Editing SG33SHS-T (section)

== Chapter 1: Introduction ==

=== 1. Social Evolution ===

There are two attitudes observed in social life: a conservative attitude and a progressive attitude. The former seeks to hold onto subjective and faith-based beliefs while maintaining the status quo as much as possible, while the latter is characterized by an objective and critical approach that adapts to evolving social circumstances and reforms established practices accordingly. These two attitudes are inherently complementary and interdependent, as reflected in the old saying, “Review the old in order to understand the new.”<ref>Confucius, ''Analects'' 2.11: ''wengu zhixin'' 温故知新 ( Jp.''onko chishin'').</ref> In Buddhism, it is said that “faith without understanding increases ignorance, while understanding without faith fosters wrong views. Understanding and faith, harmoniously united, become the foundation for practice.”<ref>As is often the case throughout the essay, Seno’o here neglects to cite his source. The closest equivalent I have found comes from Song 宋 dynasty (960–1279) monk Yongming Yanshou 永明延壽 (904–975), who said: “Faith without understanding enhances ignorance, and understanding without faith enhances distorted views” (Robert Traer, “Faith in the Buddhist Tradition,”''Buddhist-Christian''''Studies'' 11 [1991], p. 91). This sentiment was later picked up and further elaborated by Jinul 知訥 (1158–1210), Korea’s great twelfth-century Son/Zen monk; see Traer (1991) above, p. 91.</ref> Wise understanding and unwavering conviction mutually complement each other, giving rise to a power- ful, practical life.<ref>Compare with the well-known motto of Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci (1891–1937): “Pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will” (''L’Ordine Nuovo'', March 4, 1921). Though they are exact contemporaries, I have seen no evidence that Seno’o ever read Gramsci—whose works, at any rate, were only first translated into Japanese in 1961, the year of Seno’o’s death—so this could be considered an example of what we might call “convergent ideological evolution.”</ref> Just as the left foot cannot move forward without the firm support of the right foot on solid ground, both attitudes are essential for societal progress. However, when it comes to the essential attitude for social life, it must be progressive. This is because, just as the right foot must follow suit and take a step forward, society itself inherently progresses and develops continuously. Therefore, it is imperative that our approach align with this progress and be oriented toward advancement.

For example, regarding Hegel’s philosophy that “everything that exists is rational, and everything that is rational exists,”<ref>“Was vernuenftig ist, das ist wirklich; und was wirklich ist, das ist vernuenftig” (G. W. F. Hegel, ''Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts'', 1820–1821). This is commonly translated into English as “What is rational is real; and what is real is rational.” See, for example, S. W. Dyde’s translation of Hegel’s''Philosophy of Right'' (London: G. Bell, 1896), p. 10.</ref> Wilhelm II attempted to rationalize his own position as kaiser through the first clause [of that sentence]. On the contrary, Marx emphasized the second clause to assert the rationality of his revolutionary social movement. While the former statement may seem correct at first glance, it merely reflects a conservative attitude that disregards the inherent developmental nature of society. In a developing society, even previously rational entities eventually encompass growing contradictions and inevitably progress toward a more rational existence. Those who recognize this understand that the latter statement is more accurate. Transitions and transformations involve both subjective and objective conditions, and there may be instances where the timing is premature. In any case, the undeniable fact is that society is constantly evolving and changing. Therefore, an essential attitude for social life is a progressive stance that embraces and dialectically resolves all aspects of development. A conservative attitude, which fears or curses change, is either a result of ignorance or a self-serving attitude to defend one’s own interests, and it is not something young and idealistic members of society should embrace. An often-cited example is that the clothing of a growing child must gradually change in style and size; otherwise, it becomes useless and even harmful. Similarly, when we look at a chicken egg, the shell is an absolute necessity until a certain point. However, once the chick is nurtured and ready to emerge, the shell becomes an unnecessary obstruction and a potentially fatal barrier to new life.

Looking at our [Japanese] history, it is clearly one of constant change. The despotic rule of clans such as the Soga 蘇我 <ref>The Soga clan, one of the most powerful noble kin groups of the early Japanese state, was largely responsible for the spread of Buddhism in Japan in the sixth century.</ref> gave way—via the Taika reforms—to aristocratic governance,<ref>The Taika reforms were carried out according to a set of doctrines established by Emperor Kōtoku 孝徳 (596–654; r. 645–654) in 645. The reforms strengthened the power of the imperial court after the defeat of the Soga clan and helped promote the adoption of Chinese ideas and practices.</ref> which was then replaced by warrior rule and eventually developed into bourgeois politics through the great revolution of the Meiji Restoration [1868]. We are now witnessing vigorous movements toward the emergence of a new society. When we observe world history, we see a similar process of transformation from autocratic rule to constitutional monarchy, republics, democracies, communism, and so on. While there may be some variations and peculiarities, just as there are differences in sensitivity and intelligence between children, every nation-state, without exception, follows the general trend of human history. It undergoes a gradual or rapid process of change, much like the transition from youth to adulthood and old age. Thus, there is no form of existence on earth that remains unchanging.

=== 2. The Possibility of Buddhist Reform ===

Buddhism is no different; it is nothing but the principle of development and change. Indeed, the Buddhist teachings expounded by Śākyamuni Buddha have undergone a two-thousand-five-hundred-year history of division into thirteen schools and fifty-six sects. This history is a result of the objective conditions and circumstances of a changing society and not necessarily a product of subjective beliefs held by each of the sect founders. For example, Shinran’s acceptance of married priests and consumption of meat might have been considered a heretical reform within the Buddhist community at the time. However, today, there are no objections raised by [Japanese] Buddhist practitioners as it is ultimately seen to be a response to objective requirements and the recognition that “what is rational exists.” In the ''Sutra of Infinite Meanings'', it is stated, “Infinite meaning arises from one dharma.”<ref>T no. 276, 9: 717b04. The''Sutra of Infinite Meanings'' (Ch.''Wuliangyi jing'', Jp.''Muryōgikyō'' 無量 義經), closely associated with the''Lotus Sutra'', is generally considered an apocryphal Mahayana Chinese text composed before the 5th c.</ref> The “one dharma” refers to the true nature of reality, the very essence of the constantly evolving world. The fact that Buddhism has produced a vast array of teachings and scriptures, comprising eighty-four thousand doctrines and seven thousand volumes, is a testament to its nature as a product of changing social contexts. Therefore, as long as society continues to develop in the present and future, Buddhism can undergo limitless development and change without hindrance. It is through such adaptability that Buddhism can continue to maintain its social significance and value.

Currently, there is a widespread emergence of “new” voices in various sectors of society and culture, such as new sciences, new arts, new educational practices, and so on. What exactly do these “new” voices imply? It goes without saying that they signify the demand for the evaluation and transformation of the old cultural forms of the Meiji and Taishō [1912–1926] eras. Under such emerging social conditions, if Buddhism sticks to the old forms as they are, its fate will surely be nothing other than decay. The indifference of the masses toward established temple Buddhism already speaks volumes. If we are to have Buddhism for society, rather than society for Buddhism, then it is quite clear that the temple Buddhism of the Kamakura period of six or seven hundred years ago cannot simply be adapted to the present day. The old Buddhism must be thoroughly reevaluated and reformed both in terms of its teachings and its ritual forms. This is precisely why we are advocating a modern, revitalized Buddhism. If Buddhism is completely irrelevant to contemporary society, it should be unequivocally discarded. However, if it still possesses elements that can be useful when reexamined, then its teachings should be clarified in and for a modern context. The question of whether Buddhism has the potential to meet the essential demands of modern society requires careful consideration. But what exactly are the demands of contemporary society? This is a problem that needs to be scrutinized.

=== 3. The Demands of Modern Society ===

1. Modern science denies the existence of supernatural gods and buddhas and advocates atheism.

2. Modern science rejects the belief in an afterlife and advocates materialism by denying the existence of spirits or souls.

3. Modern people are not satisfied with illusory happiness; they want to fully enjoy real happiness in their everyday lives.

4. The masses in modern society desire economic stability and thus demand the transformation of capitalism.

5. Awakened humanity transcends nationalism and promotes internationalism.

6. Progressive Buddhists aim to reconcile sectarian Buddhism and ardently desire its unification.

Let us briefly examine the validity of each of these six items, critically evaluate established Buddhism, and in line with the Buddhist truth, outline the possibilities for a revitalized Buddhism.