Okay..what, then, "realizes" emptiness?
There is no realizer of emptiness; when emptiness is seen, there is no seer, no object, and no seeing.
I understand and agree theoretically--having no direct experience, needless to say......"There is no realizer of emptiness; when emptiness is seen, there is no seer, no object, and no seeing," and also, lest we forget, there is even no emptiness. But in the meantime, until such "seeing of emptiness," it is essential to understand the primacy of "the mind"--
It strikes me, on reflection, that the teaching or topic of Emptiness may indeed be the "summit" or "apex," the highest point, indeed, the goal; so I'm going to modify my position a bit. In my view, the most crucial point the sutras make is the primacy of mind. Starting from the first lines of the Dhammapada, and indeed through the texts we variously classify or call Yogacara, Cittamatra, and Tathagatagarbha, this crucial point wends it's way, with elaborations, positions, assertions, etc., some of which are hotly contested.
But through it all, the foundation of all Buddhist thought, in my opinion, is the primacy of mind/consciousness/sentience. It's so obvious to us, I think, that we take it for granted. But lacking this context, or forgetting it at times, people get caught up in "anti-materialist" positions, or "realist" positions, or even convoluted fabrications regarding "modes of conventional existence," and differences between "existence" and "inherent existence" and other such qualifiers. (And yes, people who focus on "mind" get caught up in their own fabrications of existence of mind, etc., as well.....)
The aim of Buddhist sutras is not to inform us of how the world and beings exist or do not exist, except inasmuch as that information impacts and relates to our subjective experience, our mind. So, although I grant that Emptiness is the top of the mountain, the foundation is equally important.