensory element of the mental faculty, the sensory element of mental phenomena, and the sensory element of mental consciousness are no more than just designations for things. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols for the sensory element of mental consciousness [and so forth], they neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“In the same way, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, and the term ‘bodhisattva’ are no more than just designations for things. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols for the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, and the term ‘bodhisattva,’ they neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“Subhūti, it is like this: associated with what is called the inner [dependent origination of] the physical body, as another instance, there are terms assigned by convention that are just designations. The bones of the head is a conventionally assigned designation, the bones of the neck is a conventionally assigned designation, and the bones of the shoulders, the bones of the arms, the bones of the joints, the bones of the ribs, the bones of the hips, the bones of the thighs, the bones of the shins, and the bones of the feet are conventionally assigned designations, but these are all no more than just designations. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols for the bones of the head and [the other bones of the body], up to and including the bones of the feet, they neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“In the same way, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, and the term ‘bodhisattva’ are no more than just designations. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, they neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“Subhūti, it is like this: associated with what is called outer [dependent origination], as yet another instance, there are diverse terms assigned by convention—grass, trees, branches, leaves, and petals—that are all no more than just designations. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, they neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“In the same way, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, and the term ‘bodhisattva’ are no more than just designations. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, they neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“Subhūti, it is like this: for ‘the blessed lord buddhas of the past,’ for instance, there is a mere name, but that name does not exist inside, does not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“Subhūti, it is like this: phenomena such as, for instance, dreams, echoes, reflections, magical displays, mirages, the moon’s appearance in water, and phantom emanations of the tathāgatas are no more than just designations. Those designations for things, besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“In the same way, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, and the term ‘bodhisattva’ are all phenomena that are no more than just designations for things. Those designations for things, besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.

“Subhūti, thus it is that when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they should train in names and symbols that are designations, instructions that are designations, and dharmas that are designations.

“Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom in that manner do not consider whether so-called physical forms are permanent. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are impermanent. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are imbued with happiness. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are imbued with suffering. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms constitute a self. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms constitute a nonself. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are at peace. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are not at peace. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are empty. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are not empty. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are with signs. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are without signs. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are with aspirations. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are without aspirations. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are conditioned. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are unconditioned. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are afflicted. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are purified. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms arise. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms cease. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are void. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are not void. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are virtuous. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are nonvirtuous. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are objectionable. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are free from being objectionable. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are contaminated. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are uncontaminated. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are tainted with afflicted mental states. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are untainted with afflicted mental states. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are mundane. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are supramundane. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are associated with cyclic existence. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are permanent. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are impermanent. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are imbued with happiness. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are imbued with suffering. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] constitute a self. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] constitute a nonself. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are at peace. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are not at peace. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are empty. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are not empty. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are with signs. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are without signs. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are with aspirations. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are without aspirations. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are conditioned. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are unconditioned. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are afflicted. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are purified. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] arise. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] cease. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are void. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are not void. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are virtuous. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are nonvirtuous. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are objectionable. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are free from being objectionable. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are contaminated. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are uncontaminated. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are tainted with afflicted mental states. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are untainted with afflicted mental states. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are mundane. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are supramundane. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are associated with cyclic existence. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether the so-called eyes are permanent. They do not consider whether the so-called eyes are impermanent. They do not consider whether the so-called eyes are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called sights are permanent. They do not consider whether so-called sights are impermanent. They do not consider whether so-called sights are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called visual consciousness is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called visual consciousness is impermanent. They do not consider whether so-called visual consciousness is imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether it constitutes a self or a nonself, whether it is at peace or not at peace, whether it is empty or not empty, whether it is with signs or without signs, whether it is with aspirations or without aspirations, whether it is conditioned or unconditioned, whether it is defiled or purified, whether it arises or ceases, whether it is void or not void, whether it is virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether it is objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether it is contaminated or uncontaminated, whether it is tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether it is mundane or supramundane, or whether it is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called visually compounded sensory contact is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called visually compounded sensory contact is impermanent. They do not consider whether so-called visually compounded sensory contact is imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether it constitutes a self or a nonself, whether it is at peace or not at peace, whether it is empty or not empty, whether it is with signs or without signs, whether it is with aspirations or without aspirations, whether it is conditioned or unconditioned, whether it is defiled or purified, whether it arises or ceases, whether it is void or not void, whether it is virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether it is objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether it is contaminated or uncontaminated, whether it is tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether it is mundane or supramundane, or whether it is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether any so-called feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the eyes, sights, and visual consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering—are permanent or impermanent, whether they are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether the so-called ears are permanent. They do not consider whether the so-called ears are impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether the so-called ears are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called sounds are permanent. They do not consider whether so-called sounds are impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called sounds are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called auditory consciousness is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called auditory consciousness is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called auditory consciousness is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called aurally compounded sensory contact is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called aurally compounded sensory contact is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called aurally compounded sensory contact is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether any so-called feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the ears, sounds, and auditory consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering—are permanent or impermanent. They do not consider whether they are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether the so-called nose is permanent. They do not consider whether the so-called nose is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether the so-called nose is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called odors are permanent. They do not consider whether so-called odors are impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called odors are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called olfactory consciousness is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called olfactory consciousness is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called olfactory consciousness is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called nasally compounded sensory contact is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called nasally compounded sensory contact is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called nasally compounded sensory contact is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether any so-called feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the nose, odors, and olfactory consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering—are permanent or impermanent. They do not consider whether they are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether the so-called tongue is permanent. They do not consider whether the so-called tongue is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether the so-called tongue is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called tastes are permanent. They do not consider whether so-called tastes are impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called tastes are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called gustatory consciousness is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called gustatory consciousness is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called gustatory consciousness is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called lingually compounded sensory contact is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called lingually compounded sensory contact is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called lingually compounded sensory contact is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether any so-called feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the tongue, tastes, and gustatory consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering—are permanent or impermanent. They do not consider whether they are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether the so-called body is permanent. They do not consider whether the so-called body is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether the so-called body is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called tangibles are permanent. They do not consider whether so-called tangibles are impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called tangibles are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called tactile consciousness is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called tactile consciousness is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called tactile consciousness is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called corporeally compounded sensory contact is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called corporeally compounded sensory contact is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called corporeally compounded sensory contact is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether any so-called feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the body, touch, and tactile consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering—are permanent or impermanent. They do not consider whether they are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether the so-called mental faculty is permanent. They do not consider whether the so-called mental faculty is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether the so-called mental faculty is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called mental phenomena are permanent. They do not consider whether so-called mental phenomena are impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called mental phenomena are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called mental consciousness is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called mental consciousness is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called mental consciousness is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether so-called mentally compounded sensory contact is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called mentally compounded sensory contact is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called mentally compounded sensory contact is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“They do not consider whether any so-called feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the mental faculty, mental phenomena, and mental consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering—are permanent or impermanent. They do not consider whether they are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.

“If you ask why, it is that when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they do not consider whether that perfection of wisdom, that bodhisattva, or that term bodhisattva are present in conditioned elements. They do not consider whether they are present in unconditioned elements. And if you ask why that is, it is because when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they do not imagine and they do not conceptualize any of those phenomena. This is because, when they practice the perfection of wisdom, they remain in nonconceptual states and cultivate the applications of mindfulness. Practicing the perfection of wisdom, apart from focusing their attention on all-aspect omniscience, they still do not observe a perfection of wisdom itself. Nor do they observe the name perfection of wisdom. Nor do they observe a bodhisattva. Nor do they observe the name bodhisattva. Nor do they observe the buddhas. Nor do they observe the name buddha.

“So as to cultivate the correct exertions, the supports for miraculous ability, the faculties, the powers, the branches of enlightenment, the path, the perfections, all the aspects of emptiness, the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions, the eight aspects of liberation, the nine serial steps of meditative absorption, emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, the extrasensory powers, the meditative stabilities and dhāraṇī gateways, the powers of the tathāgatas, the fearlessnesses, the kinds of exact knowledge, and the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas, as they practice the perfection of wisdom they do not even observe the nature of the perfection of wisdom. They do not even observe the name perfection of wisdom. Nor do they observe the bodhisattvas. They do not even observe the name bodhisattva. Nor do they observe the buddhas. They do not even observe the name buddha.

“If you ask why, it is because when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they absolutely understand what is the defining characteristic of a phenomenon for all phenomena, and that defining characteristic of a phenomenon for all phenomena is to be neither defiled, nor to be purified.

“Subhūti, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they understand the designation for things as names or symbols, and in thus understanding the designation for things as names or symbols, they will not be attached to physical forms. They will not be attached to feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness.

“They will not be attached to the eyes. They will not be attached to sights. They will not be attached to visual consciousness. They will not be attached to visually compounded sensory contact. They will not even be attached to feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the eyes, sights, and visual consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering.

“They will not be attached to the ears. They will not be attached to sounds. They will not be attached to auditory consciousness. They will not be attached to aurally compounded sensory contact. They will not be attached to feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the ears, sounds, and auditory consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering.

“They will not be attached to the nose. They will not be attached to odors. They will not be attached to olfactory consciousness. They will not be attached to nasally compounded sensory contact. They will not even be attached to feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the nose, odors, and olfactory consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering.

“They will not be attached to the tongue. They will not be attached to tastes. They will not be attached to gustatory consciousness. They will not be attached to lingually compounded sensory contact. They will not be attached to feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the tongue, tastes, and gustatory consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering.

“They will not be attached to the body. They will not be attached to tangibles. They will not be attached to tactile consciousness. They will not be attached to corporeally compounded sensory contact. They will not be attached to feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the body, touch, and tactile consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering.

“They will not be attached to the mental faculty. They will not be attached to mental phenomena. They will not be attached to mental consciousness. They will not be attached to mentally compounded sensory contact. They will not be attached to feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the mental faculty, mental phenomena, and mental consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering. They will not be attached to conditioned elements. They will not be attached to unconditioned elements.

“They will not be attached to the perfection of generosity. They will not be attached to the perfection of ethical discipline, the perfection of tolerance, the perfection of perseverance, the perfection of meditative concentration, or the perfection of wisdom. They will not even be attached to the names of these [perfections] or their defining characteristics. They will not even be attached to the body of a bodhisattva.

“They will not be attached to the eye of flesh. They will not be attached to the eye of divine clairvoyance, the eye of wisdom, the eye of the Dharma, or the eye of the buddhas. They will not be attached to the extrasensory powers. They will not be attached to the emptiness of internal phenomena. They will not be attached to the emptiness of external phenomena. They will not be attached to the emptiness of external and internal phenomena, and they will not be attached to [the other aspects of emptiness], up to and including the emptiness of the essential nature of nonentities. They will not be attached to the applications of mindfulness. They will not be attached to the correct exertions, the supports for miraculous ability, the faculties, the powers, the branches of enlightenment, or the noble eightfold path. They will not be attached to the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions, the eight aspects of liberation, the nine serial steps of meditative absorption, emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, or the extrasensory powers. They will not be attached to the meditative stabilities or to the gateways of the dhāraṇīs. They will not be attached to the ten powers of the tathāgatas, the four fearlessnesses, the four kinds of exact knowledge, great loving kindness, great compassion, or the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas.

“They will not be attached to the real nature. They will not be attached to the very limit of reality. They will not be attached to the realm of phenomena. They will not be attached to the maturation of beings. They will not be attached to the refinement of the buddhafields. They will not be attached to skillful means. If you ask why, it is because there is no such thing as attaching, nothing that attaches, and nothing to be attached to.

“Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom in that manner will flourish through the perfection of generosity. They will flourish through the perfection of ethical discipline, the perfection of tolerance, the perfection of perseverance, the perfection of meditative concentration, and the perfection of wisdom. They will enter a bodhisattva’s full maturity. They will step on to the level at which progress has become irreversible.

“They will perfect the extrasensory powers, and having indeed perfected the extrasensory powers, they will bring beings to maturity, and in order to to serve, honor, respect, and worship the blessed lord buddhas, refine the buddhafields, and behold the lord buddhas, they will move from buddhafield to buddhafield. And, having indeed seen those lord buddhas, they will also manifest the roots of virtuous action through which they seek to serve, honor, respect, and worship those lord buddhas. Also, through those roots of virtuous action they will be reborn in proximity to those lord buddhas. They will also hear the Dharma from those lord buddhas. [Their retention of] all the teachings that they have heard will never be interrupted until they have manifestly attained buddhahood in unsurpassed, complete enlightenment. They will also acquire the dhāraṇī gateways, and they will also acquire the gateways of the meditative stabilities. Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom should understand these designations for things as names and symbols.

“Subhūti, you asked, ‘Blessed Lord, you have spoken of “bodhisattvas, bodhisattvas.…” ’ Do you think, Subhūti, that physical forms constitute a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than physical forms constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness constitute a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in physical forms, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that physical forms are present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are present in a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of physical forms constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the eyes constitute a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty constitute a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the eyes, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the eyes are present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty are present in a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that sights constitute a bodhisattva, or do you think that sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena constitute a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in sights, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that sights are present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena are present in a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the sensory element of the eyes, or do you think that the sensory element of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the sensory element of visual consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the sensory element of the ears, the sensory element of sounds, and the sensory element of auditory consciousness constitute a bodhisattva; or do you think that the sensory element of the nose, the sensory element of odors, and the sensory element of olfactory consciousness constitute a bodhisattva; or do you think that the sensory element of the tongue, the sensory element of tastes, and the sensory element of gustatory consciousness constitute a bodhisattva; or do you think that the sensory element of the body, the sensory element of touch, and the sensory element of tactile consciousness constitute a bodhisattva; or do you think that the sensory element of the mental faculty, the sensory element of mental phenomena, and the sensory element of mental consciousness constitute a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the sensory element of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the sensory element of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the sensory element of visual consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva; or else do you think that anything other than the sensory element of the ears, the sensory element of sounds, the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the sensory element of the nose, the sensory element of odors, the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the sensory element of the tongue, the sensory element of tastes, the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the sensory element of the body, the sensory element of touch, the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the sensory element of the mental faculty, the sensory element of mental phenomena, and the sensory element of mental consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the sensory element of the eyes, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the sensory element of sights, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the sensory element of visual consciousness; or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the sensory element of the ears, the sensory element of sounds, the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the sensory element of the nose, the sensory element of odors, the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the sensory element of the tongue, the sensory element of tastes, the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the sensory element of the body, the sensory element of touch, the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the sensory element of the mental faculty, the sensory element of mental phenomena, or the sensory element of mental consciousness?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the sensory element of the eyes is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the sensory element of sights is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the sensory element of visual consciousness is present in a bodhisattva; or do you think that the sensory element of the ears, the sensory element of sounds, the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the sensory element of the nose, the sensory element of odors, the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the sensory element of the tongue, the sensory element of tastes, the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the sensory element of the body, the sensory element of touch, the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the sensory element of the mental faculty, the sensory element of mental phenomena, or the sensory element of mental consciousness is present in a bodhisattva?

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the sensory element of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the sensory element of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the sensory element of visual consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva; or else do you think that an absence of the sensory element of the ears, an absence of the sensory element of sounds, an absence of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, an absence of the sensory element of the nose, an absence of the sensory element of odors, an absence of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, an absence of the sensory element of the tongue, an absence of the sensory element of tastes, an absence of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, an absence of the sensory element of the body, an absence of the sensory element of touch, an absence of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, or an absence of the sensory element of the mental faculty constitutes a bodhisattva; or do you think that an absence of the sensory element of mental phenomena constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the sensory element of mental consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the earth element constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the water element constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the fire element, the wind element, the space element, or the consciousness element constitute a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the earth element constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the water element, the fire element, the wind element, the space element, or the consciousness element constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the earth element, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the water element, the fire element, the wind element, the space element, and the consciousness element?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the earth element is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the water element, the fire element, the wind element, the space element, and the consciousness element are present in a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the earth element constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the water element, an absence of the fire element, an absence of the wind element, an absence of the space element, or an absence of the consciousness element constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva, and do you think that formative predispositions, consciousness, name and form, the six sense fields, sensory contact, sensation, craving, grasping, the rebirth process, actual birth, and aging and death constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than formative predispositions, consciousness, name and form, the six sense fields, sensory contact, sensation, craving, grasping, the rebirth process, actual birth, and aging and death constitute a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in ignorance, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in [the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that ignorance is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that [the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, are present in a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of [the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of physical forms constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of feelings, the real nature of perceptions, the real nature of formative predispositions, or the real nature of consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the real nature of physical forms constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the real nature of feelings, the real nature of perceptions, the real nature of formative predispositions, or the real nature of consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of physical forms, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of feelings, the real nature of perceptions, the real nature of formative predispositions, or the real nature of consciousness?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of physical forms is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of feelings, the real nature of perceptions, the real nature of formative predispositions, or the real nature of consciousness is present in a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the real nature of physical forms constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the real nature of feelings, an absence of the real nature of perceptions, an absence of the real nature of formative predispositions, or an absence of the real nature of consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the ears, the real nature of the nose, the real nature of the tongue, the real nature of the body, or the real nature of the mental faculty constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the real nature of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the real nature of the ears, the real nature of the nose, the real nature of the tongue, the real nature of the body, or the real nature of the mental faculty constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the eyes, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the ears, the real nature of the nose, the real nature of the tongue, the real nature of the body, or the real nature of the mental faculty?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of the eyes is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the ears, the real nature of the nose, the real nature of the tongue, the real nature of the body, or the real nature of the mental faculty is present in a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the real nature of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the real nature of the ears, an absence of the real nature of the nose, an absence of the real nature of the tongue, an absence of the real nature of the body, or an absence of the real nature of the mental faculty constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of sounds, the real nature of odors, the real nature of tastes, the real nature of tangibles, or the real nature of mental phenomena constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the real nature of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the real nature of sounds, the real nature of odors, the real nature of tastes, the real nature of tangibles, or the real nature of mental phenomena constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of sights, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of sounds, the real nature of odors, the real nature of tastes, the real nature of tangibles, or the real nature of mental phenomena?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of sights is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of sounds, the real nature of odors, the real nature of tastes, the real nature of tangibles, or the real nature of mental phenomena is present in a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the real nature of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the real nature of sounds, an absence of the real nature of odors, an absence of the real nature of tastes, an absence of the real nature of tangibles, or an absence of the real nature of mental phenomena constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of visual consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva; or do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of the ears, the real nature of the sensory element of sounds, the real nature of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the nose, the real nature of the sensory element of odors, the real nature of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the tongue, the real nature of the sensory element of tastes, the real nature of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the body, the real nature of the sensory element of touch, the real nature of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the mental faculty, the real nature of the sensory element of mental phenomena, or the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva; or do you think that anything other than the real nature of the sensory element of sights, the real nature of the sensory element of visual consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the ears, the real nature of the sensory element of sounds, the real nature of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the nose, the real nature of the sensory element of odors, the real nature of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the tongue, the real nature of the sensory element of tastes, the real nature of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the body, the real nature of the sensory element of touch, the real nature of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the mental faculty, the real nature of the sensory element of mental phenomena, or the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the sensory element of sights, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the sensory element of visual consciousness; or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the sensory element of the ears, the real nature of the sensory element of sounds, the real nature of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the nose, the real nature of the sensory element of odors, the real nature of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the tongue, the real nature of the sensory element of tastes, the real nature of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the body, the real nature of the sensory element of touch, the real nature of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the mental faculty, the real nature of the sensory element of mental phenomena, or the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of sights is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of visual consciousness is present in a bodhisattva; or do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of the ears, the real nature of the sensory element of sounds, the real nature of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the nose, the real nature of the sensory element of odors, the real nature of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the tongue, the real nature of the sensory element of tastes, the real nature of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the body, the real nature of the sensory element of touch, the real nature of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the mental faculty, the real nature of the sensory element of mental phenomena, or the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness is present in a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of visual consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva; or do you think that an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of the ears, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of sounds, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of the nose, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of odors, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of the tongue, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of tastes, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of the body, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of touch, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of the mental faculty, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of mental phenomena, or an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of the earth element constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the water element, the real nature of the fire element, the real nature of the wind element, the real nature of the space element, or the real nature of the consciousness element constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the real nature of the earth element constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the real nature of the water element, the real nature of the fire element, the real nature of the wind element, the real nature of the space element, or the real nature of the consciousness element constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the earth element, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the water element, the real nature of the fire element, the real nature of the wind element, the real nature of the space element, or the real nature of the consciousness element?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of the earth element, the real nature of the water element, the real nature of the fire element, the real nature of the wind element, or the real nature of the space element are present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the consciousness element is present in a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the real nature of the earth element constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the real nature of the water element, an absence of the real nature of the fire element, an absence of the real nature of the wind element, an absence of the real nature of the space element, or an absence of the real nature of the consciousness element constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of name and form, the real nature of the six sense fields, the real nature of sensory contact, the real nature of sensation, the real nature of craving, the real nature of grasping, the real nature of the rebirth process, the real nature of actual birth, or the real nature of aging and death constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the real nature of ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of name and form, the real nature of the six sense fields, the real nature of sensory contact, the real nature of sensation, the real nature of craving, the real nature of grasping, the real nature of the rebirth process, the real nature of actual birth, or the real nature of aging and death constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of ignorance, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of name and form, the real nature of the six sense fields, the real nature of sensory contact, the real nature of sensation, the real nature of craving, the real nature of grasping, the real nature of the rebirth process, the real nature of actual birth, or the real nature of aging and death?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of ignorance, the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of name and form, the real nature of the six sense fields, the real nature of sensory contact, the real nature of sensation, the real nature of craving, the real nature of grasping, the real nature of the rebirth process, the real nature of actual birth, or the real nature of aging and death is present in a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the real nature of ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the real nature of formative predispositions, an absence of the real nature of consciousness, an absence of the real nature of name and form, an absence of the real nature of the six sense fields, an absence of the real nature of sensory contact, an absence of the real nature of sensation, an absence of the real nature of craving, an absence of the real nature of grasping, an absence of the real nature of the rebirth process, an absence of the real nature of actual birth, or an absence of the real nature of aging and death constitutes a bodhisattva?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

Then the Blessed One asked, “Subhūti, to what purpose have you said that physical forms do not constitute a bodhisattva, that anything other than physical forms does not constitute a bodhisattva, that a bodhisattva is not present in physical forms, that physical forms are not present in a bodhisattva, and that the absence of physical forms does not constitute a bodhisattva? Why do you say that feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness do not constitute a bodhisattva, that anything other than consciousness [and the other aggregates] does not constitute a bodhisattva, that a bodhisattva is not present in consciousness [and the other aggregates], that consciousness [and the other aggregates] are not present in a bodhisattva, and that the absence of consciousness [and the other aggregates] does not constitute a bodhisattva? Why do you say that the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body, the mental faculty, sights, sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, mental phenomena, the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, the sensory element of visual consciousness, the sensory element of the ears, the sensory element of sounds, the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the sensory element of the nose, the sensory element of odors, the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the sensory element of the tongue, the sensory element of tastes, the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the sensory element of the body, the sensory element of touch, the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the sensory element of the mental faculty, the sensory element of mental phenomena, and the sensory element of mental consciousness; the earth element, the water element, the fire element, the wind element, the space element, and the consciousness element; and ignorance, formative predispositions, consciousness, name and form, the six sense fields, sensory contact, sensation, craving, grasping, the rebirth process, actual birth, and aging and death all do not constitute a bodhisattva; that anything other than [all those phenomena], up to and including aging and death, do not constitute a bodhisattva; that a bodhisattva is not present in [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death; that [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death are not present in a bodhisattva; and that the absence of [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death, does not constitute a bodhisattva? Why do you say that the real nature of physical forms, the real nature of feelings, the real nature of perceptions, the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of the eyes, the real nature of the ears, the real nature of the nose, the real nature of the tongue, the real nature of the body, the real nature of the mental faculty, the real nature of sights, the real nature of sounds, the real nature of odors, the real nature of tastes, the real nature of tangibles, the real nature of mental phenomena, the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes, the real nature of the sensory element of sights, the real nature of the sensory element of visual consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the ears, the real nature of the sensory element of sounds, the real nature of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the nose, the real nature of the sensory element of odors, the real nature of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the tongue, the real nature of the sensory element of tastes, the real nature of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the body, the real nature of the sensory element of touch, the real nature of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the mental faculty, the real nature of the sensory element of mental phenomena, the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness, the real nature of the earth element, the real nature of the water element, the real nature of the fire element, the real nature of the wind element, the real nature of the space element, the real nature of the consciousness element, the real nature of ignorance, the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of name and form, the real nature of the six sense fields, the real nature of sensory contact, the real nature of sensation, the real nature of craving, the real nature of grasping, the real nature of the rebirth process, the real nature of actual birth, and the real nature of aging and death all do not constitute a bodhisattva? Why do you say that anything other than [the real nature of all those phenomena, up to and including] the real nature of aging and death, does not constitute a bodhisattva; that a bodhisattva is not present in [the real nature of all those phenomena, up to and including] the real nature of aging and death; that [the real nature of all those phenomena, up to and including] the real nature of aging and death, is not present in a bodhisattva; and that the absence of [the real nature of all those phenomena, up to and including] the real nature of aging and death, does not constitute a bodhisattva?”

“Blessed Lord,” replied Subhūti, “if bodhisattvas are absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could the designation ‘physical forms’ constitute a bodhisattva! How could anything other than physical forms constitute a bodhisattva! How could a bodhisattva be present in physical forms! How could physical forms be present in a bodhisattva! How could the absence of physical forms become a bodhisattva! How could the designations ‘feelings,’ ‘perceptions,’ ‘formative predispositions,’ or ‘consciousness’ constitute a bodhisattva! How could anything other than consciousness [and the other aggregates] constitute a bodhisattva! How could a bodhisattva be present in consciousness [and the other aggregates]! How could consciousness [and the other aggregates] be present in a bodhisattva! How could the absence of consciousness [and the other aggregates] become a bodhisattva!

“Blessed Lord, if bodhisattvas are absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could the designations ‘the eyes,’ ‘the ears,’ ‘the nose,’ ‘the tongue,’ ‘the body,’ ‘the mental faculty,’ ‘sights,’ ‘sounds,’ ‘odors,’ ‘tastes,’ ‘tangibles,’ ‘mental phenomena,’ ‘the sensory element of the eyes,’ ‘the sensory element of sights,’ ‘the sensory element of visual consciousness,’ ‘the sensory element of the ears,’ ‘the sensory element of sounds,’ ‘the sensory element of auditory consciousness,’ ‘the sensory element of the nose,’ ‘the sensory element of odors,’ ‘the sensory element of olfactory consciousness,’ ‘the sensory element of the tongue,’ ‘the sensory element of tastes,’ ‘the sensory element of gustatory consciousness,’ ‘the sensory element of the body,’ ‘the sensory element of touch,’ ‘the sensory element of tactile consciousness,’ ‘the sensory element of the mental faculty,’ ‘the sensory element of mental phenomena,’ ‘the sensory element of mental consciousness,’ ‘the earth element,’ ‘the water element,’ ‘the fire element,’ ‘the wind element,’ ‘the space element,’ ‘the consciousness element,’ ‘ignorance,’ ‘formative predispositions,’ ‘consciousness,’ ‘name and form,’ ‘the six sense fields,’ ‘sensory contact,’ ‘sensation,’ ‘craving,’ ‘grasping,’ ‘the rebirth process,’ ‘actual birth,’ or ‘aging and death’ constitute a bodhisattva! How could anything other than [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death, constitute a bodhisattva! How could a bodhisattva be present in [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death! How could [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death, be present in a bodhisattva! How could the absence of [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death, become a bodhisattva!

“Blessed Lord, if bodhisattvas are absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could anything designated as the real nature of physical forms constitute a bodhisattva! How could anything other than the real nature of physical forms constitute a bodhisattva! How could a bodhisattva be present in the real nature of physical forms! How could the real nature of physical forms be present in a bodhisattva! How could the absence of the real nature of physical forms constitute a bodhisattva! How could anything designated as the real nature of feelings, the real nature of perceptions, the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of the eyes, the real nature of the ears, the real nature of the nose, the real nature of the tongue, the real nature of the body, the real nature of the mental faculty, the real nature of sights, the real nature of sounds, the real nature of odors, the real nature of tastes, the real nature of tangibles, the real nature of mental phenomena, the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes, the real nature of the sensory element of sights, the real nature of the sensory element of visual consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the ears, the real nature of the sensory element of sounds, the real nature of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the nose, the real nature of the sensory element of odors, the real nature of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the tongue, the real nature of the sensory element of tastes, the real nature of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the body, the real nature of the sensory element of touch, the real nature of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the mental faculty, the real nature of the sensory element of mental phenomena, the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness, the real nature of the earth element, the real nature of the water element, the real nature of the fire element, the real nature of the wind element, the real nature of the space element, the real nature of the consciousness element, the real nature of ignorance, the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of name and form, the real nature of the six sense fields, the real nature of sensory contact, the real nature of sensation, the real nature of craving, the real nature of grasping, the real nature of the rebirth process, the real nature of actual birth, or the real nature of aging and death constitute a bodhisattva! How could anything other than the real nature of [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death, constitute a bodhisattva! How could a bodhisattva be present in the real nature of [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death! How could the real nature of [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death, be present in a bodhisattva! How could the absence of the real nature of [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death, constitute a bodhisattva! That would be impossible!”

“Well said, Subhūti, well said!” replied the Blessed One. “Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings, as beings who are not apprehended, should train accordingly in the perfection of wisdom that is not apprehended.

“Subhūti, you asked, ‘What is it that has the designation bodhisattva?’ Do you think, Subhūti, that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are permanent?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are impermanent?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings that are permanent, for feelings that are impermanent, for perceptions that are permanent, for perceptions that are impermanent, for formative predispositions that are permanent, for formative predispositions that are impermanent, for consciousness that is permanent, or for consciousness that is impermanent?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are happiness?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are suffering?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings that are happiness, for feelings that are suffering, for perceptions that are happiness, for perceptions that are suffering, for formative predispositions that are happiness, for formative predispositions that are suffering, for consciousness that is happiness, or for consciousness that is suffering?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are a self?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are not a self?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings that are a self, for feelings that are not a self, for perceptions that are a self, for perceptions that are not a self, for formative predispositions that are a self, for formative predispositions that are not a self, for consciousness that is a self, or for consciousness that is not a self?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are at peace?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are not at peace?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings that are at peace, for feelings that are not at peace, for perceptions that are at peace, for perceptions that are not at peace, for formative predispositions that are at peace, for formative predispositions that are not at peace, for consciousness that is at peace, or for consciousness that is not at peace?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are empty?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are not empty?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings that are empty, for feelings that are not empty, for perceptions that are empty, for perceptions that are not empty, for formative predispositions that are empty, for formative predispositions that are not empty, for consciousness that is empty, or for consciousness that is not empty?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are with signs?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are without signs?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings that are with signs, for feelings that are without signs, for perceptions that are with signs, for perceptions that are without signs, for formative predispositions that are with signs, for formative predispositions that are without signs, for consciousness that is with signs, or for consciousness that is without signs?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are with aspirations?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are without aspirations?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings that are with aspirations, for feelings that are without aspirations, for perceptions that are with aspirations, for perceptions that are without aspirations, for formative predispositions that are with aspirations, for formative predispositions that are without aspirations, for consciousness that is with aspirations, and for consciousness that is without aspirations?”

“No, Blessed Lord!”

The Blessed One then asked, “Subhūti, on what basis do you say that a bodhisattva is not a designation for physical forms, and similarly, that a bodhisattva is not a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness? Similarly, why do you say that a bodhisattva is not a designation for physical forms that are permanent, not a designation for physical forms that are impermanent, not a designation for physical forms that are imbued with happiness, not a designation for physical forms that are imbued with suffering, not a designation for physical forms that are a self, not a designation for physical forms that are not a self, not a designation for physical forms that are at peace, not a designation for physical forms that are not at peace, not a designation for physical forms that are empty, not a designation for physical forms that are not empty, not a designation for physical forms that are with signs, not a designation for physical forms that are without signs, not a designation for physical forms that are with aspirations, and not a designation for physical forms that are without aspirations?

“Similarly, why do you say that a bodhisattva is not a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness that are permanent, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are impermanent, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are imbued with happiness, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are imbued with suffering, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are a self, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are not a self, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are at peace, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are not at peace, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are empty, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are not empty, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are with signs, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are without signs, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are with aspirations, and not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are without aspirations?”

Subhūti then replied, “Blessed Lord, if physical forms are absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms! If feelings are absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for feelings! If perceptions are absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for perceptions! If formative predispositions are absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for formative predispositions! If consciousness is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for consciousness!

“Blessed Lord, if permanence is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, and if impermanence is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for permanent physical forms! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for impermanent physical forms! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for permanent feelings! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for impermanent feelings! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for permanent perceptions! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for impermanent perceptions! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for permanent formative predispositions! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for impermanent formative predispositions! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for permanent consciousness! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for impermanent consciousness!

“Blessed Lord, in the same way, if happiness is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended and if suffering is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms imbued with happiness! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms imbued with suffering! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness imbued with happiness! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for consciousness [and the other aggregates] imbued with suffering!

“Blessed Lord, if self is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended and if nonself is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms with self! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms without self! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness with self! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for consciousness [and the other aggregates] without self!

“Blessed Lord, if being at peace is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended and if not being at peace is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are at peace! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are not at peace! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness that are at peace! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for consciousness [and the other aggregates] that are not at peace!

“Blessed Lord, if empty is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended and if not empty is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are empty! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are not empty! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness that are empty! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for consciousness [and the other aggregates] that are not empty!

“Blessed Lord, if having signs is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended and if being without signs is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are with signs! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are without signs! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness that are with signs! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for consciousness [and the other aggregates] that are without signs!

“Blessed Lord, if having aspirations is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended and if being without aspirations is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are with aspirations! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are without aspirations! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness that are with aspirations! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for consciousness [and the other aggregates] that are without aspirations!”

“Subhūti, it is so! It is so!” replied the Blessed One. “Subhūti! When bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom in that manner, they should train in the perfection of wisdom without apprehending a designation for physical forms; without apprehending a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are permanent; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are impermanent; without apprehending a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness that are permanent; without apprehending a designation for consciousness [and the other aggregates] that are impermanent; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are imbued with happiness; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are imbued with suffering; without apprehending a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness that are imbued with happiness; without apprehending a designation for consciousness [or the other aggregates] that are imbued with suffering; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are a self; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are without self; without apprehending a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness that are a self; without apprehending a designation for consciousness [or the other aggregates] that are without self; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are at peace; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are not at peace; without apprehending a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness that are at peace; without apprehending a designation for consciousness [or the other aggregates] that are not at peace; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are empty; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are not empty; without apprehending a designation for consciousness [or the other aggregates] that are empty; without apprehending a designation for consciousness [or the other aggregates] that are not empty; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are with signs; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are without signs; without apprehending a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness that are with signs; without apprehending a designation for consciousness [or the other aggregates] that are without signs; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are with aspirations; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are without aspirations; without apprehending a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness that are with aspirations; and without apprehending a designation for consciousness [or the other aggregates] that are without aspirations.

“You said, Subhūti, ‘I do not observe any such thing as a “bodhisattva.”’ With regard to that statement of yours, Subhūti, mental phenomena do not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of mental phenomena does not observe mental phenomena. Subhūti, the element of physical forms does not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of mental phenomena does not observe the element of physical forms. The element of feelings does not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of mental phenomena does not observe the element of feelings. The element of perceptions does not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of mental phenomena does not observe the element of perceptions. The element of formative predispositions does not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of mental phenomena does not observe the element of formative predispositions. The element of consciousness does not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of mental phenomena does not observe the element of consciousness. The element of the eyes does not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of mental phenomena does not observe the element of the eyes. The element of feelings does not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of the ears, the element of the nose, the element of the tongue, the element of the body and the element of the mental faculty do not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of mental phenomena does not observe the element of the mental faculty [and so forth]. Subhūti, the conditioned elements do not observe unconditioned elements. Unconditioned elements do not observe conditioned elements. If you ask why, unconditioned elements cannot be conceived apart from conditioned elements, nor can conditioned elements be conceived apart from unconditioned elements.

“Accordingly, Subhūti, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they do not observe any dharmas at all. Since they do not observe anything, they do not fear, they do not tremble, and they will not be fearful. Their minds will not be discouraged in any respect whatsoever. They will not lose heart. They will not be regretful. If you ask why, Subhūti, it is because, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they do not observe physical forms; they do not observe feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness; they do not observe the eyes; they do not observe the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body, or the mental faculty; they do not observe sights; and they do not observe sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, or mental phenomena. They do not observe the earth element. They do not observe the water element, the fire element, the wind element, the space element, or the consciousness element. They do not observe ignorance, and they do not observe formative predispositions, consciousness, name and form, the six sense fields, sensory contact, sensation, craving, grasping, the rebirth process, actual birth, or aging and death. They do not observe attachment. They do not observe hatred or delusion. They do not observe the self. They do not observe sentient beings, life forms, life, living creatures, individuals, human beings, people, actors, agents, experiencers, instigators of experience, knowers, or viewers. They do not observe the realm of desire. They do not observe the realm of form. They do not observe the realm of formlessness. They do not observe the mind of śrāvakas. They do not observe the mind of pratyekabuddhas. They do not observe the mind of bodhisattvas. They do not observe śrāvakas. They do not observe the attributes of śrāvakas. They do not observe pratyekabuddhas. They do not observe the attributes of pratyekabuddhas. They do not observe bodhisattvas. They do not observe the attributes of bodhisattvas. They do not observe buddhas. They do not observe the attributes of buddhas. They do not observe enlightenment. They do not observe the attributes of enlightenment. They do not observe anything, up to and including all mundane and supramundane phenomena. Since they do not observe any dharmas at all, they are not afraid, they do not tremble, and they will not be fearful.”

“Blessed Lord, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom in that manner, why do they not become discouraged with regard to all those dharmas? Why will they not become utterly disheartened?”

“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “it is because bodhisattva great beings do not observe such dharmas as the mind or mental states. Subhūti, this is why when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom they do not become discouraged with regard to all those dharmas. They do not become utterly disheartened.”

“Blessed Lord, how is it that bodhisattva great beings’ mental faculty experiences no fearfulness?”

“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “it is because bodhisattva great beings do not observe a mental faculty or a sensory element of the mental faculty. Subhūti, this is why bodhisattva great beings experience no fearfulness.

“So it is, Subhūti, that bodhisattva great beings should train in the perfection of wisdom by not apprehending anything at all. Subhūti, should it be the case that bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom apprehend no such perfection of wisdom, apprehend no such bodhisattva, apprehend no such term as bodhisattva, and apprehend no such mind of enlightenment, then that in itself is the essential advice for bodhisattva great beings! That is their very instruction.”