A critical review of five articles that appeared in the special issue of Acta Asiatica, i.e. • Saitō, Akira. “Avalokiteśvara in the Prajñāpāramitāhṛdaya.” • Watanabe, Shōgo. “The Lineage of the Prajñāpāramitāhṛdaya: With a Focus on Its Introduction and Expressions of Emptiness.” • Horiuchi, Toshio. “Revisiting the ‘Indian’ Commentaries on the Prajñāpāramitāhṛdaya: Vimalamitra’s Interpretation of the Eight Aspects.” • Ishii, Kōsei. “The Chinese Texts and Sanskrit Text of the Prajñāpāramitāhṛdaya Seen by Wŏnch’ŭk 円測.” • Silk, Jonathan A. “The Heart Sūtra as (...) Dhāraṇī.” -/- My overall impression of Frontier is that the authors are committed to a hermeneutic dictated by the Buddhist religion itself, that the Heart Sutra is an Indian text, composed in Sanskrit. The articles in Frontier seem to suggest that no counterfactual evidence exists, or could exist, that would change this conclusion. (shrink)

This article illustrates the importance of research methods in Buddhist Studies using the recent article on the Heart Sutra by Ng and Ānando (2019) as a case study. The authors make a novel conjecture about the Heart Sutra to explain a difference between the Xīnjīng (T 251) and the Dàmíngzhòujīng (T 250) but in doing so they neglect the relevant research methods and critical thinking. Their selection of literary resources is somewhat erratic and their evaluation of them appears to contain (...) bias. The authors did not consult relevant Sanskrit texts (including the Sanskrit Heart Sutra). The logic applied to their source materials appears to be faulty at times and this causes them to arrive at an unconvincing conclusion. By going over the same ground, using more appropriate methods and materials, a far better explanation of the problem emerges. (shrink)