I've been thinking about the general principles behind esotericism. Esotericism is basically religion based on "initiation." At one time I despised esoteric teachers and felt that esotericism was a dishonest way to approach religion. I was influenced by Nichiren's strong critiques of esotericism and my own experience with charlatans and dream-weavers. But researching the subject has led me to revise my opinion. It's just not that simple. The distinctions have to be made in a more nuanced fashion than that. Recent discussions on Nichiren's own esoteric linkage have had me thinking on this subject a lot recently.
Religious teachings are held in an esoteric manner for any number of reasons, some of which should be obvious to anyone. For example I was reading on the internet a public flame war between a Rabbi who calls his website "Koshertorah" and another internet teacher -- and they were arguing over something that would have seemed incredible had I not come from a Buddhist background. His school teaches reincarnation -- "Ha Gilgulim" (the reincarnation) as part of it's Kabballist teachings. Now I'm not going to debate the merits or demerits of his argument, but what was interesting was that his defense held that the teaching was held as an esoteric teaching even by Rabbis who publicly disputed it. This is pure esotericism; and it is taught that way for a very logical reason. He claimed that the Rav. Saadia didn't teach it publicly because had he taught it publicly it would have resulted in his persecution. It's not a completely convincing argument -- but it set me thinking about "appropriate esotericism" versus "inappropriate esotericism" and what constitutes either.
More discussion at:
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/irgosho
Continued...
Basically one keeps a teaching secret for any number of reasons. The main reason is that others aren't ready for it. The basis of esotericism is the realization that the human mind has "stages" in it's ability to absorb abstract concepts. Teachers often teach Newton's theories because they are conceptually concrete. Once someone understands Newtons' theories it becomes easier to grasp Einsteins. If they taught Einstein first, they'd lose a lot of their students. Legitimate esotericism aims at finding ways to teach otherwise incomprehensible truths to people. Often this requires them developing enough faith and understanding in the underpinning concepts to be ready for the heavy duty ones; like relativity.
The concepts that make up the "field" of esoteric teachings are like "relativity". And those who grasp them often think they've acquired "magical" understanding or that there is no way on earth that others would ever understand what they are teaching. That and the content of what they grasp can lead to what I call "inappropriate esotericism." In appropriate esotericism happens when teachers get so caught up in the fantasy and fictions of their mind that they lose touch with reality; or lose interest in dealing with worldly problems in a realistic and honest way. Nichiren referred to this in his Ho'on Sho, in which he claimed that the conflicts within and between Shingon and Tendai were caused by as he says: "you can pile up a mountain of BS and call it incense but when burned it will only stink of BS, so one can pile up a mountain of lies and call it dharma."
Teachers are meant to come down from the mountain and teach among the people. The mind-awakening of the Lotus, and all the sutras and teachings of the Buddhas, Sages, Rabbis, teachers, savants, everywhere; are meant to be turned back into making this world a better place.
Thus if it will cause death and destruction to teach an abstract idea like "reincarnation" -- then save it for the advanced students. Inappropriate esotericism is also the teaching of religion in such a way as to arouse the hatred and enmity of ignorant people when the same thing can be done more effectively by another means. If something should be kept quiet; keep it quiet. But for God's sake, if something will save people from misery -- teach it even if in the short run it will arouse hatred and bigotry. The decision should never be "I'll teach this because it will make me rich and famous."
In-appropriate esotericism is teaching any religion without the intent, purpose and wisdom to "save" them from their own evil inclinations and ignorance. Both Kobo Daishi and Dengyo Daishi brought Esotericism back to Japan in the 8th century. Which one of them was teaching appropriate esotericism?
Chris
Posted by cholte at August 7, 2005 10:02 PMOhhhh...so THAT'S why I've been chanting the Expedient Means Chapter all these years!! ;) Best, Byrd in LA
Posted by: Byrd in LA at August 9, 2005 11:49 AMYep, everytime we do Gongyo we are being "initiated" into the wonders of the Lotus Sutra; as when we chant daimoku.
Posted by: chris_holte at August 10, 2005 04:12 PMI have recently been reading Ryuichi Abe's The Weaving of Mantra which is all about Kukai's transmision of Shingon to Japan. It is a remarkable book and the author's take is that Kukai was less sectarian than Saicho, and that in fact he became a leader of the Nara establishment and provided his teachings not so much to rival the Nara schools but to compliment them - and that is why he was accepted by them whereas Saicho was locked out. The author also puts forward the interpretation that Kukai's esoteric discourse was a way of freeing Buddhism from the Confucian based stranglehold of the ritsuryo legal code that had made Buddhism into an arm of the Confucian centered bureaucracy. The Kukai the Abe describes comes across as a drop out from the establishment who returned from China and succeeded in transforming the system from within using tact rather than polemics. He also argues that the sectarianism usually imposed on this story was a construction of Tokugawa and Meiji era scholarship. Anyway, I think you, Chris, would really get a lot out of this book. It will definately be a main source for when I get around to dealing with Nichiren's critiques of Shingon in the Senji Sho and Ho'on Jo.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
Another good source is the essay I cited in my own post.
Sectarianism is always in the eyes of the beholder. Kukai and Dengyo took opposite approaches to propagating their ideas because they had opposite "take" on what those ideas meant. The bottom line is that Saicho was promoting ideas based on the Lotus Sutra, which advances the bold notion of saving all sentient beings.
While Kukai was advancing notions of Daimond world and Womb world esotericism which didn't get involved in such considerations. His use of "tact" is an established fact. Rather than seeking to convert people to his views he initiated them into the wonders of esotericism. This meant that rather than working with which nativist ideas made sense or didn't make sense; or trying to change the world, Shingon was a religion that sought to change the "players." It was kind of the Scientology of it's day with Kukai serving the role of L. Ron Hubbard. He wrapped his ideas around existing ones.
Good or bad? I don't know. But it is esotericism that he was teaching, and this esotericism is interesting but not necessarilly what Buddhism is really about. Heck esotericism probably predates Buddhism. At least that is my opinion.
Chris
Posted by: chris_holte at August 16, 2005 08:52 AMThis post couldn't have come at a better time in my life. Some of us search far and wide for the answers, and others stumble right on it, like I just did now. :)
Posted by: Immortal Beloved at August 24, 2005 12:22 AM