When exploring religion, people tend to want to go to the source, researching history and the original documents of the religious system in question.
The reality lies, I believe, in how a religion manifests itself in it’s present form today says more about that religion than any degree of history.
The concept of sin has always interested me. How Christians treat sin and bad behavior is a fascinating thing. In many church groups it seems that proper Christian apparel is any code of dress which is 20 years out of date. Modesty - sweaters buttoned up to the neck, white shirts and ties - are all signs of Christian faith.
I followed a young couple down Cannery row one day (just going the same way) who were members of a Central California Christian denomination that dresses very specifically, nearly a pseudo-Amish fashion. The women all wear dresses reminiscent of turn-of-the-century peasant dresses, all with varying paisley and flowered patterns, and wear bonnets on their heads. Men, interestingly enough, wear plain clothes and black pants that largely are inappropriately tight - tight around the legs the way pants fit in the 70’s. In another time, another place, this would be everyday attire yet removed from it’s original era it becomes un-flattering and without any style whatsoever. In other words, religious.
This same phenomena exists in Buddhism of course. Many Americans who have taken Buddhist vows wear robes. Not merely at their temples during service, rather everyday throughout their normal working lives. Buddhist robes are a source of curiosity for me as well. Exotic, other-worldly, Robes of Buddhist priests are more an unusual fashion curiosity than the uniform of the deeply committed and faithful, as they would be in their country of origin.
All these uniforms of faith are tribal identification rather than statements of deep faith in one’s religion. It’s a way to state to the world “I belong, you do not”.
In it’s primordial origins religion emerged as a method of understanding that which could not be explained. The Earth, the natural cycles of weather, draught, storms, disease, all these natural cycles could only be explained to early man through belief, superstition and ritual. Tribalism in religion in it’s earlier form was a default since man himself is a highly tribal animal.
More important than prayer and devout faith in one’s creator is that sense of belonging or tribal membership. As many cultures have grown more and more tribal and warlike throughout history religions become merely a banner of the national tribe rather than a system of faith.
The true test I imagine would be to take a test culture, or even a test world, and suddenly remove all historical references to, and all memory of religion with the push of a button. I wonder how long it would be before religion would be reinvented? In fact I believe that religion is the symptom, not the cause, of much of what we see going on today.
Sin plays heavily in Christianity. That Jesus Christ died for our sins and then more importantly was reborn thus setting the example and hope for all mankind creates a model in which sin is in fact the root of our salvation. Yet I often ponder sin’s real relationship to Christian faith.
When I speak of sin, I am not talking about flipping someone off, speeding through a stoplight, or using the Lord’s name in vain. Rather I am referring to abhorrent behavior. Hate, anger and jealousy, murder, theft, malicious deception are a few that come to mind. These are the kinds of acts that are universally known to be wrong. This is the sort of “right and wrong” that is clearly apparent to anyone of sound mind and body. Of course from a quantum perspective “sound mind and body” is a highly subjective concept in itself.
Christian doctrine is clear about what is considered sinful. The Catholic Church even maintains official lists of what is sin and what is not while struggling over conflicts in time and culture such as birth control. But real sin, hateful and destructive behavior to one’s self and others, this is born from self-hatred and self-loathing. Self-loathing is also a primordial reality of being human. This is the roots of true sin and not some ancient mythology of a garden, a snake and an apple.
Christianity is a relatively new religion as is the Bible. Many religious systems pre-date both the Bible and the Church by a considerable margin yet even in this there is little validation. The Bible, like most religious source documents, has been altered, edited, changed and manipulated by politicians through the ages.
Other denominations such as the Mormons, the Later Day Saints, simply created (or discovered if you will) their own completely separate gospel. It’s origin is HIGHLY dubious and in saying that I am being very forgiving, but that doesn’t matter. The Mormon Church is a tremendously successful tribe, politically and financially.
Tribalism is at the heart of religion, not faith. Faith is secondary, more a prerequisite to tribal membership than a product.
Soka Gakkai International has definitely put the “tribal” into Nichiren Buddhism in my opinion. I state this as an observation rather than a judgment. In my early years attending Nichiren Shu services I could sense my own tribal identity as an SGI member (NSA back then). Other members tread carefully around me, not sure what I would do next. For one to test the waters of their own tribalism one needs only to visit another tribe.
The question is “does tribalism negate religious faith?”. The answer is simply “that is not a valid question”. The two are inseparable. Mankind has survived by way of tribalism. Unfortunately men have been unable thus far to bridge the gap between national tribalism and global tribalism. The current state of planetary war is proof of that.
I suggest only that we take some time out of our religious life to consider what our faith would look and feel like if we were not a tribe member. Tribes are safe and comfortable entities, but can also be very limiting. SGI is tribal - yes, but there are much more tribal Nichiren groups in this Country. There are Nichiren “sects” utterly hidden away from view, existing by internet only. These groups strongly rationalize their own superiority by manipulating the Gosho, and claiming supremacy in faith. It’s easy to do when you have SGI’s basic propagation efforts to build upon, or deconstruct. Blow back the fur, find the flaws and claim to have corrected them. All you need then is a cool website, a highly exclusive e-mail list (never a discussion forum, discussion is too risky) and you’re in business.
The fact is that there is a ready minority audience for any high and mighty SGI break-away which promises correctness in faith without demanding actual attendance at meetings or other uncomfortable face-to-face interaction. Can true Buddhism truly exist in this fashion? I personally believe it cannot. Relationships and dialog are the basic building blocks of self-discovery and human revolution, but I know there are plenty out there that are happy to be assured of the opposite.
Perhaps in this way tribalism is the key to true religious faith. It doesn’t really matter what I believe anyway, there are primordial functions at work throughout human life that have been unalterable and unstoppable since we first came down from the trees….
Perhaps something to ponder - perhaps not.
Rev. Greg Dilley
"The question is “does tribalism negate religious faith?”. The answer is simply “that is not a valid question”. The two are inseparable."
I disagree. Tribal religion and Universal religion are at odds. IMO. They are two different animals. Then there is divination, a third animal.
does anybody know where i can find some hot wet asian tofu?
Posted by: danny at September 24, 2006 01:03 PMOnly thing that can be torn apart for the time being is my heart. Because my dearest friend, whom I know since my seventeenth (now I am 51), my schoolmade from classroom,person who introduced Nichiren Buddhism to me, general director of Soka Gakkai Slovenia, my sweet and equaly beautiful in face and mind Jasmina, struggles with the cancer. She was the first who concieved this Buddhism both in Serbia and Slovenia. Like bright sunny day she is, with no guilty toward anyone!
"Demons! Will you cause this disciple to suffer and thereby swallow a sword, point first; take hold of a raging inferno; or become the enemy of all the Buddhas throughout the universe in the three existences of life? How terrible this will be for you! You had better cure his illness immediately and protect him, should you hope to escape the grievous suffering demons must undergo. If not, your heads will be broken into seven pieces and after your death, you will fall into the hell of incessant suffering. Bear Nichiren’s words in mind, forever, for if you fail to take them seriously, you will surely repent.
Nichiren,
The Votary of the Lotus Sutra"
So that we could for the rest of our lives praise Buddha's name!
Maybe they were wearing the wrong robes, or maybe the robes weren't being worn correctly Bruce!
Every though of THAT? HAHA! Touche'!
Rev. Greg
Posted by: Rev. Greg at September 22, 2006 08:42 PMEveryone takes everything so serious; you would think there were really Gods, Buddha’s and Religions! Long broad tongues, and deeply respect you's.. I have seen those fall apart into sect squabbles and nasty comments by the holiest of those who wear robes
Bruce
Posted by: Bruce Maltz at September 22, 2006 08:17 PMLike: Does everything that I see in front of me exist without me who actually observe? Yes, BUT, without me there will be none who would see it as existing right now at all. So, everything in front my eyes, everything that I see is part of me, my oposite side, like non - me...
Is another human being also non - me? Is this a secret of relationships, face-to-face interaction, self discovery? And the most important question for me: is this path that is needed for us if we want to be like Nichiren? For me, the answer is - yes. And exactly it is what differs Nichirens Buddhism from all other religions (that I am somehow familiar with). It takes strength to "hold" world around us. It was much easier when we were young and completely healthy. Because, one should never underestimate the strength of anything - however stupid may be - that people believe in. Like faith - also superstition is really something that people agree about. Tribe agree about.
"I deeply respect you..."
What if all Priests wore Elvis Jumpsuits? Would that make them Elvis?
Wearing a Priest robe does what?
A Nichiren Immatator?
Does it make someone a priest?
You are either yourself or an actor, and we all know what the Sutra says about actors, and so Nichiren must have the same view.
At least the Dali Lama wears a Rolex and Gucci shoes.. or is that Shu's...
Religious faith and tribalism are both eternal functions of human life, occuring and reoccuring, and inseperable. Ura and Omote, or yin yang. Nothing exists outside the quantum engine of our own brains. We create, we destroy. No one controls us by withholding truth and creating fear - we were born afraid. Fear response is at the very heart of everything we do as a species.
Thanks for asking.
Rev. Greg Dilley, Shidoshi
Posted by: Rev. Greg at September 20, 2006 05:12 AMThe question is “does tribalism negate religious faith?”.
The question is::: What is religions faith? Is it the biggest hoax ever played on mankind? If religious faith was invented by man, why give it credence? Hard medicine to put your religon on trial.
Great blog. I wonder if the world would ever move beyond tribalism, or is that part of the make up of human beings? And couldn't religion be something other than defining yourself as part of a group with most other people outside? Tibalism is part of how things were but will it always be so?
clown hidden
It helps to know the etymological roots of words. Sin originally meant "against guidance," and people get confused about the meaning of the word largely because their teachers are extremely ignorant about what they are doing.
That comes from the effects of centuries of authoritarianism. If it hadn't been for the influence of empires like the Roman and Moslem empires, and of movements such as the Inquisition, people would have more access to advanced concepts of religion, simply from the passing on of experience.
Even the Protestant reformation simply substituted a literalistic and locally authoritarian regime for a layered, sophisticated and corrupt one.
When truth is suppressed the result is lies, fantasy, and confused fear. When ideas are imposed, opposing ideas go underground, and both the concept and anti-concept become corrupted.
Posted by: Chris at September 19, 2006 04:12 PMHi Rev. Greg,
As always a very thoughtful and intriguing blog. I ran into the Anabaptists once too at Ocean Beach. I did wonder where they came from. They seemed nice enough anyway.
As for dress codes as a kind of tribal badge - I think that is part of it. Certainly Shakyamuni Buddha deliberately set up the robes for his monks as a way of differentiating them from the naked accetics and the Jains and the other groups at that time. Also, he wanted his monks to be a living witness to the Dharma when they wandered about on alms rounds. So part of the dress code was tribal differentiation, but the other part is that it was a form of letting people know what the monks and nuns represented - a kind of fashion billboard.
I have wondered about this. My friend Rev. Faulconer wears his robes all the time, and he is in fact a full time minister of the Portland Temple. So for him the robes are just a tribal id or an advertisement but also a statement of a role he has taken upon himself - much as a policeman't uniform identifies his role in society.
As for me - I prefer to be incognito. I only wear my full robes at the temple. In fact, even at Faithful Fools I only put on the outer informal robe and the wakesa. But I sometimes wonder if I am copping out by not wearing my robes more often - by not making myself more publicly available as a minister? Is my desire to not draw attention to myself just common sense or is it a form of reticence regarding sharing the Dharma? I preer to think that in my position as a father and a full-time office worker and only part-time minister to only wear the robes when I am serving in that particular function. In other words, when it is appropriate. So for me the robes are not about tribe (because in fact at Faithful Fools and Marin Co. I have set up a very non-denominational situation) or setting myself apart or above others. Rather, it is about function and role.
Anyway, I recognize that you most likely were not talking about me - but i reading your blog it did spur me on to think about my relationship with my own robes and kesa.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
Greg, that was a very well done bit of Cultural Anthropology.
Obviously there are many flavors in every box, right?
Still, Jesus himself didnt care what clothing people wore. This stuff is all arbitrary BS.
I guess the trick is to simply BE that good thing you hoped to be when you joined...
Interesting post Greg,
Those folks you saw on Cannery Row were Dunkards (German Anabaptists). A large group lives in Stanislaus County. I was taken aback when I first saw them 10 years ago when I moved to Modesto. The dress is deceptive- these folks live very modern lives, attend college, work in many professions, do all sorts of community work ( in addition to traditional agricultural and artisan professions). Women (and men) are encouraged to pursue higher education.
I am far more intrigued by the dress of the rapidly growing mega Christian churches (eg Calvary Chapels, Lakewood Church). They seem to have grasped that it isn't the dress that defines folk- people are encouraged to come as they are to church. Services are tailored to the varied backgrounds and interests such as contemporary as well as traditional services, places for families with young children, rock bands and special activities (singles groups, divorce groups, teen groups). They have the marketing down pat consequently growing faster than every other sector of organized religion in the US.
The other rapidly growing group in the US are muslims. People may deride women wearing hijab and the separation of the sexes in the Mosque but I have learned there are all sorts of variations of people practicing Islam. Islam like Buddhism is a very generic term for people with a wide range cultural and political backgrounds. Not all Muslims hold to traditional dress, not all hold to fundamentalist beliefs about social and political structure (eg sharia ?spelling law).
Personally I like pushing the envelope in my tribe (SGI-USA) by wearing geles (west African head wraps) or actually dressing up to go to activities. There is still that NAP (Negro American Princess) programming that I find hard to override. My peeps believe in dressing up to go to worship- even my Unitarian parents:).
Best,
Mimi
Posted by: Mimi at September 14, 2006 10:53 AMRev. Greg -
Certainly it is something to ponder. One only need try to build a sangha to find out just how deeply these complex threads are woven through us all. It is easy to unite in negation; "we all know what we DON'T want" but finding out exactly what we do want is much harder and far more divisive. It is much harder to find folks who want something close enough to what you want to even think about trying to accomplish that together. Trust me on this one.
Namaste, Engyo Mike Barrett
Posted by: Engyo Mike Barrett at September 14, 2006 12:02 AM