In the cacophony of clicks, clatter, bells, and whistles that is social media, the art of conversation has been reduced to drive-by comments—swift, reckless, and as enriching as a fast-food binge, and usually as enjoyable as a carjacking. Our keyboards and smartphones are battlegrounds where restraint meets impulse, and, sadly, impulse often wins. Yet, in this era of digital verbosity, the Buddhist eightfold path offers an antidote to this affliction—a call to right speech remains ever relevant.

Right speech, one of the ethical imperatives of Buddhism, isn’t about censorship; it’s about intention, awareness, and the karmic ripple effect of words. Imagine if, before spewing a half-baked retort based on a headline skimmed with one eye on the television, we paused, breathed, and considered the weight of our words and the comment we felt mindlessly compelled to spew from our smartphones. Right speech isn’t an archaic muzzle but a revolutionary act of freedom from the knee-jerk need to be part of the noise, to throw your single penny into a fountain overflowing with coins.

Scroll through any comment section and you’ll witness a battleground of unbridled tongues (or fingers, in this case). Each comment is often more about the commenter’s eagerness to speak than any meaningful engagement with the article, and often telling others more about themselves than they realize. The endless stream of terse comments is mostly worthless idle chatter. (Did you read the article, Karen?) It’s as if the act of commenting is an end in and of itself—a noisy echo chamber where listening and understanding are casualties trampled underfoot by the rush to be heard and seen. 

Although it would fall under the warning against idle chatter, I’m not talking about your “So cute!” comment on Aunt Janet’s 400th picture of her cat’s lazy eye. The internet needs more lazy-eyed cat pictures and Aunt Janets. And in those instances, social media is working as it should—connecting us to family and friends scattered across a busy, noisy, and often harsh world.  

The drive to voice our opinion that I’m referencing, even when it’s half-formed, clashes with our Buddhist contemplative tradition, which teaches that every action—including speech—should arise from a place of awareness. What would happen if we treated every comment as if it were a pebble dropped in water, its ripples reaching far and wide? The same could be said for every social media post, but that is a whole other psychological rabbit hole.

Restraint as rebellion, attention as an act of revolution.

The precepts built around the teaching of right speech are not simply a means to shackle the unruly but a way to unchain ourselves from our basest impulses. By connecting with this moral imperative, we learn to choose words that enlighten, engage, and encourage. Our words may even ignite emotions in others or trouble them deeply, but they should come from a clear sense of awareness and intention. This isn’t control; it’s liberation—a path to awakened interaction that can turn the comment section from a ridiculous romper room of Pavlovian responses into a space for introspective dialogue that furthers the dharma (I can dream).

For those brave minds willing to swim against the rough rapids of hasty and, let’s say it—worthless—commenting, here’s a radical proposal: read the article. Fully. Reflect. Then—if you must—leave a comment that contributes, that respects the silent work of reading, and that honors the exchange of ideas. This is right speech for the digital age—restraint as rebellion, attention as an act of revolution.

The comment section is a microcosm of the world. It can be a wasteland of worthless words or a refuge of thoughtful exchange. By applying right speech, we can choose the latter. We can choose to be part of a solution that reveres silence as much as speaking, that values reflection over reaction, and that places understanding at the heart of communication. Or choose the wasteland of hungry ghosts wandering in a state of self-inflicted ignorance. Choice is the key operative here.

So the next time you’re about to launch into a comment, pause. Think. Reflect. Your words have power. Use them wisely and intentionally. This is right speech. Each moment, each action is a great sutra unfolding before us, teaching the dharma. Your digital footprint reveals the path you’re on, one comment at a time. And be careful! The author might be lurking and waiting to pounce—and you don’t want to be that Chad they call out with the burn, “Did you even read the article?”

The post Read Me! appeared first on Tricycle: The Buddhist Review.

The post What We’re Listening to appeared first on Tricycle: The Buddhist Review.

The Buddhist and the Ethicist: Conversations on Effective Altruism, Engaged Buddhism, and How to Build a Better World
by Peter Singer and Shih Chao-Hwei
Shambhala Publications, December 2023, 264 pp., $21.95, paper

The Buddhist and the Ethicist is the culmination of a five-year conversation between Peter Singer, a utilitarian ethicist and animal liberation advocate, and Shih Chao-Hwei, an engaged Buddhist nun, academic, and activist who champions gender equality and LGBTQ rights. Ethics is active—something to be done rather than a fixed opinion—and in this fascinating book, Singer and Chao-Hwei explore dynamic topics, including animal welfare, capital punishment, gender equality, and the foundations of both Buddhism and ethics.

The Lost Art of Silence: Reconnecting to the Power and Beauty of Quiet
by Sarah Anderson
Shambhala Publications, December 2023, 304 pp., $21.95, paper

Sarah Anderson, a painter and writer who opened the famed Travel Bookshop in London’s Notting Hill in 1979, provides a thorough meditation on silence: its essentialness and elusiveness, as well as the very human impulse to fill our worlds with “vacuous sound.” The book includes sections on religion and spirituality, the arts, and “darker” silence realms like war and prison. Woven through are histories and anecdotes from great thinkers, artists, contemplatives, and other silence enthusiasts who can inspire our own quest to find silence in the unlikeliest of places.

Buddhism and Loss: Navigating Grief, Adversity and Change
by Diane Esguerra
Mud Pie Books, 2023, 114 pp., $8.95, paper

The first noble truth reminds us that life contains suffering, and Diane Esguerra—a psychotherapist and Soka Gakkai practitioner—very skillfully writes about the many different ways loss comes into our lives, from the deaths of those closest to us, to our youth, to the funds in our bank account. Through Buddhist wisdom and contemporary case studies, Esguerra demonstrates how practice can help us through the losses we’ll inevitably experience, and how mindfully navigating loss can help us better appreciate all aspects of the human experience.

Scholar’s Corner

Buddhist Masculinities
edited by Mega Bryson and Kevin Buckelew
Columbia University Press, September 2023, 352 pp., $35.00, paper

Buddhist literature is full of idealized sacred and mundane physical perfections; often, those aesthetic ideals refer to men. Examining a wide range of Buddhist maleness—from narratives of morally superior monks and demon-taming tantric heroes to depictions of irresistible buddhas and bodhisattvas with sensuous bodies and jeweled smiles—Buddhist Masculinities expands on contemporary gender and intersectionality studies, merging a variety of methodological approaches. This much-needed transdisciplinary book pays critical attention to how ideas of masculinity have embodied, defined, and legitimized power and virtue in diverse Buddhist contexts. A must-read for practitioners and scholars alike.

WHAT WE’RE REREADING

Radical Acceptance: Embracing Your Life with the Heart of a Buddha
by Tara Brach

Now approaching its twentieth anniversary, this modern classic by Buddhist teacher and psychologist Tara Brach continues to find new audiences. “Believing that something is wrong with us is a deep and tenacious suffering,” Brach writes, offering readers a path to freedom and fulfillment through the eponymous practice. Utilizing a mix of psychology and Buddhism, the book aims to guide readers out of the strictures we create for ourselves with guided meditations and a discussion of the Jungian shadow self, the repository of our negative emotions.

–Philip Ryan, executive editor

The post What We’re Reading appeared first on Tricycle: The Buddhist Review.

In the long transmission history of Chan Buddhism from the legendary days of Bodhidharma, few figures shimmer as luminously as the Southern school Chan master Shenhui (684–758). Born during the dynamic days of the Tang dynasty (618–907), considered by many a golden age of Chinese cosmopolitanism, Shenhui lived during a time of intense cultural production, political intrigue, and military activity. As Buddhism’s influence wove itself into the fabric of culture and daily life, Shenhui emerged as a central figure in the philosophical and historical development of the Chan Buddhist identity. Infusing the tradition with a spirit of revolutionary vigor, he dispelled any notion of Buddhist quiet wisdom with his piercing insight and vociferous wit.

Emphasizing the doctrine of “sudden enlightenment,” Shenhui’s teachings and the controversy surrounding him propelled the Southern school to dominance. Criticizing the teaching of “gradual enlightenment” promoted by the so-called “Northern school,” Shenhui argued that enlightenment is instantaneous, a realization that lies dormant awaiting insight. His radical views not only set his contemporary Buddhist world on fire but also set the trajectory for Chan, ushering it toward a distinct identity. 

Yet what makes him truly captivating is his larger-than-life personality and his reemergence as a central Chan player over a thousand years after his time. An adroit orator, deft debater, and learned master of the dharma, his sermons are said to have drawn huge crowds, and he wielded sharp criticism and penetrating wisdom, making his dharma talks both impactful and enlightening. But within a few generations, his lineage died out. As a student of the famed Sixth Patriarch Huineng, his contribution to the history of Chan was eclipsed and mostly overlooked until the discovery in 1900 of manuscripts in the Library Cave at Dunhuang. This discovery changed the course of how we understand Chan history.

In the posthumously published Zen Evangelist: Shenhui, Sudden Enlightenment, and the Southern School of Chan Buddhism, preeminent Chan expert John R. McRae’s (1947–2011) lifetime of work on Shenhui challenges our understanding of the Sixth Patriarch’s central place in the Chan narrative and presents, for the first time, Shenhui’s surviving body of work in English translation. While much of this rich tome is for those acquainted with Chan history, the translation of Shenhui’s recorded teachings will ring a familiar tone with seasoned practitioners, reminding us to remain vigilant when observing our dualistic thinking.

These adapted excerpts from McRae’s book reveal Shenhui’s polemical attacks on the Northern school teachers and his unyielding adherence to the Middle Way. Most likely compiled at the end of Shenhui’s life or just after his death, these excerpts offer a taste of this towering figure who shook the foundations of Chan and often left those who encountered him without words.

The Teachings of Shenhui from Zen Evangelist:

I have witnessed Reverend Shenhui preach from the lion’s seat: “There is no one else in China who understands the teaching of Bodhidharma’s Southern school. If there were someone who knew, I would never preach about it. I preach today in order to discriminate the true and the false for Chinese students of the path and to define the teachings for Chinese students of the path.” To witness such inconceivable events made me gaze upon Shenhui with awe.

At the time there was present in the dharma assembly a dharma master named Chongyuan from that monastery whose fame had already spread to the two capitals and beyond the seas. His words were like a bubbling spring, and his questions truly exhausted the origin of things… 

On this day Dharma Master Chongyuan entered the assembly, raised his eyebrows, and lifted his voice in total dedication to victory in battle over Shenhui. Then the attendants rolled up the screen, calling to the officials present that they would serve them. 

His Reverence Shenhui said, “This screen is not the usual sort used at the gates of people’s homes. Why is this place of enlightenment being destroyed only to allow officials in?” Dharma Master Chongyuan then pointed at the screen and rebuked His Reverence by saying, “Do you call this an ornament or not?” His Reverence replied, “It is.” Dharma Master Chongyuan said, “The Tathagata has preached that ornaments are not ornaments.”

His Reverence said, “What the sutra preaches is, ‘Do not exhaust the conditioned and do not abide in the unconditioned.’” 

The dharma master asked once again, “What does it mean to ‘not exhaust the conditioned and not abide in the unconditioned’?”

His Reverence replied, “To ‘not exhaust the conditioned’ means that from the first generation of bodhicitta up to achieving perfect enlightenment seated under the bodhi tree and entering nirvana between the two sala trees, one never discards any dharma. This is to ‘not exhaust the conditioned.’ To ‘not abide in the unconditioned’ is to study emptiness without taking emptiness as one’s realization, to study non-action without taking non-action as one’s realization. This is to ‘not abide in the unconditioned.’”

The dharma master was silent then, waiting for a while before speaking. He said, “Lust and anger are the path, which is not in ornamentation.” His Reverence said, “Then ordinary people must have attained the path.” Dharma Master Chongyuan said, “Why do you suggest that ordinary people have attained the path?” His Reverence said, “You have said that lust and anger are the path, and since ordinary people are those who practice lust and anger, why would they not have attained the path?”

Dharma Master Chongyuan asked, “Do you understand or not?” His Reverence answered, “I understand.” The dharma master said, “Understanding is non-understanding.” His Reverence said, “The Lotus Sutra says, ‘From the time of my attainment of buddhahood, I have passed through immeasurable and unlimited eons.’ Indeed, the Buddha did not attain buddhahood. And indeed, he did not pass through immeasurable and unlimited eons.”

Dharma Master Chongyuan said, “This is the preaching of Mara.” His Reverence said, “Monks and laypeople, listen all! This is Dharma Master Chongyuan, who is recognized by everyone from Chang’an and Luoyang to the farthest corners of the ocean for his brilliance in doctrinal exposition. He is one who has lectured on the sutras and treatises of the Mahayana without error. On this day he is saying that the Lotus Sutra is the preaching of Mara! What, I wonder, is the preaching of the Buddha?”

At this point, the dharma master realized that his error was egregious, and he appeared dazed before the assembly. After a little while he tried to speak again, but His Reverence said, “You’ve been pinned to the ground. Why do you need to get up again?”

His Reverence said to the dharma master, “My holding this unrestricted great assembly and ornamenting this place of enlightenment today has not been for the accumulation of merit, but in order to define the principle of Chan for the students of the path in China and to distinguish the true and the false for the students of the path in China.”…

His Reverence said, “If I were studying under the dharma master, I would recognize his teachings as the dharma master’s as soon as I examined the case. If the dharma master studied under me, he would pass through three great incalculable eons without being able to achieve buddhahood.”

When His Reverence said this, the dharma master became thoroughly ashamed and afraid, looking at Shenhui with his face pale. Although the two bodhisattvas were questioning each other, they were both standing up and had not yet sat down on the lecture seat and chair, respectively. What was said was subtle and had not yet exhausted the feelings between the two men. At this point, as soon as Dharma Master Qianguang, one of the elder monks there, saw that Dharma Master Chongyuan was defeated in this opening debate but was going to continue to resist, he had someone set out chairs. He then requested that they reopen the discussion and explicate their doctrines again, and at last, he got His Reverence and Dharma Master Chongyuan to sit down… 

***

Dharma Master Jian of Mount Lu asked, “What is the meaning of the Middle Path?”

Shenhui answered, “It is the extremes.”

“I just asked you about the meaning of the Middle Path. Why do you answer that it is the extremes?”

“The Middle Path you just mentioned is necessarily dependent on the meaning of the extremes. Without depending on the meaning of the extremes, one cannot posit the Middle Path.”

***

Duke Zhang of Yan asked, “You always preach the dharma of non-thought and exhort people to spiritual cultivation, yet I wonder whether the dharma of non-thought is existent or nonexistent.”

Shenhui answered, “Non-thought cannot be said to be existent and cannot be said to be nonexistent. To call it existent would be to have it identical to worldly existence, and to call it nonexistent would be to have it identical to worldly nonexistence. Thus, non-thought is not identical to existence or nonexistence.”

“What does one call it?”

“It’s not called anything.”

“What is it like?”

“It’s also not like anything. Hence, non-thought cannot be explained. Just now, my saying ‘explained’ has to do with responses to questions. Unless given in response to a question, there would never be an oral explanation. It is like a bright mirror: unless presented with an object, the mirror never manifests an image. My saying ‘manifests an image’ just now means that the image is only manifested as the response to an object.”

“Does it not illuminate when not responding to an image?”

“Saying ‘illuminate’ has little to do with responding or not responding to objects; in both cases the mirror always illuminates.”

Duke Zhang asked, “You have said that there is no object or image and also no oral explanation, and that all of existence and nonexistence is entirely beyond being posited. Now you refer to illumination, but what kind of illumination is it?”

Shenhui responded, “My reference to ‘illumination’ means that all of this exists because of the brightness of the mirror. Because of the purity of mind of sentient beings, there naturally exists a refulgence of great wisdom, which illuminates the world without exception.”

“How does one get to see a non-thing, and seeing a non-thing, then call it a thing?”

“One does not call it a thing.”

“Then if you do not call it a thing, what is the buddhanature?”

Shenhui replied, “To see and not see without any thing is true seeing, constant seeing.”

⧫

Adapted from: John R. McRae, Zen Evangelist: Shenhui, Sudden Enlightenment, and the Southern School of Chan Buddhism, edited by James Robson and Robert H. Sharf, with Fedde de Vries, p. 81–84, 152, 155–157. © 2023 Kuroda Institute (University of Hawaii Press).

The post The Relentless Middle Way of Shenhui appeared first on Tricycle: The Buddhist Review.

The Kesaputtisutta, known in the West as the Kalama Sutta, is a teaching from the Anguttara Nikaya. Popularized through fake quotes and internet memes, it is often incorrectly interpreted as advocating radical skepticism and an individualized rational approach to religious doctrine and faith. However, no traditional commentary supports such an interpretation of this previously not-often-cited teaching, and even a cursory reading of the full text proves otherwise.

In this sutra, the people of Kesaputta (the Kalamas) are being visited by many teachers and mendicants and are confused by their conflicting doctrines and mutual disparagement. They ask the Buddha for advice, who cautions them against blindly following teachers, scripture, tradition—even their own logical conjecture—and instead urges them to practice the teachings and directly experience if they work or not. The words of the wise should be heeded, but not before they are tested.

The writers of the sutra close by directly addressing two foundations of the Buddhist faith: karma and reincarnation. For them, the pros outweigh the cons. Whether or not karma and reincarnation exist, if you follow the Buddha’s advice on discerning the correct teachings, you can rest assured that life will be better—both now and in a possible next life.

–Frederick M. Ranallo-Higgins, associate editor

On one occasion, the Blessed One, on a wandering tour among the Kosalans with a large community of monks, arrived at Kesaputta, a town of the Kalamas. The Kalamas of Kesaputta heard it said, “Gotama the contemplative, the son of the Sakyans, having gone forth from the Sakyans, has arrived at Kesaputta. Master Gotama’s fine reputation has spread: He is indeed a Blessed One, worthy, and rightly self-awakened, consummate in knowledge and conduct, well-gone, a knower of the cosmos, an unexcelled trainer of those persons ready to be tamed, teacher of human and divine beings, awakened, blessed. He has made known—having realized it through direct knowledge—this world with its devas, maras, and brahmas, its generations with their contemplatives and brahmans, their rulers and common people; has explained the Dhamma admirable in the beginning, in the middle, in the end; has expounded the holy life both in its particulars and in its essence, entirely perfect, surpassingly pure. It is good to see such a worthy one.”

They said to the Blessed One, “Lord, there are some brahmans and contemplatives who come to Kesaputta. They expound and glorify their own doctrines, but they deprecate the doctrines of others, revile them, show contempt for them, and disparage them. They leave us absolutely uncertain and in doubt: Which of these venerable brahmans and contemplatives are speaking the truth, and which are lying?”

“Of course you are in doubt. When there are reasons for doubt, uncertainty is born.”

The Buddha said, “Of course you are uncertain. Of course you are in doubt. When there are reasons for doubt, uncertainty is born. So in this case, don’t go by reports, legends, traditions, scripture, logical conjecture, inference, analogies, agreement through pondering views, probability, or the thought, ‘This contemplative is our teacher.’ When you know for yourselves that certain qualities are unskillful, blameworthy, criticized by the wise, and, when adopted and carried out, lead to harm and suffering—then you should abandon them.

“When greed, aversion, or delusion arise in a person, does it arise for welfare or for harm?”

“For harm, lord.”

 “Overcome by greed, aversion, or delusion, he kills living beings, takes what is not given, goes after another person’s wife, tells lies, and induces others to do likewise, all of which is for long-term harm and suffering.”

“Yes, lord.”

“So, as I said: Don’t go by reports, legends, traditions, scripture, logical conjecture, inference, analogies, agreement through pondering views, probability, or the thought, ‘This contemplative is our teacher.’ When you know for yourselves that these qualities are unskillful, blameworthy, criticized by the wise, and, when adopted and carried out, lead to harm and suffering—then you should abandon them.

“Now, Kalamas, don’t go by reports, legends, traditions, scripture, logical conjecture, inference, analogies, agreement through pondering views, probability, or the thought, ‘This contemplative is our teacher.’ When you know for yourselves that these qualities are skillful, blameless, praised by the wise, and, when adopted and carried out, lead to welfare and happiness—then you should enter and remain in them.

“What do you think, Kalamas? When lack of greed, lack of aversion, or lack of delusion arises in a person, does it arise for welfare or for harm?”

“For welfare, lord.”

“And this ungreedy, unaversive, or undeluded person doesn’t kill living beings, take what is not given, go after another person’s wife, tell lies, or induce others to do likewise, all of which is for long-term welfare and happiness.”

“Yes, lord.”

“So, as I said: Don’t go by reports, legends, traditions, scripture, logical conjecture, inference, analogies, agreement through pondering views, probability, or the thought, ‘This contemplative is our teacher.’ When you know for yourselves that these qualities are skillful, blameless, praised by the wise, and, when adopted and carried out, lead to welfare and to happiness—then you should enter and remain in them.

“Now, Kalamas, one who is a disciple of the noble ones—thus devoid of greed and ill will, undeluded, alert, and resolute—keeps pervading all directions with an awareness imbued with goodwill, compassion, appreciation, and equanimity. Thus he keeps pervading above, below, and all around, everywhere, and in every respect the all-encompassing cosmos with an awareness imbued with goodwill, compassion, appreciation, and equanimity: abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.

“Now, Kalamas, one who is a disciple of the noble ones—his mind thus free from hostility, free from ill will, undefiled, and pure—acquires four assurances in the here and now:

“‘If there is a world after death, if there is the fruit of actions rightly and wrongly done, then this is the basis by which, with the break-up of the body, after death, I will reappear in a good destination, the heavenly world.’ This is the first assurance he acquires.

“‘But if there is no world after death, if there is no fruit of actions rightly and wrongly done, then here in the present life I look after myself with ease—free from hostility, free from ill will, free from trouble.’ This is the second assurance he acquires.

“‘If evil is done through acting, still I have willed no evil for anyone. Having done no evil action, from where will suffering touch me?’ This is the third assurance he acquires.

“’But if no evil is done through acting, then I can assume myself pure in both respects.’ This is the fourth assurance he acquires.

“One who is a disciple of the noble ones—his mind thus free from hostility and ill will, undefiled, and pure—acquires these four assurances in the here and now.”

“Magnificent, lord! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way, has the Blessed One—through many lines of reasoning—made the Dhamma clear. We go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Sangha of monks. May the Blessed One remember us as lay followers who have gone to him for refuge, from this day forward, for life.”

♦

Adapted from Kalama Sutta: To the Kalamas, translated by Thanissaro Bhikku

The post Don’t Go By Reports appeared first on Tricycle: The Buddhist Review.

Illumination: A Guide to the Buddhist Method of No-Method
by Rebecca Li
Shambhala Publications, October 2023, 280 pp., $21.95, paper

There’s method in the no-method approach, or the Buddhist practice of “silent illumination” as taught by Chan Master Sheng Yen (1931–2009). Rebecca Li, a Chan Buddhist teacher, writes that this method completely changed her understanding of silence. Silence does not mean to “push away or avoid all noise,” but instead to “refrain from succumbing to our habitual reactivity that gets in the way of fully experiencing the present moment as it is.” After introducing readers to the essential components of silent illumination, chapters on the “modes of operation,” including craving and trance, help us halt reactivity and see contentment as our natural state of being.  

Three Minutes a Day: A Fourteen-Week Course to Learn Meditation and Transform Your Life
by Richard Dixey
New World Library, August 2023, 144 pp., $18.95, paper

No matter how busy we are, we can probably find three free minutes per day. This guide by Richard Dixey, a senior faculty member at Berkeley’s Dharma College, makes the bold claim that just a few minutes of daily meditation can “generate a real insight into personal experience that no amount of reading can replicate.” Exercises include watching a candle to develop concentration and listening to the sound of a fading gong to develop flexible concentration. This guide is suitable for both beginners and experienced meditators looking for a shift in perspective. A free mobile app is also available to keep you on track.

Buddhism and Waste: The Excess, Discard, and Afterlife of Buddhist Consumption
edited by Trine Brox & Elizabeth Williams-Oerberg
Bloomsbury Academic, 2022, 194 pp., $35.95, paper

Buddhism is green. At least more than other religions, right? Although many like to valorize Buddhism as inherently antimaterialist and mindful of its worldly interconnectedness, the lived reality is quite different. From the garbage, sewage, and excrement produced daily by both monastics and lay Buddhists to the desacralized ritual objects and decaying mummified bodies left behind by the dead, this timely and poignant text examines the Buddhist contribution to the seemingly endless wave of “zombie rubbish” that sits poised to overwhelm and consume our very existence. 

---

Scholar’s Corner

Living Treasure: Buddhist and Tibetan Studies in Honor of Janet Gyatso
edited by Holly Gayley and Andrew Quintman
Wisdom Publications, June 2023, 544 pp., $59.95, hardcover

Janet Gyatso, the Hershey Professor of Buddhist Studies at Harvard University, is “one of the most creative and influential thinkers of her generation,” as the editors of this anthology by her peers write. Living Treasure celebrates two areas of her greatest expertise—terma (hidden texts) and Tibetan autobiographical writing—and features essays from many of her former students. Gyatso’s multidisciplinary approach and “interrogation of what it means to be human” are found in her pieces on supine demonesses, a third gender, and Tibetan nuns’ advocacy for full ordination. What results is a scholarly work that need not be limited to an academic audience.

---

WHAT WE’RE REREADING

Prisoners of Shangri-La: Tibetan Buddhism and the West
by Donald S. Lopez Jr.

Cultural misunderstandings often fuel the divisive debates across our fractious and fractured online forums. In this overheated milieu, examining the roots of our ideas about Buddhism is crucial. Donald Lopez’s groundbreaking challenge to Western cultural assumptions about Tibet and Tibetan Buddhism, Prisoners of Shangri-La (published in 1998 and revised in 2018), still resonates. Lopez’s detailed catalog of countless tropes that still shape popular discourse adds needed context to the endless stream of misinformed posts and drive-by comments. Cutting through complexity with meticulous yet down-to-earth prose and a bodhisattva’s compassion, Lopez delivers a trenchant critique of Western fantasies about Tibet.

–Frederick M. Ranallo-Higgins

The post What We’re Reading appeared first on Tricycle: The Buddhist Review.

The popular Western understanding of a purely humanistic Buddha is a modern invention. Depending on whom you ask, much of the world views him as both a powerful superhuman being and a man.

Several canonical versions of the Buddha’s birth have survived, and some are quite fantastical. Dated to the 3rd or 4th century CE and attributed to the Sarvastivada school, the incredibly influential Arya lalitavistara nama mahayana sutra, or the Noble Mahayana Sutra “The Play in Full,” covers the Buddha’s last lifetime as a god in Tushita heaven, his final birth in this world, his journey to awakening, and his first turning of the wheel of the dharma. With parts being traced to the earliest days of the textual tradition, this time-and-space-bending Mahayana Buddhist narrative continues to inspire sincere renunciation and faith and to stimulate philosophical and doctrinal inquiry. Most likely not meant as a traditional biography, the Lalitavistara focuses on the transcendent qualities of complete awakening itself, and the reader is repeatedly reminded that other fully awakened beings have also traveled this long and laborious path.

This passage on the birth of the Bodhisattva (how the Buddha is addressed before his enlightenment) illustrates his supernatural presence and abilities, reminding us of the cosmic and mythical figure that followers the world over continue to trust for guidance in their liberation from the suffering of samsara.

–Frederick M. Ranallo-Higgins, associate editor

As soon as he was born, the Bodhisattva stepped onto the ground. Wherever his feet touched the ground, a large lotus immediately sprung from the earth. Then the great naga kings Nanda and Upananda revealed their upper bodies in the sky and produced two streams of cool and warm water to rinse the Bodhisattva’s body. Sakra, Brahma, the guardians of the world, and many hundreds of thousands of divine sons then bathed the Bodhisattva in perfumed water and scattered flower petals over him. A parasol of precious gems and two yak-tail whisks also appeared from midair. 

The Bodhisattva stood on a large lotus and surveyed the four directions with his lion’s gaze, the gaze of a great being. At that time the Bodhisattva, with unhindered higher knowledge, which he manifested due to the ripening of previous roots of virtue, saw the entire great trichiliocosm [universe]. He saw all the cities, towns, estates, kingdoms, royal cities, and lands, as well as all gods and humans. He perfectly knew the minds of all sentient beings and carefully surveyed them, looking to see if there was anyone similar to himself in terms of virtuous conduct, discipline, meditative absorption, or knowledge. However, in the entire great trichiliocosm, the Bodhisattva did not see anyone like himself.

At that point the Bodhisattva felt a lion-like fearlessness, free from anxiety or apprehension. Without any hesitation or wavering, he reminded himself of his good motivations. Because he had examined the minds of all sentient beings, he now knew their thoughts. Unsupported, he took seven steps toward the East and declared, “I will be the cause of all virtuous practices.”

Wherever the Bodhisattva took a step, a lotus sprouted forth. He then took seven steps toward the South and said, “I am worthy of the offerings of gods and humans.” Next, he took seven steps toward the West and, pausing on the seventh step, he proclaimed these satisfying words in lion-like fashion: “I am the Supreme Being on this earth. This is my last birth, where I shall uproot birth, old age, sickness, and death!” He then took seven steps toward the North and said, “I will be supreme among all sentient beings!” Next, he took seven steps downhill, saying, “I will subjugate Mara and his army! I will cause great rain clouds of the dharma to shower down on all hell beings, extinguishing the fires of hell and filling the beings there with happiness.” Finally, he took seven steps uphill, lifted his gaze, and said, “All sentient beings will look up to me.”

As the Bodhisattva spoke in this way, his words were immediately heard throughout the entire great trichiliocosm. Such was the nature of the foreknowledge that sprang from the ripening of the Bodhisattva’s previous actions. Whenever a bodhisattva takes birth into his final existence, and as he awakens to perfect and complete buddhahood, various miracles unfold.

At that time all beings were so delighted that the hairs on their bodies shivered. There was also a terrifying quaking of the earth, which caused the hairs on their bodies to stand on end. The cymbals and musical instruments of gods and humans sounded without being played by anyone. At that time all the trees in the great trichiliocosm—whether in season or not—blossomed and bore fruit. From the expanse of pure space, the sound of thunder rang out, and from the cloudless sky, a fine mist of rain showered down ever so gently, mixed with divinely colored flowers, cloths, ornaments, and powdered incense. Deliciously scented breezes blew, delightful and cooling. In all directions, there was no darkness, dust, smoke, or mist to be seen, and everything appeared bright and beautiful.

Also, from the empty space above, the great melodious and profound sounds of the realm of Brahma were heard. All the light of the sun, the moon, Brahma, Sakra, and the guardians of the world was eclipsed by an otherworldly light of a hundred thousand colors, which filled the entire great trichiliocosm and brought pleasure and happiness, both physical and mental, to everyone that it touched. At the very moment when the Bodhisattva was born, all beings became filled with bliss. All types of attachment, anger, delusion, pride, dislike, dejection, fear, greed, jealousy, and stinginess subsided, and everyone abandoned all forms of unwholesome conduct.

The illnesses of the sick were cured. The hungry and the thirsty were relieved of their hunger and thirst. The drunk and intoxicated were freed from their intoxication. The mad had their sanity restored. The blind could see. The deaf could hear. The crippled had their capacities restored. The destitute gained wealth. The imprisoned were freed. All ailments and sufferings of those in the hell realms, starting with the Hell of Ultimate Torment, ceased at that moment. The suffering of those born into the animal realm, such as the fear of being eaten by one another, was also pacified. Likewise, the sufferings experienced by beings in the realm of the Lord of Death, such as hunger and thirst, were also pacified.

The newborn bodhisattva had already practiced good conduct for countless trillions of eons, and he possessed great diligence and strength. As such, when he took his first seven steps, he had already attained the state of reality. Therefore all the buddhas, the blessed ones, in all the realms in the ten directions blessed the earth at that spot of vajra nature so that it would not be destroyed by his steps. Such was the awesome strength of the newborn bodhisattva’s first seven steps.

At that time the entire world was filled with a bright light, and the sounds of singing and dancing were heard. A rain of flowers, powders, incense, garlands, jewels, ornaments, and cloths showered down from innumerable clouds. All beings were filled with perfect joy. In short, when the Bodhisattva, who is more exalted than anyone in all the worlds, came into this world, many inconceivable events took place.

♦

Dharmachakra Translation Committee (tr.). The Play in Full (Lalitavistara, Toh 95). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2022.

The post The Birth of the Buddha appeared first on Tricycle: The Buddhist Review.

Exploring history, as Jacqueline Stone stated in a recent interview with Tricycle, exposes what has been lost and forgotten, and, often, what has been added. Awakening to how deeply personal experience is shaped by our embeddedness in a particular time and place can inform and enrich Buddhist practice. Over the last 150 years, changes of what is broadly called “modernity” have molded our world and structured our experiences in profound ways. Tracing back the influence of these changes on Buddhism reveals that what we usually take for granted as “Buddhist” may be more a consequence of history and social trends.

Although the social, political, economic, religious, and technological changes that characterize modernity originated in the cultural West, their impact on Asian Buddhism was not a one-way current—Asian monastics, teachers, and lay practitioners arose to the challenges of modernity and seized the openness of the moment to reinvent and revitalize their traditions. Monks and nuns brought practice out of the forests, mountains, and monasteries and into the lives of everyday people, envisioning Buddhism as a much-needed “spiritual” practice to counter increasing materialism. They manifested their vision of a new Buddhism for a still-suffering world, and the Buddhism we know today is firmly rooted in their struggles and efforts.

Professor David L. McMahan, the Charles A. Dana Professor of Religious Studies at Franklin & Marshall College, is a leading expert on the complex constellation of social influences impacting Buddhism during the 19th and 20th centuries. His book The Making of Buddhist Modernism is the indispensable text on the subject. In this latest interview with Tricycle, he elucidates the Asian roots of the modern transformation that has shaped Buddhism around the world.

–Frederick M. Ranallo-Higgins

Since you published The Making of Buddhist Modernism in 2008, scholars, including you, have continued to explore the subject. How do scholars currently understand Buddhist modernism?  Part of the project of scholars in identifying a specifically modern Buddhism was to show that what Americans and Europeans often encountered in recent decades are historically unique forms of Buddhism. Like other historical forms of Buddhism, this version had been adapted in response to the intellectual trends, the default intuitions, the background assumptions, and the ethical values of the time and place. To point out that these new articulations of Buddhism exist need not be a judgment on their authenticity—Buddhisms have been changing and adapting for twenty-six centuries.

Buddhist modernism specifically refers to distinctive forms of Buddhism that have emerged in the last 150 years and have been significantly shaped by modernity’s ideas, practices, and institutions. These include, for example, an engagement with some of the intellectual forces of modernity, such as science, Enlightenment rationalism, romanticism, transcendentalism, Protestantism, and psychology, as well as social forces like democracy, feminism, liberalism, and egalitarianism. Buddhist modernism is sometimes described as a fusion of these discourses with aspects of Buddhist thought and practices, creating unique hybrid forms.

Sometimes these forms are critical of, or simply ignore, widespread aspects of Buddhism, like relic veneration, appeasement of troublesome spirits, or prayers to buddhas and bodhisattvas for good fortune. They often abandon or reinterpret traditional cosmology in favor of a broadly scientific worldview and recast concepts of karma as “natural law” and meditation as an internal science that discerns empirical realities or laws of nature. There is a tendency toward the psychologization of teachings as well, for example, interpreting the various realms of rebirth primarily as states of mind. The spread of meditation among laypeople, the attenuation of hierarchy, and increasing gender equality are also identified with Buddhist modernism.

Having said all of this, though, no one monolithic “Buddhist modernism” or a definitive break between “modern” and “traditional” Buddhism exists. Multiple Buddhist modernisms contain unique combinations of traditional and modern elements with a variegated spectrum of continuities and discontinuities. For example, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama makes ample use of science and is exceptionally well-versed in it; at the same time, he believes in rebirth, the nonmaterial basis of consciousness, and gods that can have good or bad effects on humans.

What do we mean by “tradition” and “modernity”? “Modernity” is usually defined as a time period, a set of ideas, as social, political, and economic institutions, technologies, and so forth. This term’s unique cultural and historical realities have had significant, unprecedented transformative effects on the world. However, like all dualisms, the binary of “tradition” and “modernity” starts to deconstruct at a certain level of analysis. And this can be useful.

These concepts often come with polemics and value judgments. The modern is associated with progress, rationality, and science, and some practitioners may see certain “traditional” elements of Buddhism as outdated, moribund, and a matter of “cultural baggage.” Naturally, people of any religion will ask how their tradition can exist in harmony with, for example, contemporary science, democratic institutions, egalitarianism, and other elements of the modern world. But there is a history to keep in mind. Westerners have often ascribed “modernity” to themselves and “tradition” to non-Western peoples, usually ones that Western powers have colonized. So there is an unfortunate echo of colonialism and racial prejudice that can be a part of the mix. Appeals to the modern also tend to flatten everything “traditional” into a uniform, ahistorical past rather than recognizing that Buddhist traditions have been dynamically changing, adapting, and innovating for centuries.

Some may conversely see Buddhist modernism in a negative light and strive to shun anything “modern,” insisting that theirs is the pure, “traditional” dharma, unencumbered by the supposedly corrupting influence of modernity. But what is “traditional” is always imagined from a present perspective, and some aspects of tradition are reinterpreted and deployed in response to—or reaction against—the modern. Like the various Theravada forest traditions, what may seem like a very “traditional” form of Buddhism is often a recent reformulation.

When did the modernization of Buddhism begin, and what were some contemporaneous sociopolitical currents stimulating the drive to modernize? It’s essential to recognize that whatever Buddhist modernism is, it is not simply “Western” or “Westernized” Buddhism, nor Buddhism that’s been salvaged by the people of North America and Europe. It’s often assumed that the most innovative reformers of Buddhism were from Europe and America. But the first modern Buddhist reformers were in Sri Lanka (then Ceylon), China, Japan, Burma, etc. They were motivated to reexamine and reform their traditions, partly due to internal social forces but also in light of the tumultuous effects of colonialism and the attendant disempowering of Buddhism in their countries. So these reform movements associated with Buddhist modernism mostly came from the 19th and early 20th centuries and began in Asia.

For example, bringing meditation out from the monastic community to the masses was part of Ledi Sayadaw’s response to British rule’s threat to Buddhism in Burma. He was concerned that colonialism could destroy Buddhism; part of his plan to preserve it was to bring philosophical teachings and meditation to laypeople. Anagarika Dharmapala, in Sri Lanka, presented Buddhism as essentially compatible with, even a precursor to, modern science, insisting on its compatibility with evolutionary theory, psychology, and scientific ideas of causation. This was very important in establishing a link between Buddhism and science that is still prominent in different ways.

Were Asian Buddhists simply reacting to colonialism and hegemony and not necessarily creatively responding to the challenges of modernity? These are not exclusive of each other. Creativity often emerges in stress, conflict, and pressure, and we can see a mixture of defensive moves and creativity in modern rearticulations of Buddhism.

The project of reimagining Buddhism led reformers not just to critique their own traditions and reform them in ways that would be acceptable to the West; they often used Western concepts, fused with Buddhist ones, to critique the West, especially its drive for economic and military power.

Part of the creativity has involved looking at resonances in global currents of thought and practice. For example, the concept of dependent arising underwent a considerable transformation in Asia before it reached a global audience. It began as bad news: karmic bonds enmesh us in bondage, suffering, and continual rebirth. But the interdependence of all things begins to take on more positive meanings in East Asia, especially when combined with the idea that buddhanature permeates everything, including the natural world. Today, the more generalized notion of interdependence has been forged from a mixture of classical articulations and more recent conceptions of ecology, biology, and causality, as well as the empirical reality of the increased systemic interconnectedness of everything and everyone in the contemporary world. In this sense, Buddhist thinkers have been able to think deeply about classical ideas that resonate with current concepts and realities.

Engaged Buddhism is also sometimes characterized as a Westernization of Buddhism. Yet many of the most influential figures in this movement, like Thich Nhat Hanh, Sulak Sivaraksa, the Dalai Lama, and Buddhadasa, are Asian and have infused particular concerns rooted in their cultural context into the movement.

What role did literacy and education play in early efforts to modernize Asian Buddhism? The explosion of Buddhist publishing, the wide availability of classical Buddhist texts in translation, and the increase in literacy over the last 150 years has radically changed how it’s possible to access Buddhist thought and practice.

Many Asian reformers were educated in their local forms of Buddhism and Western curricula set up by colonial governments. This enabled them to embrace certain Western ideals while using them in unique ways. For example, Dharmapala critiques colonialism by employing Western ideals of freedom and democracy, pointing out the apparent contradiction between these ideals and the subjugation of colonized and enslaved people.

The development of a transnational educated population accessing the same scientific theories, literature, and philosophical ideas also contributed significantly to the development of transnational Buddhism. People worldwide began working from a shared repertoire of ideas, which allowed new resonances and connections.

You’ve argued that Asian Buddhists used the term “spiritual” to position Buddhism as secular but also to critique and expand the borders of the secular. What influence has this had on Western Buddhist modernism? The way we use “spiritual” and “spirituality” today is a relatively recent phenomenon. People in the late 19th century began to use it to refer to something at once deeply personal and at the same time universal, almost something free-floating above established religious traditions. Spirituality began to be conceived as something that all religious traditions have but to which no tradition could lay exclusive claim. It was the idea that there is more to religion than just institutions, dogmas, and hierarchies—spirituality pointed toward an internal experience with its own authority.

Buddhism appealed to certain Western seekers partly because it was articulated as compatible with secular forms of knowledge. But it also promised to infuse spirituality into these forms of knowledge or extend secular knowledge into the spiritual realm without contradicting it. One powerful narrative throughout the 20th century was the narrative of science and modernity being forces that were “disenchanting” the world, robbing it of the meaning, depth, and life that it had in premodern times. Buddhist reformers tapped into this disenchantment among specific educated populations by promising to “reenchant” the world, while not contradicting the basic principles of science and secular discourses.

Were Asian Buddhist reformers concerned with finding an imagined “original” Buddhism, similar to some Western Buddhists?  Yes, many framed it that way. Many Theravada Buddhists claim the Pali canon as the “original” Buddhism. There is a lot of debate among scholars about how confident we can be that the current versions of the Pali suttas reflect the earliest forms of Buddhism, since these texts were not written down until several centuries after the life of the Buddha, and they were redacted in subsequent centuries. Scholars can be confident that specific layers of these texts are likely earlier than others, but we can’t be confident that these give us an unambiguous “original” Buddhism. I think of the Pali Nikayas and Chinese Agamas as reflecting the earliest iterations of Buddhism to which we have access. But we have no access to whatever “original Buddhism” was.

Did Asian reformers receive pushback from other monastics who didn’t want to modernize?  Modernizing efforts successfully established new possible ways of practicing Buddhism, but they in no way displaced things not associated with modernist revivals like rituals, belief in spirits, prayer, etc. One of the crucial fissures was between an approach ultimately committed to a universalist or theosophical version of Buddhism—like that of Henry Steel Olcott, one of the first Americans to become a Buddhist—and a reformed Buddhism that is not interested in subsuming Buddhist truths within a more general all-religions-lead-to-the-same-ultimate-truth approach. Dharmapala broke with Olcott because he didn’t want Buddhism to be seen as one part of a larger truth to which all religions had access. He believed in Buddhism.

Regarding people within the monastic community, many were interested in modernizing and reforming Buddhism. And, yes, some resisted and still do. These are matters of vigorous debate. Many were not interested in scrapping all features of Buddhism that couldn’t be made to fit with scientific, psychological, or transcendentalist ideas. So, again, one could see it as a complex, plural, and variegated continuum of beliefs and practices. One modernist articulation of Buddhism might draw heavily from psychology but also believe in spirits that populate the human world. Another might insist on no “supernatural” elements at all. This is why the notion of a singular Buddhist modernism is problematic.

In an interview with Tricycle, Robert Bellah criticized religious expressions of the “radical ‘disencumbered’ individualism that idolizes the choice-making individual as the prime reality in the world,” and then stated that “to emphasize primarily the individualistic side of Buddhism (especially Zen) in America is only to contribute to our pathology, not ameliorate it.” How might Buddhist modernism reinforce our own cultural and individual pathologies? There is, of course, a dimension of Buddhism that emphasizes internal or extraordinary experiences that can break through delusion. The idea has usually been that practitioners must awaken to the same realization as the Buddha. The Buddha’s awakening to a wider and truer sense of reality is the paradigm.

In the West, this emphasis on internal experience can get assimilated with modern Western individualism, notions of the atomistic, autonomous self, and the absolute authority of individual experience. This latter may seem quite Buddhist: many texts insist that it is not enough to “believe” in the Buddha; one must verify the truths he realized. But in practice, this has almost always been a collective project carried out in close consultation with a teacher, the sangha, and one’s particular tradition. Zen, for example, may seem like the ultimate individualist, trust-your-experience, find-the-buddha-within path. Yet, in practice, one’s insights and realizations are cultivated in close consultation with the roshi, who can ultimately confirm them as genuine or dismiss them as illusory.

This traditional importance of a sangha and teacher in Buddhist practice seems at odds with contemporary mindfulness practices used for individual health and wellness.  Yes! There is tension between conflicting possibilities in contemporary mindfulness and meditation practice. On the one hand, it can reinforce an individualism that seeks to enhance the self. You meditate to make yourself a better worker, parent, hedge fund manager, or golfer. On the other hand, it can shake up the boundaries of the self, show its fluidity, disrupt its narratives, and foster a sense of interrelatedness with others. It can make one more comfortable in challenging conditions and more accepting of social norms, or it can be a powerful tool of critical self-inquiry that can entail questioning the default intuitions and tacit ideologies of one’s society as they exist in one’s mind.

In some cases, Buddhist modernism may become wedded to the more pathological forms of Western individualism. One feature often ascribed to the milieu that Bellah is referring to is an implicit opposition between the individual and society. There is a strong tradition in the West, beginning with Rousseau and others, of conceiving society in opposition to the individual. Society corrupts the individual’s purity and constrains individual freedom. And in Buddhist circles today, we often hear that the Buddhist path is a matter of overcoming social conditioning, implying that only the pure, authentic insight of the individual who transcends all social and cultural influence matters. However, this interpretation neglects how Buddhist insight has always been fostered in a complex interaction between individuals, teachers, communities, and cultures.

But more community-oriented forms of Buddhism are emerging—maybe forms of Buddhist postmodernism, as Ann Gleig suggests—that cast a critical eye on seeing the spiritual quest as one solely of the internal experience of the isolated, lone individual. They might encourage people to see themselves more relationally, which has implications for personal relationships, community, and social-political engagement.

You’ve written that a new understanding of spirituality emerged in which personal spiritual experience transcends doctrine and authority. What challenges might this personal, subjective spirituality create? This is another creative tension in Buddhism today. In some iterations of contemporary spirituality, individual insight is sacrosanct and transcends institutions and religious authority. For example, Buddhist meditation aims to cultivate insight into things as they really are. When hearing this, we tend to think of insight in psychological terms—I have an insight into what’s been making me anxious or obsessing about something.

But meditation, as laid out in classical texts, suggests that the insights to be cultivated are Buddhist insights, for example, into the impermanence of everything, the unsatisfactory nature of the body, or the fact that we have no permanent, independent self. What if I have an insight that fundamentally challenges Buddhist doctrine? After 2,500 years of Buddhists insisting that there are five skandhas, what if I have an insight that there are seven? Buddhist communities have to negotiate this emphasis on the authority of individual insight and the authority of the dharma and Buddhist institutions.

This is not unique to the modern or contemporary context, but the current emphasis on the authority of individual experience undoubtedly enhances it. Different traditions will likely navigate this terrain in different ways, some insisting on adherence to doctrine over personal experience and others giving more credence to innovation. This negotiation may be especially challenging to Buddhism since it has been understood recently as a path that elevates personal experience above all else.

People often characterize Buddhism as a “way of life” or a philosophy—in other words, it’s not a religion. Is Buddhism a religion? Scholars have endless debates about what “religion” is or is not. Without getting into that, it’s clear that if you see Buddhism on the ground in Asia, you’ll most likely think it’s a religion. It involves prayer, ritual, belief in supernatural beings, etc. The same is true of a lot of Buddhism in the West too! In the last 150 years, some Buddhists and Buddhist enthusiasts have cast the tradition as a way of life or philosophy. They often mean that one can, for example, follow the eightfold path without resorting to the things one usually associates with religion. There is a certain truth to that—but it’s a truth that has come about recently. Before the last 150 years, no one conceived of a Buddhist way of life that resembles contemporary secularized versions.

The Search for “True” Dharma

A distinctive mark of Buddhist modernism is the search for an “original” form of Buddhism. In this quote from his 2017 article “Buddhism, Meditation, and Global Secularisms,” in the Journal of Global Buddhism, David McMahan writes about the search for a true Buddhism and the academic skepticism toward any such possibility.

In the 19th and 20th century, authors from around the globe began to create a narrative of Buddhism, celebrating the rediscovery of “true” Buddhism, in part by Western scholars: a Buddhism of texts, philosophy, psychology, meditation, and ethics that contrasted starkly with the “degenerate” Buddhism that colonists found on the ground in places they occupied. The latter Buddhism was a matter of “cultural baggage” that had accumulated around the core of the dharma and was inessential—even corrupting—to its original liberative message. Most scholars today are quite skeptical of this narrative and recognize the picture of a pure rational core of Buddhism enveloped by various cultural impurities to be inadequate to account for the complexities of Buddhism in all its varieties now and throughout history. Yet the picture persists in many different contexts of the rescue of Buddhism from moribund tradition and its (re)emergence into its true ancient form, which turns out to be the most compatible with the modern.

The post The Roots of Buddhist Modernism appeared first on Tricycle: The Buddhist Review.

Buddhist history and culture permeate Seoul, but you need to know where to look in this vast and bustling world-class city. Korean Buddhism dates back to the 4th century CE and exerted tremendous influence throughout East Asia. Politically sidelined and pushed out of the cities for 500 years during the Confucian Joseon dynasty (1392–1897), the most impressive temples are deep in the mountains and require travel and hiking to reach. Korea has spectacular temples, mountaintop hermitages, towering pagodas, ancient ruins, rock-hewn grottoes, and precious Buddhist relics too numerous to see in one trip. Most South Korean cities have Buddhist temples, and Seoul is no exception.  Here are some favorite spots:

1| Jogyesa

Dating back to the 14th century, Jogyesa is the head temple of the Jogye Buddhist Order, the largest order in Korea. This temple lies in the heart of the historic district between Gyeongbokgung and Changgyeonggung. The sound of chanting monks and the smell of incense drift through the air around the main dharma hall. Another building enshrines a statue of Amitabha Buddha, and the two 500-year-old white pine trees on the grounds are designated Natural Monuments. The best time to visit is during the Buddha’s Birthday festivities in May, when copious colorful lanterns carrying the wishes and prayers of lay members are hung over the temple grounds.

55 Ujeongguk-ro, Jongno-gu
jogyesa.kr/eng  

2| Ujeongguk Street and Insadong

Want some prayer beads or Buddhist robes? Maybe little plastic Buddhist tchotchkes or high-end Buddhist art to take home? Wander the neighborhoods around Ujeongguk Street in front of Jogyesa and peruse the numerous shops that cater to monks and nuns, art collectors, lay pilgrims, and tourists. These shops are visual wonderlands. Neighboring Insadong Street is a popular destination for traditional arts and crafts, with many shops and street vendors selling Buddhist objects. Don’t be afraid to head down the narrow alleys winding off the main thoroughfares, where you’ll find some of the best restaurants and shops.

Ujeongguk-ro, Jongno-gu Insadong-gil, Jongno-gu

3| Bongwonsa

Founded in 889 by Master Doseon, Bongwonsa, the head temple of the Taego Buddhist Order, sits at the foot of Ahn Mountain on the Yonsei University campus, tucked away in a quiet part of this dense and noisy metropolis. The temple ground comes with a sordid tale involving a serial killer and offers up a sacred space with a few ghosts wandering about. Make sure to check out the university campus and take a hike up Ahn Mountain for an unforgettable view.

San 1 Beonji, Bongwon-dong
bongwonsa.or.kr/eng/

4| Myogaksa

Myogaksa is the administrative headquarters of the Gwaneum Buddhist Order, situated in the heart of downtown Seoul. Founded in 1942 by Ven. Taeheo Hongseon, this temple occupies an important geomantic site on the east side of Mount Naksan and has a statue of Avalokiteshvara, the bodhisattva of compassion, carved into the hillside. Myogaksa has a temple-stay program for travelers and regularly conducts tea ceremonies. After emptying your mind in a meditation session, head over to the nearby Dongdaemun markets or the famous Dongmyo Flea Market to fill up your shopping bags.

31 Jong-ro 63ga-gil, Jongno-gu
myogaksa.net

5| Hwagyesa

Established in 1522 as a hermitage, this large temple complex in the Samgak Mountain foothills was an important Joseon dynasty royal temple where aristocratic female devotees would go to learn the dharma, practice, worship the Buddha, and get away from their restrictive Confucian confines. As the home temple for internationally famed Master Seungsahn (1927–2004), founder of the Kwan Um School of Zen in the United States, Hwagyesa is noted for its temple-stay program and resident Western renunciates. The surrounding scenery is breathtaking, and the sound of the dharma bell ringing through the hills on a misty morning is magical.

117 Hwagyesa Road, Gangbuk-gu
hwagyesa.org/

6| Maji Restaurant

Vegans beware! Many foods in Korea, even those labeled as vegetarian or vegan, are prepared with fish or shellfish oils or pastes (particularly the kimchi). If traveling through Korea, your best bet is a restaurant specializing in Buddhist temple food. Maji will not disappoint. Even a diehard meat eater won’t be able to deny this tantalizing nirvanic experience served in a serene traditional setting. The Buddha himself would hardly pass up this opportunity to eat like a bodhisattva.

19 Jahamun-ro 5-gil, Jongno-gu
happycow.net

7| Doban Restaurant

Run by a Buddhist nun, Doban is the real deal for authentic and organic temple food, but you’ll need a reservation (except during lunch, when you might get squeezed in). The basic lunch menu is simple and inexpensive. The more extravagant three-course meal options, which are pricey but worth every penny, require a reservation and an order placed in advance. I highly recommend the ten-dish three-course option (Course Reservation C), but you need a minimum party of three to obtain this dharma treasure. Don’t incur any bad karma—call ahead and dress appropriately.

7-27 Mabang-ro 6 gil, Yangjae-dong

The post The Buddhist Traveler in Seoul appeared first on Tricycle: The Buddhist Review.

Nichiren Buddhism is one of the most widely practiced traditions in Japan, yet you’d be hard-pressed to find a concise overview of the school—its history, its core beliefs, and its many offshoots. While there are plenty of books and articles about its founder, Nichiren (1222–1282), and Soka Gakkai, one of its more visible forms in the West, there is little covering the long history of this very influential Buddhist tradition. When I reached out to experts in Buddhist studies for answers, the response was always the same: “I don’t know about that. It’s too big a topic! Ask Jackie Stone.”

Princeton Emerita Professor Jacqueline Stone is a leading scholar on Nichiren Buddhism. She wasn’t surprised that I had come up all but empty-handed in my search, noting that despite its importance in Japan and in North America, Nichiren has been given relatively scant attention by Western academics. That has always struck her as a major gap in Buddhist studies.

Exploring Buddhism’s long history can enrich and at times even transform how one relates to one’s own practice. Understanding better how a particular religious tradition has developed over time tells us much, not only about that one tradition but also about tradition itself. As Professor Stone says below: “Religious practitioners continually negotiate between faithfulness to their received tradition, the perceived demands of their own historical moment, and their personal concerns. Some aspects of the tradition are retained as normative; others are reinterpreted, downplayed, or set aside and sometimes new, diverse elements are incorporated. Often this process goes on unconsciously, but it’s valuable and important for anyone involved in religion, whether as a practitioner or a scholar, to be aware of this.”

—Frederick M. Ranallo-Higgins, Associate Editor

Let’s start from the beginning. Can you describe Nichiren and his teachings? What were some of the trends that may have influenced him? I like your question because it recognizes that Nichiren was grounded in trends of his own time. Nichiren was a serious Buddhist thinker. He was trained in the Tendai tradition and versed in classical Tendai teachings, a school of Buddhism introduced from China by Saicho in the early 9th century. In the Tendai school, the Lotus Sutra represents the complete, integrated truth of the Buddha’s teaching, while all other teachings are regarded as provisional. Tendai developed its own stream of Esoteric Buddhism, and Nichiren’s use of the daimoku, the title of the Lotus Sutra, Namu Myohorengekyo, and his mandala, the gohonzon, are all rooted in esoteric practices. Nichiren drew on a long tradition that saw the entirety of the Lotus Sutra—and indeed, the entirety of Buddhism—as encompassed within its title. He did not invent the practice of chanting the daimoku. Although not widespread, it is attested before his time. However, he was the one who gave it a significant doctrinal foundation. For Nichiren, the daimoku was the crystallization of the eternal Shakyamuni Buddha’s merits and wisdom, and he taught that in chanting it, one manifests the buddha realm in one’s present reality.

“For Nichiren, the daimoku was the crystallization of the eternal Shakyamuni Buddha’s merits and wisdom.”

He also draws on the medieval Japanese Tendai thought of his time. These Tendai exegetes were also steeped in esoteric teachings but had begun to reassert the supremacy of the Lotus Sutra. Nichiren embraced that. His claim that Buddhahood is to be realized in this world, in this body, by ordinary people, owes in part to medieval Tendai.

Nichiren’s thought was also shaped by his opposition to the exclusive nembutsu movement of the 12th-century Pure Land teacher Honen. Honen taught that the sole path to salvation is to abandon all other practices and chant the name of the Buddha Amida, the nembutsu, relying on Amida’s promise of rebirth in his Pure Land. Nichiren often debated Honen’s followers in Kamakura. I suspect those early encounters with Pure Land followers helped shape his exclusive devotion to the Lotus Sutra. Like his Pure Land opponents, Nichiren advocated the chanting of a single phrase, grounded in faith and accessible to all, but his underlying doctrinal basis differs radically.

Is it accurate to characterize Nichiren as a “reformer,” as many do? The depiction of Nichiren and other Kamakura-period Buddhist leaders as “reformers” is a product of the Meiji period (1868–1912) and later. In the early 20th century, some scholars likened those new Buddhist movements to the Protestant Reformation. This owes a great deal to the secularizing efforts of the modern Japanese state and to the importation of a Western definition of “religion” as a matter of private personal experience. Scholars have now largely abandoned the comparison, but the “reformer” label persists.

Nichiren himself does not use the language of reform. Later in life, he wrote, “I am neither the founder of a school nor a latter-day follower of any existing school.” In his mature self-understanding, he saw himself as the teacher for the final dharma age, or mappo, the age when the Buddha’s teachings become obscured and enlightenment is difficult to achieve. I believe he envisioned himself as the bearer of a Buddhism that would supersede existing forms.

We can learn about Nichiren’s self-understanding in his identification with two figures from the Lotus Sutra. One is Bodhisattva Superior Conduct, leader of a vast throng of bodhisattvas nobler in appearance than the Buddha himself. In the sutra, Superior Conduct receives Shakyamuni Buddha’s mandate to propagate the sutra in an evil future age after his nirvana. Nichiren refers to himself as a forerunner of Bodhisattva Superior Conduct, but his later dharma heirs explicitly identify him with this bodhisattva. Some lineages even regard Nichiren as a buddha—in fact, as the original buddha—but that was not something Nichiren himself ever claimed.

Nichiren also likened himself to the humbler figure of Bodhisattva Never Despising, whose sole practice was to bow to everyone he met as a future buddha. According to the Lotus Sutra, Never Despising was met with hatred and contempt, but because he persisted in his efforts, he eradicated the karma of his past deeds and eventually became the Buddha Shakyamuni. Nichiren wrote that he was an ordinary person who had not eradicated even the slightest bit of delusion, but like Never Despising, he had been invested with a sacred responsibility by his commitment to the Lotus Sutra.

The opinions of people in the town of Kamakura about Nichiren were probably divided. He was twice arrested and exiled for openly criticizing the government and other Buddhist leaders through his style of assertive proselytizing. Some, however, found his message compelling. We should remember that Nichiren was not famous in his own lifetime. At a rough estimate, he had only some few hundred followers. Aristocrats in Kyoto, the capital, never heard of Nichiren while he was alive. It was after his death that his followers spread his teaching throughout the country.

The death of a founder often presents major challenges. Did Nichiren’s followers face any difficulties after his death? Yes, there was a schism not too many years after Nichiren’s death. Nichiren had appointed six major disciples to lead his following after his death. Nichiren specified that no rank order should exist among them. Within less than a decade after his death, a break occurred between one disciple, Byakuren Ajari Nikko, and the others. The story that has come down to us is one of friction between Nikko, a strict purist, and others who had a more accommodating attitude toward matters of orthopraxy.

Nikko’s successors became known as the Fuji school, which remained a minor lineage until the 20th century. Its best-known representative today is Nichiren Shoshu—that branch of Nichiren Buddhism with which Soka Gakkai was formerly affiliated. Those who’ve encountered Nichiren Buddhism outside Japan are most likely to have done so through some branch of Nikko’s lineages.

I looked for information on Nichiren Buddhism from the 14th through 19th century but found very little. What were some of the key developments during that time? This is a huge question, and you’re right; this period has been understudied, although there is a growing body of excellent research in Japanese that is shedding new light on this period.

Nichiren’s teaching spread throughout the country and became a fully fledged school, known as the Hokkeshu or the Lotus sect, and branched into multiple lineages and temple networks. While it spread among all social classes, it gained support especially from the rising merchant class in the cities of Kyoto and Sakai, which were contributing to a new and thriving urban culture. Many of the leading artists and craftsmen of the late medieval and early modern times were Hokkeshu devotees.

At its height, the Hokkeshu had at least 21 temples in the southern part of Kyoto, more than there are today. That area was called the Daimoku District, because the chanting of the daimoku could be heard everywhere. During periods of civil warfare, temples became virtual fortresses, and the shared faith of the followers enabled their solidarity. During a time of conflict in the 1530s, the Hokkeshu virtually governed Kyoto for four years.

In the late 16th century, powerful warlords seeking to unify the country began to break the independent power of Buddhist institutions. That process was completed under the new Tokugawa shogunate during the 17th century. Buddhist temples were subsumed within the state bureaucracy, and families had to register with a Buddhist temple. Records of temple families were used for the census and other forms of population oversight.

During the early modern period (1603–1868), it was no longer possible to engage in Nichiren’s practice of assertive proselytizing. It was, however, a time of ritual and scholastic development for Buddhism generally. Sectarian identities also solidified. New Nichiren biographies were published, several of them in vernacular Japanese, and even illustrated, aiming at a lay readership.

One important development within the early modern Nichiren sect was the burgeoning of lay associations. Some were under clerical leadership, but others were organized independently and headed by laypeople. These groups promoted such activities as pilgrimage to sacred sites, festivals marking important dates in Nichiren’s life, and the traveling display of images, mandalas, and other sacred objects held by noted Nichiren temples. Some groups studied Nichiren’s writings and began to risk harsh government sanctions to revive Nichiren’s practice of assertive proselytizing. These associations can be seen as the predecessors of the Nichiren Buddhist lay movements that arose during the late 19th and 20th centuries.

The Meiji period had a profound impact on Japanese Buddhism. How did Nichiren Buddhists respond to advancing modernity? It’s important to remember that the country’s leaders felt under immense pressure to quickly transform Japan into a modern nation, in order to resist Western hegemony and to be able to stand shoulder to shoulder with developed countries on the world stage. At this time, Buddhism lost state support and came under criticism as a superstitious relic of the past. It had to prove its relevance to an emerging modern nation.

In response, Buddhist sects launched efforts at internal reform, education, social welfare, and intersectarian cooperation. Buddhist clerics went abroad for study, and sectarian educational centers—which later became private Buddhist universities—were established. We see a dramatic growth in lay Buddhist movements, adjacent to or independent of traditional temple structures. At the same time, the study of Buddhism as an academic discipline was established on the Western model. Experts on Buddhist texts, thought, and history were no longer necessarily priests, and lay secular scholarship on Buddhism began to flourish.

Of course, these changes involved Nichiren Buddhism as well. Many Asian Buddhists promoted spiritual cultivation that centered on the private, internal spiritual experience. In Japan, such movements can be seen as having arisen partially in response to the new official understanding of religion as a personal realm, independent of public affairs. Thus some religious groups emphasized personal cultivation. Nichiren Buddhism followed suit, but its philosophical grounding was different from that of, say, Zen or Pure Land schools and resisted redefinition as purely private or interior. For example, a new, largely lay-centered movement known as Nichirenism arose that interpreted Nichiren’s teachings in light of practical social realities and the demands of modern nation-building.

Nichirenism was considered a form of self-cultivation, as was chanting the daimoku, but its adherents also saw self-cultivation as extending outward to uplift society and the nation. Nichiren’s teaching affirms the phenomenal world as the locus for realizing Buddhahood, and he taught that the spread of faith in the Lotus Sutra would transform this world into a buddha land. For centuries, that had remained a vague, future goal. For Nichirenism adherents, it acquired an immediacy, even a millenarian thrust. Through their efforts, it was going to happen soon. Some even saw the expansion of the Japanese empire as the vehicle by which the Lotus Sutra would spread worldwide.

Nichirenism had an immense impact on postwar lay Nichiren Buddhist movements—not in terms of their ideology, but in terms of their dynamism, organizational structure, innovative use of media, and proselytizing style.

What are some of the key characteristics of Nichiren Buddhism as it is being transmitted to the West? I would not want to generalize too much, as even in the West, Nichiren Buddhism comprises a range of groups. Of the lay movements, Soka Gakkai is the largest and best known, but the older temple lineages are also represented. One common emphasis is on chanting as a source of both self-insight and the wisdom and courage to act effectively in the world. Some Nichiren Buddhist groups participate in explicit forms of social engagement.

There’s an underlying assumption that Buddhist practice has the power to resolve practical problems, and one practices Buddhism not only for one’s own inner enlightenment but also to transform one’s external reality. Nichiren taught that in chanting the daimoku, one accesses the buddha realm, that dimension where self opens up to interpenetrate and pervade all others; thus, one’s own daimoku touches others’ lives as well. Nichiren Buddhists are therefore committed to a social aspect of Buddhist practice—to Nichiren’s conviction that the spread of faith in the Lotus Sutra will bring about a better and more just world.

For contemporary Nichiren practitioners, the key questions they face are likely going to be how to apply Nichiren’s teaching in daily life and how to propagate it effectively in a time and cultural environment very different from Nichiren’s. Those questions go beyond what scholarship can answer.

For Western Buddhists drawn to meditation, Nichiren Buddhism can be seen as worldly, not as “real” Buddhism. For many Nichiren Buddhists, the Lotus Sutra is the only way to salvation. Do these two views contribute to a mutual misunderstanding? That’s possible. The notion that silent, seated meditation represents the essence of Buddhist practice can sometimes be found within the Buddhist tradition. But it has gained tremendous impetus from modern, and particularly Western, factors. These go back to an early 19th-century European quest for the “human buddha,” which was informed by both European Enlightenment values and the anticlerical, antiritualist bias of Protestant Christianity.

The reification of seated meditation—“mindfulness”—as a core essence of Buddhism has enabled its separation from the contexts in which it was historically embedded—ritual practice, precept observance, and monastic life. This has been reinforced by the appropriation of mindfulness techniques for therapeutic use. Today, some college and university instructors have students do basic meditation in class, and no one seems to object. It’s very hard to imagine the same thing happening with chanting.

“Let’s be clear: daily chanting is a discipline of personal cultivation.”

Because meditation is silent, unlike chanting, it’s easier to conceive of it as timeless and universal, not culturally bound. This often leads to a misplaced privileging of origins: people assume they’re going back to an original authentic practice, what Gautama practiced under the Bodhi tree. That assumption ignores the history of how meditation itself has changed and developed over the centuries. Some meditation traditions have been lost and revived from texts. Several forms of mindfulness meditation popular today were developed by Asian teachers in the 19th and 20th centuries, often streamlined for lay practitioners.

I was thinking about this while driving down here this morning. When practice becomes solely a matter of meditation, and what you’re doing is all about deconstructing bad mental habits, inhabiting the moment, and being aware of one’s impulses, it’s very therapeutic and useful. But it bypasses the idea of the dharma having power that can be tapped into through ritual. That there’s transformative power to be gained from such practices as reciting texts and venerating relics, which modern redefinitions have often marginalized. That’s been a part of Buddhism as far back as I know.

So the emphasis may contribute to misunderstandings about chanting, the most important practice in Nichiren Buddhism. I think so. There is a widespread lack of understanding about vocal forms of Buddhist practice, in general. Let’s be clear: daily chanting is a discipline of personal cultivation. Across Asia, sutra recitation and mantra chanting are venerated traditions with solid doctrinal support. There’s a saying, “the voice does the Buddha’s work.” Chanting involves body, mouth, and mind in praise of the dharma. In the esoteric tradition, mantras are the Buddha’s speech and are vehicles for realizing union with the Buddha. For Nichiren, chanting the daimoku contains the merits of all good practices: meditative insight, inner stability, joy and gratitude in the dharma, benefits for oneself and others, and the realization of buddhahood in this lifetime.

Soka Gakkai’s early emphasis on chanting for this-worldly benefits may also have contributed to some misunderstanding. When Josei Toda (1900–1958) revived Soka Gakkai after the Second World War, his followers were chiefly unskilled laborers in search of work. Their education had been interrupted by the war, and they were then left behind in the nation’s postwar reconstruction. Often, they were poor, ill, lacking adequate food, and living in cramped quarters. Toda gave them pride in their mission as contemporary bodhisattvas and stressed the power of chanting to improve their worldly circumstances. To affluent North Americans, however, that emphasis sometimes seemed materialistic and contrary to Buddhist teachings of restraining desire.

On the Nichiren Buddhist side, the exclusive truth claim has often been asserted dogmatically without adequate understanding of its historical context and doctrinal underpinnings. Nichiren famously said that the dharma should be propagated in a manner appropriate to the time and place. For Nichiren, teachings other than the Lotus Sutra had led to enlightenment in prior ages but no longer suited the capacity of persons in the present, final dharma age: in this era, only the Lotus Sutra could guarantee enlightenment for all. He saw the Lotus Sutra as being displaced and obscured by the spread of Esoteric Buddhism, Pure Land teachings, Zen, and so forth. And this for him was the root cause of suffering in Japan: famine, epidemics, and the Mongol threat. So he aggressively asserted the supremacy of the Lotus Sutra. But he also said that, even in the final dharma age, one should use a more moderate approach in those countries whose evil stems from ignorance of the dharma.

I think—at least I hope—that with greater understanding of the history of one’s own tradition, it becomes harder to be casually dismissive of others.

When Western Buddhists discuss “traditional” and “modern” Buddhism, they often consider themselves the makers of modern Buddhism. As you stated, didn’t Asian Buddhist reformations in the 19th century and reform-minded missionary Buddhists who transmitted Buddhist teachings to the West have a large role in creating modern Buddhism? In many cases, I would have to agree.

Change is the norm for religious traditions; otherwise, they won’t survive. At each juncture, some aspects of the received tradition will speak more compellingly than others. Religious practitioners continually negotiate between faithfulness to their received tradition, the perceived demands of their own historical moment, and their personal concerns. Some aspects of the tradition are retained as normative; others are reinterpreted, downplayed, or set aside; and sometimes new, diverse elements are incorporated. Often this process goes on unconsciously, but it’s valuable and important for anyone involved in religion, whether as a practitioner or a scholar, to be aware of this. Because then it’s possible to see in what direction it is going, what’s being lost, what’s being gained, what’s changed.

“Change is the norm for religious traditions; otherwise, they won’t survive.”

Religious change is an ongoing process. It’s also worth noting that the “traditional” and the “modern” are not givens but mutually dependent categories. That is, they have meaning only in their relation to each other. What is essential and what is “outmoded tradition” are always defined in relation to the viewer’s perspective in the present, and it won’t necessarily be the same for all Buddhists.

All that said, what we call modernity was indeed an extraordinarily transformative moment for Buddhism worldwide. Those who study so-called “Buddhist modernism” point to broadly shared characteristics: a grounding in the history of colonialism, imperialism, and resistance; a de-emphasis on ritual and the priesthood; strong lay orientation; a jettisoning of mythic and cosmological elements, or their reinterpretation in psychological terms; appropriations of science as a legitimating discourse; and a this-worldly orientation including emphasis on social justice, often accompanied by social or even political involvement. This was a global sea change in Buddhism in which Asian teachers played a huge role. When Buddhism was introduced to the West, it was already well under way.

Chanting the Daimoku

The following passage from the apocryphal medieval Tendai text Shuzenji-ketsu provides a contemporaneous example of the importance of chanting the daimoku, although it isn’t clear if Nichiren was influenced by this text. It also connects the practice to Zhiyi (538–597 CE), the fourth patriarch of Chinese Tiantai Buddhism.

You should make pictures of images representing the ten realms and enshrine them in ten places. Facing each image, you should, one hundred times, bow with your body, chant Namu Myoho-renge-kyo with your mouth, and contemplate with your mind. When you face the image of hell, contemplate that its fierce flames are themselves precisely emptiness, precisely provisional existence, and precisely the middle, and so on for all the images. When you face the image of the Buddha, contemplate its essence being precisely the threefold truth. You should carry out this practice for one time period in the morning and one time period in the evening. The Great Teacher Zhiyi secretly conferred this Dharma essential for the beings of dull faculties in the last age. If one wishes to escape from birth and death and attain bodhi, then first he should employ this practice. –Shuzenji-ketsu, trans. Jacqueline Stone

The post Knowing Nichiren appeared first on Tricycle: The Buddhist Review.