Chapter 11.
Religion as Manifesting Truth
In its earnest search for truth, as a religion of
enlightenment, Buddhism has a deep faith that knowledge frees and truth
liberates. It has had abiding confidence in the potential of the human
mind to experience truth, to break through the veil of ignorance that
shrouds our being. Buddha, as the truly awakened one, has awakened to
the truth of his very being. His pursuit and goal is to be our pursuit
and goal.
The pursuit of truth in Buddhism gave rise over the
centuries to profound analyses of being, of the nature and operation of
consciousness, of the various levels and characteristics of knowledge.
Buddhist thought developed epistemology (how we know), metaphysics (the
nature of what appears to exist), and logic as the principles of
thinking. There were theories of two-levels of truth formulated by
Nagarjuna in the Madhyamika or "Middle Path" school. There was the
three-level theory of the "Consciousness Only" or Yogacara school of
Vasubandhu. Buddhism critiqued ordinary experience to dramatize that we
can only be emancipated when we discover the true relation of the
absolute truth to the relative truth of our own experience. Whatever the
school, and whatever the shift of philosophical emphasis in its 2,600
years of history, Buddhism was -- and is still -- understood as a
quest for truth.
At times, for a variety of reasons, this quest for
truth became entangled in highly complex scholasticism. In China, for
example, there developed great translation enterprises and diverse
schools based on the great sutras and treatises. There was a reaction
against these trends in the formation of Zen Buddhism which looked to
spontaneous, sudden insight, (quite apart from complicated texts and
schools of practice) as the emancipating truth.
In Japan's Kamakura period, for the ordinary person,
the shortcut to liberation came through the Pure Land practice of
Nembutsu as well as Zen. These Chinese trends and schools, spreading to
Japan and developing in the Kamakura period, eventually gave rise to the
many strands of Japanese Buddhism that exist today. Still, at the heart
of all of these, and of all forms of Buddhism everywhere in the world,
there is that yearning to realize the truth that frees.
The quest for truth in Buddhism has frequently been
obscured on the institutional level. Buddhism played the role of the
defender of the state and -- through its great spiritual powers -- of
the provider of individual wants. Buddhism, in many places and
historical periods, became identified with magic. In its adaptation to
the demands of supporting political powers, Buddhism sometimes
restricted the search for truth largely to the monasteries where
dedicated monks individually might seek their own enlightenment. Though
Mahayana Buddhism announced the ideal of sharing enlightenment with
others, and working with them to achieve it, Mahayana monastic life was
largely an individual endeavor to attain the goal for oneself.
The two-level theory of truth, and its accompanying
"doctrine of convenient means" (hoben) was originally
developed in order to point devotees to the true source of enlightenment
as a means to lead people to the higher truth. However, the two-level
theory of truth is elitist in structure. Experts may know about the
higher level of truth, but the ordinary person is confined to the plane
of relative truth. It is interesting that until very recent times, any
religious education aimed at elevating and spiritualizing the religious
perceptions of the masses has been rare. In Japan, despite Buddhist
activity, the basic religious perspective which govern the Japanese
religious world has not seriously changed from the earliest primitive
times.
The degradation of the term hoben to the level of its
use as an intellectual sop for people who are presumed unable to
understand anything higher, is counter to Buddhism's basic thrust to
make the truth known. Buddhist subservience to the political forces
which supported it (particularly in Japan) was at the expense of this
basic task. When the Kamakura Buddhism appeared, there was a determined
attempt to break through the stranglehold which the court society of
Japan had forced on Buddhism. During the Kamakura period, for each
teacher, the search for truth again became paramount þ and direct. Soon
thereafter, however, compromise again developed. The truth became
routinized, institutionalized, fixed. Where the disciples of old could
read the texts and letters of such individuals as Shinran and Nichiren,
and where Dogen wrote in the vernacular, by later generations it had all
become too difficult and was considered really unnecessary since one's
status as a truth seeker or follower was guaranteed by membership in the
institutions that developed from the Kamakura period of Buddhism.
Despite this process of history, the question of truth
remains as the central issue of Buddhism, and of religion generally, in
our 20th century. Shinran points, in the "Tannisho," to the centrality of this question:
"If the Original Vow of Amida is true, then
Sakyamuni's sermons cannot be untrue. If the Buddha's words are true,
then Zendo's comments cannot be untrue. If Zendo's comments are true,
how can Honen's sayings be false? If Honen's sayings are true, what I,
Shinran, say cannot possibly be false, either. After all is said, such
is the faith of this simpleton. Beyond this, it is entirely left up to
each one of you whether you accept and believe in the Nembutsu, or
reject it." [1]
Though Shinran in this passage argues that since he
could not actually perform the difficult practices of Buddhism which
were believed to yield enlightenment, and thus he was ultimately doomed
to hell, then Honen could hardly have deceived him when he taught that
we can be saved by reciting the Nembutsu alone. Left at this point, it
would appear that Shinran's choice was a matter of desperation -- it was
the only alternative left. However, if such had been the case, he
probably would have given up even the practice of Nembutsu. Desperation
is not a sound basis for commitment.
Shinran moves from the position of apparent
desperation to the question of the truth which grounds his faith in the Nembutsu. In this he serves notice, that he believes what has been
taught him is itself the truth and that truth, when followed back
through the tradition, finds its roots in the Vow of Amida itself. The
issue of truth was central to Shinran and his innovative interpretation
of Buddhist tradition makes his teaching an issue of truth for other
perspectives in Buddhism. His denial that we can do any good deed to
contribute to our enlightenment is hard to square with traditional
Buddhist understanding that it is through the accumulation of good deeds
that we develop the spirituality and potential to achieve enlightenment
through many births. Shinran's concept of "poisoned good
deeds" strikes at the heart of Buddhist views of karmic
retribution, for with Shinran, there could only be bad karma, as he
defined it. This meant that for him, the search for truth was especially
keen and necessary.
It is not without reason, therefore, that in the
various sections of his "Kyogyoshinsho," the titles are all given as
"Ken Jodo Shinjitsu" -- "A Collection of passages
revealing the true teaching, practice and enlightenment of Pure Land
(Buddhism)." He announces in the introduction:
"Hence, it is clear to me that the auspicious
name of the complete and all-merging supreme virtue is the True Wisdom
which turns evil into merit and that the Adamantine Serene Faith which
is difficult to attain is the Truth which removes doubt and enables us
to realize Enlightenment." [2]
" ... How difficult it is to attain the True,
pure Faith ..." [3]
" ... Veritable, indeed, are the True Words of
(Amida's) 'embracing and not forsaking' and the True Teaching which is
unequaled and rare!" [4]
" ... Accordingly, then, this is the clear
evidence that (the Larger Sutra) reveals the True Teaching. Indeed, this
is the true exposition for which the Tathagata appeared in this world,
the rare and supreme wonderful scripture, which the ultimate teaching of
the One Vehicle, the Golden Words, enable one to quickly attain the
complete and all merging merits, the true words praised by (Buddha of)
the ten quarters, and the true teaching conforming to the time and
capabilities of sentient beings. This we should know." [5]
These passages make clear that Shinran's faith was
rooted in a perception of truth. In the Introduction to the volume on
Faith in the "Kyogyoshinsho," he comments that "the awakening of
True Mind is made possible by the compassionate skilful means of the
Great Sage." Here, faith which we experience is identified with the
True Mind, or the Mind of Truth which is aroused through Sakyamuni's
teaching.
In other words, the root of faith must be deeply set
in the soil of truth, else it will wither in the hot sun of adversity.
The anchor point of faith is truth, in the same way that a ship on a
stormy ocean is held by its sea anchor so that it will not drift and be
completely at the mercy of mountainous waves.
For some readers, the question will naturally occur:
How did the Buddhists determine the truth that is this anchor point of
faith, and the salvation of the human condition? While remembering that
for Buddhism truth is essentially an experience -- the attainment of
wisdom -- nevertheless, for the diverse people it confronted, it did
attempt to establish principles which would open people to pursue the
goals of Buddhism more deeply. The philosophical approaches of Nagarjuna
and Vasubandhu raise questions concerning the validity of our ordinary
experience. Nagarjuna attacked our logic, our concepts, and words to
show that they are inadequate to depict truth directly. Vasubandhu
showed that through analysis of our perceptions of the world, there is
basis for doubting the validity of ordinary experience to represent the
truth. By dislodging people from their attachment to the senses, and
from their addiction to logic, these teachers made it possible for
people to be more open, to look deeper into themselves and their
experience.
In terms of competing philosophies of ancient times,
Buddhism criticized theories, then current among the peoples of India,
on the issues of soul and of cause and effect. As the centuries passed,
within Buddhism itself the gradual development of sectarian divisions
required principles to distinguish the true teaching of Buddhism from
lesser expressions. This was especially so as the teachings spread
beyond India. In China, for example, it was once again in competition
with, and critical of, Confucianism and Taoism, both formidable
opponents in those times. While respecting Confucian morality, Buddhists
emphasized that Confucianism had no profound philosophy and lacked a
view of human destiny.
The "Benshoron," quoted by Shinran, states in
general evaluation:
"Laotzu, Duke Chou, and Confucius may, as
disciples of the Tathagata, teach people, but they are already
heathenish. What they tell are but the good deeds of the secular world.
We cannot cross over the fate of common mortals and attain the holy
state." [6]
In China, too, the multiplicity of schools and texts
that developed in Buddhism stimulated the formation of criteria to
assess the relative worth and importance of these various texts and
teachings, a series of endeavors called Critical Classification of
Doctrine. The most comprehensive and influential of these was the system
developed by T'ien-t'ai Ta-shih, Chih-I, which in Japan was called the
Tendai school and was introduced on Mount Hiei by Saicho in the ninth
century. Tendai is known generally as the teaching of five periods and
eight doctrines.
Another widely important and influential theory of
critical classification of doctrine was that set forth by Shan tao of
the Pure Land school, and this is the set of critical principles that
had such significant impact upon Honen in Japan as basis for the
establishment of Pure Land School of Buddhism. It was in this tradition
that Shinran developed his own classification in order to clarify his
experience of Buddhism, and his analysis of the true teaching, the
insights that grew out of his own experience.
Buddhism was not a religion of "believe anything
you want," or a religion which simply catered to individual whim,
and thus the formation of such systems was important in view of the
Buddhist search for truth. Buddhism, being a religion of principle,
sought to arrange principles in some order to focus upon the essential
truth to which these principles could lead. In the case of Shinran, the
critical classification based on Pure Land teaching, was modified to
show that the final expression of Buddhism is singlemindedness and this
singlemindedness is characterized as either shallow or deep. The shallow
singlemindedness refers to the Settled (Meditative mind) and Dispersed
minds (worldly good deeds and morality) which he calls self power, while
the deep singlemindedness is the true mind of other power. In his
definition of this position, Shinran went beyond the classifications of
traditional Pure Land by distinguishing two types of Nembutsu.
Based on his understanding that faith is the true mind
of Amida bestowed on, or aroused in, the person, there is self-power
Nembutsu and Other Power Nembutsu. Other Power Nembutsu emerges as the
result of faith and expresses one's gratitude for the Primal Vow in
contrast to the self-power practice which the devotee regards as his or
her own meritorious act.
In this way, Shinran deepened understanding of
religiosity and faith in the Pure Land tradition þ but at the same
time, he also challenged religious understanding in Buddhism. This
challenge was a rejection of egoistic employment of religion, and in
"Kyogyoshinsho," Shinran expressed this by quoting from the
"Nirvana Sutra" as follows:
"There are four good things which may gain one
four evil fruits. What are the four? The first is one in which one reads
and recites the sutras to surpass others. The second is one in which one
observes moral precepts 'to profit.' The third is 'to offer alms' with
things that belong to others. The fourth is one in which one who
concentrates thoughts and thinks to attain 'thoughtlessness' and
non-thoughtlessness.'" [7]
In our consideration of modern Shinshu, the emphasis
on truth in Shinran's thought has great importance. On the one hand,
Shinran was clearly in line with the search for truth which animated
Buddhist faith and practice throughout its long history. On the other,
however, his search for truth led him to question the accepted
perspectives of his day and to formulate new interpretations. He was not
merely a sentimentalist, but was capable of analytical thought and the
"Kyogyoshinsho," his major work, reveals this as well as his critical
temperament and systematic, but creative approach. His insertion of the
volume on Faith between that on Practice and on Realization represents a
view never before established in Buddhism.
In these volumes, and in their sequence as well as in
his letters and other writings, there is the evidence of his constant
attempt to make his principles clear and to state his case with these
principles rather than appealing to sentiment or invoking his authority
as a teacher. Though he possessed both sentiment and sensitivity, to a
high degree, Shinran was highly intellectual. This aspect of Shinshu and
of Buddhism in general, needs reaffirmation, and a re-application to our
own time. In the present century, there is great religious confusion in
all the traditions because a serious search for truth has been
abandoned. In our times, the quest for truth as been replaced by the
pursuit of taste.
It is easy to be religious today because religion
demands little of us in facing the corruption and decadence that marks
our mappo era. Even when there appears to be arduous disciplines, most
forms of contemporary religions are basically adjustive and adaptive to
surrounding conditions. They build interior worlds for their believers
while leaving the exterior world of suffering untouched þ even to the
point of expressing a judgment. There are some religious groups which
never placed themselves against the evil of the Viet Nam war, and many
which have had trouble in facing up to the racism that was, and
continues to be, a central problem. The ideal of the Bodhisattva's
identification with beings in the full range of their sufferings in the
world of samsara would suggest that the most profound truth of religion
is that it fortifies the inner person, while at the same time, the
person works in the outer world to bring compassion into the lives of
our fellow beings.
The great emphasis today in religion, as it has been
for some time, is on peace of mind þ which of course we all desire and
need. However, since peace of mind is merely egoistic satisfaction, it
cannot be the primary value and purpose of religion. The desire for
inner peace is the basis of much religious competition and exploitation
in the world today. Individuals are attracted in great numbers to
charismatic leaders, who promise spiritual security, salvation or
material blessings in return for the submission and allegiance of the
follower. This competition and exploitation certainly fits the condition
of mappo as Buddhist symbolism describes.
For myself, I do not believe
that religion should take advantage of human weakness in order to
capture the support of the masses. It is in this way that Shin Buddhism
speaks differently to modern man, for the religious truth expressed by
Shinran questions religiosity itself. It directs the question to the
deepest levels of our motivation. Shinran understood that we not only
receive benefit through religion, but religious faith motivates our
concern for others (Rita). The aim of religious faith is not to achieve
fame or fulfill lust which means to assert control over others. Rather,
for Shinran, a robust faith enables us to see through our own egoism and
pretensions of self-sufficiency.
Thus, the truth which Shinran and Buddhism seek to
illuminate is not a chauvinistic truth, a truth which asserts its
superiority over other expressions of truth. There are those within the
tradition who may do this, but Buddhism in its deepest dimensions has
always urged its followers not to be attached to views, not to get stuck
on questions which merely end in argument, but constantly to transcend
towards the goal of enlightenment. Buddhism has always recognized that
the pursuit of truth and the recognition of truth are quite different.
It is singleminded in the pursuit, but it has been tolerant to
differences in the expression of truth, sometimes þ it may seem þ to
the point of indifference. Also, it realizes that truth lies beyond our
limited means to perceive it. This approach of Buddhism is important
today because its compassionate understanding can go far to redirect
western intellectual concerns which have given science and technology
the priority over truly humane and human values.
Unlike western philosophies, which became detached
from religious sources of inspiration, Buddhism links the quest for
truth with the development of the compassionate heart, the heart of
concern for all beings. This is illustrated in the Bodhisattva path in
which the practicer starts seeking his own salvation and ends by
rejecting it until all can be saved. The Bodhisattva dedicates himself
to study and knowledge in order to provide or open the way to salvation
for all beings. In Buddhism, compassion and wisdom are inseparable.
In the light of our consideration that Buddhism is a
quest for truth, we must understand that each tradition has formulated
what it regards is its truth. Disagreement in interpretation has given
rise to the religious competition and conflict which marks Buddhist
history. There has been, however, a tendency in recent times among
Buddhist schools to minimize differences, even at the expense (or so it
sometimes appears) of setting aside the essential point of the faith.
The search for truth should not, of course, be an exercise in group ego,
but at the same time our attempt to maintain positive relations with
others should not prevent expression of our differences with them.
Shinran and the other teachers of his day were very clear about the
differences which separated them from their fellow Buddhists. Dogen
criticized Nembutsu. Honen and Shinran criticized what they deemed the
self-power schools. Nichiren denounced all of them. Shinran pronounced
his judgment on his times, stating the issues clearly and without
hesitation:
"Even though the multitudinous beings in the
corrupted world and the defiled evil sentient beings, having left the
ninety-five wrong paths, have entered the Dharma-gates of the
'Incomplete and Complete Teachings' or the 'Expedient and True
Teachings,' it is very difficult to follow the teachings truthfully and
few really practice the way; many are led to falsehood and the deluded
beings are quite numerous." [8]
"As I contemplate matters, I see that the
acquirement of serene Faith arise out of the Tathagata's Selected Vow
and that the awakening of True Mind is made possible by the
compassionate, skilful means of the Great Sage.
"However, priests and laymen of the Declining Age
and masters of these days, sunken in the idea 'that one's true nature is
Buddha' and 'that Buddha's Pure Land exists in one's mind,' degrade (the
belief in) the True Enlightenment in the Pure Land; or, being deluded by
the mind of self-power to practice meditative and non-meditative good
deeds, they are blind to the Adamantine True Faith." [9]
The guiding principle in the quest for truth is that
we be sure to probe as deeply as we can, and I believe that, like
Shinran, we must always test our perceptions and our understandings
against the experience of life. We must always ask the compassionate
question: In what way does our knowledge and wisdom enhance the lives of
those about us? These were the kinds of questions that led to the
developments Shinran initiated in his interpretation of Pure Land
thought and its implication for religious existence. The deepest wisdom
a person can discover must be a unifying and vitalizing wisdom which
confers meaning and value on even the lowliest being. It takes seriously
the question of what is really good for a person and in the asking
respects the personality and integrity of that person. Shinran was not
pompously dogmatic in all this. After putting forth evidences for his
view, he notes that it is up to the individual whether he will accept it
or not. Though there are critical words in Shinran, there is no
condemning word. His is a true search for truth.
In his writing, Shinran frequently uses the term Jodo
Shinshu, which he derived from Honen. Shin is also read Makoto in
Japanese. It means true, truth, reality and sincerity. In this context
it may be interpreted as True Teaching. Many people that I have met
appear confused as to the meaning and inference of the word Shin in this
context. For many its true meaning appears to have been forgotten
because it became a traditional teaching in which the questioning of
truth is a secondary issue. Shin has largely become a term with vague
and hazy dimensions.
Re-examining the term from the perspective of this
unit, our emphasis on the question of the meaning of Shin is a plea to
return to the awareness of the original meaning, the implications with
which Shinran used the term. By refreshing our understanding from that
source, we can keep the tradition from being merely a tradition simply
handed over from the past. Reflection, renewal, recognition,
retrospection is necessary to the ongoing criticism of religion and
tradition that is a central focus in the history of Buddhism. If
tradition does not manifest and make clear the truth, what is tradition?
For religion to remain vital, its followers must keep the question of
truth open and uppermost in their considerations. Therefore, to question
the religious aspects of a tradition does not mean disrespect, but, on
the contrary, a deeper respect in an attempt to understand genuine and
appreciate deeply the roots which brought that tradition into being.
Multiple Choice Questions
1. Which of the following is false? During the
course of its history, Buddhism's quest for truth: a)
became entangled in highly complex scholasticism b) became identified with
magic c) was entirely free of political influence 2. The two-level theory of
truth is:
a) universal in scope b) elitist in structure c) evidence of Buddhism's ideal of making the truth known to
all
3. For the Kamakura Buddhist teachers the search for
truth was paramount. With the formation of Buddhist institutions:
a) this trend continued b) truth was thought to be too difficult for the ordinary person to
grasp c) the search for truth was given top priority
4. The Critical Classification of Doctrine was
developed so that:
a) Buddhist leaders could clarify their own
experiences of Buddhism
b) people no longer had to search for truth c) texts could be rated in terms of their
importance
5. Shinran distinguished two types of Nembutsu. They
are:
a) self-power Nembutsu and Other Power Nembutsu b) shallow
Nembutsu and deep Nembutsu c) settled Nembutsu and dispersed Nembutsu
6. The great emphasis today in religion, as it has
been for some time, is:
a) concern for the suffering of others b) the reward of eternal
life c) peace of mind 7. For Shinran the aim of religious faith
is to:
a) gain benefits for oneself b) assert control over
non-believers
c) see through our own egoism
8. According to the author, to keep religious
tradition alive, its followers must:
a) preserve their religious tradition as it is b) keep the question of truth open and honor its
quest c) increase the membership
Thought Questions
1. It is often the case that the original vitality of
the founder is lost when institutionalization takes place. Frequently
the truth becomes routinized and fixed and members of the institution no
longer are truth seekers. What is th danger of this happening? What do
you think the institution can do to encourage an open search for truth?
Why do you think the institution may not want to do this?
2. The author says that in our times the quest for
truth has been replaced by the pursuit of taste. What does he mean by
"the pursuit of taste?" Do you agree? Why?
3. Many people today turn to religion in order to find
peace of mind. The author states that peace of mind is merely egoistic
satisfaction. What do you think? Examine your own motivations. Why are
you drawn to religion?
4. Reflect upon the following statement:
"Buddhism has always recognized that the pursuit of truth and the
recognition of truth are quite different." Comment on this.
5. We think that tradition is important. Yet, if
tradition does not manifest and make clear the truth, what is tradition?
Bibliography
Bloom, Alfred: "Shoshinge: The Heart of Shin
Buddhism"
Shin Buddhism Translation Series, "The True Teaching, Practice and
Realization of the Pure Land Way," 3 vols
Notes
[1] "Tannisho," Ryukoku Translation Series, p.
21 [2] "Kyogyoshinsho," Ryukoku Translation Series, p.
20 [3] Ibid [4] Ibid., p.
24 [5] Ibid., p. 36 [6] Kosho Yamamoto,
"Kyogyoshinsho," p. 329 [7] Ibid. p.
269 [8] "Kyogyoshinsho," Ryukoku Translation Series, p.
163 [9] Ibid. p. 84 |
