DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**EnvellFen** · 04-02-2011, 07:04 AM

Regarding the dating of the Heart Sutra (remembering that the Buddha's death was around 483 BCE) :

" Recent scholarship is unable to verify any date earlier than the 7th century CE."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_Sutra

Quite apart from all of that, and the obvious similarites to some of the Pali suttas, it doesn't seem to be addressing the way that the Buddha himself actually taught about emptiness.

hi

my viewpoint is the Heart Sutra is not simply a reiteration of the Buddha's teaching on emptiness. The impression I have gained is the Heart Sutra is a redefinition of emptiness, which is used pervasively in the Mahayana schools to assert emptiness is 'non-imputing' or 'non-conceptualising'.

For example, in the video below, at 5:00 minutes, Lama Choedak states correctly: "Without suffering, you cannot even practise compassion". But later, after 6:45 minutes, Lama Choedak states, as a "higher" understanding:

(1) there is "no person", which accords with the Pali suttas; and

(2) there is "no suffering", which does not accord with the Pali suttas.

The Pali suttas assert there is suffering however it is "the mind" or "minds" that suffer rather than "persons" or "selves".

For example:

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi at Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery.

Now at that time a certain householder's dear & beloved little son, his only child, had died. Because of his death, the father had no desire to work or to eat. He kept going to the cemetery and crying out, "Where have you gone, my only little child? Where have you gone, my only little child?"

Then he went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there the Blessed One said to him:

"Householder, your faculties are not those of one who is steady in his own mind. There is an aberration in your faculties."

Piyajatika Sutta Imo, this distinction is quite important because when we decide to conceptualise/non-conceptualise "there is no suffering", compassion and empathy may be lost. We may be behave in a manner that some may consider inappropriate & insensitive.

Imo, it is not necessary to remove the perception of "suffering" in order for the mind to be liberated. What is simply required is to remove the perceptions of "self".

Imo, the distinctions I have made are the salient difference between the Pali teachings on emptiness and the Heart Sutra.

Personally, I do not regard the Heart Sutra as a "higher" teaching. The Pali states:

Buddh'vārahanta-varatādiguṇābhiyutto,

The Buddha, endowed with such virtues as highest worthiness:

Suddhābhiñāṇa-karuṇāhi samāgatatto,

In him, purity, supreme knowledge & compassion converge.
With metta

04-02-2011, 07:04 AM	#24
EnvellFen Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 507 Senior Member	Regarding the dating of the Heart Sutra (remembering that the Buddha's death was around 483 BCE) : " Recent scholarship is unable to verify any date earlier than the 7th century CE." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_Sutra Quite apart from all of that, and the obvious similarites to some of the Pali suttas, it doesn't seem to be addressing the way that the Buddha himself actually taught about emptiness. hi my viewpoint is the Heart Sutra is not simply a reiteration of the Buddha's teaching on emptiness. The impression I have gained is the Heart Sutra is a redefinition of emptiness, which is used pervasively in the Mahayana schools to assert emptiness is 'non-imputing' or 'non-conceptualising'. For example, in the video below, at 5:00 minutes, Lama Choedak states correctly: "Without suffering, you cannot even practise compassion". But later, after 6:45 minutes, Lama Choedak states, as a "higher" understanding: (1) there is "no person", which accords with the Pali suttas; and (2) there is "no suffering", which does not accord with the Pali suttas. The Pali suttas assert there is suffering however it is "the mind" or "minds" that suffer rather than "persons" or "selves". For example: I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi at Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Now at that time a certain householder's dear & beloved little son, his only child, had died. Because of his death, the father had no desire to work or to eat. He kept going to the cemetery and crying out, "Where have you gone, my only little child? Where have you gone, my only little child?" Then he went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there the Blessed One said to him: "Householder, your faculties are not those of one who is steady in his own mind. There is an aberration in your faculties." Piyajatika Sutta Imo, this distinction is quite important because when we decide to conceptualise/non-conceptualise "there is no suffering", compassion and empathy may be lost. We may be behave in a manner that some may consider inappropriate & insensitive. Imo, it is not necessary to remove the perception of "suffering" in order for the mind to be liberated. What is simply required is to remove the perceptions of "self". Imo, the distinctions I have made are the salient difference between the Pali teachings on emptiness and the Heart Sutra. Personally, I do not regard the Heart Sutra as a "higher" teaching. The Pali states: Buddh'vārahanta-varatādiguṇābhiyutto, The Buddha, endowed with such virtues as highest worthiness: Suddhābhiñāṇa-karuṇāhi samāgatatto, In him, purity, supreme knowledge & compassion converge. With metta
	Quote