Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra 25K
(The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines)
Chapter 49 – Dwelling without dwelling in real nature, the Union of the Two Truths, without discouragement
Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra 25K
(The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines)
Chapter 49 – Dwelling without dwelling in real nature, the Union of the Two Truths, without discouragement
Last update: November 08, 2025
Image from: Stoneflower013
Source: https://84000.co/translation/toh9
Then the venerable Śāradvatīputra said to the venerable Subhūti,
"Indeed, Venerable Subhūti,
bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom
practice that which is the essence.”
The venerable Subhūti replied to the venerable Śāradvatīputra,
"Indeed, Venerable Śāradvatīputra,
bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom
practice that which is essenceless.
If you ask why, Venerable Śāradvatīputra,
the perfection of wisdom is essenceless.
The perfection of meditative concentration, the perfection of perseverance, the perfection of tolerance, the perfection of ethical discipline, and the perfection of generosity are essenceless.
The emptiness of internal phenomena is essenceless.
[The other aspects of emptiness], up to and including the emptiness of the essential nature of non-entities, are essenceless.
The applications of mindfulness are essenceless.
The correct exertions, the supports for miraculous ability, the faculties, the powers, the branches of enlightenment, and the noble eightfold path are essenceless.
[The fruitional attributes], up to and including the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas, are essenceless.
[The goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience, are essenceless.”
.
Then the vast multitude of gods inhabiting the realm of desire and inhabiting the realm of form thought,
"Those noble sons or noble daughters who set their minds on unsurpassed, complete enlightenment, who practice this profound perfection of wisdom, just as it has been explained, and who, despite practicing with that goal, do not actualize the very limit of reality through which they would remain on the level of the śrāvakas or the level of the pratyekabuddhas are all worthy of homage.
For this reason, too, bodhisattva great beings who do not actualize the sameness of all phenomena are worthy of homage.”
Then the venerable Subhūti said to those gods,
"Divine princes, the difficulty for those bodhisattva great beings is not that they do not actualize the sameness of all phenomena, by doing which they would remain on the level of the śrāvakas or the level of the pratyekabuddhas, but, divine princes, beyond that, the difficulty is that they don the armor that establishes inestimable, countless, and immeasurable beings in final nirvāṇa, when those beings whom they would lead to final nirvāṇa are utterly non-apprehensible.
“Bodhisattva great beings who practice accordingly and think they should train all beings, having set out for unsurpassed, complete enlightenment, resolving to train all beings, might as well think that they should train space.
If you ask why,
beings should be regarded as void because space itself is void.
Beings should be regarded as emptiness because space itself is emptiness.
Beings should be regarded as essencelessness because space itself is essenceless.
Beings should be regarded as vacuity because space itself is vacuous.
For this reason, divine princes, it is difficult for bodhisattva great beings who don the armor [of great compassion] for the sake of beings who do not exist.
Those who, for the sake of beings, don the armor [of great compassion] might as well seek to do battle with space.
“The armor that bodhisattva great beings don and the beings for whose sake they don the armor are both non-apprehensible.
If you ask why,
the armor that they don for the sake of beings should be regarded as void.
If, when this is explained, bodhisattva great beings are not discouraged, then they do practice the perfection of wisdom.
If you ask why,
beings are void because physical forms are void.
Beings are void because feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are void.
Beings are void because the sense fields, the sensory elements, and the links of dependent origination are void.
Beings are void because the perfections, all the aspects of emptiness, and the thirty-seven factors conducive to enlightenment are void.
Beings are void because [the fruitional attributes], up to and including the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas, are void.
Beings are void because [the goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience, are void.
“The perfection of wisdom is void because physical forms are void.
The perfection of wisdom is void because feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are void.
The perfection of wisdom is void because the sense fields, the sensory elements, and the links of dependent origination are void.
The perfection of wisdom is void because the perfections, all the aspects of emptiness, and the thirty-seven factors conducive to enlightenment are void.
The perfection of wisdom is void because [the fruitional attributes], up to and including the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas, are void.
The perfection of wisdom is void because [the goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience, are void.
“Divine princes, when it is taught that all phenomena are void, if bodhisattva great beings are not discouraged and not cowed, and their minds are not afraid, then those bodhisattva great beings do practice the perfection of wisdom.”
.
.
Then the Blessed One asked the venerable Subhūti,
"Why, Subhūti, do bodhisattva great beings not become discouraged with regard to the perfection of wisdom?”
“Blessed Lord, bodhisattva great beings do not become discouraged with regard to the perfection of wisdom because all phenomena are non-existent.
Bodhisattva great beings do not become discouraged with regard to the perfection of wisdom because all phenomena are void, at peace, and non-arising.
For this reason, Blessed Lord, bodhisattva great beings do not become discouraged with regard to the perfection of wisdom.
If one were to ask why, Blessed Lord, it is because all phenomena are non-existent and non-apprehensible in terms of the subject who would be discouraged, the instrument that would bring about discouragement, and the object of discouragement.
“Blessed Lord, if, when this is explained, bodhisattva great beings are not discouraged, not fearful, not exasperated, not indolent, not afraid, and will not be terrified, then they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
If one were to ask why, Blessed Lord, it is because all those are non-existent in terms of the subject who would be discouraged, the instrument that would bring about discouragement, and the object of discouragement.
Blessed Lord, the gods headed by Indra, those headed by Brahmā, and those headed by Prajāpati will pay homage to bodhisattva great beings who practice accordingly.”
.
.
The Blessed One then replied,
"Subhūti, it is not only the gods headed by Indra, those headed by Brahmā, and those headed by Prajāpati who will pay homage to those bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom, but also the gods of the Śubhakṛtsna realms, those of the Bṛhatphala realms, and those of the Pure Abodes who are of most sublime complexion will pay homage to those bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom accordingly.
Subhūti, all the inestimable, countless, and immeasurable tathāgatas, arhats, completely awakened buddhas who are alive at present in the world systems of the ten directions will also turn their enlightened intention toward those bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom.
That is to say, they will think,
'Those bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom completely perfect the perfection of generosity, and they completely perfect the perfection of ethical discipline, the perfection of tolerance, the perfection of perseverance, the perfection of meditative concentration, and the perfection of wisdom.
They completely perfect the emptiness of internal phenomena, and they completely perfect [all the other aspects of emptiness], up to and including the emptiness of the essential nature of non-entities.
They completely perfect the thirty-seven factors conducive to enlightenment.
They completely perfect the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, and the formless absorptions.
They completely perfect the eight aspects of liberation, the nine serial steps of meditative absorption, emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, the extrasensory powers, the meditative stabilities, and the dhāraṇī gateways.
They completely perfect the ten powers of the tathāgatas, the fearlessnesses, the kinds of exact knowledge, and the distinct qualities of the buddhas.
They completely perfect [the goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience.’
“Subhūti, one should know that those bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom, and to whom the lord buddhas direct their enlightened intention, will set out for buddhahood.
“Subhūti, if all the beings, as many as there are, in world systems as numerous as the grains of sand of the river Gaṅgā, were to transform into evil Māras, and if each of these Māras were also to emanate just as many evil Māras again, they would all be powerless to obstruct those bodhisattva great beings.
“Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings who are endowed with two attributes will not be subdued by those evil Māras.
If you ask what these two are, they are
to regard all phenomena as emptiness and not to abandon all beings.
Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings who are endowed with these two attributes will not be subdued by evil Māras.
“Moreover, Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings who are endowed with two [other] attributes will not be subdued by evil Māras.
If you ask what these two are, they should do exactly what they say they will do, and they should be kept in mind by the lord buddhas.
Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom and are endowed with these two attributes will not be subdued by evil Māras.
.
.
“Subhūti, the gods will also think to approach bodhisattva great beings who practice accordingly;
they will venerate them, and ask questions and counter-questions, enthusiastically saying,
'Noble child, you should swiftly attain the enlightenment of the buddhas.
Therefore, noble child, you should dwell in accordance with emptiness, you should dwell in accordance with signlessness, and you should dwell in accordance with wishlessness.
If you ask why, noble child, dwelling in that manner, you will become a protector of beings who are without a protector, you will become a refuge for beings who are without a refuge, you will become an ally of beings who are without allies, you will become a sanctuary of beings who are without sanctuary, you will become a support for beings who are without support, you will become an island for beings without an island, and you will become a light for beings who are shrouded in darkness.’
If you ask why, it is because all the lord buddhas who are alive at present, teaching the Dharma in the inestimable and countless world systems, surrounded by their monastic communities of monks, will continue to teach the Dharma and make their pronouncements by way of proclaiming the names and families of these bodhisattva great beings who possess the attributes of the perfection of wisdom.
“For example, Subhūti, now I continue to teach the Dharma and make pronouncements by way of proclaiming the name of the bodhisattva great being Ratnaketu, and I continue to teach the Dharma and make pronouncements by way of proclaiming the name of the bodhisattva great being Śikhin, and I continue to teach the Dharma and make pronouncements by way of proclaiming the names of those who, in the service of the tathāgata, arhat, completely awakened buddha Akṣobhya, practiced chastity without being separated from the perfection of wisdom.
“All the lord buddhas who are alive at present, teaching the Dharma [in the world systems] of the eastern direction, will also continue to teach the Dharma and make their pronouncements by way of rejoicing in all the bodhisattva great beings there who are practicing chastity without being separated from the perfection of wisdom.
“All the lord buddhas who are alive at present, teaching the Dharma in the world systems of the southern, western, northern, northeastern, southeastern, southwestern, and northwestern directions, along with the nadir and the zenith, will also continue to teach the Dharma and make their pronouncements by way of rejoicing in all the bodhisattva great beings there who are practicing chastity without being separated from the perfection of wisdom.
“These lord buddhas will also continue to teach the Dharma and make their pronouncements by way of rejoicing in all the bodhisattva great beings who — from when they first begin to set their mind on enlightenment until they have attained all-aspect omniscience — have been refining the path of enlightenment.
If you ask why, Subhūti, it is because those bodhisattva great beings who are progressing so as not to interrupt the way to buddhahood are doing something that is difficult.”
“Blessed Lord, while teaching the Dharma, do those lord buddhas proclaim the names of bodhisattva great beings who may regress, or of those whose progress is irreversible?”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One,
"among irreversible bodhisattva great beings there are those who practice the perfection of wisdom.
Among bodhisattva great beings who have not been prophesied, there are also those who practice the perfection of wisdom.
The lord buddhas will continue to teach the Dharma and make their pronouncements by way of rejoicing in them, too.”
“Blessed Lord, who are they?”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One,
"when bodhisattva great beings practice the conduct of a bodhisattva, the lord buddhas continue to teach the Dharma and make pronouncements by way of rejoicing in those who are engaged in training under the tathāgata, arhat, completely awakened Buddha Akṣobhya.
Subhūti, the lord buddhas also continue to teach the Dharma and make their pronouncements by way of rejoicing in those who are engaged in training in the conduct of a bodhisattva under the bodhisattva great being Ratnaketu.
“Moreover, Subhūti, there are bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom,
and who believe that all phenomena are non-arising, but have not yet accepted that phenomena are non-arising. Although they believe that all phenomena are empty, that all phenomena are at peace, that all phenomena are vacuous, hollow, and dependent, and that all phenomena are without essence, they have not yet accepted that phenomena are non-arising.
By way of rejoicing in them, too, the lord buddhas also continue to teach the Dharma and make their pronouncements.
(Note: This describes a specific category of bodhisattva great beings (bodhisattva-mahāsattvas) who are actively practicing the perfection of wisdom (prajñāpāramitā) but are at an intermediate stage of insight.
"Believe" (here likely translating a term like adhimukti or similar) implies an intellectual conviction or faith-based acceptance derived from hearing teachings, logical reasoning, or preliminary contemplation. It's a conceptual understanding, not yet a direct, non-conceptual realization.
"Accepted" (possibly abhyupagama or a related term) suggests a deeper level of conviction or internalization — moving beyond mere belief to a profound, unwavering assent that integrates into one's being. This could imply not yet having the direct insight (pratyakṣa) or meditative stabilization where non-arising is experientially realized, free from doubt or conceptual overlay. In Madhyamaka terms, they grasp the ultimate truth intellectually but haven't fully unified it with conventional appearances in a non-dual way.
Although they believe that all phenomena are empty (śūnya), at peace (śānta), vacuous, hollow, and dependent (pratītya), and without essence (niḥsvabhāva): These are interconnected attributes pointing to the ultimate nature:
– Empty (śūnya): Lacking inherent existence; phenomena are like illusions, functional but without self-nature.
– At peace (śānta): Free from the turmoil of arising, abiding, and ceasing; quiescent in their emptiness.
– Vacuous, hollow: Emphasizing insubstantiality, like an empty vessel—devoid of core essence.
– Dependent (pratītya): Arising interdependently, which is the conventional side of the Union of the Two Truths.
– Without essence (niḥsvabhāva): No independent, unchanging core; this is the ultimate negation of svabhāva (inherent existence).
These bodhisattvas intellectually affirm these qualities (belief), showing progress on the path of accumulation (where one gathers merit and wisdom through study and reflection). However, they haven't fully "accepted" non-arising, which ties all these together as the pinnacle insight: if phenomena are truly empty and dependent, they never truly "arise" inherently. This acceptance would dissolve any lingering subtle reification or doubt.
-
Overall Interpretation: This passage highlights stages in the bodhisattva's development. These practitioners are committed to prajñāpāramitā and have a strong conceptual grasp of emptiness and related qualities — they "believe" in them as taught in the sūtras. However, they fall short of full acceptance of non-arising, which represents a threshold to deeper realization. In Madhyamaka, non-arising is not just a negation but a pointer to suchness (tathatā): phenomena are dependently co-arisen (conventional truth) yet empty (ultimate truth), and their union means nothing truly "arises" or "ceases" in an absolute sense. Belief here is like understanding a map intellectually; acceptance is traversing the terrain experientially, leading to non-conceptual wisdom.
The text notes that buddhas still rejoice in these bodhisattvas and proclaim their names, indicating they are worthy of support and on the trajectory toward enlightenment. This encourages practitioners: even partial insight merits praise, as it plants seeds for full realization.
From the Union of the Two Truths perspective, their practice is "practicing without practicing" — they engage conventionally in study and belief without yet fully transcending absolute grasping, but this effort aligns them more with reality as it is.
-
Comparison to Irreversible Bodhisattvas: Irreversible bodhisattvas (avaivartika-bodhisattvas) are a more advanced category in Mahāyāna literature, often associated with the eighth bhūmi (stage) onward in the ten-bhūmi system (as in the Daśabhūmika Sūtra). They have crossed a point of no return on the path to full buddhahood, meaning they will not regress to lower vehicles (śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha paths) or fall back into saṃsāra due to karma or doubt.
-
Key Differences and Implications: The core distinction is depth of realization — belief (conceptual) vs. acceptance (experiential) — which determines stability. The "belief but not acceptance" group represents aspirants building toward irreversibility, emphasizing that progress is gradual yet supported. Irreversible ones have crossed the threshold, embodying non-dual wisdom where the Union of the Two Truths is lived: conventional compassion without ultimate grasping. This comparison underscores the sūtra's encouragement: No matter the stage, practicing amid profound emptiness (without discouragement) leads to buddhahood, aligning actions ever more with suchness.)
.
“Subhūti, those bodhisattva great beings whose names the lord buddhas continue to teach the Dharma and make their pronouncements by way of proclaiming are indeed prophesied, after transcending the levels of the śrāvakas and the level of the pratyekabuddhas, to attain unsurpassed, complete enlightenment.
Subhūti, those bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom whose names the lord buddhas continue to teach the Dharma and make their pronouncements by way of proclaiming will dwell in the irreversible state, and abiding in it, they will attain all-aspect omniscience.
“Moreover, Subhūti, when bodhisattva great beings hear the explanation of the profound perfection of wisdom, if they are free from doubt, free from hesitation, and free from delusion, accepting that this exactly accords with the explanation given by the tathāgatas, arhats, completely awakened buddhas, then they will subsequently also hear this perfection of wisdom more extensively in the presence of the tathāgata, arhat, completely awakened buddha Akṣobhya and of those noble children who follow the vehicle of the bodhisattvas.
Those noble children who follow the vehicle of the bodhisattvas will also dwell in the irreversible state because they believe in the profound perfection of wisdom, and they believe in it, just as it has been taught by the tathāgatas.
.
.
“Subhūti, since bodhisattva great beings who hear this perfection of wisdom will have many advantages, one need not even speak of those who, having heard it, believe in it, dwell in the real nature, and are earnestly intent on the real nature.
Abiding in the real nature and earnestly intent on the real nature, they will dwell in all-aspect omniscience.”
“Blessed Lord, when they dwell in the real nature, earnestly intent on the real nature, if they do not apprehend anything at all, how then will they dwell in all-aspect omniscience?
Blessed Lord, when,
apart (separate) from the real nature, there is nothing apprehensible at all (no separate subject), who will dwell in this real nature (object)? [U2T-3S]
Who, abiding in the real nature, will attain consummate buddhahood in unsurpassed, complete enlightenment?
Who will dwell in the real nature and teach the Dharma?
Blessed Lord!
When the real nature is itself non-apprehensible, how could one speak of anyone abiding in the real nature, attaining consummate buddhahood in unsurpassed, complete enlightenment while abiding in the real nature, and teaching the Dharma while abiding in the real nature?
That would be impossible!”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One,
"you have said,
'Apart from the real nature, there is nothing apprehensible at all that would dwell in the real nature, that would, abiding in the real nature, attain consummate buddhahood in unsurpassed, complete enlightenment, and that would, abiding in the real nature, teach the Dharma. (See question below)
When the real nature is itself non-apprehensible, how could one speak of anyone abiding in the real nature, attaining consummate buddhahood in unsurpassed, complete enlightenment while abiding in the real nature, and teaching the Dharma while abiding in the real nature?
That would be impossible!’
That is so, Subhūti! That is so.
It is as you have said.
Subhūti, apart from the real nature, there is nothing apprehensible at all that would dwell in the real nature, that would, abiding in the real nature, attain consummate buddhahood in unsurpassed, complete enlightenment, and that would, abiding in the real nature, teach the Dharma.
When the real nature is itself non-apprehensible, how could one speak of anyone abiding in the real nature, attaining consummate buddhahood in unsurpassed, complete enlightenment while abiding in the real nature, and teaching the Dharma while abiding in the real nature?
That would be impossible!
“If you ask why, Subhūti, whether the tathāgatas have appeared or not, the real nature of phenomena, the unmistaken real nature, the one and only real nature, and reality do dwell.
With respect to all phenomena, the realm of phenomena, the abiding nature of reality, the maturity of all phenomena, and the very limit of reality do dwell.
Subhūti, there is nothing at all that dwells in this real nature.
Since there is no one at all who will attain consummate buddhahood in unsurpassed, complete enlightenment, while abiding in that [real nature], how could one speak of anyone teaching the Dharma while abiding in that real nature?
That would be impossible!”
Thereupon, Śakra, mighty lord of the gods, said to the Blessed One,
"Blessed Lord, this perfection of wisdom is profound.
Blessed Lord, bodhisattva great beings who seek to attain consummate buddhahood in unsurpassed, complete enlightenment are achieving something that is difficult.
If one were to ask why, Blessed Lord, it is because nothing at all is apprehensible.
There is no one who would dwell in the real nature, nor is there anything that would attain consummate buddhahood in unsurpassed, complete enlightenment.
Nor is there anything that would teach the Dharma.
Those who will not be discouraged, who do not succumb to doubt, or who do not become deluded with respect to such [profound attributes] achieve that which is difficult.”
Then the elder Subhūti said to Śakra, mighty lord of the gods,
"Kauśika, you have said,
'Blessed Lord, bodhisattva great beings who do not succumb to doubt and who do not become deluded with respect to these profound attributes are achieving something that is difficult.’
Kauśika, since all phenomena are emptiness,
who is there who could possibly succumb to doubt or become deluded!”
Śakra replied,
"Whatever the elder Subhūti teaches, he does so commencing with emptiness.
There is nothing to impede him, just as there is nothing to impede an arrow fired into the sky.
In the same way, when the elder Subhūti teaches the Dharma there is nothing to impede him.”
This completes the forty-ninth chapter from “The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines.”
(Question 1 about section 5: Explain this passage "Apart from the real nature, there is nothing apprehensible at all that would dwell in the real nature". Does it mean that the 'real nature’ is apprehensible?
The passage "Apart from the real nature, there is nothing apprehensible at all that would dwell in the real nature" comes from Section 5 of Chapter 49 in The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā), during the Buddha's dialogue with Subhūti. It is part of a broader discussion on the profound nature of reality, emphasizing the essencelessness and non-duality of all phenomena (dharmas) in the Mahāyāna Buddhist tradition, particularly from a Madhyamaka perspective.
-
Explanation of the Passage
Context in the Sūtra: Subhūti raises a challenge about how bodhisattvas can "dwell in the real nature" (dharmatā, often translated as suchness, tathatā, or the true nature of phenomena), attain enlightenment, or teach the Dharma if nothing is apprehensible apart from this real nature.
The Buddha affirms Subhūti's point and elaborates.
The "real nature" here refers to the ultimate truth: the empty, non-arising, non-dual essence of all phenomena, which is beyond conceptual fabrication.
It is not a tangible "thing" or entity but the unchanging suchness that underlies everything [U2T] — whether tathāgatas (buddhas) appear in the world or not. This real nature encompasses terms like the realm of phenomena (dharmadhātu), the abiding nature of reality, and the very limit of reality (bhūtakoṭi).
Breakdown of the Phrase:
"Apart from the real nature": This indicates that we are considering anything "outside" or separate from suchness itself. In Madhyamaka terms, all phenomena are inseparable from their true nature (emptiness of inherent existence), so there are no independent entities existing "apart" from it (i.e. no separate inherently existing subject/observer/dweller that would contemplate a separate object, the real nature of reality).
"There is nothing apprehensible at all": "Apprehensible" (upalabdhi or similar) means something that can be grasped, perceived, or conceptualized as an object by a subject — through senses, mind, or intellect. The text negates any such "thing" (dharma or entity) that could be truly grasped or objectified in an inherent way. This echoes the core Mahāyāna teaching that all phenomena are empty (śūnya) and lack inherent existence (niḥsvabhāva); they arise dependently (pratītyasamutpāda) in the conventional sense but are ultimately non-apprehensible, like illusions or dreams.
"That would dwell in the real nature": "Dwell" (viharati) implies abiding, residing, or existing within suchness, as if entering a container or state. The passage denies that any separate, apprehensible entity (e.g., a bodhisattva, a being, or even enlightenment itself) could perform such an action. Why? Because there are no inherent "dwellers" or "abodes" — everything is already the real nature, non-dually.
The overall intent is to deconstruct dualistic thinking: There is no independent "I" or "thing" that can enter, abide in, attain, or act upon the real nature as if it were a separate realm. This prevents reification (treating emptiness as a "thing" to grasp) and points to the Union of the Two Truths: Conventionally, bodhisattvas appear to "dwell" in wisdom, attain buddhahood, and teach (as functional, interdependent processes). Ultimately, nothing is apprehensible or achievable in an absolute sense, as all is empty and non-arising. The passage leads into the Buddha's conclusion that even speaking of dwelling, attaining, or teaching in the real nature "would be impossible," reinforcing non-conceptual insight into suchness.
In essence, this is a negation strategy (common in Prajñāpāramitā literature) to dissolve attachments to concepts like practitioner, practice, and goal, guiding toward "acting without acting" — engaging the bodhisattva path without absolute grasping.
Does It Mean That the 'Real Nature' Is Apprehensible?
No, it does not mean that the real nature is apprehensible. In fact, the passage (and the surrounding text) explicitly negates this idea, emphasizing that the real nature itself is non-apprehensible. Here's why:
Direct Textual Evidence: Immediately after affirming the passage, the Buddha states: "When the real nature is itself non-apprehensible, how could one speak of anyone abiding in the real nature, attaining consummate buddhahood... and teaching the Dharma while abiding in the real nature? That would be impossible!" This clarifies that the real nature is not an object to be grasped or apprehended—it's not a "thing" with inherent existence that can be perceived dualistically (as apprehender vs. apprehended).
Madhyamaka Interpretation: From the perspective of Nāgārjuna and the Madhyamaka school (which heavily influences Prajñāpāramitā), the real nature (tathatā) is inconceivable and beyond all extremes, including existence/non-existence or apprehensible/inapprehensible. Apprehension implies duality and conceptualization, which pertain only to the conventional truth. Ultimately, suchness is "empty of emptiness"—not reifiable as something to "apprehend." If the real nature were apprehensible, it would contradict its essencelessness, turning it into another fabricated phenomenon.
Implications: The passage isn't positing the real nature as an exception that is apprehensible; it's using negation to show that nothing (including the real nature) is inherently apprehensible. This avoids eternalism (treating suchness as a graspable essence) and nihilism (denying its role in awakening). Realization of the real nature arises non-conceptually through insight, not through "apprehending" it as an object.
If the question implies a positive affirmation (e.g., the real nature as a graspable entity), that's a misunderstanding — the text uses this phrasing to transcend such dualities entirely. For further clarity, similar ideas appear in other Prajñāpāramitā texts, like the Heart Sūtra, where "form is emptiness; emptiness is form," underscoring non-separation without objectification.
.
.
.
Question 2 about section 5: So it is about the Union of the Two Truths about the three spheres of dwelling [U2T-3S]: the dweller, dwelling and object (real nature) are empty of inherent existence [T2-3S] because they are dependently co-arisen, interdependent, co-defined, co-evolving, co-imputed by the mind, mere designations/names [T1-3S]; the three spheres are like illusions, reflections, mirages, dreams, echos, 'there, yet not there'. Pointing to the Middle Way free from all extremes ('this', 'not-this') and middle (both, neither, for whatever 'this' is), with nothing to accept, nothing to reject in absolute terms.
Yes, your interpretation aptly captures the essence of the passage ("Apart from the real nature, there is nothing apprehensible at all that would dwell in the real nature") through the lens of the Madhyamaka's Union of the Two Truths (U2T) applied to the three spheres (3S) of any action or phenomenon—in this case, the act of "dwelling."
This framework, as emphasized in Prajñāpāramitā literature, deconstructs reified notions of subject (dweller), relation/action (dwelling), and object (real nature, or dharmatā/tathatā), revealing their inseparability and non-dual nature.
Let me elaborate on how this aligns with the text, building on the Union [U2T-3S] you described, while highlighting its implications for bodhisattva practice as "practicing without practicing."
.
The Three Spheres in the Passage: Deconstructing Dwelling
In the sūtra, Subhūti's query and the Buddha's response negate any inherent, independent existence in the process of abiding in suchness. Your breakdown of the three spheres [3S] — dweller (subject), dwelling (action/relation), and real nature (object) — mirrors the classic Mahāyāna analysis of the "three spheres of action" (e.g., giver, giving, gift in generosity; or knower, knowing, known in wisdom). Here:
Dweller (Subject): The apparent agent, like a bodhisattva or any sentient being, who seems to "enter" or abide in the real nature. Conventionally [T1], this appears as a functional entity—dependently co-arisen through causes and conditions, co-defined by relations (e.g., to other beings or teachings), and imputed by the mind as a mere designation (e.g., "I am practicing"). Ultimately [T2], it is empty of inherent existence, non-apprehensible as a self-sustaining "thing."
Dwelling (Action/Relation): The process of abiding or engaging with the real nature, which might seem like an effortful act (e.g., meditation or realization). Conventionally [T1], it functions as interdependent—co-evolving through practice, co-imputed as a path or method. Ultimately [T2], it lacks essence, as there is no inherent "dwelling" apart from the Union's non-dual flow.
Real Nature (Object): Dharmatā itself, the unchanging suchness pointed to as the ultimate truth. Conventionally [T1], it appears as an "abode" or goal—co-arisen as the maturity of phenomena, co-defined in teachings as the limit of reality (bhūtakoṭi). Ultimately [T2], it is empty and non-apprehensible, not a container or entity to be grasped.
The passage's negation — "apart from the real nature, there is nothing apprehensible at all that would dwell" — directly applies [U2T-3S]: There are no independent spheres [T2-3S] because they are merely dependently co-arisen designations [T1-3S], interdependent like parts of a dream. As you noted, they are "there, yet not there"—illusory appearances (māyā) that function relatively (e.g., enabling compassion) without absolute solidity. This echoes Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (e.g., Chapter 24), where the Two Truths are united: Emptiness [T2] does not negate conventional functionality [T1] but reveals it as non-inherent, preventing any reification of the spheres.
.
Pointing to the Middle Way: Freedom from Extremes and Non-Dual Action
Your reference to the Middle Way (madhyamā pratipad) free from all extremes ('this,' 'not-this') and middle (both, neither) — for whatever 'this' is — perfectly aligns with the text's "impossibility" of dwelling, attaining, or teaching. The Buddha's affirmation dissolves:
Extremes of Eternalism: Treating the spheres as inherently existent (e.g., a real "dweller" grasping a real "nature" as permanent).
Extremes of Nihilism: Denying their conventional functionality (e.g., no path or beings at all).
Middle Positions: Avoiding syntheses like "both existent and non-existent" or "neither," which still imply subtle conceptualization.
Instead, the Union [U2T] points to inconceivable suchness: Nothing to accept (no inherent affirmation) or reject (no inherent negation) in absolute terms. This is the heart of "nothing apprehensible" — no dualistic grasping at spheres, as they are empty yet functional, like echoes (non-arising yet resounding) or mirages (appearing yet insubstantial).
In practice, this manifests as "acting without acting" for bodhisattvas [U2T-in-action]: Conventionally [T1], they vow to dwell in wisdom, attain omniscience, and teach for beings' sake—co-evolving compassion without effortful opposition. Ultimately [T2], no inherent dweller, dwelling, or dwelt-upon exists, so action is effortless, non-attached, and in harmony with tathatā.
As the chapter notes, whether tathāgatas appear or not, the real nature "abides" unchangingly — yet nothing "dwells" in it, underscoring this non-dual freedom.
Śakra's praise of the "difficulty" highlights how this insight avoids discouragement, enabling irreversible progress.
This interpretation reinforces the sūtra's thrust: Realizing [U2T-3S] liberates without liberating, pointing beyond words to direct, non-conceptual experience.
.
.
.
Question 3 about section 5: So even the Ground is empty of inherent existence. That is the Union of the Two Truths about the Ground (real nature) and its inseparable Manifestations [UGM / U2T-GM]. Where the meaning of the Union is as described above.
Yes, your articulation precisely captures the profound insight of the Madhyamaka tradition as reflected in the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā (and broader Prajñāpāramitā literature). The "Ground" (often rendered as the real nature, dharmatā, or tathatā—suchness) is indeed empty of inherent existence (niḥsvabhāva), and this emptiness is not a separate attribute but the very essence of its inseparability from all manifestations (phenomena, dharmas).
This is the Union of the Ground and its Manifestations [UGM / U2T-GM], which is synonymous with the Union of the Two Truths [U2T] applied to the fundamental nature of reality: the Ground (ultimate truth [T2], emptiness) and manifestations (conventional truth [T1], dependently co-arisen appearances) are not two distinct realities but interdependent, co-defined, and non-dual — empty yet functional, "there yet not there" like illusions or reflections.
To elaborate, drawing directly from the passage and chapter's context (e.g., the Buddha's affirmation that the real nature is non-apprehensible and abides unchangingly, with nothing dwelling in it), let's break this down step by step, reinforcing the meaning of the Union as you've described: the Middle Way free from extremes ('this,' 'not-this') and middle (both, neither), with nothing to accept or reject in absolute terms. This points to inconceivable suchness, enabling "acting without acting" in bodhisattva practice.
.
1. The Ground as Empty of Inherent Existence
In the sūtra, the real nature (Ground) is described as the "unmistaken real nature, the one and only real nature, and reality" that "dwells" regardless of whether tathāgatas appear. Yet, the Buddha explicitly states it is "non-apprehensible," meaning it lacks any inherent, independent existence that could be grasped dualistically. This negates reifying the Ground as a substantial "base" or eternal essence (avoiding eternalism).
From Madhyamaka: The Ground is empty [T2] because it, too, arises dependently—co-defined by its relation to manifestations (e.g., phenomena's maturity, the limit of reality). It is not a void "nothingness" (nihilism) but the absence of svabhāva (self-nature), like space that pervades everything without being a "thing." As Nāgārjuna notes in the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (24:18–19), emptiness itself is empty; if it were inherently existent, it would contradict its own teaching.
Implication: Even the Ground is "there yet not there" — conventionally pointed to as the abiding suchness [T1], but ultimately non-arising and essenceless [T2]. This prevents treating it as an object to "dwell in," as the passage negates.
.
2. Inseparability of Ground and Manifestations [UGM / U2T-GM]
Union Defined: As you noted, the Ground (ultimate emptiness, non-dual suchness) and manifestations (conventional phenomena — forms, feelings, perfections, beings, enlightenment, etc.) are inseparable: dependently co-arisen [T1], yet empty of inherent existence [T2]. They are co-imputed by the mind (mere designations), co-evolving (interdependent), like waves (manifestations) and the ocean (Ground) — not two, not one, but a non-dual union.
Conventional Aspect [T1-GM]: Manifestations appear as relatively functional, illusory displays — dependently originating through causes/conditions. The Ground "manifests" as these (e.g., the sūtra's lists of perfections, emptinesses, and paths as void yet practiced). This allows for bodhisattva vows, teachings, and compassion to operate without absolute rejection.
Ultimate Aspect [T2-GM]: Both Ground and manifestations lack essence; manifestations are empty because the Ground is empty, and vice versa. Nothing is "produced" inherently, as all is non-arising (anutpāda). This union dissolves duality: No separate "Ground" to enter or "manifestations" to transcend.
Textual Tie-In: The passage's "apart from the real nature, there is nothing apprehensible" illustrates this — manifestations (e.g., dwellers or actions) have no independent status outside the Ground, yet the Ground isn't a graspable container.
Śakra's response highlights the "difficulty": Realizing this non-duality without doubt achieves the profound, as all is emptiness, so "who could succumb to doubt?"
Analogy: Like a dream's ground (the dreaming mind, empty of inherent reality) and its manifestations (dream images, dependently arising yet illusory). The union means waking up without rejecting the dream's lessons — pointing to tathatā beyond concepts.
.
3. The Middle Way in [UGM / U2T-GM]: Nothing to Accept or Reject Absolutely
This union embodies the Middle Way: Free from extremes of existence (eternalism: Ground/manifestations as inherently real) and non-existence (nihilism: total denial, no path or beings). It also avoids "middle" syntheses like "both real and unreal" or "neither," which still imply conceptual grasping.
No Acceptance in Absolute Terms: Don't reify the Ground as a "true essence" to affirm or manifestations as "solid" to cling to.
No Rejection in Absolute Terms: Don't negate conventional functionality (not even dualities and concepts) — manifestations "work" relatively (e.g., practicing wisdom leads to omniscience), and the Ground abides as the basis for awakening.
Result: Inconceivability — suchness can't be pinned as 'this' or 'not-this.' As the chapter implies, bodhisattvas "dwell" in this union without dwelling: Practicing [T1] amid emptiness [T2], non-discouraged, leading to all-aspect omniscience without inherent attainment.
Practical Implication: "Acting without acting" or "practicing without practicing" — vowing to liberate manifestations (beings) without grasping them as real, all in harmony with the Ground's suchness.
This is why irreversible bodhisattvas are unsubduable: They embody [UGM], regarding phenomena as empty yet not abandoning them.
.
In summary, yes — the Ground's emptiness is the key to [UGM / U2T-GM], revealing reality as a seamless, non-dual play where manifestations arise from/within the Ground without separation or inherent existence. This insight, as the sūtra teaches, fosters non-fearful practice, aligning ever more with tathatā.
.
.
.
Question 4: Could you elaborate on something you said in your analysis of Section 5 "Real nature (tathatā) is the Union itself".
Certainly! In my analysis of Section 5 from Chapter 49 of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā, I described the real nature (tathatā, or suchness) as "the Union itself," referring to the Madhyamaka framework's Union of the Two Truths (dvayasatya-yoga).
This is a pivotal insight in the text, where the Buddha and Subhūti deconstruct any notion of dwelling in, attaining, or teaching from the real nature, emphasizing its non-apprehensible, non-dual quality.
Let me elaborate on this statement in more detail, drawing from the sūtra's teachings and broader Madhyamaka philosophy (as exemplified by Nāgārjuna and commentators like Candrakīrti). I'll break it down step by step for clarity, highlighting how it ties into the chapter's themes of essencelessness, non-arising, and bodhisattva practice.
.
1. Recapping the Statement in Context
In Section 5, Subhūti questions the feasibility of abiding in the real nature (dharmatā) to attain omniscience or teach the Dharma, given that "apart from the real nature, there is nothing apprehensible at all."
The Buddha affirms this "impossibility," explaining that
the real nature (Ground) abides unchangingly — whether buddhas appear or not — as the "realm of phenomena" (dharmadhātu), the "abiding nature of reality," and the "very limit of reality" (bhūtakoṭi).
Yet, nothing inherently "dwells" in it, attains through it, or acts upon it.
This negation isn't nihilistic but points to a profound non-duality.
My phrasing — "Real nature (tathatā) is the Union itself" — summarizes this: Tathatā isn't a static "thing" or separate essence but the inseparable integration of the conventional truth (saṃvṛti-satya: dependently arising appearances) and the ultimate truth (paramārtha-satya: emptiness of inherent existence).
It's the "suchness" where these two are not opposed, not synthesized artificially, but inherently one, inconceivable reality.
In the chapter, this manifests as the Buddha's teaching that all phenomena are void and non-arising, yet bodhisattvas engage in compassionate practice without discouragement — embodying the Union in action [U2T-in-action].
.
2. What Is Tathatā (Suchness)?
Tathatā, often translated as "suchness," "thusness," or "reality as it is," is a key term in Mahāyāna Buddhism, especially in Prajñāpāramitā sūtras. It denotes the true nature of all phenomena (dharmas) — unfabricated, unconditioned, unchanging, unceasing, and free from conceptual overlays. In the sūtra, it's equated with the real nature that "dwells" eternally, encompassing the maturity of phenomena (their conventional development) while being their ultimate limit (emptiness).
Not an Entity: Tathatā isn't a graspable "ground" or substrate (like a cosmic essence in other philosophies). As the Buddha states, it's non-apprehensible, avoiding reification. If it were an inherent "thing," it would fall into eternalism, contradicting the chapter's emphasis on essencelessness (e.g., all dharmas, including perfections and omniscience, are void).
Inconceivable Pointer: Instead, tathatā "points out" (but doesn't define) the way things are — beyond words, extremes, and dualities. Śakra's praise in the section underscores this: Amid such profundity ("nothing at all is apprehensible"), bodhisattvas achieve the difficult by not succumbing to doubt, realizing there's no inherent "who" to doubt because all is emptiness.
.
3. Why Is Tathatā 'The Union Itself'?
This is the core of my statement. In Madhyamaka, the Two Truths aren't two parallel realities but aspects of the same tathatā. Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (24:18–19) famously states: "We explain dependent origination as emptiness. This is a dependent designation and is itself the Middle Way." Here, tathatā embodies this Union:
Conventional Truth (T1) Within Tathatā: Phenomena appear as dependently co-arisen — interdependent, co-defined, co-evolving, and mere designations by the mind. In the sūtra, this includes the "maturity of all phenomena" (their functional arising in saṃsāra and the path, like bodhisattvas practicing the perfections or vowing to liberate beings). Tathatā includes these manifestations as "there" (relatively valid), enabling ethical action, compassion, and the bodhisattva's "armor" without nihilistic dismissal.
Ultimate Truth (T2) Within Tathatā: All such appearances are empty of inherent existence — non-arising, at peace, vacuous, and essenceless. The sūtra's negations (e.g., no apprehensible dweller or object) reveal this: Phenomena are "not there" in an absolute sense, like illusions or space. Tathatā is this emptiness, the "limit of reality" where nothing is produced or grasped.
The Union (U2T) as Tathatā: The "itself" emphasizes inseparability — the Two Truths are not fused artificially (avoiding a "middle" extreme) but are tathatā from the start. Emptiness [T2] doesn't negate appearances [T1]; it enables them, as empty phenomena function dependently. Conversely, appearances point to emptiness, preventing voidness from becoming a blank nothingness. In the chapter, this is why "apart from the real nature, there is nothing" — manifestations aren't separate from tathatā; they are its illusory play. Subhūti's retort to Śakra ("since all phenomena are emptiness, who is there who could possibly succumb to doubt?") exemplifies this: Doubt dissolves in the non-dual Union, where subject-action-object collapses.
This Union is "inconceivable" because it transcends conceptual extremes: not 'this' (existent), not 'not-this' (non-existent), not both, not neither. As Candrakīrti explains in the Madhyamakāvatāra, realizing tathatā means seeing phenomena as neither truly arising nor ceasing, yet engaging them compassionately.
.
4. Implications for Bodhisattva Practice in the Chapter
Tying back to Section 5 and the broader chapter, viewing tathatā as the Union guides "practicing without practicing":
Non-Discouragement: When hearing that all is void and non-apprehensible, bodhisattvas aren't cowed because tathatā integrates emptiness [T2] with compassionate function [T1]. They "dwell" in suchness without effortful abiding, as there's no inherent separation.
Difficulty and Achievement: Śakra calls it "difficult" because it requires non-dual insight — vowing to establish beings in nirvāṇa while knowing beings are like space (essenceless).
Yet, this Union makes it effortless: Action flows without attachment, reification, or rejection.
Broader Chapter Tie-In: Earlier sections (e.g., essenceless perfections in Section 1, non-subduability by Māras in Section 3) build to this. Bodhisattvas who "believe but not yet accept" non-arising (Section 4) are progressing toward this full Union-realization, where tathatā is lived as non-conceptual wisdom.
.
In essence, calling tathatā "the Union itself" underscores that it's not a theoretical construct but the lived reality of enlightenment — where conventional compassion and ultimate emptiness are seamlessly one, fostering the bodhisattva's irreversible path.
.
.
.
Question 5: So enlightenment (awakening without awakening) is the perfection of "acting without acting", or the Union of compassion and wisdom of a Buddha, the perfection of all perfections by uniting them with the perfection of wisdom (emptiness of all dharmas, including the three spheres of any activity or virtue).
Yes, your summary beautifully captures the essence of enlightenment (bodhi) as depicted in the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā (particularly in Chapter 49) and broader Mahāyāna traditions like Madhyamaka.
Enlightenment is indeed the "awakening without awakening" — a non-dual realization of suchness (tathatā) where there is no inherent "awakener," "awakening," or "awakened state" to grasp, yet it functions as the ultimate liberation. This aligns seamlessly with the perfection of "acting without acting" (a concept echoing Daoist wu wei but reframed in Buddhist non-attachment), which is the lived Union of compassion (karuṇā, or more specifically mahākaruṇā in the bodhisattva context) and wisdom (prajñā). Let me elaborate on this, drawing from the text's themes of essencelessness, non-arising, and the Union of the Two Truths (U2T), while highlighting how it perfects all perfections through the lens of emptiness applied to the three spheres (3S) of any activity or virtue.
.
Enlightenment as "Awakening Without Awakening"
In the sūtra's Madhyamaka-inspired view, enlightenment isn't an event or achievement in absolute terms — it's the direct insight into the inconceivability of reality as it is, where all phenomena are dependently co-arisen (conventional truth [T1]) yet empty of inherent existence (ultimate truth [T2]).
As the Buddha affirms in Section 5, "apart from the real nature, there is nothing apprehensible at all that would dwell in the real nature," and even attaining buddhahood or teaching the Dharma "would be impossible" if viewed dualistically.
This "impossibility" points to non-duality: There is no separate self that "awakens" to an external truth; awakening is the dissolution of such reifications.
Without Awakening: Ultimately [T2], nothing arises or ceases — phenomena are non-arising (anutpāda), at peace (śānta), and essenceless (niḥsvabhāva). Enlightenment doesn't "happen" as a transformation from ignorance to knowledge, as there's no inherent ignorance to overcome. Subhūti's question in Section 5 underscores this: If the real nature is non-apprehensible, "who will dwell in the real nature and attain consummate buddhahood?"
Yet Awakening Functions: Conventionally [T1], it appears as the bodhisattva's irreversible realization of all-aspect omniscience (sarvākārajñatā), enabling them to guide beings without grasping. This is the Middle Way: Enlightenment "arises" dependently as compassionate activity, like an illusion that benefits dreamers, but without absolute acceptance or rejection.
This non-dual "without" avoids nihilism (denying the path's efficacy) and eternalism (treating enlightenment as a permanent state), embodying the Union itself as tathatā.
.
The Perfection of "Acting Without Acting"
Your phrasing of "acting without acting" perfectly describes the bodhisattva's effortless engagement post-enlightenment (and progressively on the path). In the chapter, bodhisattvas don the "armor" of great compassion for non-apprehensible beings (Section 1), akin to battling space — functional yet void. This is action [T1] harmonized with wisdom [T2] [U2T-in-action]:
Acting [T1]: Conventionally, buddhas and bodhisattvas manifest compassion through teaching, vowing to establish beings in nirvāṇa, and perfecting virtues like the six pāramitās (generosity, ethics, etc.). As Section 3 notes, they "completely perfect" all dharmas up to omniscience, becoming protectors, refuges, and lights for beings without such.
Without Acting [T2]: Ultimately, there are no inherent actors, actions, or acted-upon — no effort, attachment, or opposition in absolute terms. Beings are void like forms or the perfections themselves (Section 1), so action flows without reification. Śakra's metaphor of Subhūti's teaching as an "arrow fired into the sky" (unimpeded) illustrates this: Wisdom penetrates without obstruction, as all is emptiness.
This perfection is the Middle Way in motion — compassionate involvement without dualistic grasping, leading to non-discouragement amid profundity (Sections 2 and 5). It's why irreversible bodhisattvas are unsubduable by Māras (Section 3): They regard phenomena as empty [T2] yet do not abandon beings [T1] [U2T-in-action].
.
The Union of Compassion and Wisdom as a Buddha's Essence
Enlightenment is precisely this Union (U2T): Compassion (the conventional drive to benefit all, non-abandoning) inseparable from wisdom (ultimate insight into emptiness, non-arising).
In Madhyamaka, a buddha embodies this — wisdom realizes the essencelessness of all dharmas, while compassion ensures that realization doesn't lead to passive withdrawal (as in lower vehicles like śrāvakas or pratyekabuddhas).
Compassion as Method (Upāya): The bodhisattva's vow to liberate "inestimable beings" (Section 1), despite their non-apprehensibility. This is the relational, functional aspect [T1], like the gods' encouragement to dwell in emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness to become a sanctuary for the unprotected (Section 4).
Wisdom as Emptiness (Śūnyatā): The realization that "all phenomena are void" (repeated throughout), including the three spheres [3S] of any activity: subject (e.g., compassionate actor), object (e.g., beings), and relation (e.g., liberating). As Subhūti states, perfections are essenceless, and discouragement is non-existent in terms of subject, instrument, or object (Section 2).
A buddha's Union perfects this: Compassion motivates without attachment, wisdom discerns without rejection — acting effortlessly for others' awakening.
.
Perfecting All Perfections Through Prajñāpāramitā
Finally, your point on uniting all perfections with the perfection of wisdom (prajñāpāramitā) is spot-on. The sūtra positions prajñā as the "mother" or culminator of the other five pāramitās (generosity, ethics, tolerance, perseverance, concentration), emptying them of inherent essence to make them truly transcendent.
Without Wisdom: The other perfections risk reification — e.g., generosity as an inherent act with giver, gift, recipient [3S]. This could lead to attachment or lower fruitions (Section 1 warns against actualizing the limit of reality on śrāvaka levels).
United with Wisdom: Emptiness [T2] applied to the [3S] perfects them — generosity becomes "giving without giving," void yet boundless. As the Buddha lists in Section 3, bodhisattvas "completely perfect" all (perfections, emptinesses, factors of enlightenment, etc.) through prajñā. This Union [U2T] elevates them: Conventionally effective [T1] for beings' benefit, ultimately non-dual [T2], aligning with enlightenment's "without."
In Chapter 49's arc, this perfection is the bodhisattva's "difficulty" — practicing amid voidness without fear (Section 5) — culminating in buddhahood, where all virtues flow as the Union's natural expression.
The Madhyamaka school, as articulated by Nāgārjuna
and his successors, posits that
all phenomena lack inherent existence (svabhāva) [T2]
and arise dependently (pratītyasamutpāda) [T1].
This is encapsulated in the doctrine of
the Union of the Two Truths [U2T]: the conventional truth (saṃvṛti-satya), where phenomena appear as relatively functional, interdependent entities that serve as the basis for everyday experience, ethics, and practice [T1]; and the ultimate truth (paramārtha-satya), where all such phenomena are empty of inherent existence, devoid of independent essence [T2], and thus illusory in their apparent solidity [Illusory].
The Union of the Two Truths (dvayasatya-yoga) reveals that these two truths are not separate realities but inseparable aspects of the same suchness (tathatā) — inconceivable, beyond conceptual extremes of existence [T2] and non-existence [T1], beyond eternalism and nihilism.
True insight arises from transcending dualistic grasping,
leading to "acting without acting" [U2T-in-action] (wu wei in a Buddhist sense):
engaging in conventional activities (like the bodhisattva's compassionate vows) [T1]
without reifying them absolutely, without attachment to subjects, objects, or actions as inherently real [T2].
This Middle Way avoids nihilism (by affirming conventional functionality) [T1] and eternalism (by affirming ultimate emptiness) [T2], enabling effortless practice in harmony with reality as it is [U2T].
Chapter 49 of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā (Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines) exemplifies this Madhyamaka framework.
It explores the essencelessness (niḥsvabhāvatā) of all dharmas
— perfections, emptinesses, paths, beings, and even enlightenment —
while emphasizing the bodhisattva's non-discouraged practice amid this profound voidness.
The chapter deconstructs reified notions of practice, beings,
and goals, pointing to the Union [U2T]: phenomena conventionally arise as dependently co-originated (e.g., the bodhisattva's armor of compassion functions to benefit "beings") [T1], et are ultimately empty (non-apprehensible, like space) [T2].
The true nature is thus "pointed out" not through affirmation or negation but through this non-dual insight, fostering "practicing without practicing" [U2T-in-action] — vowing to liberate all without grasping at liberator, liberated, or liberation.
Below, I analyze each section in detail, highlighting how the text illustrates this Union and its implications for bodhisattva action.
This section opens with a dialogue between Śāradvatīputra and Subhūti, where Subhūti counters the notion of practicing the "essence" [T1] by asserting that the perfection of wisdom (prajñāpāramitā) and all dharmas are essenceless (niḥsvabhāva) [T2] [U2T-in-action].
He lists the perfections, emptinesses, paths, fruitions, and omniscience as essenceless.
Gods praise bodhisattvas who
practice [T1] without actualizing the limit of reality [T2] [U2T-in-action] (bhūtakoṭi) on lower vehicles,
and Subhūti elaborates the true difficulty: donning the armor of compassion [T1] for non-apprehensible beings [T2] [U2T-in-action], akin to battling space.
From the Madhyamaka view,
this deconstructs essentialism via the Union of the Two Truths [U2T]. Conventionally, the perfections and paths function as relatively valid means (upāya) for bodhisattvas — dependently arising practices that guide beings toward awakening [T1]. They appear functional: generosity alleviates suffering, wisdom dispels ignorance. Yet ultimately, they are empty of inherent essence [T2], as Subhūti states: "the perfection of wisdom is essenceless" because it is void like forms, feelings, etc.
This emptiness is not mere absence but the lack of independent existence [T2]; dharmas arise interdependently [T1], like reflections in a mirror [Illusory], without self-nature [T2].
The bodhisattva's "armor" illustrates the Union [U2T] in action: conventionally, it is the great compassion (mahākaruṇā) that vows to establish "inestimable beings" in nirvāṇa — a functional, relational commitment [T1]. Ultimately, beings are non-apprehensible, "void because space itself is void," empty of inherent self [T2].
Training beings is like training space: conventionally purposeful (to avoid nihilism) [T1], but without absolute grasping (to avoid eternalism) [T2].
The text warns against discouragement when hearing "all phenomena are void," pointing to the Middle Way:
bodhisattvas "practice without practicing [U2T-in-action]," engaging compassionately [T1] without reifying beings or armor as truly existent [T2]. This non-attached action aligns with tathatā (reality as it is),
where effort is effortless, as no inherent entities are opposed/rejected or accepted.
Subhūti's repetition (e.g., perfections are void because aggregates are void) uses analytical meditation (vipaśyanā) to reveal this Union, dissolving dualities like practitioner/practice, leading to non-fearful insight.
The Buddha questions Subhūti on
why bodhisattvas do not become discouraged with prajñāpāramitā.
Subhūti replies that
all phenomena are non-existent, void, at peace, and non-arising [U2T-3S]
— non-apprehensible in terms of subject, instrument, or object of discouragement.
Such bodhisattvas practice truly, earning homage from gods.
Madhyamaka interprets this as affirming the ultimate truth:
non-arising (anutpāda) means dharmas lack inherent production [T2], existing only dependently (conventional truth) [T1] [U2T]. Discouragement cannot arise because there is no inherent "discourager" (subject), "cause of discouragement" (instrument), or "discouraged object" [U2T-3S] — a classic Madhyamaka tetralemma deconstruction, echoing Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (e.g., Chapter 1 on causes).
The Union shines here: conventionally, phenomena appear to arise and cease (enabling practice and homage) [T1], but ultimately, they are "at peace" (śānta), empty [T2] [U2T] and non-dual [Uopp / U2T-opp].
Bodhisattvas' non-fear ("not discouraged, not fearful")
embodies "acting without acting [U2T-in-action]": they train in wisdom [T1] without effortful grasping, as there is nothing inherently to fear or attain [T2] [U2T].
This non-exasperation is the Middle Way in practice — neither nihilistically abandoning beings (since conventional compassion functions) [T1] nor eternalistically clinging to them (since ultimate emptiness prevails) [T2] [U2T-in-action].
Homage from gods (Indra, etc.) conventionally motivates [T1], but ultimately, even gods and homage are void [T2], pointing to tathatā beyond praise or blame [U2T].
The Buddha expands that not only lower gods but higher ones (from Śubhakṛtsna to Pure Abodes) homage such bodhisattvas. All current tathāgatas direct enlightened intention toward them, recognizing their perfection of all dharmas up to omniscience.
Bodhisattvas with two attributes — regarding phenomena as empty yet not abandoning beings, and doing as they say while kept in mind by buddhas — are unsubduable by Māras.
This section vividly illustrates the Union in bodhisattva resilience. Conventionally, Māras represent obstacles (doubt, temptation) that dependently arise in samsāra; buddhas' intention and homage function as supportive conditions for the path.
The attributes embody the Middle Way: "regard all phenomena as emptiness" (ultimate truth, avoiding eternalism) yet "not abandon all beings" (conventional truth, avoiding nihilism).
This non-dual stance is "acting without acting [U2T-in-action]" — compassionate engagement [T1] without reification [T2], making one invincible, as Māras cannot grasp what is empty.
The list of perfections (generosity to wisdom, emptinesses, etc.) as "completely perfected" is conventional rhetoric: they function progressively on the path [T1] but are ultimately empty [T2], non-arising.
Buddhas' mindfulness points to tathatā (inconceivable reality as it is): enlightenment is not an inherent achievement but the realization of the Union's inconceivability, where bodhisattvas "set out for buddhahood" [T1] without inherent departure/going or arrival/coming [T2] [U2T].
Gods encourage bodhisattvas to dwell in emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness to become protectors, refuges, etc., for beings. The Buddha explains that current buddhas proclaim names of bodhisattvas practicing under past figures like Akṣobhya or Ratnaketu, rejoicing in those practicing chastity with prajñāpāramitā, including irreversible and unprophesied ones.
Even those who believe in non-arising without full acceptance are rejoiced in (see note above).
Hearing the profound wisdom without doubt leads to irreversibility.
From Madhyamaka, dwelling in the three gates (emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness) is the Union enacted: conventionally, these liberate beings (as protector, light, etc.), dependently arising as skillful means. Ultimately, they reveal no inherent signs, wishes, or entities — suchness beyond conceptualization.
Buddhas' rejoicing and proclamations are conventional upāya, functional for inspiration, but empty of inherent proclaimers or proclaimed [U2T-3S].
The distinction between irreversible (avaivartika) and others highlights stages on the path: conventionally progressive (refining the way to buddhahood), ultimately timeless, as all are non-arising.
Belief without full acceptance shows the Union's gradual revelation — partial insight into emptiness fosters non-doubt, aligning action with tathatā: "practicing without practicing," where even incomplete understanding functions without absolute fixation.
The difficulty of non-interruption echoes the Middle Way: avoiding regression (nihilism) or stagnation (eternalism).
Subhūti questions how one dwells in the real nature (dharmatā) to attain omniscience if nothing is apprehensible.
The Buddha affirms this impossibility:
apart (separate) from real nature, nothing dwells, attains,
or teaches; real nature abides unchanging,
whether tathāgatas appear or not.
Śakra praises the profundity and difficulty;
Subhūti retorts that since all is emptiness, no one doubts;
Śakra lauds Subhūti's unobstructed teaching like an arrow in the sky.
This culminates the chapter's Madhyamaka thrust.
Real nature (tathatā) is the Union itself: the abiding, unmistaken suchness where phenomena conventionally mature (dependent origination) but ultimately limit reality (bhūtakoṭi), empty and non-apprehensible.
The "impossibility" of dwelling, attaining, or teaching deconstructs all reification — no inherent subject/agent, act, and object — echoing Nāgārjuna's negation of motion, doer/doing/result.
Yet, tathāgatas "appear" conventionally, teaching without inherent appearance.
Bodhisattvas achieve the "difficult" by non-discouragement amid this: "acting without acting," abiding in suchness without effort, as nothing is accepted/rejected absolutely.
Subhūti's response — "who could succumb to doubt?" — points to ultimate emptiness dissolving dualities, without rejecting them;
Śakra's metaphor affirms the Middle Way's freedom, like an arrow transcending impediments.
Advantages of hearing/believing the sūtra are conventional fruits leading to omniscience,
which is ultimately the non-dual realization of the Union.
Chapter 49 masterfully weaves Madhyamaka insights, using dialogues to reveal the Union of the Two Truths as the essence(less) of prajñāpāramitā.
Phenomena are dependently co-arisen (conventional functionality for compassion and path) yet empty (ultimate non-apprehensibility, avoiding extremes).
This inconceivability of tathatā is "pointed out" through negation and affirmation, guiding bodhisattvas to "training without training": vowing universally without absolute attachment, practicing effortlessly in accord with reality.
The chapter thus exemplifies the Middle Way in Mahāyāna — compassionate action harmonized with emptiness, fostering irreversibility and omniscience without inherent attainment. This non-dual approach liberates without liberating, embodying the profound difficulty and sublimity of the bodhisattva ideal.