 |
|
 |
|
|
February 01, 1999
The Meaning of Slander and
Religious Tolerance
By Shin Yatomi
Associate Editor
IT seems a long time has passed since the priests at Taiseki-ji
told the members of SGI that they could not sing Beethoven?s
“Ode to Joy” in German. To do so, they announced,
is tantamount to praising Christianity and thus a “slander”
of Nichiren Daishonin?s Buddhism. This argument seemed
rather ominous then, but now such a narrow, dogmatic approach
to this Buddhism seems quite laughable. Over the last
eight years, we have learned to look at the Daishonin?s
Buddhism from the standpoint of its essential humane spirit,
reason and common sense. And we have come to grasp more
deeply a simple yet important truth: religion exists for
the sake of people, not vice versa.
With SGI President Ikeda?s constant efforts to communicate
the essence of the Lotus Sutra and the writings of Nichiren
Daishonin, the Daishonin?s Buddhism has entered a new
era, no longer confined within the framework of Japan?s
ethnocentric, esoteric religious culture. For decades
the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood endeavored to impose this
culture upon the SGI?s efforts to spread the Daishonin?s
Buddhism as a world religion. This atmosphere—characterized
by a tradition of absolute priestly authority and emphasis
on formalities—did have a shackling effect. Nevertheless,
we were able to maintain our conviction that the Daishonin?s
Buddhism is a religion that can offer the universal values
of humanism to all people of all nations, cultures and
ethnicities. It is based on this perspective that we have
been deepening and refreshing our understanding of how
best to practice and communicate the Daishonin?s Buddhism
in today?s world.
One expression of this refreshed understanding is Article
7 of the SGI Charter: “SGI shall, based on the Buddhist
spirit of tolerance, respect other religions, engage in
dialogue and work together with them toward the resolution
of fundamental issues concerning humanity” (December
8, 1995,World Tribune, p. 5).Some have raised the question:
Isn?t “respecting other religions” a slander
of the Law? Aren?t we abandoning the Daishonin?s spirit
of shakubuku—to lead people to a correct understanding
by refuting erroneous teachings? To answer directly, respecting
other religions, or those who practice them, does not
in itself constitute slander of the Law, nor does it go
against the Daishonin?s spirit.
In order to shed light on the meaning of Article 7 of
the SGI Charter, we must examine in a little more detail
what is meant by “slandering the Law.” Prior
to 1991, under the influence of the priesthood, the meaning
of slander as it applied to our religious faith was ambiguous,
and was often misinterpreted and misused. We often heard:
“It?s a slander to point your feet at the Gohonzon.”
Or, “It?s a slander to put a gongyo book on the
floor.” We were also told that criticizing a priest
constituted inexcusable slander, and that even “singing
?Ode to Joy? in German is a slander.”
IN fact, the priesthood?s tendency has been to use the
term slander to describe any act that displeased them.
This might be compared to a religious authority with a
dogmatic belief in a Western religion promising his critics
that they are “going to Hell” because of their
criticism of him. To preserve their authority, the Nichiren
Shoshu priesthood used the concept of slandering the Law
as a tool to intimidate believers and often to defend
their view of certain Japanese cultural traditions as
essential Buddhist practice.
“The Law” in “slandering the Law”
refers to the Lotus Sutra. Of course, as Nichiren Daishonin
made clear, the Lotus Sutra of the Latter Day means the
sutra?s essence, the Law of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. But since
the Daishonin expounded the Law of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo
on the basis of the doctrines contained in the Lotus Sutra,
when we examine the Buddhist concept of slander in terms
of its doctrinal meaning, it is appropriate to take “the
Law” to mean the Lotus Sutra. “A slander of
the Law,” therefore, literally means a slander of
the Lotus Sutra; it is speech or conduct that denies the
teaching and ideal of the Lotus Sutra.
What is the teaching and ideal of the Lotus Sutra? The
Daishonin expressed what he saw as the quintessence of
the Lotus Sutra in the form of the Gohonzon, using the
doctrine of the three thousand realms in a single moment
of life (ichinen sanzen) as his theoretical foundation.
Based on the Lotus Sutra, T?ien-t?ai expounded the doctrine
of three thousand realms in a single moment to explain
that all beings are entities of the Mystic Law, endowed
with the Buddha nature. In other words, the fundamental
message of the Lotus Sutra is that all living beings have
the Buddha nature and thus are infinitely precious and
worthy of respect. The sanctity of life and the inherent
dignity of all people are at the core of the Sutra?s teaching.
From this perspective, we can define slander of the Law
as any denial of the sanctity of life or the inherent
dignity of all people.
This interpretation of slander is consistent with the
Daishonin?s perspective. He criticized major Buddhist
sects of his day as slanderous of the Lotus Sutra. His
was not merely a criticism of doctrine, however. For example,
the Daishonin criticized the Pure Land (Nembutsu) sect
not just for denying the Lotus Sutra?s validity on a doctrinal
level. The Pure Land sect views this world itself as defiled
and detestable; it teaches believers that they can only
be happy in the afterlife if they are reborn in the Pure
Land through reciting the name of the Amida Buddha. What
lies at the core of the Pure Land teaching is despair
and an escapist attitude.
The Daishonin stated: “If you chant the Nembutsu
incantation often, you will come to feel like injuring
yourself” (Gosho Zenshu, p. 1509). The Daishonin
denounced the Pure Land sect because it denied people?s
potential to overcome their suffering and thus diminished
the inherent dignity of their lives. Historically, the
Pure Land sect was often manipulated by the authorities
as a tool to oppress and control people. This is in complete
opposition to the ideal of the Lotus Sutra, which is to
empower people through awakening their inner potential.
THE Daishonin?s criticism was also directed toward the
Shingon sect, not merely because it proclaimed its doctrinal
superiority over the Lotus Sutra. The Shingon sect was
essentially an esoteric teaching in which believers relied
on priests to perform rituals so that they might receive
blessings from the transcendental Dainichi Buddha; it
promoted people?s dependence upon an imaginary superior
being and diminished their ability to reason. Such an
idea fundamentally contradicts the ideal of the Lotus
Sutra, which asserts the importance of self-reliance by
pointing out the existence of Buddhahood within each person.
As we see in those two instances of the Daishonin?s criticism
of other Buddhist sects, slander of the Law is more than
just vilifying the Lotus Sutra; it is to deny the sutra?s
underlying humanistic principle. For example, if a child
speaks ill of the Lotus Sutra or its practitioners while
completely ignorant of what he or she is doing and of
what the essence of the sutra is about, should we admonish
this child as a slanderer of the Law? While maybe in need
of some schooling in manners, that child should certainly
not be taken to task as a slanderer. On the other hand,
what if a government official or a doctor superficially
praises the Lotus Sutra or the Daishonin?s teachings,
but is led by corruption to give tacit approval to the
use of contaminated blood supplies while knowing their
potential for spreading disease? Some people, although
though not directly critical of the Law, act counter to
the Sutra?s teaching about the inherent dignity of all
people.
WHAT if a Christian minister in your neighborhood church
were to ask for your cooperation in a neighborhood watch
program to prevent crime or a community cleanup? Is lending
this Christian minister your support considered to be
a slander of the Law? Of course, it is not. In this case,
discussing the safety of your community with those who
embrace religions other than Buddhism has nothing to do
with slandering the Law.
What is most important is to promote the happiness and
peace of all humanity. Since Buddhism exists for us to
achieve this goal, it is only natural to have dialogue
and cooperate with those of different religious beliefs
in the process of bringing such a Buddhist ideal to reality.
From this viewpoint, Article 7 of the SGI Charter declares
that we “respect other religions.” This is
not to say that we compromise our religious beliefs and
abandon the Daishonin?s spirit of shakubuku. The concept
of “respecting other religions” is easier
to comprehend if we understand its intention, which is
to respect the people who practice those religions. It
must be pointed out that showing respect to other human
beings, regardless of their religious beliefs, is different
from accepting or advocating their belief.
What is shakubuku then? Is it not to strictly refute erroneous
teachings? Shakubuku may be defined from a number of perspectives.
For example, A Dictionary of Buddhist Terms and Concepts
explains that shakubuku is “a method of propagating
Buddhism by refuting another?s attachment to heretical
views and thus leading him to the correct Buddhist teaching.
The term is used in contrast to shoju, or leading another
to the true teaching gradually without refuting his misconception”
(pp. 376–77). Ultimately, however, shakubuku is
to speak the truth of the Lotus Sutra—the universal
potential of enlightenment possessed by all people. So
shakubuku is not simply a matter of using harsh words
or roundly refuting other religious beliefs.
T?ien-t?ai in his Hokke Gengi (Profound Meaning of the
Lotus Sutra) explains that since the Lotus Sutra expounds
the truth, it naturally refutes the provisional teachings
(i.e., to teach it is to practice shakubuku) while the
Nirvana Sutra, which was taught after, and serves to confirm
the validity of the Lotus Sutra, accepts the provisional
teachings (i.e., shoju).
Put simply, shakubuku is to speak the truth of the supremacy
of the Lotus Sutra while shoju is to accept other religious
teachings while teaching the benefit of the Lotus Sutra?s
teachings. Because we communicate the Daishonin?s teachings
based on our firm belief in the universal potential of
enlightenment possessed by all people as expounded in
the Lotus Sutra, and we hold these principles to be supreme,
our method of communicating the Daishonin?s Buddhism is
basically shakubuku. The distinction between these two
methods, however, may not be always clear-cut. Sometimes
it is more appropriate to adopt shoju based on the spirit
of shakubuku. Nichiren Daishonin stated: “T?ien-t?ai
declared that the practice should ?accord with the times.?
His disciple Chang-an interpreted this to mean, ?You should
distinguish between shoju and shakubuku and never adhere
solely to one or the other.? The Lotus Sutra represents
a single truth, but its practice and propagation vary
according to the people and the time” (MW-1, 175).
Instead of being overly concerned about which method to
choose, what is most important to keep in mind is the
goal of propagation—people?s happiness.RELIGION
is inextricably bound with culture. Even if we recognize
a need to examine the value and philosophical correctness
of various religious doctrines, it is very difficult to
justify being critical of another culture. In countries
with little relation to Buddhism, and where religious
values and cultural values are deeply intertwined, to
disrespect or denounce a religious belief is tantamount
to disrespecting and denouncing the culture. Buddhism
makes clear that its teachings should be spread while
showing respect for and taking into consideration the
culture and traditions of the place where it is being
propagated.
Although the basic attitude of the Daishonin?s propagation
was shakubuku, his writings indicate that he exercised
flexibility in his method of propagation. He states: “It
is natural for a rooster to crow in the morning but strange
for him to crow at dusk. Now when the true and provisional
teachings are utterly confused, it would be equally unnatural
for one to seclude himself in the mountains, carrying
out the easy practice of shoju, and avoid refuting the
enemies of the Lotus Sutra. He would lose all chance to
practice the Lotus Sutra”(MW- 1, 105). In this passage,
the Daishonin refers to a situation in which the true
and provisional teachings of Buddhism are confused. In
such a case, the Daishonin suggests that a clear distinction
be made between what is a true Buddhist teaching and what
is a provisional Buddhist teaching through the method
of shakubuku.
THIS situation, however, may not represent today?s American
society where the majority of people are unfamiliar with
Buddhism. In this regard, the Daishonin states: “When
the country is full of evil persons without wisdom, then
shoju is the primary method to be applied, as described
in the Anrakugyo [Peaceful Practices] chapter. But at
a time when there are many persons of perverse views who
slander the Law, then shakubuku should come first, as
described in the Fukyo chapter”(MW-2, 183).
The Daishonin explains that when a society is ignorant
of Buddhism, shoju, the tolerant way of propagation, may
be a better approach. However, when confusion in the realm
of Buddhism is the chief concern, shakubuku, the method
of strictly refuting error and directly revealing the
truth, may be the primary method. The strict stance the
SGI has taken toward the errors and abuses of the Nichiren
Shoshu priesthood accords with this idea.
In another writing, the Daishonin said: “However,
slander can be either minor or serious, and there are
times when we should overlook it rather than attack it.
The adherents of the Tendai and Shingon sects slander
the Lotus Sutra and should be refuted. But without great
wisdom it is very difficult to differentiate correctly
between their doctrines and the teachings which Nichiren
expounds. Therefore, at times you might be well advised
to refrain from attacking them, just as I did in the ?Rissho
Ankoku Ron?”(MW-1, 158). In the “Rissho Ankoku
Ron,” the Daishonin refutes the teachings of the
Pure Land sect, but does not refer to the teachings of
the Shingon or Tendai sects. Here the Daishonin explains
that although other religious sects, such as the Shingon
and Tendai sects, contradict the Lotus Sutra, if the timing
and condition of people are not appropriate, it is wise
not to refute them.
In a letter written to a believer who had previously practiced
the Pure Land sect and chanted the Nembutsu incantation,
the Daishonin writes as follows: “Women who put
their faith in the Lotus Sutra should chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo
sixty thousand, a hundred thousand, or even ten million
times a day, and after that, if they still have some time
to spare, they may now and then murmur to themselves the
name of Amida or one of the other Buddhas”(MW-3,
26–27). Of course, if you chant daimoku one hundred
thousand times a day, you would not have time to even
sleep, let alone to chant the Pure Land sect?s incantation.
In this letter, although the Daishonin clarifies the erroneous
teachings of the Pure Land sect, he does not tell her
to stop chanting the name of Amida Buddha. The Daishonin
simply tells the recipient to chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo.
Once again, we can see the Daishonin?s flexible stance
toward communicating his teaching to others. Had this
believer been told never to chant the name of the Amida
Buddha, she may have been unable to accept the Daishonin?s
teaching. Religious beliefs and attitudes are deeply rooted
in people?s minds; our sensitivity and understanding toward
those to whom we are communicating are therefore critical,
as the Daishonin demonstrates.
THE ultimate purpose of communicating Buddhism to others
is to help them become happy, not to prove the superiority
of Buddhism over other religions. As we can see in the
Daishonin?s examples, he was always concerned about how
to lead people to the truth revealed in the Lotus Sutra—to
their inherent enlightened potential. The Daishonin?s
views transcended narrow, religious sectarianism. He wrote,
“I, Nichiren, am not the founder of any sect, nor
am I a latter-day follower of any older sect” (MW-5,
195).
He did not try to spread his teachings to prove his own
greatness; his sole concern was people?s happiness, as
he states: “Nichiren has been trying to awaken all
the people of Japan to faith in the Lotus Sutra so that
they too can share the heritage and attain Buddhahood”(MW-1,
24). Based on his clear sense of purpose in propagation,
he exercised a great deal of flexibility, while not compromising
in proclaiming what constitutes the true essence of Buddhism.
As long as we do not contradict the essential teaching
of the Daishonin and faith in the Gohonzon, it is natural
that we take into account the background and condition
of individuals as well as the customs and traditions of
the time and of the country. So when we are trying to
communicate the Daishonin?s teaching, it is important
to judge each case from the viewpoint of what is most
important to the happiness of the person we are addressing.
If we become overly concerned about details or methodology
while forgetting the purpose of our dialogue, we may create
a negative situation in which people actually go further
away from Buddhism.
We might also consider that the time in which the Daishonin
appeared—when the correct teaching and practice
of the Lotus Sutra had never before been revealed—and
the country— Japan, where great confusion in the
realm of Buddhism prevailed—demanded that he clearly
demonstrate what was correct and what was false, even
to the point that doing so invited grave persecution.
In this way, he could establish the correct teaching for
all humankind in the Latter Day of the Law. Our mission
today is to enable that powerful and universal teaching
to flow to every corner of every nation of the world,
a world whose survival depends on the wisdom that teaching
can impart.
SGI President Ikeda gives us valuable insight into what
it means to respect the practitioners of other religions
while maintaining the integrity of the Daishonin?s Buddhism.
He writes in The New Human Revolution:
To take a strict stance in distinguishing between good
and evil and to show generosity toward others—these
two things are in no way incompatible and are essentially
part of the same whole.
Let?s suppose, for example, that someone eats poisonous
mushrooms and is rushed to a doctor. Irrespective of who
the patient may be, the doctor naturally exhausts all
possible means to save the person and also offers sincere
words of encouragement. This, we might say, is an example
of “generosity toward others.”
It is also likely, however, that the doctor will warn
the patient not to eat harmful mushrooms in the future.
I am sure there is no doctor who would stand by indifferently
while the patient declares, “But poisonous mushrooms
are delicious; I want to eat them again.” This corresponds
to “taking a strict stance toward the Law.”
In both these instances, the doctor is motivated by his
compassion and commitment to removing the patient?s suffering.
This is also the behavior of a Buddhist.
For that reason, there is no contradiction between the
spirit of shakubuku—that of “refuting the
erroneous and revealing the true”—and true
friendship. The spirit of compassion is fundamental to
both. Consequently, it is the Buddhist ideal that the
more we exert ourselves in faith, the greater the generosity
with which we can embrace our friends and deepen our friendships.
Because shakubuku is an endeavor to touch the others?
lives through dialogue, trust and friendship are essential.
Please become a person who transcends differences of religion
and prays for the happiness of her fellow human beings,
who forges deep ties of friendship with many people. Your
doing so will also testify to the depth and breadth of
Buddhism. (The New Human Revolution, vol. 1, pp. 204–05).
Our challenge to grasp and practice the intent of Article
7 of the SGI Charter is two-fold. We must endeavor to
be tolerant toward people regardless of their religious
affiliation, while at the same time maintaining and protecting
the integrity of the Daishonin?s Buddhism. As mentioned
before, slander of the Law is a denial of the inherent
dignity of all people, and shakubuku is a dialogue with
others that arises from our sincere conviction in the
universal potential—the treasure of enlightenment
possessed by all. When we understand slander and shakubuku
in those terms, it helps us understand the meaning of
the SGI Charter.
AS we set our sights on the peace and happiness of humanity
as the ultimate goal of Buddhism, it is natural to respect
all people as human beings regardless of their religious
beliefs and cooperate with them toward humane goals. SGI
President Ikeda states, “A person of true tolerance
is at the same time a person of action who works to encourage
the bonds of empathy and appreciation among people”
(July 1996, Seikyo Times, p. 8). After all, if we discriminate
against people based on their religious beliefs and refuse
to work with them toward the resolution of humanity?s
problems, we would be contradicting the spirit of the
Lotus Sutra and thus committing slander of the Law in
the truest sense.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
