Form is emptiness

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
Dinsdale
Posts: 6813
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Form is emptiness

Post by Dinsdale » Fri Jun 21, 2019 1:51 pm

We seem to be back to that distinction between nouns and adjectives, emptiness v. empty, and the difference between sunyata and sunna.

Anyway, here are the results from a search for emptiness on the Sutta Central site - you might find what you're looking for there:
https://suttacentral.net/search?query=Emptiness
Buddha save me from new-agers!

User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 6288
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: Form is emptiness

Post by Aloka » Fri Jun 21, 2019 2:06 pm

chownah wrote:The only place I have seen the term "emptiness" in a sutta is in one that talks about the emptiness release or somthing like that but even this is explained in term of being empty of self as I remember.
It's probably SN 41.47:

On one occasion Ven. Godatta was living near Macchikasanda in the Wild Mango Grove. Then Citta the householder went to him and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, Ven. Godatta said to him, "Householder, the immeasurable awareness-release, the nothingness awareness-release, the emptiness awareness-release, the themeless awareness-release: Are these phenomena different in meaning and different in name, or are they one in meaning and different only in name?"

"Venerable sir, there is a line of reasoning by which these phenomena are different in meaning and different in name, and there is a line of reasoning by which they are one in meaning and different only in name.

"And what is the line of reasoning by which they are different in meaning and different in name? There is the case where a monk keeps pervading the first direction [the east] with an awareness imbued with good will, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth. Thus above, below, & all around, everywhere, in its entirety, he keeps pervading the all-encompassing cosmos with an awareness imbued with good will — abundant, expansive, immeasurable, without hostility, without ill will. He keeps pervading the first direction with an awareness imbued with compassion... appreciation... equanimity, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth. Thus above, below, & all around, everywhere, in its entirety, he keeps pervading the all-encompassing cosmos with an awareness imbued with equanimity — abundant, expansive, immeasurable, without hostility, without ill will. This is called the immeasurable awareness-release.

"And what is the nothingness awareness-release? There is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, [perceiving,] 'There is nothing,' enters & remains in the dimension of nothingness. This is called the nothingness awareness-release.

"And what is the emptiness awareness-release? There is the case where a monk, having gone into the wilderness, to the root of a tree, or into an empty dwelling, considers this: 'This is empty of self or of anything pertaining to self.'[1] This is called the emptiness awareness-release.

"And what is the themeless awareness-release? There is the case where a monk, not attending to any theme[2] enters & remains in the themeless concentration of awareness.[3] This is called the themeless awareness-release.

"This, venerable sir, is the line of reasoning by which these phenomena are different in meaning and different in name.

"And what, venerable sir, is the line of reasoning by which they are one in meaning and different only in name? Passion, venerable sir, is a making of measurement, aversion a making of measurement, delusion a making of measurement. For a monk whose fermentations are ended these have been abandoned, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. To the extent that there are immeasurable awareness-releases, the unprovoked awareness-release is declared supreme. And that unprovoked awareness-release is empty of passion, empty of aversion, empty of delusion.

"Passion is a something, aversion a something, delusion a something. For a monk whose fermentations are ended these have been abandoned, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. To the extent that there are nothingness awareness-releases, the unprovoked awareness-release is declared supreme. And that unprovoked awareness-release is empty of passion, empty of aversion, empty of delusion.

"Passion is a making of themes, aversion a making of themes, delusion a making of themes. For a monk whose fermentations are ended these have been abandoned, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. To the extent that there are themeless awareness-releases, the unprovoked awareness-release is declared supreme. And that unprovoked awareness-release is empty of passion, empty of aversion, empty of delusion.

"This, venerable sir, is the line of reasoning by which these phenomena are one in meaning and different only in name."

"It's a gain for you, householder, a great gain: what your eye of discernment plumbs in the deep word of the Buddha."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
.

Dinsdale
Posts: 6813
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Form is emptiness

Post by Dinsdale » Fri Jun 21, 2019 2:14 pm

Aloka wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 2:06 pm
chownah wrote:The only place I have seen the term "emptiness" in a sutta is in one that talks about the emptiness release or somthing like that but even this is explained in term of being empty of self as I remember.
It's probably SN 41.47:

On one occasion Ven. Godatta was living near Macchikasanda in the Wild Mango Grove. Then Citta the householder went to him and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, Ven. Godatta said to him, "Householder, the immeasurable awareness-release, the nothingness awareness-release, the emptiness awareness-release, the themeless awareness-release: Are these phenomena different in meaning and different in name, or are they one in meaning and different only in name?"

"Venerable sir, there is a line of reasoning by which these phenomena are different in meaning and different in name, and there is a line of reasoning by which they are one in meaning and different only in name.

"And what is the line of reasoning by which they are different in meaning and different in name? There is the case where a monk keeps pervading the first direction [the east] with an awareness imbued with good will, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth. Thus above, below, & all around, everywhere, in its entirety, he keeps pervading the all-encompassing cosmos with an awareness imbued with good will — abundant, expansive, immeasurable, without hostility, without ill will. He keeps pervading the first direction with an awareness imbued with compassion... appreciation... equanimity, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth. Thus above, below, & all around, everywhere, in its entirety, he keeps pervading the all-encompassing cosmos with an awareness imbued with equanimity — abundant, expansive, immeasurable, without hostility, without ill will. This is called the immeasurable awareness-release.

"And what is the nothingness awareness-release? There is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, [perceiving,] 'There is nothing,' enters & remains in the dimension of nothingness. This is called the nothingness awareness-release.

"And what is the emptiness awareness-release? There is the case where a monk, having gone into the wilderness, to the root of a tree, or into an empty dwelling, considers this: 'This is empty of self or of anything pertaining to self.'[1] This is called the emptiness awareness-release.

"And what is the themeless awareness-release? There is the case where a monk, not attending to any theme[2] enters & remains in the themeless concentration of awareness.[3] This is called the themeless awareness-release.

"This, venerable sir, is the line of reasoning by which these phenomena are different in meaning and different in name.

"And what, venerable sir, is the line of reasoning by which they are one in meaning and different only in name? Passion, venerable sir, is a making of measurement, aversion a making of measurement, delusion a making of measurement. For a monk whose fermentations are ended these have been abandoned, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. To the extent that there are immeasurable awareness-releases, the unprovoked awareness-release is declared supreme. And that unprovoked awareness-release is empty of passion, empty of aversion, empty of delusion.

"Passion is a something, aversion a something, delusion a something. For a monk whose fermentations are ended these have been abandoned, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. To the extent that there are nothingness awareness-releases, the unprovoked awareness-release is declared supreme. And that unprovoked awareness-release is empty of passion, empty of aversion, empty of delusion.

"Passion is a making of themes, aversion a making of themes, delusion a making of themes. For a monk whose fermentations are ended these have been abandoned, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. To the extent that there are themeless awareness-releases, the unprovoked awareness-release is declared supreme. And that unprovoked awareness-release is empty of passion, empty of aversion, empty of delusion.

"This, venerable sir, is the line of reasoning by which these phenomena are one in meaning and different only in name."

"It's a gain for you, householder, a great gain: what your eye of discernment plumbs in the deep word of the Buddha."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
.
I'm not sure that it is.

Emptiness awareness-release here looks the same as emptiness awareness in SN35.85, which is the Sutta we were discussing earlier.
"This is empty of self, or anything pertaining to self."
Buddha save me from new-agers!

chownah
Posts: 8437
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Form is emptiness

Post by chownah » Fri Jun 21, 2019 2:57 pm

ShanYin wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:51 pm
Does the phrase 'form is emptiness' have any place in Theravada? I believe it's from the heart sutra which is a Mahayana suttra.

Is emptiness different in different schools? Which one focuses more on emptiness?

Does any Theravadin here believe that the Mahayana Suttras are the words of the Buddha?
I know that in my posts so far I have been emphasizing the theravada idea of things being "empty of self" and have been suggesting that this is the theravada equivalent to the mahayana "form is emptiness"....but....thanks to dinsdale who brought some search results from stutta central I have found a sutta I have long been looking for without success!!....and....I think it is something which you will be very interested in. It talks about emptiness without there being any reference to "empty of self".

I am tempted to post the entire sutta here but it is a bit too long for that...I'll just bring one small part but I do hope that you will take a look at the link because I think you will see a much closer representation of the mahayana concept of "form is emptiness" than can be found in the "empty of self" concept which is so prevelant in the theravada.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .html#fn-1
....a short excerpt:
.............a monk — not attending to the perception[1] of village, not attending to the perception of human being — attends to the singleness based on the perception of wilderness. His mind takes pleasure, finds satisfaction, settles, & indulges in its perception of wilderness.

"He discerns that 'Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the perception of village are not present. Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the perception of human being are not present. There is only this modicum of disturbance: the singleness based on the perception of wilderness.' He discerns that 'This mode of perception is empty of the perception of village. This mode of perception is empty of the perception of human being. There is only this non-emptiness: the singleness based on the perception of wilderness.' Thus he regards it as empty of whatever is not there. Whatever remains, he discerns as present: 'There is this.' And so this, his entry into emptiness, accords with actuality, is undistorted in meaning, & pure.

The Perception of Earth
"Further, Ananda, the monk — not attending to the perception of human being, not attending to the perception of wilderness — attends to the singleness based on the perception of earth. His mind takes pleasure, finds satisfaction, settles, & indulges in its perception of earth. Just as a bull's hide is stretched free from wrinkles with a hundred stakes, even so — without attending to all the ridges & hollows, the river ravines, the tracts of stumps & thorns, the craggy irregularities of this earth — he attends to the singleness based on the perception of earth. His mind takes pleasure, finds satisfaction, settles, & indulges in its perception of earth.

"He discerns that 'Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the perception of human being are not present. Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the perception of wilderness are not present. There is only this modicum of disturbance: the singleness based on the perception of earth.' He discerns that 'This mode of perception is empty of the perception of human being. This mode of perception is empty of the perception of wilderness. There is only this non-emptiness: the singleness based on the perception of earth.' Thus he regards it as empty of whatever is not there. Whatever remains, he discerns as present: 'There is this.' And so this, his entry into emptiness, accords with actuality, is undistorted in meaning, & pure.
........
....and the conclusion:
"Ananda, whatever contemplatives and brahmans who in the past entered & remained in an emptiness that was pure, superior, & unsurpassed, they all entered & remained in this very same emptiness that is pure, superior, & unsurpassed. Whatever contemplatives and brahmans who in the future will enter & remain in an emptiness that will be pure, superior, & unsurpassed, they all will enter & remain in this very same emptiness that is pure, superior, & unsurpassed. Whatever contemplatives and brahmans who at present enter & remain in an emptiness that is pure, superior, & unsurpassed, they all enter & remain in this very same emptiness that is pure, superior, & unsurpassed.

"Therefore, Ananda, you should train yourselves: 'We will enter & remain in the emptiness that is pure, superior, & unsurpassed.'"
I'm kind of excited at having found this again and I hope you find something of value in it.
chownah
P.S. .....do read the whole thing....
chownah

User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 6288
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: Form is emptiness

Post by Aloka » Fri Jun 21, 2019 4:16 pm

chownah wrote: I am tempted to post the entire sutta here but it is a bit too long for that...I'll just bring one small part but I do hope that you will take a look at the link because I think you will see a much closer representation of the mahayana concept of "form is emptiness" than can be found in the "empty of self" concept which is so prevelant in the theravada.

Ajahn Amaro mentions MN 121 in chapter 12 of "The Island -An Anthology of the Buddha's Teachings on Nibbana" and says this sutta "arguably forms the Buddha's most extensive teaching on emptiness in the Pali Canon."


https://www.amaravati.org/dhamma-books/the-island/


:anjali:

Caodemarte
Posts: 961
Joined: Fri May 01, 2015 3:21 pm

Re: Form is emptiness

Post by Caodemarte » Fri Jun 21, 2019 4:51 pm

Take a look at the works of deceased Theravadin scholar David J. Kalupahana. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Kalupahana). He repeatedly argues that the Mahayana emptiness idea is Theravada which he tends to conflate with Early Buddhism and the Pali canon. He was more than a bit of a Theravada triumphalist, which might actually appeal to some here! :)

pegembara
Posts: 1615
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: Form is emptiness

Post by pegembara » Fri Jun 21, 2019 5:49 pm

https://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/heartv08.htm
Madhupindika Sutta: The Ball of Honey

"Now, when there is no eye, when there are no forms, when there is no eye-consciousness, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of contact. When there is no delineation of contact, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of feeling. When there is no delineation of feeling, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of perception. When there is no delineation of perception, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of thinking. When there is no delineation of thinking, it is impossible that one will delineate a delineation of being assailed by the perceptions & categories of objectification.

"When there is no ear...

"When there is no nose...

"When there is no tongue...

"When there is no body...
Here is seeing emptiness in forms. In tbe seeing just the seen. No grasping to signs and features.
So, concerning the brief statement the Blessed One made, after which he entered his dwelling without analyzing the detailed meaning — i.e., 'If, with regard to the cause whereby the perceptions & categories of objectification assail a person, there is nothing there to relish, welcome, or remain fastened to, then that is the end of the obsessions of passion, the obsessions of resistance, the obsessions of views, the obsessions of uncertainty, the obsessions of conceit, the obsessions of passion for becoming, & the obsessions of ignorance. That is the end of taking up rods & bladed weapons, of arguments, quarrels, disputes, accusations, divisive tale-bearing, & false speech. That is where these evil, unskillful things cease without remainder' — this is how I understand the detailed meaning. Now, friends, if you wish, having gone to the Blessed One, question him about this matter. However he answers is how you should remember it."
Last edited by pegembara on Sat Jun 22, 2019 3:13 am, edited 3 times in total.
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 3:53 am

Re: Form is emptiness

Post by Sherab » Fri Jun 21, 2019 10:12 pm

Dinsdale wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:54 am
Sherab wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:35 am
Dinsdale wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 7:59 am
As I see it sunyata is basically a Mahayana development of themes in the suttas. Anatta and sunna are relevant, but I also see a strong connection with iddapaccayatta (conditionality), which is re-expressed as phenomena lacking independent existence, or not existing "from their own side".

There has been a tendency to reify sunyata as a "ground of being" or "ultimate reality", though IMO this idea is contradicted by teachings like "emptiness of emptiness", and the line "Emptiness is only form" in the Heart Sutra.
It is a mistake to equate "ground of being" with "ultimate reality". Why can't there be an ultimate reality without it being the ground of being?
I think "reality" would be quite sufficient here. Or "things as they really are".
I'm not a fan of the word "reality" though, I think it's a can of worms.
Before we go any further, it would be useful for you to define what you meant with these terms "ultimate reality", "ground of being" and "things as they really are". This will allow us to avoid equivocation in the discussion.

Dinsdale
Posts: 6813
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Form is emptiness

Post by Dinsdale » Sat Jun 22, 2019 6:30 am

Sherab wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 10:12 pm
Dinsdale wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:54 am
Sherab wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:35 am

It is a mistake to equate "ground of being" with "ultimate reality". Why can't there be an ultimate reality without it being the ground of being?
I think "reality" would be quite sufficient here. Or "things as they really are".
I'm not a fan of the word "reality" though, I think it's a can of worms.
Before we go any further, it would be useful for you to define what you meant with these terms "ultimate reality", "ground of being" and "things as they really are". This will allow us to avoid equivocation in the discussion.
Im not sure what they mean, they are just examples of the way sunyata is reified. Possibly it's due to the influence of other religious traditions that Buddhism has mingled with, and adapted to.
Sometimes people talk about sunyata, and it sounds more like Brahman. :shrug:
Buddha save me from new-agers!

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 3:53 am

Re: Form is emptiness

Post by Sherab » Sat Jun 22, 2019 11:30 pm

Dinsdale wrote:
Sat Jun 22, 2019 6:30 am
Sherab wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 10:12 pm
Dinsdale wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:54 am


I think "reality" would be quite sufficient here. Or "things as they really are".
I'm not a fan of the word "reality" though, I think it's a can of worms.
Before we go any further, it would be useful for you to define what you meant with these terms "ultimate reality", "ground of being" and "things as they really are". This will allow us to avoid equivocation in the discussion.
Im not sure what they mean, they are just examples of the way sunyata is reified. Possibly it's due to the influence of other religious traditions that Buddhism has mingled with, and adapted to.
Sometimes people talk about sunyata, and it sounds more like Brahman. :shrug:
I think that sunyata/emptiness/void is a difficult idea for people to wrap their heads around it. (My teacher thought otherwise though because when I ask him what is emptiness, he said that it is simple but did not elaborate. It is possible that the very simplicity of emptiness that makes it so difficult.)

I have yet to see someone with a view of sunyata that is consistent with dependent arising. Very often I see people saying that sunyata is identical with dependent arising. I think that is inaccurate.

I also think that too many shrink away from considering the idea of an ultimate reality as this that would cause others to accuse them of subscribing to eternalism or to Brahman. So when a person starts making statement about reification of sunyata I wanted to know his/her thinking behind that statement.

In the Mahayana, I think most would hold that emptiness (the lack of self of person and the lack of self of phenomena) is the ultimate reality of all dharmas. In this sense, it is simple. But it, in my opinion, is not the ground of being. For that, I would argue (tentatively) that you need consciousness.

samsarictravelling
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2018 4:17 am
Contact:

Re: Form is emptiness

Post by samsarictravelling » Sun Jun 23, 2019 1:24 am

Sherab wrote:
Sat Jun 22, 2019 11:30 pm
Dinsdale wrote:
Sat Jun 22, 2019 6:30 am
Sherab wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 10:12 pm

Before we go any further, it would be useful for you to define what you meant with these terms "ultimate reality", "ground of being" and "things as they really are". This will allow us to avoid equivocation in the discussion.
Im not sure what they mean, they are just examples of the way sunyata is reified. Possibly it's due to the influence of other religious traditions that Buddhism has mingled with, and adapted to.
Sometimes people talk about sunyata, and it sounds more like Brahman. :shrug:
I think that sunyata/emptiness/void is a difficult idea for people to wrap their heads around it. (My teacher thought otherwise though because when I ask him what is emptiness, he said that it is simple but did not elaborate. It is possible that the very simplicity of emptiness that makes it so difficult.)

I have yet to see someone with a view of sunyata that is consistent with dependent arising. Very often I see people saying that sunyata is identical with dependent arising. I think that is inaccurate.

I also think that too many shrink away from considering the idea of an ultimate reality as this that would cause others to accuse them of subscribing to eternalism or to Brahman. So when a person starts making statement about reification of sunyata I wanted to know his/her thinking behind that statement.

In the Mahayana, I think most would hold that emptiness (the lack of self of person and the lack of self of phenomena) is the ultimate reality of all dharmas. In this sense, it is simple. But it, in my opinion, is not the ground of being. For that, I would argue (tentatively) that you need consciousness.
I found this about 2 days ago. I went searching for it again just now and found it (I think it's the same article; I re-read the parts I think I read then, and it sounds exactly like what I read two days or so ago). I boldface parts from the selection I give (after I the boldfaced the title, author's name, and date given for the article). My selection may be pertinent to the discussion of 'emptiness':

The Heart Sutra Will Change You Forever

BY KARL BRUNNHÖLZL| SEPTEMBER 29, 2017

...

One thing we can safely say about the Heart Sutra is that it is completely crazy. If we read it, it does not make any sense. Well, maybe the beginning and end make sense, but everything in the middle sounds like a sophisticated form of nonsense, which can be said to be the basic feature of the Prajnaparamita Sutras in general. If we like the word “no,” we might like the sutra because that is the main word it uses—no this, no that, no everything. We could also say that it is a sutra about wisdom, but it is a sutra about crazy wisdom. When we read it, it sounds nuts, but that is actually where the wisdom part comes in. What the Heart Sutra (like all Prajnaparamita Sutras) does is to cut through, deconstruct, and demolish all our usual conceptual frameworks, all our rigid ideas, all our belief systems, all our reference points, including any with regard to our spiritual path. It does so on a very fundamental level, not just in terms of thinking and concepts, but also in terms of our perception, how we see the world, how we hear, how we smell, taste, touch, how we regard and emotionally react to ourselves and others, and so on. This sutra pulls the rug out from underneath our feet and does not leave anything intact that we can think of, nor even a lot of things that we cannot think of. This is called “crazy wisdom.” I guess I should give you a warning here that this sutra is hazardous to your samsaric sanity. What Sangharakshita says about the Diamond Sutra equally applies to all Prajnaparamita Sutras, including the Heart Sutra:

…if we insist that the requirements of the logical mind be satisfied, we are missing the point. What the Diamond Sutra is actually delivering is not a systematic treatise, but a series of sledgehammer blows, attacking from this side and that, to try and break through our fundamental delusion. It is not going to make things easy for the logical mind by putting things in a logical form. This sutra is going to be confusing, irritating, annoying, and unsatisfying—and perhaps we cannot ask for it to be otherwise. If it were all set forth neatly and clearly, leaving no loose ends, we might be in danger of thinking we had grasped the Perfection of Wisdom.
—Sangharakshita, Wisdom Beyond Words

...

Source: https://www.lionsroar.com/the-heart-sut ... u-forever/

____________________________________________________________________________

I most likely don't want to reply to any reply post, so please forgive me.

atipattoh
Posts: 182
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:28 am

Re: Form is emptiness

Post by atipattoh » Sun Jun 23, 2019 2:31 am

Hi,
Dinsdale wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 5:13 am
when I said I don’t see it different from Theravada, limited to those 2 phrases. Another 2 phrases “ 色不异空,空不异色”prior to those 2 phrases, I don’t think they are in Theravada. I had been feeling very odd when reading these 2; so a little digging, found this, that, as i read it, has similarity in Theravada.
T05n0220_p0221║色性空,受、想、行、識受、想、行、識性空。舍利子!是色非色空,是色空非色,色不離空,空不離色,色即是空,空即是色,受、想、行、識亦復如是。
This appear to be where heart sutra comes from.

atipattoh
Posts: 182
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:28 am

Re: Form is emptiness

Post by atipattoh » Sun Jun 23, 2019 2:57 am

Hi chownah, the above is 大般若波羅蜜多經 , varies from the heart sutra that you quoted; on “Form is not other than emptiness. Emptiness is not other than form”. The name for heart sutra is “ 般若波羅蜜多經”
chownah wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 10:03 am
From the heart sutra:
Listen, Sariputra,
(2-form is emptiness, emptiness is form).
(1-Form is not other than emptiness. Emptiness is not other than form).
The same is true of feelings, perceptions, mental
formations, and consciousness.
The sequence is 1-2, yours is 2-1
In heart sutra, upper half of the 4 phrases is “色不异空,空不异色”. These 2 phrases has similarity to Zen, “菩提本无树,明镜亦非台,本来无一物,何处惹尘埃。
it appear to be a struggle between mahayana and zen school.
《大般若波羅蜜多經(第1卷-第200卷)》卷37〈無住品9〉:「世尊!是色非色空,是色空非色,色不離空,空不離色,色即是空,空即是色,受、想、行、識亦復如是。」
《大般若波羅蜜多經(第401卷-第600卷)》卷409〈勝軍品8〉:「世尊!是色非色空,是色空非色,色不離空,空不離色,色即是空,空即是色,受、想、行、識亦復如是。」
《大般若波羅蜜多經(第401卷-第600卷)》卷409〈行相品9〉:「舍利子!是色非色空,是色空非色,色不離空,空不離色,色即是空,空即是色,受、想、行、識亦復如是」
Heart sutra “色不异空”, “不异”appear to me a bit late; rather,I would expect to read “色无异(于)空,空无异(于)色. The composer of heart sutra has done serious harm to the teaching, the original sutra clearly says “ 色不離空,空不離色”at least in the above 2 pieces of sutra; which means 色空 is “mixed”(not seperated from) . That nature can be seen from “是色空,是色空
****
神秀 wrote “身是菩提树,心如明镜台,时时勤拂拭,勿使惹尘埃 (does not has the image of色不异空,空不异色), prior to 惠能’s ( 661 CE(676 minus 15yrs in hiding) ) 菩提本无树; from this, can be deduce that “色不异空,空不异色” appear after this 菩提本无树event.
Heart_Sutra
The earliest extant dated text of the Heart Sutra is a stone stele dated to 661 CE located at Yunju Temple and is part of the Fangshan Stone Sutra. It is also the earliest copy of Xuanzang's 649 CE translation of the Heart Sutra (Taisho 221); made three years before Xuanzang passed away.
(Note: The account in blue , I wouldn't take it blindly. Taisho 221 says “色性空……舍利子!是色非色空,是色空非色,色不離空,空不離色,色即是空,空即是色.....。”not as in Fangshan Stone Heart Sutra https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Xi ... gxizhi.png
“…色不异空,空不异色, 色即是空,空即是色… ".
(Making Heart sutra, not Buddha’s words)
惠能’s 菩提本无树 661 CE, Fangshan Heart Sutra stone 661 CE; See the coindent!?

chownah
Posts: 8437
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Form is emptiness

Post by chownah » Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:31 am

atipattoh wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 2:57 am
Hi chownah, the above is 大般若波羅蜜多經 , varies from the heart sutra that you quoted; on “Form is not other than emptiness. Emptiness is not other than form”. The name for heart sutra is “ 般若波羅蜜多經”
chownah wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 10:03 am
From the heart sutra:
Listen, Sariputra,
(2-form is emptiness, emptiness is form).
(1-Form is not other than emptiness. Emptiness is not other than form).
The same is true of feelings, perceptions, mental
formations, and consciousness.
The sequence is 1-2, yours is 2-1
In heart sutra, upper half of the 4 phrases is “色不异空,空不异色”. These 2 phrases has similarity to Zen, “菩提本无树,明镜亦非台,本来无一物,何处惹尘埃。
it appear to be a struggle between mahayana and zen school.
《大般若波羅蜜多經(第1卷-第200卷)》卷37〈無住品9〉:「世尊!是色非色空,是色空非色,色不離空,空不離色,色即是空,空即是色,受、想、行、識亦復如是。」
《大般若波羅蜜多經(第401卷-第600卷)》卷409〈勝軍品8〉:「世尊!是色非色空,是色空非色,色不離空,空不離色,色即是空,空即是色,受、想、行、識亦復如是。」
《大般若波羅蜜多經(第401卷-第600卷)》卷409〈行相品9〉:「舍利子!是色非色空,是色空非色,色不離空,空不離色,色即是空,空即是色,受、想、行、識亦復如是」
Heart sutra “色不异空”, “不异”appear to me a bit late; rather,I would expect to read “色无异(于)空,空无异(于)色. The composer of heart sutra has done serious harm to the teaching, the original sutra clearly says “ 色不離空,空不離色”at least in the above 2 pieces of sutra; which means 色空 is “mixed”(not seperated from) . That nature can be seen from “是色空,是色空
****
神秀 wrote “身是菩提树,心如明镜台,时时勤拂拭,勿使惹尘埃 (does not has the image of色不异空,空不异色), prior to 惠能’s ( 661 CE(676 minus 15yrs in hiding) ) 菩提本无树; from this, can be deduce that “色不异空,空不异色” appear after this 菩提本无树event.
Heart_Sutra
The earliest extant dated text of the Heart Sutra is a stone stele dated to 661 CE located at Yunju Temple and is part of the Fangshan Stone Sutra. It is also the earliest copy of Xuanzang's 649 CE translation of the Heart Sutra (Taisho 221); made three years before Xuanzang passed away.
(Note: The account in blue , I wouldn't take it blindly. Taisho 221 says “色性空……舍利子!是色非色空,是色空非色,色不離空,空不離色,色即是空,空即是色.....。”not as in Fangshan Stone Heart Sutra https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Xi ... gxizhi.png
“…色不异空,空不异色, 色即是空,空即是色… ".
(Making Heart sutra, not Buddha’s words)
惠能’s 菩提本无树 661 CE, Fangshan Heart Sutra stone 661 CE; See the coindent!?
I do english fairly well....chinese not at all. What you have posted conveys no meaning to me.
chownah

atipattoh
Posts: 182
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:28 am

Re: Form is emptiness

Post by atipattoh » Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:49 am

chownah wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:31 am
The post is actually not just address to you, for Shanyin as well.
Heart sutra is a variation from 大般若波羅蜜多經 , “Form is not other than emptiness. Emptiness is not other than form”. is not the Buddha's words
Not much meaning to find Theravada sutta to match heart sutra.

Form is not other than emptiness. Emptiness is not other than form not just change the meaning of the 2 pieces sutra in 大般若波羅蜜多經, it spawn exploded interpretation on many others sutra as well.

“色性空" in 大般若波羅蜜多經, where heart sutra comes from support your interpretation of "form is empty of (self) "

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bundokji and 70 guests