[Lerpenoaneway]

I do not see how Jundo Cohen is getting mixed up about the notion of emptiness or denying that the Buddha and his teachings exist as interdependent entities. He is simply questioning the fantastical add-ons, and doing so in the typical "iconoclastic" manner of a Zen teacher. For those only accustomed to the teachings of another school, it may be hard to swallow.

Many of the Mahayana Sutras are quite glorified and rife with self-ornamentation. There is no denying this. To me, a Mahayana practitioner who recognizes this and approaches their own practice with a critical eye is comfortable enough with their Mahayana practice in order to see some of its shortcomings and work toward overcoming them, rather than pretend their way is absolutely flawless, only their way is best.

To assume that it is an accepted part of Mahayana that a fully enlightened Buddha is omniscient by nature is to mistake Mahayana for a monolithic and homogeneous entity, which it is not. Although I'm not familiar with his other work, I think Jundo Cohen demonstrates this well in the above quote.