Form is emptiness; emptiness is form

[Jinyu]

Re: Form is emptiness; emptiness is form

Hi everyone,
Thanks to everyone for this thread, a lot of interesting things really...
Just my two "euro-cents"

Does the dichotomy of the sentence construction, 'Form is emptiness; emptiness is form', cause confusion?

Well, I've found that dualist approach to this "form and emptiness subject" is particularly possible when only referring to the Heart Sutra.
But the heart sutra is the very heart of all the prajnaparamita literature and thus, the pith instruction with nothing superficial left in it.
But if you refer to the Diamond sutra, the exacts same things are said... but in the context of a questioning and answering process between Shakyamuni Buddha and the Bodhisattva Subhuti. Each time Gautama speaks about a concept, subuthi expresses his doubts and Shakyamuni directly answers to correct these "wrong views". At the end all the things said in the Heart sutra are also explained in the Diamond sutra, untill the very concept of an Ego or an non-ego, the concept of the Dharma or a non-Dharma are finally sweep by the "unwritable reality" of "Suchness"...

Well, I hope I'm not too much out of the subject... I just wanted to say that the Heart sutra is a little Jewel, the very condensed core of our practice, but when we read it in relation with the diamond sutra a lot of "concept mistakes" can be avoid... note that the very conception of a mistake regarding this Dharma is quite funny :lol: And that maybe reading the two regularly and trying to interpret them with my narrow views is a "concept mistake" by itself :wink:

I'll get back to work!
Have a nice day everyone!
gassho,
Jinyu

[disastermouse]

Re: Form is emptiness; emptiness is form

This is a key statement in the Heart Sutra. All things are made up of and rely on other things. All things are interdependent. Nothing exists on its own. So, all things are one, and you and I are part of this oneness, while remaining one of the many things in this oneness.

Does the dichotomy of the sentence construction, 'Form is emptiness; emptiness is form', cause confusion? Does it suggest that they are opposites, while actually asserting that they are in fact one?

I think the structure of the sentence causes confusion if it is not carefully read, that emptiness is some kind of nihilistic nothingness. I think this is one of the most well known and most misunderstood utterances in the Zen tradition.

What do you think?

Gassho,
Soen

Not just in the Zen tradition, LOL!

[Myozan Kodo]

Re: Form is emptiness; emptiness is form

It is, among others