Editing SG33SHS-T (section)

== Chapter 5: The Masses in Modern Society Desire Economic Stability and thus Demand the Transformation of Capitalism ==

=== 22. Economic Reforms Should Be Focused on Ordinary Workers ===

Now we come to our fourth critique.

The modern masses are deeply troubled by the instability of their economic lives. They attribute the cause to capitalist economic organization and seek to transform it into a socialist economic system. In response to this remarkable popular movement unfolding before our eyes, many religious figures, especially established Buddhist leaders, have stubbornly emphasized spiritualism.

It is said that: “Regardless of how much we transform the institutional organization, if our hearts do not change, it will be in vain.” However, is it really true that without a change of heart, the transformation of institutional organizations will be ineffective?

At the same time, we are not advocates of the supremacy of materialism. Human beings, unlike other animals, possess the creative ability to influence their environment while also being affected by it, and they have a degree of freedom to transcend certain aspects of their environment. Like Zen master Kaisen 快川,<ref>Kaisen Jōki 快川紹喜 (1500–1582) was a Rinzai Zen priest famous for his calm demeanor in the face of fire. He and his fellow monks at Erinji 恵林寺 temple were burned to death by the forces of Oda Nobunaga 織田信長 (1534–1582) in 1582.</ref> who sat in the midst of fire and said, “When the mind is annihilated, the fire is also cool,”<ref>While attributed to various monks, including Kaisen, this saying originates from a Chinese poem entitled “Xiari ti Wukong shangren yuan” 夏日題悟空上人院 (Summer Day at the Temple of Master Wukong) written by Du Xunhe 杜荀鶴 (846–904) during the Tang 唐 dynasty (618–907).</ref> or Socrates, who spoke of justice while raising the cup of poison, or Boyi 伯夷 and Shuqi 叔斉,<ref>Boyi and Shuqi were two brothers who, according to legend, lived in eastern China between the Shang 商 (ca. 1600 BCE–1046 BCE) and Zhou 周 (1046 BCE–246 BCE) dynasties and became famous due to their moral virtue, loyalty, and pacifist idealism.</ref> who chose to starve to death on Mount Shouyang 首陽 rather than drink from a stolen spring, or Christ or Master Nichiren, who showed compassion even when dragged to the execution ground, humans are capable of cultivating a mindset of freedom through their spiritual training. Even in the face of death, humans can achieve such states, let alone amid the abundance or scarcity of material possessions. Human happiness is obtained not merely through material satisfaction but rather through the disposition of the mind! It wouldn’t be entirely untrue to say so.

However, an important point to consider here is the capacity for spiritual practice in society at large. For example, a skilled mountaineer may trace a path up a sheer cliff, but that path cannot be recommended as a general route for ordinary people. Similarly, expecting ordinary individuals to attain the mindset of saints who willingly starve themselves to death or reach enlightenment with phrases like “the fire is cool” is an unrealistic proposition. The issue of institutional reform must be examined as a necessary means for creating a happy life for the general population. Advocates of institutional reform should also understand that it is not enough to focus solely on transforming the institutional system while disregarding the spiritual aspect of life. The transformation of the system is a fundamental requirement for creating a more fulfilling life and a positive mindset.

Moreover, as discussed in the previous section, the functions of the mind, or spirit, do not exist independently from the body; rather, they are psychological phenomena experienced in relation to the body and nature. For example, when the body becomes weak, the mind is more likely to become weak as well, and when experiencing poverty, one is more likely to face a series of anxieties. These mental states are subject to various changes and are not absolute. Therefore, when considering the masses in a social context, rather than focusing on individual mental states, it should be clear that providing a better environment is not only important for practical living but also for the cultivation of a positive mindset. Even cats, depending on how they are raised, can stop catching mice, while dogs and monkeys, who typically have a contentious relationship, can become affectionate companions through proper upbringing. This clearly illustrates how the nature of things—that is, the environment—can significantly influence the characteristics of living beings. Nevertheless, there are those who approach institutional organization without considering the importance of these environmental factors. What is lacking is the light of a transformed mindset that differs from that of ordinary individuals in society. Do the various gifts that are seen as products of spiritualism have any social effects? In fact, aren’t they themselves part of a cycle of exploitation, living off the riches of temple lands or completely subservient to wealthy patrons, knowing well that they cannot survive without such submission? If religion is supposed to provide a transcendent peace beyond life and death, how can we explain the extraordinary efforts and peace that socialists, considered by some as demons and opponents of spiritual ideologies, demonstrate in their movement—a drive that goes beyond life and death?

=== 23. Without a Steady Livelihood There Can Be No Enduring Peace of Mind ===

Indeed, many of the current spiritualists who disregard the reform of institutions may lack understanding or exhibit a lack of compassion. However, the revered spiritual leaders of the past, including Śākyamuni Buddha, were not like that, as I argued in the previous section. Now, let us further illustrate this point by borrowing appropriate words from Mengzi 孟子 [371–289 BCE] and continue the discussion. Mengzi’s advice to King Hui 惠 [fl. 4th c. BCE] of Liang 梁 famously began with the statement, “Your Majesty, why must you place such emphasis on profit? It should be righteousness and benevolence alone.”<ref>''Mencius'' 1A.1.</ref> However, Mengzi’s concept of righteousness and benevolence went beyond mere abstract ideas. He taught that it is through politics that the livelihood of the masses is guaranteed, and he further expounded on this idea as follows:

<blockquote>
If there is no stable livelihood, there can be no enduring commitment. Only the noble class can maintain enduring commitment, while the common people, lacking a stable livelihood, cannot. Without enduring commitment, they will be prone to indulgence and extravagance. When they fall into wrongdoing, they will be subject to punishment. This will only lead to the confusion and disturbance of the people. . . . Nowadays, the livelihood of the common people is so restricted that it is neither sufficient to serve their parents nor to support their wives and children. Even in prosperous years, they suffer until the end of their lives, and in years of famine, they cannot escape death. How then could they have leisure for cultivating ritual and righteousness?<ref>''Mencius'' 1A.7.</ref>
</blockquote>

Indeed, this criticism closely reflects the current state of society. It is futile to preach spiritualism and impose moral compliance on a restless and burdened population that lacks the opportunity to redirect their focus and learn about proper etiquette. Not only is it ineffective, but it also exhibits an extreme lack of compassion. It is truly necessary for the general population to have a stable livelihood first, as emphasized by the teachings of Mengzi when he spoke about understanding rituals and propriety. Nāgārjuna (fl. 2nd–3rd c.) also mentioned this in the ''Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom'': “When people commit the ten unwholesome actions, it is all due to poverty. If a person has their five desires fulfilled, they will act according to their wishes and will not engage in the ten unwholesome actions.”<ref>Skt. ''Mahā-prajñāpāramitā-śāstra'', Ch. ''Da zhidu lun'' 大智度論, Jp. ''Daichidoron''.</ref>

Indeed, love is not simply a concept or an illusion, but is itself a practice. It is through practice that we can better discover and rectify errors, constantly engage in objective criticism, and recognize universality.

=== 24. Capitalism Deprives People of a Sustainable Livelihood ===

Most people today lack sustainable livelihoods. About 90 percent of the working population belongs to the proletariat. They scrape by, day by day, through their labor. Moreover, the streets are filled with countless vagrants who have no place to work. How did we end up in such a situation? While religious figures preach about the importance of spiritual cultivation and criticize those who don’t work diligently, the reality is that the masses, despite having the will and ability to work, lack opportunities for employment. Even if they manage to earn some money, their lives remain constantly unstable due to the whims of the market. This is the harsh reality created by the capitalist economic system. Therefore, it is only natural for the masses to feel sympathy and support toward the socialist movement, which advocates for its transformation.

Why does capitalism deprive the masses of their permanent possessions and push them miserably toward the poverty line?

The explanation for the workings of capitalist exploitation, as understood in various socialist texts, can be summarized as follows: it is essentially due to the economic organization of commodity fetishism, mechanization, and unplanned, selfish competition driven by wage labor. In a society based on free competition, producers with more capital, who can afford better machinery and cheaper raw materials, can outcompete those with less capital, who are forced to purchase inferior raw materials at higher prices. While in the era of handicrafts, there was little difference in terms of output and labor required for producing commodities, the introduction of mechanized production accentuated this disparity significantly.

Thus, individual efforts become secondary to the amount of capital one possesses, and dominant capitalists continue to defeat and further weaken their less fortunate competitors, solidifying their own advantage. As a result, the number of unemployed individuals increases steadily. Furthermore, the invention of sophisticated machinery deprives workers of their labor power, contributing to the growth of the unemployed population. The increase in unemployment affects the supply and demand of labor, leading to a decrease in wages. Additionally, due to the unplanned nature of competitive production, the outcome of competition often results in overproduction—leading to cries of “overstocked goods” or “industrial rationalization”—which further exacerbates the issues of wage reduction and layoffs, causing further distress for workers. This situation is not limited to a single sector but extends to retail markets and rural areas as well. Small-scale retailers face immense pressure from large-scale department stores owned by powerful capitalists. In rural areas, agricultural products—the fruit of labor—are bought at low prices while other necessary goods are sold at high prices, leading us to witness the peculiar phenomenon known as the “hell of bountiful harvests.” All of this is a consequence of the unplanned, free-market capitalist economic system.

In such a scenario, the masses, even if they are willing to work, lose job opportunities, and those who manage to find work experience a decline in income. They are gradually pushed from the poverty line toward the starvation line. Meanwhile, a small group of capitalists grows fatter and wealthier. Naturally, this intensifies class conflict, leading to fierce struggles, and ultimately, the day of revolution draws closer in capitalist society. This is our current situation.

Indeed, in capitalist society, the escalating class struggle itself is a testament to the inherent nature of such a system. It is the ultimate non-Buddhist society, driven by the pursuit of self-interest and profit. Therefore, no matter how much religious leaders advocate for cooperation and brotherly love, so long as the fundamental structure [of industrial capitalist society] remains unchanged, these calls will inevitably be mere illusions and deceptions. Since human lives are intertwined with the material world, as Mengzi said, “How can they have leisure for cultivating ritual and righteousness?” This is an unavoidable fate.

=== 25. A Communal Society Provides Life Stability ===

However, a socialist society is not like the profit-driven society based on free competition seen in capitalism. It is a cooperative society that practices mutual assistance. In a cooperative society, all means of production, including the production facilities that enable capitalism, are not privately owned by individuals but managed as common property of the whole society and used for collective production. Therefore, the products of labor are not commodities for individuals to profit from and increase their private wealth but are rather collectively produced goods intended for the well-being, livelihood, and security of all members of society by way of planned production. Consequently, every member engaged in production has the right to be allocated the necessary means of livelihood, eliminating any anxieties about bread or basic necessities. Of course, this society also has strict penalties for those who refuse to work and are lazy, denying them access to food. As a result, the negative traits of laziness and undesirable competition gradually disappear, and what emerges is a society characterized by the joy and effort of creative coexistence and mutual prosperity, which can be proudly regarded as a human privilege.

I would like to provide a brief clarification in response to the criticism that in a cooperative society where private property is abolished or distribution is made equal people would lose the drive to work and express discontent, making a cooperative society impossible. Such criticism overlooks the underlying reasons why people have come to demand private property. By examining those reasons, we can easily find a resolution as this criticism is indeed a product of the ideological framework of individualistic economic organization.

The demand for private property arose because in a self-centered, free-market economy where individuals are not collectively responsible for ensuring each other’s livelihoods within the community or society, private property becomes an absolute necessity. However, in a society where essential aspects of life such as clothing, food, shelter, as well as education, health care, and other basic needs are socially guaranteed, private property is by no means an absolute requirement. Moreover, in a society where productive forces have advanced and the supply and demand of the entire society are adequately fulfilled and harmonized on a social level, the significance of private property diminishes even further.

Moreover, regarding distribution, equality in a communal society means giving seven [units of payment] to those who contribute seven units of labor and giving three to those who contribute three units. Furthermore, as social training progresses, it is reasonable to expect that when needs arise—seven [units of payment] for seven needs, three [units of payment] for three needs—distribution according to ability and need will not lead to any complaints. This is evident when reflecting on the harmonious family lives we currently lead. However, if we consider that such criticisms often come from spiritualists and proponents of personalism who preach “sacrifice” and “public service,” we cannot help but be surprised by the blatant contradictions in their arguments. On the one hand, they affirm the pursuit of personal desires and interests, while on the other they promote the idea of sacrifice and devotion as the essence of human existence. It is perplexing that they fail to recognize the stark inconsistency in their own arguments. If they truly believe in the virtues of a cooperative society without private ownership, they should be at the forefront of promoting such a society themselves!

These people have fallen into inconsistency in their arguments and thereby have demonstrated their inherent weakness in succumbing to the domination of materialistic desires in their own lives. And precisely because of that, shouldn’t we consider implementing a collective society by socializing our economic organization, thereby realizing the ideal society of mutual love and harmony that they themselves desire?

This explanation has provided a broad overview of the fundamental structure of a communal society. In practice, the implementation may vary based on geographical and industry-specific considerations; it is not a simple or mechanical process to achieve universal equality. The essence of a communal society lies in viewing the entire society as a cohesive organism, where mutual assistance replaces exploitation and the pursuit of individual profit. This communal society emerges inevitably out of capitalism, which can no longer endure the adverse effects of intensified free competition. As capitalism naturally evolves into a cooperative form, it loses its inherent characteristics, which focus on personal profit-seeking and competition, and transitions into a communal society. Therefore, we must acknowledge that there is ample possibility for the birth of this type of society.

After winter comes spring. After capitalism, a communal society will inevitably be created. Spring is coming! We should not simply put aside heavy burdens and engage with lighter issues; we must not allow ourselves to be diverted. This is a natural demand of honest human nature. It is an inevitable force that cannot be obstructed even by opium-like rhetoric. It is time for change. All those with awakened hearts should actively strive for this transformation; there is no reason to curse its development.

=== 26. The Ideal Life for Buddhists ===

The ideal lifestyle for Buddhists was a monastic life that renounced personal desires. The monastic life is a communal and social life, as opposed to life in a society driven by personal profit. Temples represented the embodiment of this communal living ideal. Therefore, material possessions were referred to as ''shihōmono'' 四方物<ref>''Shihōmono'' (lit. “four directions goods”) refers to universal access or usage.</ref> or ''jūmotsu'' 什物,<ref>''Jūmotsu'' refers to articles for daily use.</ref> indicating their shared nature. These possessions held a collective meaning. They were considered part of the natural way of life based on the fundamental principles of the Buddhist spirit such as “emptiness,” “interdependent co-arising,” “interdependence,” and “selflessness.”<ref>Here Seno’o employs the standard Japanese terms for emptiness (''kū'' 空) and interdependent co-arising (''engi'' 縁起), along with the much less common term ''sōkan sōe'' 相関相依 for “interdependence,” and the neologism ''mugaizumu'' (above, ''mugashugi'') for “selflessness.”</ref>

Of course, during the time of the Buddha, householders were allowed to possess private property and engage in profit-oriented livelihoods. However, even in the lives of householders, the attitude toward possessions was fundamentally the same as that of monastic life. Property was not considered as one’s personal belonging but rather as a societal resource to be stored and managed privately. It was taught that these possessions should be used for the benefit of society when the need arises. The practice of generosity, known as ''dana'' 陀那, was emphasized as a primary condition for the social life of Buddhists, and it can be best understood in light of the reasons mentioned above.

Therefore, it is undeniable that Buddhist practitioners, who have long criticized individualism and private ownership as sources of suffering, and who have embraced the ideals and forms of communal society, must now clearly consider how to engage with the aspirations of the masses who seek socialism in the modern world. It is neither a matter of being attached to material forms, nor is it a matter of being attached to the mind alone. Buddhism teaches the inseparability of matter and mind, and therefore, viewing economic issues and the transformation of institutional structures solely as material problems is already a significant misconception. [Socialism] is not merely a materialistic movement; it is an inherent demand for the continuous development of the essence of social and ecological life. Indeed, the social practice of selflessness should find its complete realization in such awareness and action.

However, the understanding and practice of a communal society through the application of the social sciences is not, of course, identical to the understanding and practice of Buddhism. There is room for mutual criticism in this regard. And yet, when it comes to the ultimate ideal of transforming capitalism into a communal social organization, they are in agreement. Therefore, as Buddhists we should take the lead in advocating for, and participating in, this transformation [toward socialism], and through our participation we should aim for the inner purification of the movement for change.