Joe Isuzu's Daily Slander

The Patient Giant

Buddhamitra
[仏陀密多] (n.d.) (Skt; Jpn Buddamitta)
A monk of northern India, and the eighth of Shakyamuni's twenty-three, or the ninth of his twenty-four, successors. He studied under Buddhananda, his predecessor among the Buddha's successors, converted people by skillful means, and defeated a number of Brahmanists in debate. The king of his country, however, was strongly attached to Brahmanism and tried to rid the kingdom of all Buddhist influences. Determined to overcome the king's prejudice, Buddhamitra, bearing a red flag, is said to have walked back and forth in front of the palace for twelve years. Finally the king, moved by his resolve, allowed him to debate with a Brahmanist teacher in the king's presence. Buddhamitra refuted his opponent and thus converted the king to Buddhism. (Note: there are also several references to Buddhamitra as a woman, a nun.)

Sometimes in life an immediate action is required because there is no time for explanation. Like when I was stepping off a curb and some stranger grabbed my shirt and pulled me back from being hit by a cab in New York City. It was my first time to a big city and those buildings were all so tall. All I could do was look up. I also stepped in dog poop. But nobody saved me from that. Lesson learned. Sometimes an explanation wouldn’t help even if there were time. Like a parent screaming at a toddler “don’t you ever do that again” all in an effort to keep them safe from a harm they can’t comprehend. And sometimes all you can do is be actively patient.

The Patient Giant

In 2000, my niece who was 11 at that time was diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor. Except for being blind in one eye, she's fine now and attending USC. I watched her parents go through the daily torment of facing the possibility of losing their only child. It wasn’t until the surgeon came through a pair of automatic doors, which made a “swish” sound like in the old Star Trek TV show, to tell them “We got most of it,” did they allow their resolute stoic demeanor to crack. It was more than a time to finally let go and cry. It was a crumbling. But there wasn’t much of an interval between that initial first deep inhale of release and what was to come. She needed radiation to get the rest. That was the steely truth contained within the doctor’s words, “most of it.”

Once she recovered from the initial surgery, it was off to the Ronald McDonald House at St. Jude Children’s Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee. She was fortunate to get in. Every kid who gets into St. Jude is considered a patient for life and one their own. And the bonds that form there last beyond a lifetime because sometimes a lifetime relationship only lasts a few months at the house. But the bonds remain.

I was visiting my niece and waiting in the lobby one day while she got radiation. I saw a man dressed in hospital blue, no hair, pulling an IV. He looked exactly like a patient. This is a children's hospital and this man was grown. Really grown! He was at least six and a half feet tall, a giant of a man. All chest and arms, like the front lineman of a major league football team. But he looked and dressed like a patient. Finally I notice, low and close to the floor, almost completely hidden behind the giant’s leg, a small child maybe four years old. No hair, dressed in hospital blue, and the tube from the IV that the giant was pulling was inserted into its arm. It was the giant’s son. The giant had dressed like his son and shaved his head like his son while his son had to go through the ordeal of chemotherapy. They were heading towards the chemo room. The chemo room had two large automatic doors, just like the doors the doctor came through after my nieces operation. But before they got close enough to open the doors themselves, someone came out and the doors made their distinctive sound. The little boy stopped to ponder this for a second while his dad, the giant, held his hand in fingers which where so long and large that they enveloped not just the boys hand, but his arm up to the elbow. Another person went through the doors with a “swish”, and the little boy suddenly realized that this was the portal to the place that made him lose his hair and feel so sick for so long. The little boy started to cry. His father, the giant, could have easily gathered his son up in one of his enormous hands and carried him into the therapy room. After all, that's why they were there; to get therapy to save the boys life. But the giant didn't pick up the boy. Instead, he got down on one knee and talked to the boy. He talked and talked. Ten minutes. Fifteen. Twenty. The giant sat on the floor. He kept talking. An hour went by. Finally, together, they got up and walked into the room. The little boy walked into the room, the room that makes him sick, the room where he lost his hair, the room he hates, holding the hand of the giant, his father. His father, the giant, had the patience to explain to this little boy, his son, in whom the giant could see himself, that not only was this something he couldn't avoid, but something he had to do for himself. The time for simply doing something because he was told to had past for this little son of a giant. It had past at the age of four. And the giant knew this. But they would do it together no matter what the consequences.

There have been and continue to be many giants in my life whose hands have held mine, past my elbow and into my heart. One of my giants told me the story of Buddhamitra, which they remembered reading in the older volumes of the letters of Nichiren from Repaying Debts Of Gratitude. They took the time to go and find this passage, which is actually only a footnote. They said that I reminded them of the person who waited patiently under a red flag for years and years. I’d never thought of myself as particularly patient, rather just the opposite, volatile and reactionary. But in a conscious effort, I have to some small degree, changed my nature. And it happens as a matter of recourse through the diligence of elevating my life condition through chanting Nam Myoho Renge Kyo with Nichiren’s Gohonzon. This giant, one of my giants, made me realize that I have been working on one particular issue in my life for eight years. Eight years under my own red flag. Now if this were a case of life or death, like an addiction to some substance or cancer, most people would understand my diligence because the impact is so immediately important. If it were about a career, which I spent twenty years under a red flag, people would understand. But this is one of those things that people seem to lose patience about and it seems reasonable to quit. To move on. To move away. And it has been as difficult to explain why I continue, as it has been to continue. But I appreciate those who ask “why” because it forces me to reflect on whether I’m being diligent or delusional and if I can see positive results from the journey itself. And because of this I have come to think of the journey as the reason to set the goal.

The Terror of Non-Conformity

"The raison d'etre of the world of faith is to help people become happy. In essence, ours is a gathering of supreme freedom and joy. No one has the right to reprimand and cause suffering for others, nor is anyone obliged to let him- or herself be reproved and made to feel bad...There are many differences , for instance, between the cultures, climates, and social systems of Japan and the United States. Therefore, it is only natural that there might be differences in how kosen-rufu is advanced in the two countries."
Daisaku Ikeda, My Dear Friends In America, page 8.

The first fourteen pages of this book, and page 190, could be the best leadership manual I've seen to date. In fact one could build an entire practice on those pages. I want to share what has been sitting on my altar for two years from Daisaku Ikeda:

"We are now in the process of creating an unshakable foundation meant to last for 10,000 years. For that reason, we must not be impatient, nor is there any need to try to look impressive. It is important that, person by person, we increase the size and scope of our movement by developing friendships based on humanism. Making true, genuine friends and creating a core of capable individuals is crucial. No great development can be accomplished without painstaking effort."

I am, of course, lampooning the organization which brought this amazing Buddhism into my life. That being said, and thanks to Byrd who coined the phrase, I bring you...

This is the harrowing story of Aeon Klutz. A young girl, played by Oscar winner Charlize Theron, practicing Buddhism under an unscrupulous and abusive leader, played by Oscar nominee Gary Busey, who is not so much acting but just being himself. Aeon escapes but must wander in the North Country until she meets her mentor played by Oscar winner Sally Field: “Norma Rae…that’s a name I haven’t heard in a long, long time.” Norma instructs Aeon in the ways of her previous mentors, Makiguchi, Toda, Ikeda, and the master of them all Nichiren. All portrayed brilliantly by Oscar winner Linda Hunt: “I find the challenge of playing four different men challengingly different. Instead of one Filipino man, these are four men, Japanese, you see? You see ‘Filipino’ begins with an ‘F’ and not a ‘Ph’ as in ‘The Philippines’. You see?” Aeon and Norma, together with their band of disciples, Sofia Gakkai, Inagaddadavidadevadatta, Don the Medicine King, Byakuren the Flight Attendant, and Evil “Friend” Knievel (in his last appearance jumping the drunken elephants), these Magnificent Seven help each other and the Village People they vowed to protect, regain what they thought was lost forever: conformity! And when they kick ass it’s by the book! After the smoke clears, and the dust settles, and the earth turns, and the sun comes up, and the cock crows, and the cows come home, and Tupac’s last album is released, and Elvis has left the building, sameness is restored in a miraculous transformation; everyone becomes Linda Hunt (as portrayed by Oscar winner Linda Hunt.)

What the critics are saying:

“Rapturous! Leaves everything else behind.”
Kirk Cameron

“Free Thinkers? Not for me. From now on, I’m charging for it!”
Susan Jacoby

“I found it’s ‘in your face’ approach refreshing.”
Richard Dawkins

“I read the book. I couldn’t put it down. Of course, I couldn’t pick it up either.”
Steven Hawking

“Finally something I can believe in!”
Sam Harris

“Let it be a warning for gays, lesbians, those bad people with aids, those bad people from Louisiana, feminists…oh wait, I already said lesbians… Hugo Chavez and anyone else trying to destroy the fabric of God’s America. And by God’s America, I mean My America.”
Pat Robertson

TWO ACTUAL LETTERS ACTUALLY SENT TO THE ACTUAL LEADERSHIP MANUAL COMMITTEE

LETTER 1

Regarding the SGI-USA Leadership Manual and the SGI-USA Code of Conduct for Leaders Signature Form

First let me also say that the Leadership Manual is much needed and overdue. The criteria for being a leader in the past may at times have been not so much about life experience, but rather availability. I learned for myself, usually by trial and error, some of the issues that have been addressed for the sake of the harmony of the SGI membership. The three that seem to garner the most attention are money, business dealings, and interpersonal relationships. I learned all too soon in life that if you really don’t want to see an individual ever again, loan them money. You’ll never see that person again unless it wasn’t enough money. Or if you’re in an interpersonal relationship that isn’t complicated enough, sleep with them. That will do it nicely. And it’s human nature to take the path of least resistance. Having an all too convenient gathering of individuals can be too tempting for some not to sell their snake oil. But we gather to attain our absolute happiness through Buddhism, not Amway. Kudos to those who diligently struggled to put this manual together in what must have seemed at times as futile as Sisyphus pushing his stone for eternity. Regardless of the flaws it may contain, I am ready to roll up my sleeves, or pant legs depending on how you regard it, and tackle this manual and implement it’s suggestions to the best of my ability.

Unlike the United States and it’s constitution in which the elected president takes their oath to preserve, protect and defend it to the best of their ability, this is an organization based on faith, which exists to propagate faith, and it seems ineffectual if not futile to try and create a duality between leadership or organizational matters and the faith it fosters.

As well intended as it may be, I have serious reservations about the mandatory signature form. I don’t need to tell you what it is as you wrote it. But it helps me to walk down a path and talk. I realize that formalizing a code was much needed due to the irresponsible and detrimental behavior of some. In conjunction with the signature form, it will certainly put parameters around any behavior. The signature form is a vow or an oath, written in the form of a closed ended contract, and has been required to be signed by all who wish to remain or qualify for positions of responsibility in the SGI-USA. It states that, “I agree…” that’s the contract part; “to dedicate myself…” that’s the vow part. On the bottom is a reiteration of the introduction which states, “Not signing, therefore not accepting the Code of Conduct for Leaders, disqualifies one from leadership in the SGI-USA,” that’s the closed ended part. This implies that one doesn’t accept the code of conduct if one doesn’t sign the form. The question that immediately poses itself is in what way does not signing imply this? Simply stated; says who? The only justification for assuming that individuals not signing the form equals not accepting the code is the sentence that states so. I understand that you want some formal acknowledgement of the code. But the signature form and code of conduct combined together constitutes so much more that it becomes detrimental to this purpose. I’ll stick my neck out for you to chop my head off and make my own assumption to say that the individuals who already have the qualities this document is trying to insure will be the ones most reticent to signing.

The signature form is not an avenue for leadership to transcend differences and unite to a common goal. Rather it’s a mandate that dictates that they relinquish them. It’s demands them to obey. It allows for no recourse other than compliance. It requires them to think as directed, as stated in the code. I understand that the code is not an attempt to find reasons to remove people from leadership, but a statement of commitment to very fundamental standards for exercising that responsibility. “Independent thinking or action” that contradicts those essentials would, by definition, disqualify one from leadership. But with the signature form there is no latitude for those seeking more effective ways of supporting kosen-rufu. It turns the abidements into commandments, all ten of them.

A year or so ago Mr. Greg Martin presented a video which at the end had a clip from the movie Spartacus. In it the captured men all rose and declared that they were Spartacus. It was a good metaphor on many levels. There is a metaphor in a more recent movie, No Country For Old Men, which directly correlates to the signature form. A killer flips a coin and tells his victim, a woman, to call it heads or tales. If she gets it right she lives. If wrong, she dies. The victim says that isn’t a choice. It was the illusion of choice. She refused to choose even if she died because she refused to give that power over to her killer. She was murdered and was a victim in that sense. But she wasn’t a victim of a meaningless choice that she was coerced to make. The leadership in the SGI-USA is being given an illusion of choice in this signature form. The illusion that this choice they are being forced to make is putting their fate in their own hands. This isn’t a choice either. The ironical situation I find myself in is that I am arguing over a position of responsibility that I was cajoled into volunteering for. The metaphor for this would have to be Tom Sawyer; what’s it going to cost me before you let me paint your fence?

It occurred to me that as an educator Mr. Makiguchi fought most of his adult life against the bureaucratic hobbling of the individual that funnels them into a position of calculated obedience. I am but one person trying to make a difference. Likewise, I find it difficult to drink water from this well.

Respectfully,
Me

WHAT I LEFT OUT AND/OR ABRIDGED

The Code of Conduct, on the other hand, is open ended. It contains many good and commonsensical ideas. These ideas should be considered guidelines of wisdom. With the signature form, however, they have turned into The Ten Commandments. Some activities that I must sign and agreed to dedicate myself to have qualities attached to them like being proud and resolute. The Code of Conduct also contains ambiguities. For example:

“Abide by the guidance and activity guidelines of the SGI and participate in and promote the kosen-rufu activities of the SGI, including, but not limited to, propagation, publications and contributions.” Because of the ambiguous way this is worded, I may already be in violation of this contract as written, breaking the vow, because there is no room for independent thinking or action. Also “not limited to,” implies there are things not listed that I could be in violation or of not fulfilling.

The last four commandments have asterisks and an additional six pages of explanation that also contain the nebulous phrasing “Abide by …but not limited to,” The listed behavior for disrupting “the harmonious unity of the SGI,” the one that “disturbs the faith and practice of its members” reads like a drunken collage frat party. The “not limited to,” could be this question, which arises from what I must abide by: define faith and how I can be the judge of someone’s so as to enable me to not disturb it.

“Assigned organizational responsibility…organizational matters…organizational units…organizational leaders.” How Orwellian!
[I got a response from someone I had shown my original draft. They said of course that language is this way because this is about about organizational issues and not faith. I queried back with 'In an organization based on faith, who's leadership is to foster that same faith, how is it possible to separate that faith from the organizational issues?"]

LETTER 2

Letter to the Leadership Manual Committee

I notice that the leadership manual doesn’t state specifically that the leaders must refer to Mr. Ikeda as the mentor of the SGI-USA membership as in “our mentor”. At a recent Soka Spirit/Study Meeting, “Name Deleted” demonstrated exactly how we are suppose to think and act, just as it is written in the Code Of Conduct for Leaders. “Name Deleted” announced resolutely, with pride, and unequivocally that Daisaku Ikeda is everyone’s mentor for this time period. I assume this means everyone in the SGI. But since I’m not a sage who can judge time like Nichiren and “Name Deleted”, it very well could mean everyone everywhere. This certainly saves a lot of people from having to make that discovery for themselves with a lot of time consuming thinking. This should to be in writing! There should be no question as to who our mentor is! The leadership, if they wish to continue to be so, must be made to sign off on this and that they are to refer to him as such! The new members coming in should also sign an acknowledgement/agreement of this before they are allowed to receive a Gohonzon. Otherwise people who don’t think like us could get one.

Please take this into consideration.
Thank you for your time, of which I am no judge.
Steven Colbert

Between A Rock And A Mandala Episode II

“Ben…Ben. Why didn’t you tell me?”

Luke Skywalker to his friend/mentor Obi-Wan Kenobi (posthumously). After battling his sworn enemy and having his hand chopped off in a light saber fight by the second evilest dude in the galaxy, Darth Vader, the man Luke believes killed his father, Luke finds out from Vader himself that “Obi-Wan did not tell you everything. No. *I* am your father!” Not only that, Vader is cajoling Luke to join him in his evilness and Luke can feel his presence because of the special connection they both have as father and son through the “force”. Talk about internal personal conflict! And you thought you were having a bad day!

PART 2 OF BETWEEN A ROCK AND A MANDALA;

THE FUNCTION OF BETRAYAL

Over coming doubt is exactly what Nichiren’s letter, The Opening Of The Eyes, is about:

“And yet the people doubt me, and I too have doubts about myself. Why do the gods not assist me? Heavenly gods and other guardian deities made their vow before the Buddha. Even if the votary of the Lotus Sutra were an ape rather than a man, they should address him as the votary of the Lotus Sutra and rush forward to fulfill the vow they made before the Buddha. Does their failure to do so mean that I am in fact not a votary of the Lotus Sutra? This doubt lies at the heart of this piece I am writing. And because it is the most important concern of my entire life, I will raise it again and again here, and emphasize it more than ever, before I attempt to answer it.” WND, Vol.1, page 243. And he devotes the rest of this letter doing just that. He examines and argues the causes and effects of his actions, which are based on his interpretation of the Lotus Sutra: “Startled by these passages and it’s commentaries, I examined the entire body of sutras and the expositions and commentaries of the various teachers, and found that my doubts and suspicions melted away.” WND, Vol.1, page 264. This is the diligence I referred to earlier.

Nichiren points to a rite of passage that happens in the Lotus Sutra: “With one remark, in one moment, the Buddha wiped away his earlier pronouncements, saying, ‘I have not yet revealed the truth.’” WND, Vol.1, page 247. Shakyamuni taught for 40 years before he revealed this truth contained within the Lotus Sutra. Imagine being a disciple of his and for the last couple of decades you’ve been doing what he told you to do. And for arguments sake let’s say that he told you that in order to be happy, you’d need to stand on one foot. Imagine that you have become very good at this and the other disciples refer to you as the “go to guy” when it comes to understanding all the deeper nuances and insights of standing on one foot. There’s another disciple who does something else. He’s really good at skipping rope. There’s another one, a woman, a nun named Dorothy, who’s working on being reborn as a man, because women can’t become absolutely happy, attain enlightenment, only men. She’s the “go to gal” at this. So here you all are, diligently practicing what the Buddha told you to do for years and years and suddenly he says that that’s not the point. He also says that if people admire you for doing what he told you to do, they will go to avichi hell and it will be your fault. (Occasionally I get mail addressed to “Avichi Hell or Current Resident”. Which is the universe’s way of letting me know that changing my address isn’t changing my life. According to Buddhism, you can take it with you. But I digress and I happen to be the “go to guy” for that.) He says that you always had the potential for becoming absolutely happy and standing on one foot or skipping rope was just a way to help you realize it. As for becoming a man, well Dorothy, you can become absolutely happy just the way you are. You always could. So now how do you feel about the Buddha and what he’s telling you? A little confused? Doubtful? How about betrayed? Let’s face it you’ve really invested yourself into doing something for a long time. And why did you? Because of the trust you bequeathed to the Buddha. But this trust is also a trap because it is an attachment to what you think the Buddha is, not what the Buddha is in actuality.

To help you over come this doubt and feeling of betrayal, he throws a party, which really takes off and invites a bunch of other Buddhas from all over time and space, who all vouch for what the Buddha is now telling you. He also invites a gazillion other disciples, which shows you he’s been doing this a lot longer than you thought. He’s trying to tell you that it’s not about the teachings per say, but their intention. It’s not about him, the Buddha, but his intention as a Buddha, which is to help you become like him as quickly as possible. So don’t worship him, but appreciate his intention. Standing on one foot guy and Dorothy overcame their sense of betrayal and the doubt that they held about their own worth and became enlightened. Skipping rope guy was so good at skipping rope that he left the party early, and is teaching other people how to do it.

Addressing doubt is an act of courage and is an absolute necessity in any arena of human development. But overcoming doubt in the form of betrayal is much more difficult because some of the qualities contained within it are faith, trust and belief. These can only be offered from the betrayed, not the betrayer. It’s the quintessential element of the disciple picking the mentor. Endeavoring to understand this relationship and it’s dynamic is important to each individual’s happiness with regards to how they view life; one is a victim of it; another is an autonomous individual who takes responsibility for it and at the same time sees the symbiotic relationship that life depends upon.

I’m going to try a couple of examples which I hope can express this idea of overcoming doubt which comes in the form of betrayal. This is not an idea exclusive to Buddhism, but rather what has been referred to down through the ages as a coming of age, or a rite of passage. The first is from Robert Bly in his book Iron John. He addresses what must happen to each individual human in order to become a healthy productive person. He has been criticized by some for being too exclusive because he wrote this for men. I can appreciate, however, his elucidation on this topic, which has helped me personally come to see that this event is not gender specific, and very necessary.

I recommend to everyone who can, read the actual story as it will be much better than my
quick synopsis of the Iron John tale:

In a kingdom there is a forest and in it a place where no hunter has ever returned. The king declares it off limits. But eventually someone returns who tells of a large hairy wild man living at the bottom of a lake. He’s captured and put into a cage from which no one may let him out under penalty of death. The king’s son is playing with a golden ball when it rolls into the cage. (Yeah, the same golden ball the frog saved from the well for the petulant princess in that other story.) The prince asks the wild man if he can have his ball back. The wild man says he can if the prince lets him out. The prince says he can’t. But he comes back and asks for his ball twice more, and the third time (that’s three) he agrees to let him out. The wild man tells the prince he can find the key under his mother’s pillow. (Paging Dr. Freud.) He releases the wild man, who reveals his name to be Iron John (or Iron Hans, depending on the translation). The prince fears he will be killed for setting Iron John free, so Iron John agrees to take the prince with him into the forest.

As it turns out, Iron John is a powerful being and has many treasures he guards. He sets a task for the prince to watch over his well, but warns him not to let anything touch it or fall in. The prince obeys at first, but begins to gaze at his own reflection in the water becoming distracted, and as his hair drops into it, it all turns to gold. Disappointed in the boy’s failure, Iron John sends him away to experience poverty and struggle, but also tells the prince that if he ever needs anything, simply to call the name of Iron John three times. (That’s three.)

The prince travels to a distant land and lands a job at a castle. Not a bad place to start. Since he is ashamed of his golden hair, he refuses to remove his cap before the king. As this is mistaken for arrogance, he is sent to assist the gardener. By accident, the king’s daughter has seen the prince’s golden hair when he finally took off his hat on a hot day. She is intrigued. Hey, who wouldn’t be? He has golden hair.

War comes to the kingdom and the prince calls upon Iron John who changes his lame horse who has only three good legs (that’s three) into an armored, fire-breathing steed, and gives him a legion of iron warriors to fight alongside him. The prince successfully defends his new homeland, but returns all that he borrowed to Iron John before returning to his former position.

In celebration, the king announces a banquet and offers his daughter’s hand in marriage to any one of the knights who can catch a golden apple that will be thrown into their midst. The king hopes that the mysterious knight who saved the kingdom will show himself for such a prize. So does the princess who secretly believes it to be the seemingly arrogant boy with the golden hair.

Again the prince asks Iron John for help, and again Iron John disguises the prince as the mysterious knight. Though the prince catches the golden apple and escapes, and does so again on two more occasions (that’s three), he is eventually found out. All ends well. The prince is returned to his former station, marries the princess, and is happily reunited with his parents. Iron John too, comes to the wedding, but now without the hair and wildness that made him frightening. He reveals he was under enchantment until he found someone worthy and pure of heart to set him free. As an act of gratitude Iron John bequeaths to the prince and his bride all his wealth. The End.

The reason I keep pointing to the number three is that it seems to be a special number in fairy tales, Buddhism, and everything else that is part of the human condition. After WWI and WWII there were unknown soldiers who had died in battle. Whoever got first pick for their tomb of the unknown always picked the third in line. Check yourself out when picking straws or anything else.

There is an even more blatant tale of betrayal from those grim Grimm Brothers: Hansel and Gretel. Because there isn’t enough to eat, their father, a woodcutter, is convinced by a mean stepmother (is there any other kind?) to dump the children out in the woods. They handle themselves pretty well and overcome, abandonment, a witch who wants to eat them, and the betrayal of their father. The resolution is swift as they and their father are joyous in the reconciliation, now rich with the defeated witch’s booty, and the evil stepmother has conveniently died. (Check for ax marks.)

Both stories contain all of the essential elements that Joseph Campbell illuminates in his book The Hero With A Thousand Faces, which is the template for the archetype hero and the bases for the Star Wars movies. The hero is called to an adventure by some incident in which he must cross a threshold of no return. Along the way he meets enablers who teach him and give him tools or knowledge of powers he has yet to develop. And there is always a moment of betrayal he must overcome about his own worth in which he has the choice to bring what he has learned back for the benefit the society or not.

Luke Skywalker overcame his dark side, which was manifested by his discovered betrayal; his doubts about where he came from, what he was supposed to accomplish, and what he was to become. He had mentors and a tool to help develop his powers. In the process he not only saved the galactic community from external evil, but his father as well, from his own internal fundamental darkness. (Extra points for waiting this long to put that phrase in.) Here we see in the hero story what Mr. Ikeda previously referred to as an active life; developing the self-awareness of choice and having the external circumstances respond in kind.

As we sit in front of Nichiren’s Gohonzon, opening it’s eyes and our own, we go through a re-enactment of the hero’s journey on a daily bases. Everyday we must face ourselves and prove our own necessary worth by overcoming our doubts about who we really are. And to return to Carl Sagan’s original comment, the results must not only be able to cross the barriers of culture, but validity must apply to all and be held to an empirical scrutiny too tangible to ignore. The search for truth is an act of courage on a cosmic scale. Thus we become the heroes of the story of our own life.