I'm reading Pema Chödrön's The places that scare you, and tonight I just read the chapter where she talks about the Heart Sutra -- the one that goes "form is emptiness, emptiness is form". It is almost certainly the most famous of the "Perfection of Wisdom" sutras, and also the only one I know pretty much by heart (because it is short, and because it is recited -- in English -- as part of the standard puja in the FWBO). And she managed to turn my understanding of one element of it around.

The teaching in this sutra is not given directly by the Buddha, but by the bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara -- the Buddha simply approves his teaching at the end. (This is not uncommon in the sutras.) He gives the teaching as an answer to Shariputra, one of the principal disciples of the Buddha.

Now, what I always took as "the" explanation of this format is that it's a Mahayana device for showing their own superiority compared to other sects (called disparagingly "Hinayana"). Shariputra is an arhat, cast as the "ideal" of the Hinayana -- which is considered a limited, inferior ideal by the Mahayana. Avalokiteshvara, as a bodhisattva, represents the Mahayana ideal. In this sutra (as in others that follow a similar model, and commonly feature Shariputra) the representative of the Mahayana is shown as "winning" over the representative of the Hinayana -- demonstrating a fuller, more perfect understanding of the dharma.

And this is almost certainly the historical truth about these sutras -- the "source criticism" truth, aware of the specific context in which the text was produced as part of an ongoing "debate". What Pema Chödrön says does not contradict this -- it just takes it from a completely different angle, and gives the device an intrinsic meaning, which may or may not have been intended by the author(s), but which makes perfect sense and is perfectly orthodox, and which I really like :-)

"Then [...] Shariputra began to question Avalokiteshvara. This is an important point. Even though a great bodhisattva was teaching and the Buddha was clearly in charge, the profound meaning emerged only through questioning. Nothing was taken complacently or on blind faith.

"Shariputra is a role model for us as students. He wasn't willing just to accept what he heard; he wanted to know for himself what was true."

Wow. Yes. Turn Shariputra into a role model. Now that's a perspective I would never have thought of -- because I was quite content to stop at the historical explanation. A little knowledge... :-D

(Oh, and just in case, I should add that Pema Chödrön is a representative of a Mahayana school[1] -- she's not trying to rescue Shariputra for sectarian purposes...)

And even before she gets to that, she tells

"the story of Krishnamurti, who was raised to be the avatar by the Theosophists. The elders continually told the other students that when the avatar manifested fully, his teachings would be electrifying and revolutionary, shaking up the very foundations of their beliefs. This turned out to be true, but not quite in the way they had imagined. When Krishnamurti finally became head of the Order of the Star, he called the whole society together and officially disbanded it, saying that it was harmful because it gave them too much ground."

Which is a coolness in itself, and is also quite like something that happens in the mythical Book 2 that comes after my WIR... always nice to see that the stuff you've made up from whole cloth for fantasy people has actually happened before to real live people :-) [2]

And of course then she goes on to discuss the actual content of the Heart Sutra -- about emptiness, groundlessness, fearlessness. And that's pretty good too. I think I could fruitfully spend a few months reflecting on this particular chapter of this book. Such a good find. I am very happy.


[1] Ok, Vajrayana really. But for these purposes, Vajrayana is to be classed with Mahayana rather than with Hinayana. Just trust me :-)

[2] The reason she tells it is that in her opinion the teaching of the Heart Sutra was a very similar experience for the Buddha's students. Which is not completely unrelated to the fact that this sutra can be considered a bit like the manifesto of the Mahayana...