Are philosophers today misunderstanding 'emptiness' because of a new metaphysics?

From an article about Heidegger , > The beginning of this story, as told by Heidegger especially in the Nietzsche lectures, is the end, the completion of philosophy by its dissolution into particular sciences and nihilism—questionlessness of being, a dead end into which the West has run. Heidegger argues that the question of being would still provide a stimulus to the research of Plato and Aristotle, but it was precisely with them that the original experience of being of the early Greeks was covered over... For the later Heidegger, “western philosophy,” in which there occurs forgetfulness of being, is synonymous with “the tradition of metaphysics.” Metaphysics inquires about the being of beings, but in such a way that the question of being as such is disregarded, and being itself is obliterated. The Heideggerian “history of being” can thus be seen as the history of metaphysics, which is the history of being’s oblivion. Is this itself reason to suspect that philosophers like Plato, by which I mean contemporary thinkers who are paid to publish philosophy (including I suppose self help authors and some aspects of psychology) are bound to misunderstand the *concept* of emptiness? When the Buddha taught, the history of Being, metaphysics, had not yet, it seems, begun. Are philosophers and people in general misunderstanding the terminology the Buddha used, perhaps because he lived at a time before 'Being' when there was only 'world' -- etc..