What Is the Meaning of "Emptiness"?

< Introduction to Buddhism I >

What is the Meaning of “Emptiness”?

Hi everyone.

Sorry, raising a question in such a
large group makes me a little nervous.

So, please bear with me.

The question that I have relates
to the concepts of emptiness.

Emptiness has come up
in a few of your Dharma talks,

your videos and textbooks a few times.

It also comes up in many of the traditional texts

and Sutras like Diamond Sutra, Heart Sutra.

Whenever I read through what emptiness
means in the Buddhist concept

it leaves me a bit more confused

and sometimes a little bit dampened
and slightly demotivated.

The reason is because the way
I understand it is very shallow.

I understand it as because
of the impermanence

because of the causality being
dependent on each other,

things become empty or things are empty.

But my challenge and difficulty
with understanding the concept is

how do I approach it so that I'm not
undermining what is important in life

for instance family relationships
that matter, ambitions that matter.

That's my question.

So the emptiness, we usually express
that using the Chinese character

for me is not filled, right empty.

But as you know how a word is interpreted
really depends on the context

of what came before
and what follows after.

So the same word actually
means multiple things.

But for example, if you claim that
this word can only mean one thing,

then that's different. But what emptiness
really refers to is that one word

can mean multiple things
depending on the context.

That's what emptiness means.

So emptiness in this context
does not mean a complete absence

of something or a complete void.

It really means that
everything is contextual,

depends on the context of how those words
or what definition that word belongs to.

So let's take an example.
So somebody may look at you

and claim that you are a good person.

Another person may look at you
and say you are a bad person.

So when somebody claims
that you're a good person

that means that Joe,
you have an essence of goodness in you.

And if somebody says you're a bad person

then you have something within you that,
that person is perceived as bad.

So whether you have a
bad factor or a good factor

that's something that's intrinsic to you.
Then that's the opposite of emptiness.

But what emptiness refers to is that
it's all about that person's perception

as being good, or that person's
perception as being bad.

But there's nothing intrinsic
within you that's good or bad.

So in other words, you don't have an
essential kind of form or an element

or an attribute within you
that somebody can point to

and say that's good or that's bad.

It is just their perception of you
in that space and time context

in which they claim
that you are good or bad.

So in that case when somebody says you are
a bad person or you're a good person.

Then I can say that
she is neither good nor bad.

She is just, she is empty.

So that in that case empty
doesn't means that you don't exist,

that there's nothing,
or there's just a void.

It just means that there's
no attribute within you,

or an essence within you intrinsically
that we can call as good or bad.

Say we have this thing.

Somebody actually ate a little bit
of this thing and got healed.

And so that person said
'Okay this is a great medicine’.

But somebody else actually ate the
same thing and then actually got sick.

And that person pointed the same
thing and said that's poison.

So is this thing medicine or poison?

There are three things.

One is 'This is medicine',

and one 'This is poison'.

The third is that it has medicinal
properties or it has poisonous properties.

But this thing itself is empty.

That means that it neither has
toxic properties nor medicinal properties.

That means that this is just the thing.

But in whatever context and situation,
this thing has been applied to

sometimes has medicinal attributes
or sometimes it has toxic attributes.

So that's when you use the word
empty or Gong (공) to refer to that

this is neither medicinal nor toxic,
you are neither good nor bad person.

So all existence whether that's biological
a thing or non biological organic

or even a thought,
a mental phenomena

and it's just empty
it's neither good nor bad.

And it is just what it is.

So that's why we call it
or label it as empty

because that's the truth it is what it is.

However that thing how it's represented or
manifest really depends on the situation

the context and the connections
in which it is allowed to manifest.

So in some situations, you are a person
in some situations, you're a bad person.

In some situations this thing is a
medicine in other it is a poison.

So when we say Gong (공) the empty,

that is kind of what a thing is
what a phenomenon is.

But however it's represented
within the context or situation

it finds itself in and that
is what we call Form.

Therefore if you really truly understand
that all essence of all existence

is really empty then there's
no cause for you to suffer.

Because you realize the person
is neither bad nor good.

That doesn't mean
that person does not exist.

That just means that the person in this
situation in this space and time context

under this specific set of conditions
may appear to be good or bad to me.

Doesn't look like
you are fully clear on that.

I am thinking of how you mention
good or bad sometimes is empty.

At the same time I can't help
to think of historical dictators

that have caused a lot of hurt.

But also at the same time
I have in my head explained to myself

that they have violated
the precepts. That's all.

So even the precepts themselves are empty.

I guess I am still a little confused
about the precepts being empty.

Do you mean they are dependent

on the historical age we're in
the society that we're in?

There's no ethical precepts that we can
absolutely say that this is the truth.

That this is the way regardless
of the situation and time and space

that we find ourselves in, because
that actually is a very dangerous path.

So what Buddha taught us
that the proper way the right way

is always determined by the space and
time of the situation that we are under.

It's basically setting a compass down
in a new place and seeing

where it points north and
that's when you find the right way.

So everything is dependent

even though the proper path on that,
that's the middle way.

And the concept of that middle way as it
transition over to Mahayana Buddhism,

it became translated
or understood as emptiness.

So the emptiness, the concept
and the words, actually was a criticism

against Theravada kind
of rigid traditionalism

in which they claimed that a certain
set of ethical constructions was the way.

And the criticism in Mahayana against that
was that the construct should be empty.

So basically the original criticism
which Theravada's rigid absoluteness

of the way was that there is no fixed way
and that eventually got translated

and kind of consolidated
into the word emptiness.

Basically when someone
claims that this the truth,

then the criticism is that there's
nothing that you can point to and say

that's the absolute truth, and that got
translated into that sense of emptiness.

So the fact that we misunderstand
emptiness or the concept

because of the word that we use
in space, but it's only a part of all.

We usually obsess over somebody else,
if we like that person.

And we want to make that person behave
the way we want them to behave.

So if they don't behave
accordingly then we feel bitter.

And if that disappointment becomes
too much then we just let go,

and we become indifferent to them.

If we realize this concept of emptiness

then we can actually
let go of our obsession.

Then we can allow him or her
to behave as they want.

If they ask for our help,
then we help.

If they don't ask for help,
then we don't help.

So we're neither indifferent
in this case nor obsessive.