When
Christianity first appeared on the Japanese mainland in the 16th century,
it took a little while for Francis Xavier to understand why the Japanese people
of Kyushu (the Southern island in the Japanese mainland) were so open to the
foreign religion and its god. While supernaturalists might disagree, the primary reason was not the miraculous nature of the message or God’s Holy
Spirit moving over the masses. There were first and foremost more practical explanations. The daimyo
(warlord) in the South named Sumitada was in desperate need of defending his lands, so he found himself making deals with Portuguese merchants for weapons to use against other enemy daimyos. This period of time was known as Sengoku (a time of internal conflict among warring territories), and so out
of cultural politeness, the daimyo gave the Portuguese missionaries a stage on which to speak.
Both were using the other to get an advantage. But as time wore on, it became apparent to Xavier that much of the Jesuits’
success had to do with the confusion of the
Dainicchi he preached. Dainicchi
was the word that Francis was given as a suitable translation by a recent Christian Japanese convert named Anjiro for the Christian
god, not knowing that the same word was already part of the canon in Shingon Buddhism for
Buddha. Furthermore, it was assumed that Francis, who had come from India, was
a native of the land of Shakyamuni, i.e., from India, the place from which the historical Guatama Buddha arose. The Japanese, who had little scruples about blending their own Shintoism with Buddhism simply supposed
that Jesus was just another piece of a very large Buddhist worldview, and so their curiosity was often misinterpreted as religious zeal.
Despite
where scholars like Harold Bloom may object for finding common ground between Shin Buddhism and Christianity, it can be forgiven
if a person who is of Christian background sees striking similarities between
Amida Buddha, the worshipful being in Shin Buddhism, which is the largest sect
of Japanese Buddhism today, and the Evangelical Protestant model of Jesus as the
pathway and channel of salvation. This has been a touchstone between the two
religions for the past 150 years, and has allowed for a somewhat non-confrontational
introduction of Buddhism into American culture, notably the Buddhist Church of America, which represents the Nishi Hongwaji-ha school of Jodo Shinshu and is the largest, though most invisible, Buddhist sect in the United States.
When one
takes the time to read the more important writings of Shin Buddhists,
especially in the Jodo Shinshu sect where a clear distinction is made between
self-power (the transient center of self-awakening) and other-power (the
intransient center of self-awakening) one is reminded that the oft overemphasis
on the self in no way represents the entire tapestry of Buddhism thought, life,
and practice. Jodo Shinshu’s uniqueness is perhaps the reason why Christians
have felt attracted and drawn to its precepts and energies, despite the fact
that not many have sought conversion. Indeed, most self-enlightening forms of
Buddhism are thought to be so radically different than Christianity, that for
those converting, there is often a clear break with one’s past life in the
Church. Prayer is replaced by Meditation. Intercession is replaced by
self-realization. Repentance and reconciliation are replaced by a
self-awareness of one’s imperfections for the purpose of self-enhancement. God
is replaced, at least in practical terms, by the self.
This is not
the case in Jodo Shinshu, at least historically, although there has been a
movement, especially since the Dobokai Schism, to demythologize the more
supernaturalistic elements of Amida’s intercessory action (it should be
mentioned that in the larger framework of Mahayana Buddhist, the same could be
said for many of the ancient scriptures in the Tibetan and Chinese traditions that speak of gods, demons, and
otherworldly locations that have suffered demythologization at the hands of
Westerner practitioners and reformers). Despite this, Jodo Shinshu still
remains unique in that one may sum up its dimensionality as an ideology and
practice that sees all religious duty through the filter of gratefulness. When practicing Jodo Shinshu Buddhists speak today, they supplant meditation for gratefulness. While
enlightenment is still found in the pulse of Jodo Shinshu, self-awareness is
not as important as it is in other sects. It is thought that Amida spent five kalpas (very long periods of time) to
achieve enlightenment. So Jodo Shinshu Buddhists, much like their Western
religious counterparts, do not think that perfect enlightenment is achievable in
this space-time continuum.
It’s not
until one gets into the writings of Jodo Shinshu thinkers and monshu that one truly
appreciates the similarities found between the two religions. And in some
cases, the Japanese thinkers surpass the channels of religious experience asserted
by their Christian counterparts by presenting a more open and welcoming
convocation. Let me end with one example where Jodo Shinshu goes beyond the
promise of Christian salvation.
Perhaps one
of the largest theological battles in Christianity consists between whether one
is saved through Jesus or through some variation of Jesus and his own righteous
works. This leads to the question of whether one remains in the faith or one
can lose his salvation. Nobody has solved these questions, and depending upon
your denomination, say, e.g., Assemblies of God vs. Presbyterian, the answer is
likely different. When I was in a non-denominational church, I remember a
conversation with a Calvinist who informed me that despite what I thought I had
received in my “born again” experience, if I had backslidden (showing evidence
of moral degradation), there was no way I could have ever received the
salvation of Christ or that my confession of faith was in any way meaningful.
The Tannisho, a 13th century text that
confronts the divergences in the sect only twenty years after the passing of
its founder, Shinran Shonin, presents Amida as the Jesus that Christianity
wants, but fails to give us: one who not only unconditionally accepts the
validity of our antinomian confession of faith, but requires it, unlike the
experience of Christian faith, in which confessionalism is never too far
isolated from works righteousness, both in the scriptures and in the church's
ritualism and emphasis on moral conduct becoming of the Christian. The salvation of Amida is wholly of Amida's own doing (tariki, other-power), a grace which Yuenbo, the writer of the Tannisho, deliberately goes out of his way to emphasize by continually providing
illustrations how intellect, status, and one’s moral compass are no obstacle to
Amida’s salvation--and not simply in the invitation but also in the keeping of
oneself in the safeguard of Amida. One can infer that this is because Jodo Shinshu rejects the notion of
perfectionism or perfect enlightenment (samyaksambodhi)
as a possibility in this life. Jodo Shinshu in fact comes forward at a time in feudal Japan when corruption in Buddhism is thick and when sohei (warrior monks) of the Tendai school roamed the land like Christian crusaders, punishing enemies who disagreed with their schools principles.
This is just one, but perhaps the most
important, way in which Jodo Shinshu inteprets salvation life. The call to all is
truly a call to all and sweeps up all people despite their resistance or
acceptance. The Tannisho is also very clear that is no good work worthy of one’s
salvation or evil work worthy of damnation. It should be said that Jodo
Shinshu, while a much more simple message, comes out of sutras that are very
much mixed with other Buddhist sects, so that the translation of these ideas
remain much a part of the identity of the sect without any larger claim on the
tradition as a whole, but there is nothing like it in Christianity, for there
is simply no antinomianistic faith that exists outside of some intimated works
righteousness model, whether that be as a means of justification or as a
manifestation of sanctification. And it should be said that even in the
strictest of confessional models, the moral component of one’s fruit (or
behavior) is never far behind. It remains a stumblingblock for so many who find
themselves psychologically crushed under the weight of certain pretexts and
conditions that come from within the Christian tradition, that not only model
moral behavior for us as evidence of our faith, but place incredible pressure
on how we should be growing in Christ. It’s enough to make one ask when one is
not growing: what’s God’s part in all of this?
Jodo Shinshu has an answer: It’s all God’s part.
