Sangharakshita the Plagiarist:

While Conze wrote on page 67 of the "Prajnaparamita Literature":

>> This Sutra is a short text of 32 chapters, in the form of a dialogue between Subhuti and the Buddha. The Sanskrit original does not, however, give any chapter division, and the one adopted by Max Mueller and subsequent scholars dates back to ca. A.D. 530, when it was in China introduced into Kumarajiva's translation. The first part, which ends at ch. 13b with tenocyate prajnaparamiteti, is fairly coherent. This cannot be said of the second part. Even Asanga, Vasubandhu and Kamalasila have failed to find a plausible logical sequence behind its repetitions and abrupt transitions, … <<


Lingwood's "Legacy" states this on the pages 148 and 149:

>> A short text in two parts and thirty-two chapters, it is in the form of a dialogue between the Buddha and Subhuti. The Sanskrit original does not, however, give any chapter division, and the one adopted by Max Mueller and other scholars dates back to ca. 530 C.E. when in China it was introduced into Kumarajiva's translation.
[…]
While Part I, which ends at the beginning of Chapter XIII, is fairly coherent, the same cannot be said of Part II. Even Asanga, Vasubandhu and Kamalasila, all of whom commented on it, have failed to unravel its complications. <<



Or take a look at Conze, page 19:

>> It develops the consequences of seeing all things as void of self. Although the term "empty" is not even once mentioned, the doctrine of emptiness is nevertheless established in an ontological, psychological and logical form.
Ontologically, the selflessness of everything means that there is no dharma. Even the ultimates of Buddhist analysis do not exist in themselves, nor does the doctrine which contains that analysis. Psychologically, we are urged to "raise a thought" which is not fixed, or attached, anywhere, or which does not "stand about anywhere" (ch.10, 4), or which is supported nowhere, leans not on anything, does not depend on anything. Logically, the Sutra teaches that each one of the chief Buddhist concepts is equivalent to its contradictory opposite. A special formula is here employed to express this thought, i.e. "A mass of merit, a mass of merit, Subhuti, as a no-mass has that been taught by the Tathagata. In that sense has He spoken of it as a "mass of merit"" <<


Lingwood puts it as follows on page 151:

>> The consequences of seeing all things as void of self are worked out for various others universes of discourse. In this way, although the word 'empty' is not even once mentioned, the sutra also 'places' the doctrine of sunyata in an ontological, a psychological, a logical and a soteriological context.
Ontologically, the selflessness of everything means that there is no dharma. The ultimate elements into which the Abhidharma had so painstakingly analysed the whole psychophysical universe do not exist in themselves, nor does the doctrine which contains that analysis. […] Psychologically, the disciple is urged to develop a thought which is not fixed, or attached, or established anywhere; which does not settle down anywhere taking the data of experience for the 'signs' (nirmitta) of an actually existent entity whether 'beings' or 'Nirvana'. Logically, the sutra teaches that each of the great categories of Buddhist thought is identical with its opposite. For example, a mass of merit is so-called because it is a no-mass. <<