The title is taken from the song of the same name by the Clash, and the chorus is:
Should I stay or should I go now?
Should I stay or should I go now?
If I go there will be trouble
An’ if I stay it will be double
So come on and let me know
Of course the song is about some guy dating some girl (who probably has borderline personality syndrom) but some of the lyrics could also apply to many who are thinking of leaving various Buddhist organizations. I am actually not one of those people - but I have been asked, quite earnestly by more than one sincere Buddist, "why do you stay with Nichiren Shu?"
Now my answer is that there is a bond between my sensei and I that I absolutely do not wish to break. I have been blessed to have a sensei like the Ven. Ryusho Matsuda, and I regret that I have not written more about him and the advice and guidance and direction that he has given me or ensured has been provided to me by others (and to have a sensei who knows how to delegate or refer a disciple to others is also a great and rare blessing). My sensei, far from ever trying to contol me or narrow my horizons has often challenged me and opened my horizons and taught me to stop overlooking things and people that my preoccupations sometimes have caused me to not pay enough attention to. For me, being in Nichiren Shu is about a personal relationship with my sensei.
It is not restricted to that however. There is also the San Jose Temple as a whole, and the spiritual fellowship that I have found there with the Matsuda family and all the other people who I see there from week to week. The mutual support, encouragement, and even challenges that I meet there is what the Sangha is all about. I have never felt restricted or hemmed in or exploited by my Sangha - though I have had differences with individual members. But even learning to amicably work out personal difficulties is part of what a healthy Sangha is all about. I can honestly say that I have felt empowered by my Sangha. And it is not just me. When my sensei bestows the Omandala on new members, he says to them, "Now let us learn and practice the Dharma together."
Then there is Nichiren Shu as a whole. I personally have received a lot of encouragement and support from the Shumuin (Nichiren Shu H.Q.) and personally from the many teachers I have had the pleasure and blessing to have been taught by in Japan. I acknowledge that some have had misunderstandings with them or have been extremely frustrated in trying to work with them. I have, unfortunately, gotten myself into the middle of some of those cases of misunderstanding. I have also had my misunderstandings and frustrations. On the whole, however, I feel that there are many caring individuals in the Shumuin and also in NONA (the Nichiren Order of North America) who really do care about propagation and the spread of Odaimoku and most importantly about peace, healing and the enlightenment of all beings. There are indeed some problems and certainly some cultural and language barriers, but I believe that on the whole there is a spirit of bodhicitta and compassion at work among those I have met and dealt with (including some I have had misunderstandings/miscommunications with that were later worked out). So I really don't see the Nichiren Shu as any more or less dysfunctional than any other traditional school of Japanese Buddhism, but I do see and have met with caring individuals who really are trying to make the system work for everyone.
There there are the resources that Nichiren Shu has made available. Maybe it is still difficult for some, esp. outside the USA or Japan, to access these materials, but people are working on it. The Nichiren Buddhist International Center was created with the idea that it would be a resource center for all Nichiren Buddhists all over the world (and not just Nichiren Shu members). Liturgy books and CD and even DVDs have been made so that people can learn to do gongyo and chant Odaimoku. Nichiren's authenticated writings are being translated in conjunction with the University of Hawaii. Books introducing the Lotus Sutra (Introduction to the Lotus Sutra by Shinjo Suguro) and Nichiren Shu teachings and practice (Awakening to the Lotus), and a translation of the Lotus Sutra (by Senchu Murano) are available. And there are more such projects in the works, including gosho study guides. And there ae regular publications like the Nichiren Shu News and the Bridge newsletter which are both accessible online at www.nichiren-shu.org If nothing else, I think Nichiren Buddhists should avail themselves of these resources to learn more about the practice, teachings and faith of Nichiren Buddhism. I am immensely grateful for these efforts and I am honored to have been able to help with them.
And of course there is the doctrine and practice. I have no qualms about the doctrine and practice of Nichiren Shu. Some people think I do. Some people think I have gone over the line. I think that is because of their own narrow ideas about what Nichiren Buddhism is all about. It is telling that no Japanese ministers have ever criticized me, and it is not because no one is paying attention. In fact, I have even been asked to help in writing articles for Nichiren Shu News on doctrinal issues like ichinen sanzen, and I have been and am still involved in the translation of some of the gosho for the University of Hawaii publications. This is not necessarily an endorsement of my views, but my point is that my views are not seen as all that radical and I have never felt marginalized nor have I ever felt the need to compromise my integrity on doctrinal issues. In fact, the Nichiren Shu has often presented me with things that have caused me to reevaluate my positions or at least to recognize that I cannot be dogmatic about them.
I am sure there are other factors that I could list (I should mention that in NONA there are actual elections for important leadership positions including bishop and president for four year terms, and that temples have boards that the ministers are accountable to, and that there is financial accountability on al levels) but the bottom line is that the Nichiren Shu is the specific Sangha that I am a member of, and this has not been a restriction but rather a platform for reaching out to the greater Sangha of other Nichiren Buddhists and other Buddhists in general. I have never felt the need to leave my Sangha which has been a spiritual home and spiritual family to me. I am saddened when others act as though my Sangha is a prison or a straightjacket when I do not find that to be the case. I think it comes from a mistaken idea that a Sangha can be perfect. In reading the Vinaya, it is apparent that even the Sangha immediately surrounding Shakyamuni Buddha during his lifetime was not perfect. So I do not expect perfection, but I expect that the Sangha I am a member of will help rather than hinder my spiritual development and the ability of the members to help each other and society. Everyone must judge this on their own of course.
Now, let me turn to a different direction - I have left two Sanghas previously. Why did I do so?
In the first case, I left Soka Gakkai (at the time still the lay organization of Nichrien Shoshu) back in '88. Why did I do that? First the positives - I did meet and practice with sincere and positive individuals who did help me reevaluate my attitudes and to grow spiritually. Essentially they helped me begin overcome my own arrogance and condescension. They also helped me begin a daily practice and the self-discipline to sustain it. The SGI at that time did provide translations with many of the gosho, translations that I still avail myself of to this day. They also provided a spirit of comeraderie, empowerment, and hope that was very beneficial. So why did I leave?
1. Along with the positive elements there were many who were clearly suffering from crippling neurosis and their dogmatic and even superstitious attachments to elements of Nichiren Shoshu teaching and practice was exacerbating and not helping them.
2. While they were indeed trying to get me to overcome my own personal egotism and arrogance they were trying to replace it with a corporate egotism and arrogance. One time I was told that simply because I practiced daimoku that made me smarter than all my college theology and philosophy professors (men that to this day I have profound respect for as my great mentors at that time).
3. Instead of opening people's minds and horizons people were being told or gettnig the idea that reading other religious works like the Tao Te Ching or even the non-SGI translation of the Threefold Lotus Sutra was slanderous. Christianity and Judaism were constantly derided as dirty negative religions that only caused suffering. I was once asked to present a talk at the community center on faith but was taken off the schedule on the day of the even because I had referred to the Protestant theologian Paul Tillich's definition of faith. Furthermore, it was made clear to me that "seeking spirit" did not mean questioning or reading outside sources but only the willingness to seek and abide by SGI materials and the guidance of SGI leaders. Instead of freedom to think for yourself I found superstition and dogma.
4. I found that the Nichiren Shoshu teachings we were taught did not match the criteria of the three proofs. They did not match the sutras, in some cases were dogmatic rather than based on reason or evidence, and I was not seeing a community of buddhas as actual proof but a community of needy and controlling or controlled people. Even the gosho did not bear out the Nichiren Shoshu doctrines when I read them without bias.
5. When it became clear that I was going to continue to think for myself and even to share my views with others (this was before the internet so I wrote an essay and distributed it to fellow members and the leaders I knew), I was at first "disinvited to future meetings" and then at the request of my district allowed back in on the condition that "you don't talk to anyone because we don't want you confusing the other members." I actually put up with this indignity for a meeting or two and then realized that this kind of authoritarianism and lack of compassion was not the Buddhism I was looking for. At that point I left to see what other Buddhist Sanghas were like.
That is when I found Won Buddhism, a Korean New Religion with a temple in Philadelphia. I became the student of Rev. Bokin Kim. That is when I discovered what Buddhism is like for most American Buddhists - a non-dogmatic, compassionate, and open-minded type of spiritual practice. No paranoia or sectarianism or arrogance or dogmatism. The emphasis was on sitting meditation with some chanting (of sutras and the Korean version of nembutsu) to round it out. Compassion and ethics in daily life were emphasized as well. Study consisted not only of the particular doctrines of Won Buddhism but of the heritage of Buddhism in general. One was not discouraged but actually invited to question and ponder and think for oneself to really understand and assimilate the Dharma into one's life. This was a true breath of fresh air. In many ways it was the Buddhism I had originally been looking for. It felt like what Shakyamuni Buddha had in mind, and had the kind of spirit exemplified in the Zen stories that had inspired me in high school. What is more, even as Rev. Kim was helping me establish a strong sitting meditation practice and to learn about the history and heritage of Korean Buddhism she encouraged me to continue doing gongyo.
But in the end I left Won Buddhism for Nichiren Shu. What then was wrong with Won Buddhism? Well, the simple answer is nothing - I just like Nichiren Buddhism better as it was my first Dharma Gate and I have a stronger karmic affinity for it. But there are some other more substantial reasons.
1. Won Buddhism is a New Religion and as such a simplificaton of the Dharma in some ways. They are open to what it taught in the Buddhist canon, but traditional Buddhist teachings and practice are not their emphasis. So for instance they use the Heart Sutra for their daily practice and their founder's attention was focused on the Diamond Sutra. From my point of view these are provisional sutras emphasizing emptiness (ku) and do not take in the view of the provisional existence (ke) that the Flower Garland exemplifies, or the integration of the Three Truths in the Middle Way (Chu) that is taught in the T'ien-t'ai school and by Nichiren. So in terms of their doctrines I did learn a lot from them, things which I think Nichiren Buddhists would do well to consider, but on the whole I prefered what I see as the more developed T'ien-t'ai teachings and the synthesis in the direct practice of the Lotus Sutra provided by Nichiren.
2. The Gohonzon of Won Buddism is the empty circle representing the Dharmakaya or as they say the Mind of the Buddha. But again I believe the Gohonzon of Nichiren showing the illumination of the ten worlds by the Odaimoku is more holistic and also based on the insight that the Gohonzon is not just the Dharmakaya (the ultimate truth) but the unity of the trikaya as the Eternal Shakyamuni Buddha (the unity of the ulitmate, the ideal and the historial). So again, I find that Won Buddhism is focused on a provisional insight and not the more developed and integrated insight of Nichiren Buddhism. On the other hand they do emphasize that all being have Buddha-nature, and that all beings can attain buddhahood here and now through faith and practice. And I have found that Won Buddhists both here and in Korea (I visited their college and temples there back in '89) really did walk their talk. So their Gohonzon may be provisional, but I think their understanding and way of living points to the ultimate. Still, I prefer the calligraphic Omandal of Nichiren and what it represents.
3. The use of nembsutsu was also an issue with me. Though the nembutsu practiced by Korean and Chinese is not the exclusive nembutsu of Honen or Shinran, I still feel that the Odaimoku has superceded it as the direct practice of the Lotus Sutra. Furthermore, I think the Odaimoku better embodies the spirit of Sot'aesan, the founder of Won Buddhism, himself. He used the nembutsu because its practice was so pervasive among popular Korean Buddhism, but like the Zen Masters he felt the need to hedge it around with all kinds of qualifications so as to undercut the popular pious associations that led to dependence on a buddha as a deity outside oneself and the view that buddhahood is something that only happens after one dies. Sot'aesan's own views were much more in line with what the Odaimoku represents - here and now is where we attain buddhahood and that the Eternal Buddha is not other than ourselves (but not simply our 'self' either).
4. Won Buddhism takes Sot'aesan, their founder, as the new buddha of a new era. As in Nichiren Shoshu, there is the idea that the traditional Buddhism of Shakyamuni Buddha has had its day and that now is the time for a new turning of the Wheel of Dharma. Rev. Kim had downplayed this, but it was becoming apparent to me that this was the position of a sizeable and strong faction in Won Buddhism, and I believe that the current prime master of the school holds this position. But I am adamant about taking refuge in the traditional Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha because it is the teaching and example of Shakyamuni Buddha that I find is the most trustworthy model, and that all others are derivations or specific applications of what Shakyamuni Buddha set in motion. I could see this would eventually lead to an irreconcileable conflict between them and I, even though I have the greatest respect for Sot'aesan's teaching and example and I periodically read the Scripture of Won Buddhism that contains his teachnings and anecdotes about his life and I always find it edifying (in fact I recently helped the Won Buddhists edit some additional discourses of Sot'aesan for an upcoming publication). Anyway, for me, Buddism is about Shakyamuni Buddha. Like Nichiren I will accept no replacements.
5. Like other New Religions from East Asia, Won Buddhism is a top down centralized organization where ministers are appointed and assigned or reassigned as in a monastic order and not in keeping with the more democratic models of American churches where there is a board of directors who decide who they will accept or reject. Now there are strengths and weaknesses in both systems, and I also may not be correct in my impression of how Won Buddism operates (I never really got involved in organization stuff), but that is my impression. I much prefer the confederation system of Nichiren Shu, which is an amalgamation of otherwise independent lineages operating in a big tent atmosphere where the lay people have a role (sometimes a great role) in determing how the temples are operated.
One other note - I do not consider myself anti-SGI or even anti-Shoshu (not anymore anyway) though I disagree with certain doctrinal positions that they uphold and I feel a responsibility to publicly speak up for the mainstream teachings of Nichiren Buddhism. Other things I do not like about SGI or Shoshu have to do with internal traditions, policies, and organization and I figure that is really my business as I am not a member and I have already voted with my feet and wallet. Apart from the organization and official doctrines of those groups I welcome cordial relations with SGI and even Shoshu members, and I hope that we can be good neighbors, learn from each other, and recognize that in 90% of our teachings and practices we are in agreement. I hope to continue to have good dialogues and friendships with SGI members (and even Shoshu members) in a spirit of mutual respect if not perfect agreement.
As for Won Buddhism, I still like them a lot and maintain good personal relations with them, and have even helped them out as a kind of private contractor (for translations and revisions). My leaving them should not be construed as any kind of disaproval or indictment, and in fact I feel an immense debt of gratitude to them and particularly to Rev. Kim. I simply opted for a different kind of Buddhism that I find more compelling, though that does not negate the many things I have and continue to learn from them.
So these are my ruminations about why I am with the Sangha I am with and why I left the other Sanghas I was part of. This is in answer to those who keep wondering why I stay with Nichiren Shu despite their perception (a mistaken one I think) that I am somehow not fitting in or that I have somehow transcended the need for it (I reiterate that I think this is a mistaken perception). It is also offered to those who may feel alienated in the Sanghas they are in, or who are wondering whether staying in or leaving a particular Sangha would be the best thing to do to maintain one's integrity, convictions, and spiritual growth. So these are the things that I have worked through in relation to leaving or staying with a particular Sangha.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
Hi, Michael, and thanks for this interesting trip down your personal memory lane. I know that I for one, practiced Zen for awhile in college and after,and that's how I learned to chant sutras, making it a lot easier for me to learn gongyo when I joined the Gakkai. Although I did go through leaders who tended to blame my problems on working out my zen karma or as being some sort of karmic retribution for having practiced a sitting form of Buddhism. A couple of points and questions:
1. To what extent does the NShu retain the exclusivism that characterizes many of Nichiren's writings? By this I mean how does your school deal with the "mixing rice and filth" issue?
2. Most scholars I have read characterize the Gakkai as a New Japanese Religion, and as you know, it's my opinion that most of our clinging to Shoshu doctrines comes from a fear of being so characterized. We also seem to me to be a new religion in that we are pretty much cut off from traditional Buddhist teachings (8fold path, 4fold truth, insubstantiality, etc) - what, beside these two qualities (and a post WWII advent on the world stage) make up a "new religion" in your view? Do you know where this is clearly defined? I'm trying to figure out whether the Gkkai really is a new religion, as I want to actually practice Buddhism, this is an issue for me.
3 How do you personally (as in your practice) work to manifest not being "anti-Gakkai or Shoshu"? I mean, as a human being, I find it hard to not return hostility for hostility (OK, that's the practice of patience, but no-one likes being misrepresented), especially with the level of condescending and sometimes downright hostile misrepresentation of Nichiren Shu which characterizes both Taiseki-ji schools.
4 Do other Buddhist schools teach as the Gakkai and Shoshu do that you will incur karmic punishment for visiting other Buddhist places of worship, or if you leave the Sangha for some reason (this relates to the rice and filth issue above)? The issue of "karmic retribution" and general fear is a big one for many people who might otherwise look for a broadened view of Buddhism outside the Gakkai - what if I leave, will my mother die, will I get cancer, whatever. Honestly, at least in terms of the Gakkai and the Shoshu, you can't deal with the issue of leaving without dealing with the issue of fear. You've been out for awhile, so you don't have the problems posed by say, a parent who has a child with a chronic illness who genuinely believes that the chid may be endangered by the parent leaving or even shopping for a different group. Does the Shu have any unwritten doctrines like this (certainly this is not written down in the Gakkai, but it is enforced at varying levels) which impact their members this way? Thanks for your thoughtful posts, Best regards for a happy 4th weekend, Byrd in LA
Posted by: Byrd in LA at July 2, 2005 02:15 PMHi Byrd,
In answer to you questions:
1. The Nichiren Shu has a wide variety of ministers within it who take harder, softer, and even non-existent lines regarding exclusivity. For instance, some will refuse to teaching sitting meditation, while others will teach sitting meditation as a regular thing. I even know of one prominent Nichiren Shu minister, an expert on the Pali Canon in Japan, who went to SE Asia and took Theravadin precepts and lived as a Theravadin monk so he could better deepen his understanding of the Pali teachings and that form of Buddhism. I am not aware of anyone criticizing him for this. For that matter, Nichiren Shu seems to have a good neighbor policy with all other Buddhists - even with Nichiren Shoshu. Though you will not find us chanting nembutsu, and in Japan they occasionally have to discourage less discerning laypeople from chanting nembutsu in our temples (lay people in Japan no longer know or care about the differences between schools of Buddhism). On the whole we are a pretty open-minded, live and let live bunch, but we do strive to maintain the integrity of Nichiren's teachings - at least on our own temple grounds but even then we allow plenty of room for interpretation.
2. I fail to see the reason why being a "New Religion" should be a stigma. I have yet to see a precise and agreed upon definition. I am not even sure who coined it or when. It seems to refer to any religious movement in East Asia begun from the 19th century on that draws upon traditional elements in innovative ways. They are usually begun by charismatic figures, and are independent of the older traditional schools. Won Buddhism is a New Religion with roots in Korean Zen, Confucianism, Taoism and even a couple of older New Religions prior to it, and even a little bit of Christian influence. In Japan the New Religions are either Buddhist or Shinto based. I think that the New Religions are as significant to the development and even survival of Buddhism as the Mahayana movement has been, but they also have their drawbacks and unlike the Mahayana they do not have any qualms about contradicting traditional Buddhist teaching. The Mahayana, at least, remained consistent with core teachings, but a group like the Falun Gong, for instance, just makes stuff up and claims it is Buddhism.
3. I still get irritated by certain individuals who are paranoid and obtuse. But I have learned to respect people's sincerity and to realize that this is where they need to be. It is enough to present the truth, there is no need to get emotional about it. There is even no need to get attached to being right or proving that someone else is wrong. I guess it comes from reflecting on the parable of the raft and the parable of the right way to handle a snake. I discuss the first parable in my article "What is the Dharma?" at Ryuei.net:
http://nichirenscoffeehouse.net/Ryuei/BuddhaDharma.html
The parable of the proper way to handle a snake is from the same sutta as the parable of the raft. The basic lesson is this: if you hold even the right teaching the wrong way, you will still be wrong.
4. No other Buddhist schools do this. It would be unthinkable. In the case of Nichiren Shu we visit other Buddhists all the time and vice versa. Well, maybe not "all the time" but we have no qualms about it. Just a few months ago I led a Nichiren Shu delegation on a visit to the H.Q. of the Buddhist Churches of America (the Jodo Shinshu) and the San Francisco Zen Center so they could see how other American Buddhist groups operate. Those visits were very cordial and free of any kind of rancor, hostility, or paranoia. Everyone was pleasant and civil and acted towards each other as fellow Buddhists. It would not even have occured to anyone to be otherwise. This does not mean that we chanted nembutsu or anything. As a matter of fact, what we did do was visit a small stupa containing a relic of the Buddha on the roof of the BCA building and offered incense and chanted Odaimoku. No problem for anyone.
It is sad that people exposed to SGI or Shoshu think that all Nichiren Buddhists are fanatical sectarians use emotional blackmail and superstition, or act defensive, paranoid and hostile towards other Buddhists and other religions. This is not the case. This kind of behavior is the reason why other Buddhists view SGI and the Shoshu as cults.
When I did my training at Mt. Minbobu I asked the Archbishop of Kuonji how we should relate to other Buddhists. His answer was that in Nichiren's day, Buddhists were not willing to listen to each other but resorted to threats and force (thus Nichiren's persecutions). But today Buddhists do listen to one another, so we should talk to them. In fact, we must learn to have dialogue not only with other Buddhists but even with people of different religions for the sake of world peace. That is the gist of his answer. And in Nichiren Shu I have seen for myself that this is not mere rhetoric - it is the way the clergy and laity of Nichiren Shu actually conduct themselves.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
Thanks for the response, Michael, but I'm still curious about the fear factor, which you did not touch upon. Do any other schools have the idea that you're somehow "doomed" if you leave?
As far as the New Religion issue goes, you don't see the problem with the name "new religion" because you are not struggling to maintain the myth that you represent the One True Mahayana - a claim made in the gakkai's recently revised Bylaws. I guess that myth would be hard to maintain if your members had any kind of exposure to other shcools, and that's a good reason to keep that exposure to a minimum. I very much enjoy your blogs, plese keep them coming. Best regards, Byrd in LA
Posted by: Byrd in LA at July 3, 2005 06:59 PMHi Byrd,
I thought I did answer that in my reply to question 4, but maybe I wasn't clear enough. No other Buddhist school I have ever been exposed to has ever or would even think of telling someone they would be "doomed" if you left. In fact, just about all of them tell you to feel free to check out different Sanghas to find the one that is right for you. The idea that you are "doomed" or will be "karmically punished" if you leave is a perverse evil idea, and any group that teaches that is not teaching Buddha Dharma and is certainly not teaching the One Vehicle whereby all beings will attain buddhahood even by provisional means in the long run. These kinds of scare tactics and spiritual blackmail make those who use them no better than fundamentalist Christians or Muslims, and in a way even worse because they sully the reputation of the Buddha Dharma and even cause some people to leave it altogether by using such tactics. As the Lotus Sutra itself says, "the curses will return to the originators."
As an aside, in Wicca it is taught that anytime you curse others (which is what this kind of threat of "doom" or "karmic punishment" really is) you will yourself receive the curse back upon yourself but threefold. I always thought that was a bit much. But then I realized that the Wiccans were thinking of the way we direct our intentions in terms of a pointing finger. Anytime you point your finger, one finger points at the other person, the thumb points off in a different direction, and three fingers point back at yourself. So when we wish or predict ill on others (either due to our own egotism or tribal/sectarian egotism) we direct some energy at the other person, but much more of it will simply reflect back on ourselves. Well wishing or predictions of buddhahood, will also reflect back on ourselves, but more positively. And that is also the basis of the efficacy of the metta or loving-kindness cultivation.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
Rev Ryuei
This is a fascinating post. Of course for most people worrying about membership of a sangha, it is likely that they will be SGI members preoccupied with either 1) sectarianism 2) hiromasu 3) more scholarly doctrinal issues (transfer documents etc).
Most such people however will lack the great self confidence that you described when describing your previous movings on (you obviously were more than a match for your initial handlers in the SGI). However, I would suggest that very few people have such self confidence and that such decisions will be plagued by doubt. In an organisation where "following the will of the mentor" is propogandised so thoroughly, but also because that interacts with the geniune humility of people when they first come to buddhism (usually because life events have proved to them that they don't have all-the-answers), it makes the kind of confident assertion of alternative perspectives quite difficult. What can such people do (besides reading boards such as this) to increase their spiritual self-sufficiency?
The other issue for those contemplating a non-SGI future would be something that originally I found negative about the organisation but which I now find very positive. Namely the intensity of its proselytism. Could you have ever have come into contact with Nichiren Buddhism in the first place had it not been for the SGI? Even if this proselytism has led to excesses by deluded individuals duping themselves into thinking they were creating a huge karmic surplus in the existential bank account by doing "shakubuku" - has not the consequences of such activity been overwhelmingly positive?
That is my quandary: I'd like a more credible theology than the Soka Gakkai but a more intense social engagement than the Nichiren Shu.
Steve
Posted by: Steve at July 4, 2005 02:34 AMHi Steve,
Thanks for your comments. They are something I have given a lot of thought to as well.
1. You mention that I seem to have had great self-confidence. At the time I was continuously being called "arrogant" and a person with "no seeking spirit." Looking back on it there was an element of arrogance and hubris. On the other other hand, there was also the FACT, that my parents raised me to think for myself and NOT to be duped or manipulated by others. To be your own person and true to yourself was a strong value that my parents instilled in me as I was growing up.
Not only that, but while I was in SGI I was also taking theology and philosophy classes at La Salle University and there I met two of the people who I still consider to have been among my greatest mentors in life - Mr. Fallon (an assoicate philosophy prof) and Fr. Schepers (my theology teacher who emphasized Jung and Bernard Lonergan). These two men taught in such a way that instead of giving answers for the students to regurgitate at exam time they forced the students to think for themselves and to really engage the issues we were dealing with on a personal level. It is from Fr. Schepers that I learned Lonergan's teaching that "authentic objectivity comes from authentic subjectivity."
In addition I was being taught courses in logic and also the history of the Church (actually Church history and the deconstruction of the Bible had been taught to me in Catholic school from 6th grade on). All of this had taught me to approach religion, religious texts, and religious authorities in a critical way. On the one hand to take them seriously, their insights and their values. But on the other hand to see religious texts and dogmas as products of culture that developed over time and to recognize that there is almost always a shadow side. All of this prepared me to be critical of and to see through the Shoshu/SGI dogmatism and authoritarianism and to always wonder "what is behind all of this." You might even say that my parents and my Catholic education had immunized me against dogmatism and authoritarianism - even against that of the Catholic Church.
2. I also have wondered about whether it is possible to be socially engaged and to "evangelize" so to speak, without having to be sectarian and without having to resort to fear tactics, superstition, and tribal egotism. I do think it is possible. I think, however, that we need to deemphasize "shakabuku" which is grossly misunderstood. "Shakabuku" had a very restricted meaning and application in traditional Buddhism and one sees that Nichiren also intended it only for monks and only for formal treatises and formal debates. I believe that what needs to be emphasized today is "geshu" which means "sowing the seed." We need to share our practice, and that means telling others about it when appropriate and/or advertizing our meetings. But it does not mean "browbeating people into submission" or "cramming the sutra down people's throats." It also does not have to mean sectarianism. We need to remember that no sect or school owns the Three Great Hidden Dharmas or the Three Jewels, and that Sangha is the community of those who uphold the Buddha Dharma and this can't be identified with an organization or institution, though orgs are how Sangha can manifest itself. This is something else I learned first from Christians, by the way. They would always differentiate between the Church as an institution or denomination, and Church as the Body of Christ which has no denominational or sectarian boundaries. I believe that Sangha manifests itself in and through orgs but is not restricted to or bound by them. It is a spiritual reality primarily and derivatively an organizational one.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
Hi again - this last post in response to Steven called to my mind another issue for me with the Gakkai, and that is the utter absence of genuine scholarship as that would be defined by outside academics. I got my degree in religious studies (at Pomona College) and joined the Gakkai six years later. In 20 years, I still haven't met anyone with my academic background - maybe this just says I was dumb to stick around - it seems that scholars just sort of drop away from the Gakkai, except those who are on the payroll. It's lonesome being a brain in the Gakkai (but maybe that's true of the world in general, I dunno). If you're seriously interested in reading and scholarship outside the box of Gakkai publications, or if your opinions on doctrinal questions are based on any reading other than assigned reading, there just plain isn't anyone to talk to. Except online, of course. Ah, well, thanks again for an interesting blog, and I'm sorry I didn't pick up on your answer to my question #4 above. You did give me the answer, I just didn't see it because it was mixed up with the rice-and-filth answer about temple visitng. Happy 4th, Byrd in LA
Posted by: Byrd in LA at July 4, 2005 12:27 PMRev Ryuei
Wonderful answer! Yes, my own background was a kind of weakly held atheism and so I had very little with which to calibrate my new found faith when I first joined the SGI.
Your point about the possibility of a non sectarian spreading of the teachings made me think about the role that electronic media could play in this regard. Just as Luthuranism to a certain extent was a product of the gutenberg print technologies, the concept of more diffuse, decentered religious organisations is potentially made realisable by the electronic media. Certainly it makes (as this website proves) the holding on to doctrinal falsehood much harder.
But on the other hand I wonder whether any sort of real religious diffusion requires a kind of demented mass possession (like the early Christians or the post war Japanese) to notch up significant numbers?
Anyway, I find your writings a very refreshing take on Nichiren Buddhism and, on a different tack, I am as it happens on holiday in California this year between 28th July and 19th August - I haven't got an itinerary well sorted out but certainly want to spend at least a week in San Francisco - if there are any events happening in the places where you minister I'd be very interested in coming along. Please email if you have a calendar of some sort.
Thanks
Steve
Posted by: Steve at July 4, 2005 02:54 PMSteve. It just might not be so.
I my self is concerned with both sectarianism and doctrinal issues (no idea what hiromasu means, google returns: Aluminum-based gate structure for active-matrix liquid crystal).
But I am sure I do not lack confidence when it comes to quitting. Trust me, I am a great quitter. But I am not gonna let this one slip just because it gets a little uncomfortable. With deep respect to those who have left SGi. I still have some gunpowder left, and I am gonna use it wisely. Why? Cause we all need a better SGI. All the time,
Henrik
Henrik,
Sorry - Hiromasu is Pres Ikeda's son, whose increasing media exposure and name-checking by senior leaders seems to indicate he's being groomed for the top job. The horror of this for me would be that it would remove the "benefit of the doubt" that one accords to a number of things in the organisation. One would seriously have to question what, if any, independence of mind many senior leaders could be said to possess if this came to pass.
Steve
Posted by: Steve at July 5, 2005 01:00 AMSteve, Ryuei, et al.
I always thought it was Hiromasa - anyway, PI has stated earlier in writing that he does not support heredity rule. If his son is being groomed for the new leader with PI's approval, that should be the starters shot for disbanding the SGI. Hereditary rule? What are we feudalistic Japan? North Korea and Kim Jong Il? What a blatant, narcissistic move that would be. If such a thing becomes a reality, the only people left in the SGI will have traded their souls for the corporate ideal. Baaaaa...baaaaa.
I've got nothing against his son. I met his youngest son at the Myogyoji temple opening and he's a nice guy, although in severe need of a tanning bed. The person that assumes the leadership of the SGI should be a master of Buddhism, not daddy's number one son.
I shudder at the audacity to bestow the SGI to your son. If that is done, the SGI is finished for everyone but the most mindless drones.
Charles
Posted by: Charles at July 5, 2005 10:30 AMRuyei,
This is a great blog and the comments it inspired are tremendous!
You wrote, "As an aside, in Wicca it is taught that anytime you curse others (which is what this kind of threat of "doom" or "karmic punishment" really is) you will yourself receive the curse back upon yourself but threefold. I always thought that was a bit much. But then I realized that the Wiccans were thinking of the way we direct our intentions in terms of a pointing finger. Anytime you point your finger, one finger points at the other person, the thumb points off in a different direction, and three fingers point back at yourself. So when we wish or predict ill on others (either due to our own egotism or tribal/sectarian egotism) we direct some energy at the other person, but much more of it will simply reflect back on ourselves."
This is like the old saying, "Holding onto anger is like swallowing poison and expecting the other person to die." When I curse someone else, I am clearly the one who suffers the most. Now a question that relates to your comment about Wicca: my daughter is interested in learning more about witchcraft. Can you recommend a good, sane, knowledgable source? We've been doing a little reading on our own and both of us are enjoying it a lot. My 8 year old said, "This is a lot like Buddhism" and in some ways, she may be right.
Queen Lolo
I hope this doesn't get lost withing this rather long comments section! Speaking of associating with other denominations of Buddhism; I was so excited to hear the July 5 NPR report on Bhutan's new draft constitution. Bhutan is a country between India and China who's official religion is Buddhism and their new constitution is based on Buddhist principles. The constitution includes a parlimentary democracy, freedom of speech and the press but also a state committment to maximize gross national happiness. Along with these constitutional rights come constitutional duties such as the requirement by each citizen to provide help to the greatest possible extent to victims of accidents and in times of natural calamity. It also calls for citizens to be a pacifist, uphold justice and act against corruption.
These are all such wonderful articles that I wish we could incorporate them into the U.S. constitution.
Posted by: Royceann at July 8, 2005 02:28 PMGood blog
Posted by: Pesho at September 1, 2005 07:40 AM