BY GREG MARTIN, SGI-USA STUDY DEPARTMENT SENIOR ADVISOR
His installment begins a new series that will focus on addressing common
questions that arise for those practicing and propagating Nichiren Buddhism in
the West. Members have long sought assistance in answering questions about the
Buddhist view of God, Jesus, Satan, heaven, etc. We plan to provide some
straightforward answers over the next few months.
We hope this series will help SGI members better communicate Nichiren Buddhism
to their Christian friends and families by examining words and meanings common
to the Christian faith from a Buddhist perspective. We also hope to help members
who come from a Christian cultural background to better understand Nichiren
Buddhism, its similarities and differences, and as a result increase the
efficacy of their practice. Additionally, we hope to build a bridge that will
help non-members and Christians have a better understanding of, be more
sympathetic toward and, perhaps for some, ease their transition into practicing
Buddhism.
Before beginning, however, some comments to set the context of our examination.
First, we will focus on what we believe to be commonly accepted tenets of
Christianity while acknowledging that there is great diversity of understanding
within the Christian faith. It would be impossible within the scope of this
series to fully examine all the variations of Christian doctrine. We ask the
reader's indulgence for the unavoidable generalization of concepts this approach
must necessarily take.
Second, we do not intend to take a refutational approach to Christianity. We see
no necessity or value in attempting to undermine a religious tradition that is
both widely accepted and demonstrably valuable. At the same time, we cannot
avoid the historical evidence of its less noble aspects that have given rise to
violent propagation and the Inquisition, and its use as a tool for colonization
and subjugation.
Finally, we do not take an exclusivist position - that Nichiren Buddhism is the
only vehicle capable of carrying its adherents to the pinnacles of truth and the
shores of happiness. While we certainly believe there is only one ultimate
reality, we acknowledge that the major religious traditions also seek, and to
varying degrees see, this truth as well.
Furthermore, most religious traditions share with Nichiren Buddhism the
intention of leading their practitioners to this truth and to the goal of human
development and harmonious community. So while we do not claim to be the sole
possessors of the truth (Who could possess truth anyway?), what concerns us more
is the degree to which a religious tradition is able to deliver on its promises.
How many people are actually able to transcend their baser selves and live out
the tenets of their creed, becoming people of genuinely worthy character, wise
intention, and compassionate behavior? Is a particular religious practice
serving as a greater or lesser vehicle in achieving these goals?
Buddhists have long discussed this point using analogies such as a raft to cross
the sea of suffering or a vehicle for the journey to enlightenment. Rather than
reject the teachings of the elders as untrue, for example, Mahayana Buddhists
characterized their practices as a "lesser vehicle" that could take only few dedicated monks and nuns - to the goal of enlightenment. In contrast, with its
focus on developing practices for monastics and laity and its intention to bring
all people on this journey, the designation "greater vehicle," Mahayana, was
applied to their teachings and practices.
In this context, the major religions are all vehicles; some are bad, some are
good, and some are better vehicles, but all are vehicles nevertheless. We also
believe there is no greater vehicle than the Buddhism of Nichiren Daishonin, the
vehicle capable of taking all people - not just the special few - on this
journey. For most not yet familiar with Buddhism, it has become a widely
accepted view that the journey to enlightenment is something few can takesomething reserved for saints and sages. This suggests that for most people, the
very existence of a great vehicle for the attaining of Buddhahood and absolute
happiness is an alien concept, not part of their everyday religious experience.
But in Nichiren's Buddhism this journey is now made possible for all people
regardless of sex, race, social status, economic or educational level, sexual
orientation, or age.
With this as our backdrop, let's begin by examining our first question.
The answer to this question depends heavily on how one envisions God. One survey
reports that ninety-nine percent of Americans claim to believe in God. Yet, in
spite of the prevalence of religiosity in America, the escalating crime rate,
rampant drug addiction, epidemic mental illness, and revival of the death
penalty, to name just a few symptoms, are not signs of a spiritually healthy
society. Europeans report a growing blankness - a god-shaped hole - where God
once existed in the human consciousness.'
What also seems clear is that individual conceptualizations of God are not
uniform. There may be as many versions of God as there are people, for the
concept of God has never been a static thing. As Karen Armstrong writes in A
History of God, "Yet it seems that creating gods is something that human beings
have always done. When one religious idea ceases to work for them, it is simply
replaced. These ideas disappear quietly, like the Sky God, with no great
fanfare. In our own day, many people would say that the God worshipped for
centuries by Jews, Christians and Muslims has become as remote as the Sky God."2
Armstrong concludes, "Human beings cannot endure emptiness and desolation; they
will fill the vacuum by creating a new focus of meaning. The idols of
fundamentalism are not good substitutes for God; if we are to create a vibrant
new faith for the twenty-first century, we should, perhaps ponder the history of
God for some lessons and warnings."3
When asked if we believe in God, we find ourselves responding to the question
with one of our own: What God are you referring to?
Is it Abraham's God, the God of the Old Testament? This god was a strict father,
a creator, protector and punisher, a giver of law. This god also required the
sacrifice by Abraham of his son Isaac and authorized the conquering and killing
of many thousands of people.
Is it Augustine's God, the God of the early Christian Church? This is the god of
a powerful church, inheritor of the remnants of the Roman Empire. This god
judged all humanity based on Adam's original sin. The religion based on this god
will have us view ourselves as fundamentally flawed - originally sinful.5
Is it Michelangelo's God, a personal God, as painted on the ceiling of the
Sistine Chapel? This concept of God helped develop the liberal humanism valued
so highly in the West. It fit well with an awakening and expanding Europe. This
god loves, judges, punishes, sees, hears, creates and destroys as we do. This
god inspires. However, it can also be a liability when one assumes that this god
loves what we love and hates what we hate, thereby endorsing our prejudices
instead of compelling us to transcend them. The fact that this "personal" God is
male (and usually white) has raised deep existential problems for women and nonwhites.6
Is it the omnipotent God that some theologians believe died at Auschwitz? The
idea of an all-knowing and all-powerful God is hard for some to reconcile with
the evil of the Holocaust. For, if God is truly omnipotent, he could have
prevented it. If, they say, he was unable to stop it, he is impotent; if he
could have stopped it and chose not to, he is not compassionate.7
Our rapidly expanding scientific knowledge about the universe is also making it
apparent that God is no longer "up there" or "out there." The heavens seem empty
of the protecting, judging and caring divine presence envisioned by the ancient
world. The result is, according to John Shelby Spong, Episcopal bishop and
author of Why Christianity Must Change or Die, that tens of millions of people
are "believers in exile" who have lost touch with these God images as taught
from traditional pulpits, but are not prepared to abandon the concept of God
entirely.8
As a snake sloughs its skin as it grows, are we now witnessing the growth of our
collective conceptualization of God, leaving behind the old, and for some now
inadequate one even as a new one, not yet clear, is born? Some believe that
there is, indeed, a new view of God emerging in this post-modern age. It
abandons the external height images of the historic theistic God and is being
replaced with internal depth images of a god that is not apart, but an integral
and fundamental part of, us. It is a perspective quite consistent with the
Buddhist conceptualization of the Mystic Law.
This Mystic Law is the ultimate entity or truth that permeates all phenomena in
the universe, but it is not a personified being. There is an ultimate oneness of
the human and this ultimate Law - there is no separation between human beings
(all human beings) and this idea of God as a Mystic Law.
This eternal and unchanging truth that resides within us is the source from
which we can draw the compassionate wisdom that accords with changing
circumstances and the courage and confidence to live according to that wisdom.
It is mystical, not magical, because its totality is beyond human
conceptualization and efforts to compartmentalize it, say in human form, only
restrict and limit it. It is a law because it is experientially true in the
daily lives of individual human beings.
This ultimate reality, ultimate truth, ultimate purity exists in
every human being. Because of this, Buddhists view all people as
perfectly endowed with the potential to be wonderfully happy and
individuals. There is no us and them, no godly and ungodly - all
God, entities of the Mystic Law.
the depths of
sacred and
enlightened
are children of
Where others looked to the heavens, Buddha looked within and found the priceless
jewel of human wonder and possibility. He recognized that we, too, are made of
the divine "stuff" of the universe. We've simply forgotten who we are.
So do we believe in God? By most traditional definitions, no. But in terms of
how increasing numbers of Christians understand God, yes, we do believe in God.
Our name for God is Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, the Mystic Law. We believe it exists
both "in here" and "out there" and that this inner light can shine forth from
within when we awaken to it and open our hearts through the act of chanting Nammyoho-renge-kyo.
There will, of course, be many
unacceptable. That's fine. But
as many as twenty-five percent
resonate. People who will find
people for whom this understanding of God will be
there will also be many - according to one study
of all adults in America - for whom it will
that they also no longer really embrace these
earlier versions of God; that they've already begun to envision the universe
differently; and that the concept of God as Mystic Law matches the understanding
that they have reached on their own. They'll discover, as most SGI-USA members
can attest, that the Mystic Law will, quite nicely indeed, fill the god-shaped
hole in their spiritual selves.
If you have comments or questions on this topic, please let us know:
lb@sgi-usa.org
1. Karen Armstrong, History of God, (Ballantine Books, a division of Random
House, Inc., Alfred A Knopf, New York, 1993), pp. 397-98.
2. Ibid., p. 4
3. Ibid., p. 398
4. Ibid., pp. 18-19
5. Ibid., pp. 123-24
6. Ibid., pp. 209-10
7. Ibid., p. 346
S.John Shelby Spong, Why Christianity Must
Change or Die, (HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.,
San Francisco, 1998) p. 33.
Reference
9. Fillip Hammond and David W. Machacek,
Soha Gakkai in America, (Oxford University
Press Inc., New York, 1999), p.