Editing SG33SHS-T (section)

== Chapter 7: Progressive Buddhists Reject Sectarian Buddhism and Yearn for its Unification ==

=== 33. Sectarian Studies Serve as Tools for Sectarian Exploitation ===

There is little need for further explanation on this issue. The speculative doctrinal studies of each sect now appear to be nothing more than instruments of sectarian power. These classical forms have stultified over time, and as a result institutional Buddhism has essentially lost its theoretical basis. Awakened Buddhists today fervently desire the cleansing of sectarianism and the pursuit of a higher level of development [of Buddhist teachings] and unity. As the historical journey of the Buddha’s quest for enlightenment and his teachings of liberation are meticulously studied, the yearning for them intensifies, as evidenced by the grand festivities of sectarian integration held each year.<ref>I believe that Seno’o is here referring to the “modernist” movements toward, if not pansectarian Buddhism, then at least cooperation and some sort of unification of Buddhist identity, as seen in groups like the Zen Nihon Bukkyō Seinen Renmei (All Japan Buddhist Youth Federation), which held a large meeting in May 1933 (as noted in my introduction).</ref>

Indeed, the truth is self-evident. Put simply, “Buddhism is the teaching of the Buddha.” Therefore, it is reasonable to define a Buddhist as someone who believes in the Buddha and practices his teachings in their daily life. However, the fact that Buddhism has become divided into thirteen schools and fifty-six sects begs the question: What led to this fragmentation, and why did it happen? Undoubtedly, this division occurred as a process of cultural development that responded to the needs of each era and the capabilities of individuals. Hence, these sects that are divided are not immutable entities. They, too, must undergo a reckoning and transformation in accordance with the needs of the present time. In other words, the doctrines of each sect, though slightly different from one another, fundamentally revolve around the concept of “selflessness”<ref>Here, as elsewhere in this essay, Seno’o employs the neologism ''mugaizumu'' (sometimes ''mugashugi'') to imply the practice of “selflessness” or even the Christian-inflected “self-giving love.”</ref> and advocate the practice of love and equality in everyday life. However, these sects also have their own unique characteristics and emphases based on their historical and cultural contexts. Therefore, it is essential to critically assess and reconcile these various sects based on the principles of compassion, wisdom, and the shared goal of alleviating suffering. By doing so, Buddhism can adapt and remain relevant in the contemporary world, fostering unity and harmony among its practitioners.

=== 34. The Division and Development of Buddhism and the Character of Śākyamuni Buddha ===

When we look at the time of early Buddhism, especially in its initial period, that is, during the time when Śākyamuni Buddha was alive, naturally Śākyamuni was the sole, sacred master, and there were no sectarian divisions among his disciples. This sacred, absolute master-disciple relationship can be seen as the original form in which Buddhism developed as a religion. However, after the Buddha’s passing, the monastic community first experienced a split between the Sthaviras (Theravādins) and the Mahāsāṃghikas (Great Assembly). This was followed by further divisions and subdivisions, eventually resulting in the formation of the twenty schools, with the Sautrāntika school being the last. Even during the period of sectarian Buddhism, the force of Śākyamuni Buddha’s character continued to exert influence over all the schools. The motivation for these divisions lay in the differing interpretations of the scriptures and doctrines, shaped by the social circumstances of each community. Nevertheless, the sincere attitude of Buddhist disciples who sought to grasp the true spirit of Śākyamuni Buddha’s teachings in their respective eras demonstrates the absolute authority of his character.

After this comes the era which saw the emergence of Mahayana Buddhism. The fervent study of scriptures further heightened the reverence and longing for Śākyamuni Buddha’s character. This deep longing eventually led Nāgārjuna to expound on the theory of the two truths, asserting that although the physical form of Śākyamuni Buddha may pass away, the immortal Dharma body (''dharmakāya'') exists and continues to inspire the faith of Buddhist practitioners. This understanding established the Dharma body as the object of devotion for Buddhists, as described in texts such as the ''Nirvana Sutra'': “I have already established the sutras and precepts. You, my disciples, should simply study these sutras and precepts and diligently practice them. I too am among the (monastic) sangha.”<ref>See n. 30 above regarding the source of this quotation.</ref> Or as mentioned in the ''Sutra of the Last Teachings'':

<blockquote>
All the practices of self-benefit and benefiting others are complete. Even if I were to dwell for a long time, there would be no further benefit. Those who should be guided, whether they are celestial beings or human beings, have already been guided. Even those who have not yet been guided have already obtained the karmic conditions for attaining enlightenment. From now on, all my disciples should widely propagate and practice these teachings, for this Dharma body of the Tathāgata is always present and yet never extinguished.<ref>Seno’o includes no citation, but he may be quoting from ''Hōōkyō'' 法王経 (Tokyo: Bukkyōkan, 1915) by Takada Dōken 高田道見 (1858–1923), pp. 79–80. The ''Sutra of the Last Teachings'', or ''Bequeathed Teachings Sutra'' (Ch. ''Yijiao jing'' 遺教経, Jp. ''Yuikyōkyō'', T no. 389), is a brief Mahayana text reporting the Buddha’s final teachings to his disciples.</ref>
</blockquote>

Indeed, passages like these served as the basis for affirming the eternal nature of the Buddha as experienced and instructed by the Buddha himself. These scriptures provided confirmation of the Buddha’s perpetual and indestructible existence.

Nāgārjuna’s theory of the two bodies [''nirmāṇakāya'' and ''dharmakāya''] further evolved into the three-bodies theory of Aśvaghoṣa [80–150] and later into the three- or four-bodies theories of philosophers such as Asaṅga [fl. 4th c.] and Vasubandhu [fl. 4th–5th c.], leading to a period marked by intense discussions on the nature of the Buddha’s body. In that era, various Mahayana scriptures such as the ''Prajñāpāramitā Sutras'', ''Amitāyus Sutra'', ''Mahāvairocana Sutra'', and ''Avataṃsaka Sutra'' gained popularity and competed for attention. All these texts, without exception, stemmed from the Buddha’s enlightenment experience under the Bodhi tree and aimed to explore the content of enlightenment—particularly the reaffirmation of the Buddha’s imperishable nature. Among them, the ''Lotus Sutra'' stands out as a representative scripture that vividly presents the perfected vision of the true Buddha. Without delving into a detailed explanation, the distinguishing features of the ''Lotus Sutra'' can be summarized as follows: the first half emphasizes the potential for all sentient beings to attain buddhahood, while the latter half elucidates the various aspects of the Buddha’s body, manifesting the historical Śākyamuni Buddha as the eternal, awakened Buddha of the primordial enlightenment. This scripture represents the climax of devotion to Śākyamuni Buddha and epitomizes the ongoing reappreciation of the Buddha throughout the Mahayana Buddhist tradition.

Mahayana Buddhism, the development of which can be referred to as a period of doctrinal systematization, was transmitted to Japan via Chinese Buddhism. It then further developed during the Kamakura period, a practical and religious era that showcased the characteristics of Japanese Buddhism. However, during this time, a tendency toward independent interpretation was particularly pronounced in religious matters. Sectarian conflicts were carried out vehemently and even led to a misguided disregard for Śākyamuni Buddha. For instance, Kōbō Daishi’s teaching of the inferiority of the ''Lotus Sutra''<ref>Seno’o is here referring to Nichiren’s notion of ''daisan no retsu, keron no hō'' 第三の劣・戯論の法 that criticizes Kōbō Daishi’s subordination of the ''Lotus Sutra'' to the ''Mahāvairocana'' and ''Avataṃsaka'' sutras.</ref> [in relation to the Shingon and Kegon sutras] and Hōnen’s notion of the “fivefold miscellaneous practices”<ref>''Goshu no zōgyō'' 五種雑行 is a term coined by Hōnen in his ''Senchaku hongan nenbutsu shū'' 選択本願念仏集 (''Selection of Passages on the Nenbutsu Teaching'') to refer to the five practices towards buddhas other than Amida: reciting sutras, meditating upon them, worshipping them, chanting their names, and praising them while making offerings. See T no. 2680, 83: 3b5–19.</ref> led some believers to prioritize the worship of Amida Buddha and Dainichi Nyorai while disregarding Śākyamuni Buddha. This tendency was an unavoidable result of the objective social circumstances. However, even during this period, the essence of Buddhism, which centered around Śākyamuni Buddha, returned, reestablishing the rightful lineage of Buddhism. The movement led by Master Nichiren, based on the ''Lotus Sutra'', exemplified this return. He says the following in “Concerning the Statue of Śākyamuni Buddha Fashioned by Nichigen-nyo 日眼女 (d.u.)”:

<blockquote>
The donor, Lady Nichigen-nyo, fashioned a three-inch wooden statue representing the unity of the Lord of the Three Realms, the Founder of the Teachings, Śākyamuni Buddha. . . . “The Life Span of the Tathāgata” chapter of the ''Lotus Sutra'' describes various teachings such as the self-body and the other-body. The eastern Pure Land buddhas, the central Mahāvairocana Buddha, the buddhas of the ten directions, the seven buddhas of the past, the buddhas of the three periods, the bodhisattvas of superior conduct, and others, such as Mañjuśrī, Śāriputra, the Great Brahma King, . . . the heavenly deities, earth deities, and so on—all of these are none other than the supreme teacher, Śākyamuni Buddha. Even the deities such as Amaterasu Ōmikami and the Great Bodhisattva Hachiman have Śākyamuni Buddha as their original source. For example, Śākyamuni Buddha is like the moon in the heavens, while all other buddhas and bodhisattvas are like the reflections shimmering upon a myriad of waters. To erect a statue of Śākyamuni is to honor all the buddhas of the ten directions. It is like shaking one’s head and causing the hair to move, or thinking with the mind and causing the body to act. When a strong wind blows, it stirs not only the grass and trees but also disturbs the vast ocean. Similarly, by reverently upholding and venerating the supreme teacher, Śākyamuni Buddha, even the unyielding plants and trees come to life.<ref>For a contemporary translation of the same passage, see [https://www.nichirenlibrary.org/en/wnd-2/Content/307 “Concerning the Statue of Shakyamuni Buddha Fashioned by Nichigen-nyo,” Soka Gakkai Nichiren Buddhism Library 307], accessed September 18, 2024, pp. 811–14.</ref>
</blockquote>

This text, as such, must be considered one of the most vivid scriptures; it completely exalts the absolute centrality of Śākyamuni Buddha and dismisses all other contemporary ideologies. In this way, Japanese Buddhism has continued to this day, with Master Nichiren as its leader. As for the current trends in modern Buddhism, as mentioned earlier, they vary. The two-thousand-five-hundred-year history of Buddhism has essentially been a quest to admire the character of Śākyamuni Buddha and explore the content of his enlightenment, developing and practicing it in different eras, all in the pursuit of the path to liberation.

=== 35. Buddhist Philosophy Is Based on the Recognition and Practice of Selfless Love ===

The understanding of Buddhism among contemporary Buddhists can be said to be represented by Dr. Takakusu’s [article] “The Fundamental Meaning of Buddhism,” recently published in the ''Yomiuri shinbun'' 読売新聞 [in which he writes]:

<blockquote>
Śākyamuni Buddha fundamentally stood upon his own character, developed and enhanced that character, and attained the state of buddhahood. Amida Buddha and Mahāvairocana Buddha [Dainichi Nyorai] are ideals born from Śākyamuni’s own aspirations. These represent the ultimate human perfection. . . . The qualification for a religion is established when disciples of the present and those of future generations can sense the spiritual power of the Buddha, perceiving it as the embodiment of that ideal. . . . A complete religion is one that is manifested in the complete character of the Buddha.<ref>This article appeared in the morning edition of the ''Yomiuri shinbun'', March 22, 1931, p. 4. It was republished in the June 1931 issue of the journal ''Gendai bukkyō'' 現代仏教, and it was likely this version that Seno’o accessed, as he published part of ''Revitalized Buddhism on the Road to Social Reform'' in the following issue of the same journal. Thanks to the anonymous reviewer for providing further information on this.</ref>
</blockquote>

In addition, the late Shimaji Daitō 島地大等 wrote in his book ''Thought and Faith'':

<blockquote>
Within the historical persona of Śākyamuni, both Śākyamuni himself and his disciples recognized the true nature of the Buddha, thereby clarifying the concept of the Tathāgata. That is to say, the historical Śākyamuni himself embodies the Buddha, and we, as human beings, are also thoroughly and completely the Buddha. Therefore, we find the Buddha within humanity—it is not the case that God creates humans.<ref>Shimaji Daitō (1875–1927), ''Shisō to shinkō'' 思想と信仰 (Tokyo: Meiji Shoin, 1928), p. 154. Shimaji was a prominent Jōdo Shinshū 浄土真宗 scholar-priest of the Taishō period. He was a faculty member in the Department of Indian Philosophy at Tokyo Imperial University from 1923 until his death in 1927.</ref>
</blockquote>

In these passages it becomes clear that both Amida Buddha and Mahavairocana Buddha are ideal buddhas abstracted from the historical Śākyamuni. It is firmly recognized that there is no absolute Buddha who exists other than Śākyamuni to help us. Naturally, the historical Śākyamuni does not exist in the present; what exists now is the truth realized by the historical Śākyamuni, namely the truth of “selflessness.” Those seekers who aim to recognize and experience that truth will naturally have reverence for the Buddha—the great manifestation of that truth—and this reverence for the Buddha further facilitates the realization of the truth. In this psychological sense, Buddhism can be seen as a theistic religion, as it promotes the attainment of truth. However, in the true sense, Buddhism is certainly nontheistic and does not acknowledge the existence of any personal entity that has power over us.

In essence, faith in Amida and Mahavairocana Buddha is a symbol of reverence toward the perfected personality of Śākyamuni, the great Buddha himself. Therefore, we no longer need the idealized names of Amida and Mahavairocana Buddha, but rather, the essential attitude of Buddhist practitioners lies in their reverence for the Buddha and the practice of his truth. This necessitates the abandonment of all divisive sectarianism and the pursuit of Buddhist unity. Moreover, especially in the case of contemporary individuals seeking a religion, it is not the traditional otherworldly, soteriological religious beliefs mentioned above that are sought, but rather a religion that is realistic and ethical in nature. In this regard, such an authentic religious movement can be seen as a dual-sided movement: on one hand, it reflects the counterinfluence of social movements, and on the other hand, it represents the highest ideals of self-realization and self-completion, as advocated by Dr. Takakusu:

<blockquote>
This is the teaching of “the inseparability of the Buddha and ordinary beings,”<ref>''Shōbutsu ichinyo'' 生仏一如.</ref> which aims to lead individuals to the highest state of buddhahood. From the perspective of potentiality, it is the inseparability of the Buddha and ordinary beings; from the perspective of attainment, it is the inseparability of the Buddha and ordinary beings. In other words, it asserts that human beings and gods are not fundamentally different but share the same human nature.<ref>Takakusu Junjirō, “The Fundamental Meaning of Buddhism,” ''Yomiuri shinbun'', March 22, 1931, p. 4.</ref>
</blockquote>

This represents an ideal religious form of “the unity of the divine and human.”<ref>''Jinjin ittai'' 神人一体.</ref>

When viewed in this way, it must be said that the theoretical basis of religious negation expressed by the current and vociferous antireligious movement of Marxism is off the mark when it comes to true Buddhism. This is because Marxism criticizes religion as an abstract and theistic ideology, particularly referring to Christianity. However, Buddhism is a religion with the above characteristics—and indeed, the Buddha himself rejected the prevailing conceptual religion of his time, Brahmanism, and advocated an ethically-grounded religion based on reason, as noted above. However, Buddhism has indeed been represented by a Christian-like, other-power-oriented, transcendental religion, as seen in the Shin sect. And yet, now, even before responding to the voices of the antireligious movement, Buddhism is naturally undergoing an internal movement of self-reassessment, aiming to restore its original essence. This includes critical examination of the fundamental teachings of the ''shihō rissō'' 指方立相 doctrine,<ref>''Shihō rissō'' means “to point to the west, the location of the Pure Land, and to set up in the mind the presence of Amitābha; to hold this idea, and to trust in Amitābha, and thus attain salvation. The mystics regard this as a mental experience, while the ordinary believer regards it as an objective reality”; William Edward Soothill, ''A Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms'', available at [https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/compilation/a-dictionary-of-chinese-buddhist-terms/d/doc6761.html Wisdom Library], accessed September 18, 2024.</ref> and such a phenomenon should be celebrated as both an inevitable result of the times and a necessary step toward the reconstruction of a new society as well as a true revitalization of Buddhism.

The thirteen schools and fifty-six sects all originated from the spirit of the Buddha. The teachings of the ''Infinite Life Sutra'', the ''Lotus Sutra'', the ''Mahavairocana Sutra'', and the seven thousand other scriptures all speak of one thing: the practice of selfless love.<ref>Here Seno’o uses the term ''muga’ai'' 無我愛, borrowed from the utopian Buddhist writer and activist Itō Shōshin 伊藤証信 (1876–1963), who established the intentional community Muga-en 無我苑 (Garden of Selflessness) during the late Meiji period.</ref> Faith in Amida Buddha entails personally experiencing the path of seeking enlightenment through the practice of the Vow as demonstrated by Bodhisattva Dharmākara. This is the same as in the stories of Bodhisattva Never Disparaging and the Medicine King Bodhisattva in the ''Lotus Sutra'', or the story of Sudhana in the ''Avataṃsaka Sutra''; they are all different expressions of the same principle of selfless love in practice. Selfless love is the only path that liberates oneself and others from delusions and attachments. Faith in the Buddha begins with the practice of selfless love and ultimately culminates in that practice.

Without practice, sectarian and speculative Buddhism becomes burdensome and irrelevant. For progressive Buddhists who feel [they have] a mission in social practice, such absolute sectarianism is not only harmful but even an obstacle. Progressive Buddhists should unite under the name of the Buddha and fervently engage in a contemporary practice of selfless love. Such a unified movement is the key to the global development of our Buddhism and a significant contribution to the strengthening of internationalism.