SG33SHS-T: Difference between revisions

From The Radical Buddhism Project
← Older editNewer edit →

James (talk | contribs)

85 edits
undo
mNo edit summary
James (talk | contribs)
85 edits
No edit summary
Line 96: Line 96:
In a corner of Zōshigaya 雑司ヶ谷 [Tokyo, Japan]
In a corner of Zōshigaya 雑司ヶ谷 [Tokyo, Japan]
The author [Seno’o Girō]
The author [Seno’o Girō]
Today, we can see the decline of late-stage capitalism in politics and economics, and in urban and rural areas, while the lives of the masses have reached a peak of anxiety.
During this transitional period, what should we, as Buddhist practitioners who strive to live according to the noble and supreme ideal of saving humanity, do?
The sole task imposed upon us is the reorganization of Buddhism based on contemporary consciousness. This entails the establishment of an ideology and the firm belief that such an ideology should be accompanied by bold and concrete practices.
In this brief work, Chairman Seno’o 妹尾 boldly criticizes and rectifies traditional Buddhist studies, and calls for a leap toward a new era of Buddhist truth. We firmly believe that this essay will forcefully address the contradictions faced by young Buddhist practitioners in this transformative period and provide them with confidence and resolution.
We would like to express our gratitude to comrade Seno’o, Chairman of the Committee, for his great efforts in presenting this essay to the world as a part of a series of pamphlets from our League. At the same time, we eagerly await rigorous examination and sincere criticism of its contents by our comrades.
''Central Executive Committee of the Youth League for Revitalizing Buddhism''
''January 1933''
=== Our Principles ===
1. We deeply revere Śākyamuni Buddha as the supreme embodiment of human character and strive to realize the construction of a buddha land based on the teachings of brotherly love and compassion.
2. We acknowledge that all existing religious organizations have become remnants that have desecrated the spirit of Buddhism, and we reject them while seeking to promote Buddhism for a new era.
3. We recognize that the current capitalist economic system is contrary to the spirit of Buddhism and hinders the well-being of the masses. We aim to reform it and bring forth a new society suited to the future.
== Foreword ==
I was born into a Shin 真 [True Pure Land] sect family and was raised in an atmosphere of fervent ''nenbutsu'' 念仏 prayer. In the autumn of my twenty-first year, I fell gravely ill and was forced to drop out of school, teetering on the brink of death until the age of thirty. At that time, through some fateful circumstances, I seized upon the doctrine of Nichirenism and experienced a revival of health. Nichirenism was indeed for me the ultimate truth! With that conviction, for the past two two decades, I have completely devoted myself to the study and propagation of Nichirenism, often forsaking sleep and meals.
However, as a result of my efforts to sincerely embody the Buddhist spirit in which I now believed, albeit weakly, I found myself unable to restrain a fatal doubt against all established Buddhism, and I could not help but engage in thorough opposition [against institutional Buddhism].
For contemporary society, the conflicting denominations of sectarian Buddhism are no longer beneficial but rather harmful. Ideological evangelism of that sort is detestable opium for the contemporary mass movement.
In the spring of 1931, I embarked on a comprehensive assessment of Nichirenism, staking my entire life on it. Simultaneously, I began advocating for the dissolution and unification of all sectarian Buddhist denominations under the single name of the Buddha of Revitalized Buddhism while promoting a movement for the socioeconomic transformation of capitalism through collective efforts. It is important to note that there are those within the bourgeois class who merely toy with Buddhism, as well as monks and Buddhist scholars who make a living by peddling its teachings. However, if you genuinely grasp and practice the true spirit of Buddhism—the spirit of selflessness—in a timely manner, I firmly believe that you will come to share the same doubts and righteous indignation that I do.
Kōbō 弘法, Hōnen 法然, Shinran 親鸞, Dōgen 道元, Nichiren 日蓮,<ref>Kōbō Daishi 弘法大師 (a.k.a. Kūkai 空海, 774–836), Hōnen (1133–1212), Shinran (1173– 1262), and Dōgen (1200–1253). Nichiren (1222–1282) was the last of the major Kamakura 鎌倉 period (1185–1333) Buddhist founders and established the eponymous Nichiren (a.k.a. Hokke 法華, or Lotus) sect, dedicated to the 1st–2nd c. Mahayana Buddhist text known as the''Lotus Sutra'' (Skt.''Saddharma Pu''''̱ͫ''''arīka Sūtra''). Though Seno’o was raised in a Shin Buddhist household, an encounter at a young age with a local tofu maker led him to become a devotee of Nichiren’s teachings—an attachment he would eventually modify but never completely sever.</ref> and the like are all exceptional pioneers who embarked on the path to buddhahood. Therefore, it is essential to show reverence and respect to them. However, to ignore the objective circumstances of our advanced modern society and to accept their teachings and rituals without question is, in fact, to tragically hinder the very practice of those predecessors who fervently dedicated themselves to the Buddha. In doing so, we are alienating [these figures and their practices] from the modern masses.
Awaken, comrades! Do not hesitate to bravely carry the torch passed on by our dead pioneers! Comrades should not cling to even the slightest bit of doubt about trusting the sect founders; our only attitude should be to “seek awakening above; benefit sentient beings below!”<ref>''Jōgu bodai ge ke shujō'' 上求菩提下化衆生. According to the ''Digital Dictionary of Buddhism'' (https://tinyurl.com/3kcp223m): “‘Seeking what is above’ is one’s own quest for enlightenment, and ‘saving those that are below’ refers to the bodhisattva’s altruistic activity in seeking to save others”; see, for example, ''Mohe zhiguan'' 摩訶止觀 (Great Concentration and Insight) by Zhiyi 智顗 (538–597); T no. 1911, 36: 4a10; 6a18–6b08.</ref> The times are changing! Only the brave who move forward, stepping over the corpses, are true comrades following the founders; and the founders themselves are living bodhisattvas who participate in the grand mission of building the buddha land, our ultimate ideal.
This essay, born out of such convictions, is a compilation of the reevaluation of traditional Buddhism that we attempted last year in our magazine, ''Revitalized Buddhism''. It is aimed at reaching the masses of today and serves as a prelude to the reform of Buddhism and a physical assault on the fortress of established doctrines.
My only hope is that through the outstanding practice and understanding of comrades who fight alongside me, any immaturity and errors [found in this essay] will be rectified. It is my ultimate aspiration to truly contribute to the liberation of the masses.
''January 31, 1933''
''In a corner of Zōshigaya 雑司ヶ谷 [Tokyo, Japan]''
''The author [Seno’o Girō]''
== 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.
== Chapter 2: Modern Science Denies the Existence of Supernatural Gods and Buddhas and Advocates Atheism ==
=== 4. Characteristics of Religion as Explained by Social Science ===
Traditionally, the distinctive feature of religious forms can be summarized by the phrase Engels employs in his ''Essay on Feuerbach'': “If religion can exist without its God, then alchemy can exist without its philosopher’s stone.”<ref>Originally published in ''Die Neue Zeit'' 4, 5 (1886). For this English translation, see “Friedrich Engels: Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of German Classical Philosophy,” Marxist Internet Archive, accessed August 28, 2024, https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1886/ludwig-feuerbach/ch03.htm. Whereas Engels used this phrase to criticize the attempt by Ludwig Feuerbach (1807–1872) to salvage a “religion” without God, Seno’o appears to be employing it to suggest that ''even'' religions without “official” gods, such as Buddhism, fall for the same “delusions” as theistic ones.</ref> Religion referred to the belief in a transcendent, absolute deity whom people worshiped and prayed to in order to seek grace and salvation. While the Christian God serves as a typical example, even the diverse Buddhist traditions, although they do not emphasize the creation of the world, still possess a similar concept of a transcendent, superhuman absolute. Amida Buddha in Shin Buddhism, the Eternal Buddha<ref>''Kuon jitsujō no honbutsu'' 久遠実成の本仏 (lit. the “True Buddha of Eternal Realization”) is a concept found in the''Lotus Sutra''that suggests that rather than attaining enlightenment at the age of thirty, Śākyamuni Buddha had already attained buddhahood in the distant past. See, for example, ch. 16: “The Life Span of the Tathāgata” (T no. 262, 9: 774c–776c).''''''However, out of compassion he chose to manifest in human form via many rebirths before finally being born as Śākyamuni Buddha and attaining enlightenment.</ref> in Nichiren Buddhism, and Dainichi Nyorai<ref>Skt. Mahāvairocana, also known as the Great Sun, or Cosmic, Buddha.</ref> in Shingon Buddhism, among others, all fall into this category. In Zen Buddhism, the original teachings do not inherently involve such an absolute being, but in practice, various deities like Yakushi Nyorai 薬師如来<ref>Skt. Bhaisajyaguru, also known as the Medicine Buddha.</ref> and Kannon 観音 Bodhisattva are worshiped indiscriminately. However, one may question whether these transcendent deities truly exist, and furthermore, whether Buddhism originally took such form? The answer [to both of these questions] is, of course, “No”!
Marxism is an ideology that vividly denies the existence of such [transcendent] beings. According to Marxism, all religions are nothing more than “fantastic reflections in the minds of humans of external forces dominating their daily lives” (Engels).<ref>“''Anti-Dühring'' by Frederick Engels 1877; Part III: Socialism; V. State, Family, Education,” Marxist Internet Archive, accessed August 28, 2024, https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/ch27.htm.</ref> In other words, as Marx put it, “Man created religion, religion did not create man.”<ref>Karl Marx, from the introduction to ''A Contribution to Hegel’s “Philosophy of Right”'' (1844); Marxist Internet Archive, accessed September 24, 2024, https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/critique-hpr/intro.htm.</ref>
[Marxism] thus takes as its object the modes of early human existence that gave rise to religion and explains these from two perspectives.
=== 5. Ignorance Gives Birth to the Gods ===
The first point is this: Lenin said, “Fear created the gods,”<ref>V. I. Lenin, “On the Attitude of the Worker’s Party Toward Religion,” 1909. Lenin is citing Paul Henri Thiery, Baron d’Holbach, who wrote: “When we seek the origin of things, we shall find that it is ignorance and fear that created the gods; that imagination, enthusiasm, and deception have adorned or disfigured them; that weakness adores them; that credulity nourishes them; that custom respects them; and that tyranny supports them in order to take advantage of men’s blindness.” (Translation by the author.) A PDF of the original French, ''Système de la nature ou des lois du monde physique et du monde moral'' (1770), may be found at https://tinyurl.com/7a9feahj; the quotation is found on p. 423. Of course, this line of thought in the West dates back much further to classical atomists such as Epicurus.</ref> while according to [Johannes de] Gorter, inexplicable forces gave birth to them.<ref>Johannes de Gorter (1689–1762) was a Dutch physician and early modern atheist.</ref> In either case, the fear that ignorant and superstitious ancient humans felt toward “inexplicable” natural phenomena led them to believe that these phenomena were the work of “gods.” From the desire to somehow escape from unavoidable disasters, they would prostrate themselves, pray, or even offer sacrifices. Take lightning, for example. It was an incomprehensible phenomenon involving flashes and booms, and if it struck, humans and livestock would be instantly killed, and houses and buildings would be torn apart and burned. For primitive people who did not know how to avoid it, they considered this to be evidence of the absolute power of “gods.” This is similar to the way an infant perceives everything anthropomorphically. In the past, people used to perceive various mysterious natural phenomena in their daily lives, such as raging waves, and would worship the dragon god for safe navigation. [Likewise, they would] pray to the wind god for protection from wind disasters and perform rain rituals for droughts. They would view these phenomena as supernatural acts of gods and be filled with fear, earnestly seeking the appeasement of these “gods.” However, with today’s advanced human intellect, phenomena like lightning can be understood as the electrical interaction of opposing currents, and they are no longer seen as inexplicable. The fear associated with such phenomena has been completely resolved with just one or two lightning rods. Modern science has provided clear explanations for marine navigation and earthquakes whereas [in the past these phenomena] led to humans attempting to utilize various gods [to accomplish this aim].
=== 6. Economic Life Also Produces Gods ===
The second explanation is that gods are products of economic life. For example, let us examine the emergence of ''ujigami'' 氏神 (clan deities).''Ujigami''refer to the highest authority figures within a clan or lineage. In the past, members of a community relied on these authority figures for guidance in hunting, farming, and other livelihood activities. Moreover, in the face of external threats, such as attacks from other clans, they would unite around these leaders for defense and security. Naturally, these authority figures came to be revered as the heads of the clans. In the case of the Japanese emperor, for instance, it is argued that the emperor, by consolidating various clans and becoming the ultimate authority figure, embodies the concept of the highest''ujigami''. As a result, the emperor is viewed as a sacred being, symbolizing the well-being of all clans. This theory offers a plausible explanation for the reverence bestowed upon the emperor.
The origin of such ''ujigami'' can also be understood by considering Engels’s statement when discussing the origins of ethnic religions that “God assumed a form of earthly power over celestial power.”<ref>Engels certainly paraphrases this Feuerbachian idea throughout the essay but see the following note, where I suggest that Seno’o is actually using Bukharin here.</ref> It reads as follows: “The elders of the tribe organize, manage, command, and plan labor as guardians of accumulated experience in production, representing the principle of active creativity. On the other hand, the rest of the members listen obediently, accept commands, conform to the plans set from above, and act according to the will of others. These relations of production, especially when applied to the whole universe, become a model for examining human beings themselves.”<ref>Though Seno’o appears to imply that this second quote is from Engels, it is in fact taken from Nikolai Bukharin’s ''Historical Materialism: A System of Sociology'', originally published in Russian in 1925 and translated into Japanese in 1927 by Hiroshima Sadakichi 広島定吉 as ''Shiteki yuibutsuron no riron'' 史的唯物論の理論 (Komeiji Shoten), p. 296. For an English translation, see “Nikolai Bukharin, Historical Materialism, A System of Sociology,” Marxist Internet Archive, accessed September 18, 2024, https://www.marxists.org/archive/bukharin/works/1921/histmat/index.htm.</ref>
When we look at this in comparison with Japanese mythology, it becomes an intriguing topic. Here it is suggested that the essence of the “gods” who dominate humans essentially lies in their economic control over the earthly realm, as human beings created the illusion of gods due to their constrained economic lives. A prime example of this is the main deity of Izumo Taisha 出雲大社 (Izumo Grand Shrine), Ōkuninushi no Ōkami 大国主大神, who is considered the god of economic matters.<ref>Izumo Taisha, dedicated to the deity Ōkuninushi, is associated with creation, happiness, and good relationships, and is one of the most important, and possibly the oldest, major Shinto shrine in Japan.</ref> The concept of ''kannazuki'' 神無月<ref>''Kannazuki''falls in October. In Izumo, where the''kami''are said to gather, October is known as''kamiarizuki'' 神有月 or “the month with gods.”</ref> (the month without gods) in the lunar calendar, which refers to the absence of gods in various provinces because they gather at Izumo Grand Shrine, is another illustrative example. It signifies a time when the autumn harvest has been mostly completed, and the chiefs of each community, representing the highest authority, gather in Izumo, which was the central administrative region at that time, to hold regional conferences. During these conferences, they discuss progress reports, taxation, and plans for the following year. Therefore, it signifies a period when local leaders, representing the ''uji'' (clans), convene in Izumo to engage in discussions regarding governance and economic matters. Consequently, as society develops democratically, production systems become fully democratized and economic domination diminishes, leading to a society where individuals coexist and prosper equally; the need for such prayers to the “gods” thus naturally diminishes, and the tangible belief in them gradually disappears. In short, it is reasonable to understand that once a society reaches a stage where social life is based on equal coexistence and mutual prosperity, and production is democratically organized, the reliance on such “gods” for prayers becomes unnecessary. This is analogous to the fact that healthy individuals have no need to pray to gods or buddhas for healing, whereas sick people do.
In essence, whether it be the initial natural phenomena or the subsequent economic relationships, the true nature of the gods that were traditionally believed to exist has been fully dissected, and their illusionary nature has been thoroughly examined and accounted for through the advancement of science and the increase of productive forces. Upon full consideration, this perspective seems to be correct.
=== 7. The Salvific Power of Dubious Gods ===
Furthermore, as a method to deny the existence of omnipotent gods or buddhas from another perspective, a passage from Archbishop Brown’s book ''Communism and Christianism'' can be cited as a brilliant and insightful critique. It reads as follows:
<blockquote>If God desires something and cannot do it, then He is impotent, and this contradicts the nature of God. If He can do it but chooses not to, then He is evil. Both cases contradict the nature of God. If He neither desires it nor can do it, then He is both evil and impotent. If He both wishes to get rid of evil and can do so, which is the only conceivable way to imagine God, then how is it possible that there is evil on earth?<ref>William Montgomery Brown (1855–1937), who came to be known as “Bad Bishop Brown,” was a provocative American Episcopal clergyman and author who, after reading the works of Darwin and Marx, “converted to science” in 1913, which led to his trial for heresy in 1924—the first such prosecution of an Episcopal minister since the Reformation. Seno’o is here citing from a 1930 Japanese translation (''Kami to shihonka'' 神と資本家 [lit. God and the Capitalist; Daihōkaku Shobō]) of Brown’s 1920 work''Communism and Christianism'', subtitled “Banish Gods from Skies and Capitalists from Earth and Make the World Safe for Industrial Communism” (Galion, OH: Bradford Brown). The translator was Kamichika Ichiko 神近市子, the feminist, socialist, journalist, writer, and critic who had studied at Tsuda 津田 University and contributed to the radical feminist magazine''Seitō'' 青鞜 (Bluestocking), which ran from 1911 to 1916, after which it was suppressed by the Taishō administration for being “disruptive to society” and “injurious to public morals.” See Ian Beardsley, ''The Bluestockings of Japan: New Woman Essays and Fiction from Seitō, 1911–16'' (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 2007), p. 12.</ref></blockquote>
This objection is valid. Indeed, if there were an omnipotent God or compassionate saviors like Amida Buddha, the Eternal Buddha, or Dainichi Nyorai, then why does society continue to suffer in such a hellish state? Even parents in ordinary households, without waiting for their children’s pleas, provide bread and clothing according to the seasons. Yet, when it comes to seeking salvation, one must plead and even then receive only a meager offering of rice and salt. If we observe the pastors and priests themselves who preach such teachings, we see how many of them expose their disgraceful behavior and hypocrisy regarding economic issues. In human life, while bread alone may not be sufficient, the resolution of the foundational issue of bread becomes even more crucial. This should be understood. However, despite this, those who forcefully propagate illusory happiness and deliberately disregard economic problems not only further prove the impotence and nonexistence of God but also commit a despicable crime by deceiving and robbing the people of true happiness. In this regard, Lenin’s criticism is appropriate.
<blockquote>Religion teaches submission and endurance on earth to those who toil and suffer throughout their lives, comforting them with the hope of heavenly rewards. However, for those who live off the labor of others, religion teaches them to practice charity on earth, thus offering a cheap way to justify their exploitative practices while selling them tickets to heavenly happiness at a considerable price. Religion is the opium of the people.<ref>V. I. Lenin, “Socialism and Religion,” ''Novaya Zhizn'' 28, December 3, 1905. An English translation, taken from ''Lenin Collected Works'', vol. 10 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1965), pp. 83–85, can be found at Marxist Internet Archive, accessed September 18, 2024, https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1905/dec/03.htm.</ref></blockquote>
In response to this famous charge, leading temples and religious institutions such as Higashi 東 [East] and Nishi 西 [West] Honganji 本願寺, Mount Minobu 身延, and Mount Kōya 高野 have no choice but to solemnly submit without room for rebuttal. Opium is a narcotic, and those who sell such a deceptive narcotic while disguising themselves as wise and virtuous must be considered enemies of the people. Furthermore, if we consider the prevalence [within these sects] of superstitious practices such as fortunetelling and the interpretation of good and bad luck, they reflect a complacent attitude that seeks happiness by relying on external controlling powers, disregarding social transformation and personal effort. Such superstitions may generate social sins that distort the normal evolution of culture, including the development of fields like medicine. The aversion to certain marital unions expressed in the Chinese astrological sign ''hinoe-uma'' 丙午<ref>''Hinoe-uma'', or''heigo'', refers to the forty-third year of the sexagenary cycle of the Chinese zodiac— the year of the fire horse, renowned for disasters and the birth of women destined to kill their husbands.</ref> and the reliance on the “twenty-eight mansions”<ref>''Nijū hasshuku'' 二十八宿. Ancient Chinese astronomers divided the visible stars in the sky into twenty-eight groups, called twenty-eight constellations or twenty-eight mansions, with seven constellations in each of the four cardinal directions.</ref> to determine auspicious and inauspicious dates are representative examples of foolish superstitions. The emergence of these superstitions is also related to the delusion associated with the belief in supernatural gods and buddhas. Therefore, the clarification and promotion of atheism must be an important foundational move to sweep away these superstitions wholesale.
=== 8. Buddhism Is Atheistic ===
Indeed, the belief in the existence of supernatural gods and buddhas is not inherent to Buddhism. In fact, Buddhism originally emphasized the teaching that “the supreme reality for man is man.”<ref>Here and below Seno’o cites a line from a passage that encapsulates some important elements of Marx’s critique of religion. The full extract reads as follows: “The criticism of religion ends with the teaching that ''man is the highest essence for man''—hence, with the ''categoric imperative to overthrow all relations'' in which man is a debased, enslaved, abandoned, despicable essence.” In ''A Contribution to Hegel’s “Philosophy of Right”'' (1844); Marxist Internet Archive, accessed September 18, 2024, https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/critique-hpr/intro.htm.</ref>
In the religious context prior to Buddhism in India, the predominant belief system was Brahmanism, according to which the creator of the universe was the supreme god known as “Brahman” and humanity was considered his creation. It was believed that the Brahmin caste, who were born from the head of Brahman, held the highest social status and were responsible for conducting rituals and worshiping Brahman. The ''kṣatriyas'', born from the chest, belonged to the second caste associated with military and political functions. The''vaiśya''s, born from the abdomen, belonged to the third caste engaged in economic activities, and the''śūdra''s, born from the feet, belonged to the fourth caste and were considered slaves. It was believed that all aspects of their lives, including their fortunes and misfortunes, were governed by Brahman.
However, it was the Buddha himself who, after attaining enlightenment, went into the streets and decisively rejected Brahmanism and its hierarchical social structure. He introduced the teachings of the “four ennobling truths”<ref>Normally translated into English as “Four Noble Truths,”''catvāri āryasatyāni''implies something closer to “four truths for those who seek nobility (of spirit/mind/practice).”</ref> and the “twelve links of interdependent co-arising,”<ref>Here, too, I have opted for a less-common translation of''pratītya-samutpāda''than the more common “Dependent Origination” in order to emphasize—as Seno’o would no doubt prefer—the radical interdependence and''mutual relating''of all being.</ref> paving the way for a new path to liberation. Therefore, the
<references />

Revision as of 14:37, 13 August 2026

⚠  Under Construction  ⚠

This page is currently being compiled or translated by the editorial team. The text is incomplete, subject to active revisions, and should not yet be utilized as a stable citation source.

Today, we can see the decline of late-stage capitalism in politics and economics, and in urban and rural areas, while the lives of the masses have reached a peak of anxiety.

During this transitional period, what should we, as Buddhist practitioners who strive to live according to the noble and supreme ideal of saving humanity, do?

The sole task imposed upon us is the reorganization of Buddhism based on contem- porary consciousness. This entails the establishment of an ideology and the firm belief that such an ideology should be accompanied by bold and concrete practices.

In this brief work, Chairman Seno’o 妹尾 boldly criticizes and rectifies traditional Buddhist studies, and calls for a leap toward a new era of Buddhist truth. We firmly believe that this essay will forcefully address the contradictions faced by young Bud- dhist practitioners in this transformative period and provide them with confidence and resolution.

We would like to express our gratitude to comrade Seno’o, Chairman of the Com- mittee, for his great efforts in presenting this essay to the world as a part of a series of pamphlets from our League. At the same time, we eagerly await rigorous examination and sincere criticism of its contents by our comrades.

Central Executive Committee of the Youth League for Revitalizing Buddhism January 1933

Our Principles:

1. We deeply revere Śākyamuni Buddha as the supreme embodiment of human character and strive to realize the construction of a buddha land based on the teachings of brotherly love and compassion.

2. We acknowledge that all existing religious organizations have become remnants that have desecrated the spirit of Buddhism, and we reject them while seeking to promote Buddhism for a new era.

3. We recognize that the current capitalist economic system is contrary to the spirit of Buddhism and hinders the well-being of the masses. We aim to reform it and bring forth a new society suited to the future.

FOREWORD

I was born into a Shin 真 [True Pure Land] sect family and was raised in an atmo- sphere of fervent nenbutsu 念仏 prayer. In the autumn of my twenty-first year, I fell gravely ill and was forced to drop out of school, teetering on the brink of death until the age of thirty. At that time, through some fateful circumstances, I seized upon the doctrine of Nichirenism and experienced a revival of health. Nichirenism was indeed for me the ultimate truth! With that conviction, for the past two two decades, I have completely devoted myself to the study and propagation of Nichirenism, often forsak- ing sleep and meals.

However, as a result of my efforts to sincerely embody the Buddhist spirit in which I now believed, albeit weakly, I found myself unable to restrain a fatal doubt against all established Buddhism, and I could not help but engage in thorough opposition [against institutional Buddhism].

For contemporary society, the conflicting denominations of sectarian Buddhism are no longer beneficial but rather harmful. Ideological evangelism of that sort is detest- able opium for the contemporary mass movement.

In the spring of 1931, I embarked on a comprehensive assessment of Nichirenism, staking my entire life on it. Simultaneously, I began advocating for the dissolution and unification of all sectarian Buddhist denominations under the single name of the Buddha of Revitalized Buddhism while promoting a movement for the socioeconomic transformation of capitalism through collective efforts. It is important to note that there are those within the bourgeois class who merely toy with Buddhism, as well as monks and Buddhist scholars who make a living by peddling its teachings. However, if you genuinely grasp and practice the true spirit of Buddhism—the spirit of selfless- ness—in a timely manner, I firmly believe that you will come to share the same doubts and righteous indignation that I do.

Kōbō 弘法, Hōnen 法然, Shinran 親鸞, Dōgen 道元, Nichiren 日蓮 [1], and the like are all exceptional pioneers who embarked on the path to buddhahood. Therefore, it is essential to show reverence and respect to them. However, to ignore the objective cir- cumstances of our advanced modern society and to accept their teachings and rituals without question is, in fact, to tragically hinder the very practice of those predecessors who fervently dedicated themselves to the Buddha. In doing so, we are alienating [these figures and their practices] from the modern masses.

Awaken, comrades! Do not hesitate to bravely carry the torch passed on by our dead pioneers! Comrades should not cling to even the slightest bit of doubt about trust- ing the sect founders; our only attitude should be to “seek awakening above; benefit sentient beings below!”[2] The times are changing! Only the brave who move forward, stepping over the corpses, are true comrades following the founders; and the founders themselves are living bodhisattvas who participate in the grand mission of building the buddha land, our ultimate ideal.

This essay, born out of such convictions, is a compilation of the reevaluation of tra- ditional Buddhism that we attempted last year in our magazine, Revitalized Buddhism. It is aimed at reaching the masses of today and serves as a prelude to the reform of Buddhism and a physical assault on the fortress of established doctrines.

My only hope is that through the outstanding practice and understanding of com- rades who fight alongside me, any immaturity and errors [found in this essay] will be rectified. It is my ultimate aspiration to truly contribute to the liberation of the masses.

January 31, 1933 In a corner of Zōshigaya 雑司ヶ谷 [Tokyo, Japan] The author [Seno’o Girō]

Today, we can see the decline of late-stage capitalism in politics and economics, and in urban and rural areas, while the lives of the masses have reached a peak of anxiety.

During this transitional period, what should we, as Buddhist practitioners who strive to live according to the noble and supreme ideal of saving humanity, do?

The sole task imposed upon us is the reorganization of Buddhism based on contemporary consciousness. This entails the establishment of an ideology and the firm belief that such an ideology should be accompanied by bold and concrete practices.

In this brief work, Chairman Seno’o 妹尾 boldly criticizes and rectifies traditional Buddhist studies, and calls for a leap toward a new era of Buddhist truth. We firmly believe that this essay will forcefully address the contradictions faced by young Buddhist practitioners in this transformative period and provide them with confidence and resolution.

We would like to express our gratitude to comrade Seno’o, Chairman of the Committee, for his great efforts in presenting this essay to the world as a part of a series of pamphlets from our League. At the same time, we eagerly await rigorous examination and sincere criticism of its contents by our comrades.

Central Executive Committee of the Youth League for Revitalizing Buddhism

January 1933

Our Principles

1. We deeply revere Śākyamuni Buddha as the supreme embodiment of human character and strive to realize the construction of a buddha land based on the teachings of brotherly love and compassion.

2. We acknowledge that all existing religious organizations have become remnants that have desecrated the spirit of Buddhism, and we reject them while seeking to promote Buddhism for a new era.

3. We recognize that the current capitalist economic system is contrary to the spirit of Buddhism and hinders the well-being of the masses. We aim to reform it and bring forth a new society suited to the future.

Foreword

I was born into a Shin 真 [True Pure Land] sect family and was raised in an atmosphere of fervent nenbutsu 念仏 prayer. In the autumn of my twenty-first year, I fell gravely ill and was forced to drop out of school, teetering on the brink of death until the age of thirty. At that time, through some fateful circumstances, I seized upon the doctrine of Nichirenism and experienced a revival of health. Nichirenism was indeed for me the ultimate truth! With that conviction, for the past two two decades, I have completely devoted myself to the study and propagation of Nichirenism, often forsaking sleep and meals.

However, as a result of my efforts to sincerely embody the Buddhist spirit in which I now believed, albeit weakly, I found myself unable to restrain a fatal doubt against all established Buddhism, and I could not help but engage in thorough opposition [against institutional Buddhism].

For contemporary society, the conflicting denominations of sectarian Buddhism are no longer beneficial but rather harmful. Ideological evangelism of that sort is detestable opium for the contemporary mass movement.

In the spring of 1931, I embarked on a comprehensive assessment of Nichirenism, staking my entire life on it. Simultaneously, I began advocating for the dissolution and unification of all sectarian Buddhist denominations under the single name of the Buddha of Revitalized Buddhism while promoting a movement for the socioeconomic transformation of capitalism through collective efforts. It is important to note that there are those within the bourgeois class who merely toy with Buddhism, as well as monks and Buddhist scholars who make a living by peddling its teachings. However, if you genuinely grasp and practice the true spirit of Buddhism—the spirit of selflessness—in a timely manner, I firmly believe that you will come to share the same doubts and righteous indignation that I do.

Kōbō 弘法, Hōnen 法然, Shinran 親鸞, Dōgen 道元, Nichiren 日蓮,[3] and the like are all exceptional pioneers who embarked on the path to buddhahood. Therefore, it is essential to show reverence and respect to them. However, to ignore the objective circumstances of our advanced modern society and to accept their teachings and rituals without question is, in fact, to tragically hinder the very practice of those predecessors who fervently dedicated themselves to the Buddha. In doing so, we are alienating [these figures and their practices] from the modern masses.

Awaken, comrades! Do not hesitate to bravely carry the torch passed on by our dead pioneers! Comrades should not cling to even the slightest bit of doubt about trusting the sect founders; our only attitude should be to “seek awakening above; benefit sentient beings below!”[4] The times are changing! Only the brave who move forward, stepping over the corpses, are true comrades following the founders; and the founders themselves are living bodhisattvas who participate in the grand mission of building the buddha land, our ultimate ideal.

This essay, born out of such convictions, is a compilation of the reevaluation of traditional Buddhism that we attempted last year in our magazine, Revitalized Buddhism. It is aimed at reaching the masses of today and serves as a prelude to the reform of Buddhism and a physical assault on the fortress of established doctrines.

My only hope is that through the outstanding practice and understanding of comrades who fight alongside me, any immaturity and errors [found in this essay] will be rectified. It is my ultimate aspiration to truly contribute to the liberation of the masses.

January 31, 1933

In a corner of Zōshigaya 雑司ヶ谷 [Tokyo, Japan]

The author [Seno’o Girō]

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.”[5] 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.”[6] Wise understanding and unwavering conviction mutually complement each other, giving rise to a power- ful, practical life.[7] 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,”[8] 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 [9] gave way—via the Taika reforms—to aristocratic governance,[10] 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.”[11] 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.

Chapter 2: Modern Science Denies the Existence of Supernatural Gods and Buddhas and Advocates Atheism

4. Characteristics of Religion as Explained by Social Science

Traditionally, the distinctive feature of religious forms can be summarized by the phrase Engels employs in his Essay on Feuerbach: “If religion can exist without its God, then alchemy can exist without its philosopher’s stone.”[12] Religion referred to the belief in a transcendent, absolute deity whom people worshiped and prayed to in order to seek grace and salvation. While the Christian God serves as a typical example, even the diverse Buddhist traditions, although they do not emphasize the creation of the world, still possess a similar concept of a transcendent, superhuman absolute. Amida Buddha in Shin Buddhism, the Eternal Buddha[13] in Nichiren Buddhism, and Dainichi Nyorai[14] in Shingon Buddhism, among others, all fall into this category. In Zen Buddhism, the original teachings do not inherently involve such an absolute being, but in practice, various deities like Yakushi Nyorai 薬師如来[15] and Kannon 観音 Bodhisattva are worshiped indiscriminately. However, one may question whether these transcendent deities truly exist, and furthermore, whether Buddhism originally took such form? The answer [to both of these questions] is, of course, “No”!

Marxism is an ideology that vividly denies the existence of such [transcendent] beings. According to Marxism, all religions are nothing more than “fantastic reflections in the minds of humans of external forces dominating their daily lives” (Engels).[16] In other words, as Marx put it, “Man created religion, religion did not create man.”[17]

[Marxism] thus takes as its object the modes of early human existence that gave rise to religion and explains these from two perspectives.

5. Ignorance Gives Birth to the Gods

The first point is this: Lenin said, “Fear created the gods,”[18] while according to [Johannes de] Gorter, inexplicable forces gave birth to them.[19] In either case, the fear that ignorant and superstitious ancient humans felt toward “inexplicable” natural phenomena led them to believe that these phenomena were the work of “gods.” From the desire to somehow escape from unavoidable disasters, they would prostrate themselves, pray, or even offer sacrifices. Take lightning, for example. It was an incomprehensible phenomenon involving flashes and booms, and if it struck, humans and livestock would be instantly killed, and houses and buildings would be torn apart and burned. For primitive people who did not know how to avoid it, they considered this to be evidence of the absolute power of “gods.” This is similar to the way an infant perceives everything anthropomorphically. In the past, people used to perceive various mysterious natural phenomena in their daily lives, such as raging waves, and would worship the dragon god for safe navigation. [Likewise, they would] pray to the wind god for protection from wind disasters and perform rain rituals for droughts. They would view these phenomena as supernatural acts of gods and be filled with fear, earnestly seeking the appeasement of these “gods.” However, with today’s advanced human intellect, phenomena like lightning can be understood as the electrical interaction of opposing currents, and they are no longer seen as inexplicable. The fear associated with such phenomena has been completely resolved with just one or two lightning rods. Modern science has provided clear explanations for marine navigation and earthquakes whereas [in the past these phenomena] led to humans attempting to utilize various gods [to accomplish this aim].

6. Economic Life Also Produces Gods

The second explanation is that gods are products of economic life. For example, let us examine the emergence of ujigami 氏神 (clan deities).Ujigamirefer to the highest authority figures within a clan or lineage. In the past, members of a community relied on these authority figures for guidance in hunting, farming, and other livelihood activities. Moreover, in the face of external threats, such as attacks from other clans, they would unite around these leaders for defense and security. Naturally, these authority figures came to be revered as the heads of the clans. In the case of the Japanese emperor, for instance, it is argued that the emperor, by consolidating various clans and becoming the ultimate authority figure, embodies the concept of the highestujigami. As a result, the emperor is viewed as a sacred being, symbolizing the well-being of all clans. This theory offers a plausible explanation for the reverence bestowed upon the emperor.

The origin of such ujigami can also be understood by considering Engels’s statement when discussing the origins of ethnic religions that “God assumed a form of earthly power over celestial power.”[20] It reads as follows: “The elders of the tribe organize, manage, command, and plan labor as guardians of accumulated experience in production, representing the principle of active creativity. On the other hand, the rest of the members listen obediently, accept commands, conform to the plans set from above, and act according to the will of others. These relations of production, especially when applied to the whole universe, become a model for examining human beings themselves.”[21]

When we look at this in comparison with Japanese mythology, it becomes an intriguing topic. Here it is suggested that the essence of the “gods” who dominate humans essentially lies in their economic control over the earthly realm, as human beings created the illusion of gods due to their constrained economic lives. A prime example of this is the main deity of Izumo Taisha 出雲大社 (Izumo Grand Shrine), Ōkuninushi no Ōkami 大国主大神, who is considered the god of economic matters.[22] The concept of kannazuki 神無月[23] (the month without gods) in the lunar calendar, which refers to the absence of gods in various provinces because they gather at Izumo Grand Shrine, is another illustrative example. It signifies a time when the autumn harvest has been mostly completed, and the chiefs of each community, representing the highest authority, gather in Izumo, which was the central administrative region at that time, to hold regional conferences. During these conferences, they discuss progress reports, taxation, and plans for the following year. Therefore, it signifies a period when local leaders, representing the uji (clans), convene in Izumo to engage in discussions regarding governance and economic matters. Consequently, as society develops democratically, production systems become fully democratized and economic domination diminishes, leading to a society where individuals coexist and prosper equally; the need for such prayers to the “gods” thus naturally diminishes, and the tangible belief in them gradually disappears. In short, it is reasonable to understand that once a society reaches a stage where social life is based on equal coexistence and mutual prosperity, and production is democratically organized, the reliance on such “gods” for prayers becomes unnecessary. This is analogous to the fact that healthy individuals have no need to pray to gods or buddhas for healing, whereas sick people do.

In essence, whether it be the initial natural phenomena or the subsequent economic relationships, the true nature of the gods that were traditionally believed to exist has been fully dissected, and their illusionary nature has been thoroughly examined and accounted for through the advancement of science and the increase of productive forces. Upon full consideration, this perspective seems to be correct.

7. The Salvific Power of Dubious Gods

Furthermore, as a method to deny the existence of omnipotent gods or buddhas from another perspective, a passage from Archbishop Brown’s book Communism and Christianism can be cited as a brilliant and insightful critique. It reads as follows:

If God desires something and cannot do it, then He is impotent, and this contradicts the nature of God. If He can do it but chooses not to, then He is evil. Both cases contradict the nature of God. If He neither desires it nor can do it, then He is both evil and impotent. If He both wishes to get rid of evil and can do so, which is the only conceivable way to imagine God, then how is it possible that there is evil on earth?[24]

This objection is valid. Indeed, if there were an omnipotent God or compassionate saviors like Amida Buddha, the Eternal Buddha, or Dainichi Nyorai, then why does society continue to suffer in such a hellish state? Even parents in ordinary households, without waiting for their children’s pleas, provide bread and clothing according to the seasons. Yet, when it comes to seeking salvation, one must plead and even then receive only a meager offering of rice and salt. If we observe the pastors and priests themselves who preach such teachings, we see how many of them expose their disgraceful behavior and hypocrisy regarding economic issues. In human life, while bread alone may not be sufficient, the resolution of the foundational issue of bread becomes even more crucial. This should be understood. However, despite this, those who forcefully propagate illusory happiness and deliberately disregard economic problems not only further prove the impotence and nonexistence of God but also commit a despicable crime by deceiving and robbing the people of true happiness. In this regard, Lenin’s criticism is appropriate.

Religion teaches submission and endurance on earth to those who toil and suffer throughout their lives, comforting them with the hope of heavenly rewards. However, for those who live off the labor of others, religion teaches them to practice charity on earth, thus offering a cheap way to justify their exploitative practices while selling them tickets to heavenly happiness at a considerable price. Religion is the opium of the people.[25]

In response to this famous charge, leading temples and religious institutions such as Higashi 東 [East] and Nishi 西 [West] Honganji 本願寺, Mount Minobu 身延, and Mount Kōya 高野 have no choice but to solemnly submit without room for rebuttal. Opium is a narcotic, and those who sell such a deceptive narcotic while disguising themselves as wise and virtuous must be considered enemies of the people. Furthermore, if we consider the prevalence [within these sects] of superstitious practices such as fortunetelling and the interpretation of good and bad luck, they reflect a complacent attitude that seeks happiness by relying on external controlling powers, disregarding social transformation and personal effort. Such superstitions may generate social sins that distort the normal evolution of culture, including the development of fields like medicine. The aversion to certain marital unions expressed in the Chinese astrological sign hinoe-uma 丙午[26] and the reliance on the “twenty-eight mansions”[27] to determine auspicious and inauspicious dates are representative examples of foolish superstitions. The emergence of these superstitions is also related to the delusion associated with the belief in supernatural gods and buddhas. Therefore, the clarification and promotion of atheism must be an important foundational move to sweep away these superstitions wholesale.

8. Buddhism Is Atheistic

Indeed, the belief in the existence of supernatural gods and buddhas is not inherent to Buddhism. In fact, Buddhism originally emphasized the teaching that “the supreme reality for man is man.”[28]

In the religious context prior to Buddhism in India, the predominant belief system was Brahmanism, according to which the creator of the universe was the supreme god known as “Brahman” and humanity was considered his creation. It was believed that the Brahmin caste, who were born from the head of Brahman, held the highest social status and were responsible for conducting rituals and worshiping Brahman. The kṣatriyas, born from the chest, belonged to the second caste associated with military and political functions. Thevaiśyas, born from the abdomen, belonged to the third caste engaged in economic activities, and theśūdras, born from the feet, belonged to the fourth caste and were considered slaves. It was believed that all aspects of their lives, including their fortunes and misfortunes, were governed by Brahman.

However, it was the Buddha himself who, after attaining enlightenment, went into the streets and decisively rejected Brahmanism and its hierarchical social structure. He introduced the teachings of the “four ennobling truths”[29] and the “twelve links of interdependent co-arising,”[30] paving the way for a new path to liberation. Therefore, the

  1. ↑ Kōbō Daishi 弘法大師 (a.k.a. Kūkai 空海, 774–836), Hōnen (1133–1212), Shinran (1173– 1262), and Dōgen (1200–1253). Nichiren (1222–1282) was the last of the major Kamakura 鎌倉 period (1185–1333) Buddhist founders and established the eponymous Nichiren (a.k.a. Hokke 法華, or Lotus) sect, dedicated to the 1st–2nd c. Mahayana Buddhist text known as the Lotus Sutra (Skt. Saddharma Pu arīka Sūtra). Though Seno’o was raised in a Shin Buddhist household, an encounter at a young age with a local tofu maker led him to become a devotee of Nichiren’s teachings—an attachment he would eventually modify but never completely sever.
  2. ↑ Jōgu bodai ge ke shujō 上求菩提下化衆生. According to the Digital Dictionary of Buddhism (https://tinyurl.com/3kcp223m): “‘Seeking what is above’ is one’s own quest for enlightenment, and ‘saving those that are below’ refers to the bodhisattva’s altruistic activity in seeking to save others”; see, for example, Mohe zhiguan 摩訶止觀 (Great Concentration and Insight) by Zhiyi 智顗 (538–597); T no. 1911, 36: 4a10; 6a18–6b08.
  3. ↑ Kōbō Daishi 弘法大師 (a.k.a. Kūkai 空海, 774–836), Hōnen (1133–1212), Shinran (1173– 1262), and Dōgen (1200–1253). Nichiren (1222–1282) was the last of the major Kamakura 鎌倉 period (1185–1333) Buddhist founders and established the eponymous Nichiren (a.k.a. Hokke 法華, or Lotus) sect, dedicated to the 1st–2nd c. Mahayana Buddhist text known as theLotus Sutra (Skt.Saddharma Pu'̱ͫ'arīka Sūtra). Though Seno’o was raised in a Shin Buddhist household, an encounter at a young age with a local tofu maker led him to become a devotee of Nichiren’s teachings—an attachment he would eventually modify but never completely sever.
  4. ↑ Jōgu bodai ge ke shujō 上求菩提下化衆生. According to the Digital Dictionary of Buddhism (https://tinyurl.com/3kcp223m): “‘Seeking what is above’ is one’s own quest for enlightenment, and ‘saving those that are below’ refers to the bodhisattva’s altruistic activity in seeking to save others”; see, for example, Mohe zhiguan 摩訶止觀 (Great Concentration and Insight) by Zhiyi 智顗 (538–597); T no. 1911, 36: 4a10; 6a18–6b08.
  5. ↑ Confucius, Analects 2.11: wengu zhixin 温故知新 ( Jp.onko chishin).
  6. ↑ 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.
  7. ↑ 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.”
  8. ↑ “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’sPhilosophy of Right (London: G. Bell, 1896), p. 10.
  9. ↑ 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.
  10. ↑ 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.
  11. ↑ T no. 276, 9: 717b04. TheSutra of Infinite Meanings (Ch.Wuliangyi jing, Jp.Muryōgikyō 無量 義經), closely associated with theLotus Sutra, is generally considered an apocryphal Mahayana Chinese text composed before the 5th c.
  12. ↑ Originally published in Die Neue Zeit 4, 5 (1886). For this English translation, see “Friedrich Engels: Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of German Classical Philosophy,” Marxist Internet Archive, accessed August 28, 2024, https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1886/ludwig-feuerbach/ch03.htm. Whereas Engels used this phrase to criticize the attempt by Ludwig Feuerbach (1807–1872) to salvage a “religion” without God, Seno’o appears to be employing it to suggest that even religions without “official” gods, such as Buddhism, fall for the same “delusions” as theistic ones.
  13. ↑ Kuon jitsujō no honbutsu 久遠実成の本仏 (lit. the “True Buddha of Eternal Realization”) is a concept found in theLotus Sutrathat suggests that rather than attaining enlightenment at the age of thirty, Śākyamuni Buddha had already attained buddhahood in the distant past. See, for example, ch. 16: “The Life Span of the Tathāgata” (T no. 262, 9: 774c–776c).'However, out of compassion he chose to manifest in human form via many rebirths before finally being born as Śākyamuni Buddha and attaining enlightenment.
  14. ↑ Skt. Mahāvairocana, also known as the Great Sun, or Cosmic, Buddha.
  15. ↑ Skt. Bhaisajyaguru, also known as the Medicine Buddha.
  16. ↑ “Anti-Dühring by Frederick Engels 1877; Part III: Socialism; V. State, Family, Education,” Marxist Internet Archive, accessed August 28, 2024, https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/ch27.htm.
  17. ↑ Karl Marx, from the introduction to A Contribution to Hegel’s “Philosophy of Right” (1844); Marxist Internet Archive, accessed September 24, 2024, https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/critique-hpr/intro.htm.
  18. ↑ V. I. Lenin, “On the Attitude of the Worker’s Party Toward Religion,” 1909. Lenin is citing Paul Henri Thiery, Baron d’Holbach, who wrote: “When we seek the origin of things, we shall find that it is ignorance and fear that created the gods; that imagination, enthusiasm, and deception have adorned or disfigured them; that weakness adores them; that credulity nourishes them; that custom respects them; and that tyranny supports them in order to take advantage of men’s blindness.” (Translation by the author.) A PDF of the original French, Système de la nature ou des lois du monde physique et du monde moral (1770), may be found at https://tinyurl.com/7a9feahj; the quotation is found on p. 423. Of course, this line of thought in the West dates back much further to classical atomists such as Epicurus.
  19. ↑ Johannes de Gorter (1689–1762) was a Dutch physician and early modern atheist.
  20. ↑ Engels certainly paraphrases this Feuerbachian idea throughout the essay but see the following note, where I suggest that Seno’o is actually using Bukharin here.
  21. ↑ Though Seno’o appears to imply that this second quote is from Engels, it is in fact taken from Nikolai Bukharin’s Historical Materialism: A System of Sociology, originally published in Russian in 1925 and translated into Japanese in 1927 by Hiroshima Sadakichi 広島定吉 as Shiteki yuibutsuron no riron 史的唯物論の理論 (Komeiji Shoten), p. 296. For an English translation, see “Nikolai Bukharin, Historical Materialism, A System of Sociology,” Marxist Internet Archive, accessed September 18, 2024, https://www.marxists.org/archive/bukharin/works/1921/histmat/index.htm.
  22. ↑ Izumo Taisha, dedicated to the deity Ōkuninushi, is associated with creation, happiness, and good relationships, and is one of the most important, and possibly the oldest, major Shinto shrine in Japan.
  23. ↑ Kannazukifalls in October. In Izumo, where thekamiare said to gather, October is known askamiarizuki 神有月 or “the month with gods.”
  24. ↑ William Montgomery Brown (1855–1937), who came to be known as “Bad Bishop Brown,” was a provocative American Episcopal clergyman and author who, after reading the works of Darwin and Marx, “converted to science” in 1913, which led to his trial for heresy in 1924—the first such prosecution of an Episcopal minister since the Reformation. Seno’o is here citing from a 1930 Japanese translation (Kami to shihonka 神と資本家 [lit. God and the Capitalist; Daihōkaku Shobō]) of Brown’s 1920 workCommunism and Christianism, subtitled “Banish Gods from Skies and Capitalists from Earth and Make the World Safe for Industrial Communism” (Galion, OH: Bradford Brown). The translator was Kamichika Ichiko 神近市子, the feminist, socialist, journalist, writer, and critic who had studied at Tsuda 津田 University and contributed to the radical feminist magazineSeitō 青鞜 (Bluestocking), which ran from 1911 to 1916, after which it was suppressed by the Taishō administration for being “disruptive to society” and “injurious to public morals.” See Ian Beardsley, The Bluestockings of Japan: New Woman Essays and Fiction from Seitō, 1911–16 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 2007), p. 12.
  25. ↑ V. I. Lenin, “Socialism and Religion,” Novaya Zhizn 28, December 3, 1905. An English translation, taken from Lenin Collected Works, vol. 10 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1965), pp. 83–85, can be found at Marxist Internet Archive, accessed September 18, 2024, https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1905/dec/03.htm.
  26. ↑ Hinoe-uma, orheigo, refers to the forty-third year of the sexagenary cycle of the Chinese zodiac— the year of the fire horse, renowned for disasters and the birth of women destined to kill their husbands.
  27. ↑ Nijū hasshuku 二十八宿. Ancient Chinese astronomers divided the visible stars in the sky into twenty-eight groups, called twenty-eight constellations or twenty-eight mansions, with seven constellations in each of the four cardinal directions.
  28. ↑ Here and below Seno’o cites a line from a passage that encapsulates some important elements of Marx’s critique of religion. The full extract reads as follows: “The criticism of religion ends with the teaching that man is the highest essence for man—hence, with the categoric imperative to overthrow all relations in which man is a debased, enslaved, abandoned, despicable essence.” In A Contribution to Hegel’s “Philosophy of Right” (1844); Marxist Internet Archive, accessed September 18, 2024, https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/critique-hpr/intro.htm.
  29. ↑ Normally translated into English as “Four Noble Truths,”catvāri āryasatyāniimplies something closer to “four truths for those who seek nobility (of spirit/mind/practice).”
  30. ↑ Here, too, I have opted for a less-common translation ofpratītya-samutpādathan the more common “Dependent Origination” in order to emphasize—as Seno’o would no doubt prefer—the radical interdependence andmutual relatingof all being.
Retrieved from "https://radicalbuddhism.net/wiki/index.php?title=SG33SHS-T&oldid=825"