ARE YOU A BUDDHIST? | Zen Wisdom

QUESTION:
When people ask me what it means to be a Buddhist, I am usually at a loss for words. What constitutes being a Buddhist? If I say that I am Buddhist, or that I believe in Buddhism, what does that mean? How do I explain myself to another person?

SHIH-FU:
This is a simple question to answer. Buddhism is what Sakyamuni Buddha taught to his disciples. It includes philosophical concepts as well as methods of practice. A Buddhist, therefore, is one who practices according to the teachings of the Buddha, the essence of which is the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path. People who sincerely follow these principles and who succeed in completing the Path will perfect their personalities and attain liberation.

Generally speaking, the practice includes three major endeavors: keeping the precepts, practicing samadhi, and acquiring wisdom. A Buddhist strives to master all three.

The external form of Buddhism has three elements: the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha. The Buddha is Sakyamuni, the historical Buddha for this Dharma age. The Dharma is the doctrine of the Buddha, his teachings and methods. The Sangha is the Buddhist community made up of monks and nuns.

Actually, the Sangha is not only the monks and nuns that make up the community of left-home people. It also includes Buddhist lay practitioners. Although Buddhism emphasizes monks and nuns, with lay practitioners serving as an outer framework, the left-home community could not exist and perform its functions without the lay community. Without the structure created by these elements. Buddhism could not exist. For this reason, the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha are called the Three Jewels.

A lay Buddhist, therefore, is a member of the Sangha. Lay practice of precepts, samadhi and wisdom is part of the Dharma, and is included in the Noble Eightfold Path. The Noble Eightfold Path contains principles that all Buddhists, lay and monastic, aspire to follow and include: right understanding, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.

If you adhere to the precepts, practice samadhi and acquire wisdom, and you conduct your life according to the teachings and concepts of the Buddha, then you can call yourself a Buddhist.
Even if you are not fully immersed in Buddhism, but you have the desire to follow the Buddhadharma, you may consider yourself a Buddhist. It is difficult to embrace every facet of Buddhism completely, instantly, and with enthusiasm. It is a gradual process. But if you intend to walk the Buddha Path, and your intentions and desires are pure, then you can call yourself a Buddhist.
On the other hand, if you do not understand even the basic teachings of Sakyamuni Buddha and you cannot practice the methods or follow the precepts, then, obviously, you are not a Buddhist.
Let’s talk in more detail about precepts, samadhi and wisdom. The precepts are common moral principles. In Buddhism there are many precepts, but those that are shared by all members of the Sangha are five in number: no killing, no stealign, no sexual misconduct, no lying, no alcohol or drugs. I do not wish to explain them at this point. Suffice to say that a Buddhist should try to uphold the five precepts, especially the first ─ no killing.

Samadhi, in its most general sense, means mental discipline. There are many levels of samadhi, and there are even more methods of practice one can use to enter samadhi. A true Buddhist should practice at least one of these methods.

Wisdom, like samadhi, has many levels. One can gain wisdom through hearing the Dharma (from a monk, nun, master, or lay practitioner), reading sutras and sastras, practicing samadhi, or just by keeping the precepts. The simplest way of acquiring wisdom is through hearing the Dharma. An intellectual understanding of the Buddha’s concepts and principles is important. A Buddhist should have begun at least this level of training.

It’s not hard to be a Buddhist. If you are involved with all, or even part, of what I’ve just described, then you are a Buddhist. As long as you have a basic understanding of Buddhadharma and are willing to practice, that is sufficient. You don’t have to be perfect. If you were, you’d be a Buddha. Everyone here, for instance, is a Buddhist. Otherwise, why would you travel to this center, interrupt your daily schedule, and listen to what I am saying?

STUDENT:
As a lay practitioner, I don’t feel like a true Buddhist I feel that only monks and nuns are truly Buddhists.

SHIH-FU:
You shouldn’t feel that way. You shouldn’t think that left-home practitioners are true Buddhists and that you are a pseudo-Buddhist. You are all true Buddhists. In Sakyamuni’s time, there were many left-home disciples, but there were many more lay practitioners. The same is true today.

In the Hinayana tradition, there are four levels of attainment. Lay practitioners can reach three of those levels. After attaining the third level, they will naturally lose their worldly desires, become monks or nuns, and strive for arhatship. In the Mahayana tradition, bodhisattvas may manifest as monks, nuns, or lay practitioners, and there have been many famous lay Buddhists in that tradition.

I think I know why you are puzzled. If both left-home practitioners and lay practitioners are true Buddhists, then what is the need for monks and nuns? It is a matter of commitment. Lay practitioners have the extra responsibility of a family to support. They are susceptible to all the distractions and problems that a family and society create. They are not able to devote their full energy and strength to the practice. A monk or nun, on the other hand, can concentrate fully on the practice, and also in spreading the Dharma.

STUDENT:
At times you have said there is no difference between the Buddhist point of view and the Ch’an point of view. At other times you make a distinction between conventional Buddhism and Ch’an Buddhism. There are many different sects of Buddhism. Are there radical differences among the sects, or are they fundamentally the same?

SHIH-FU:
Actually, more sects of Buddhism existed in the past than exist today. The seeds for the many sects were planted in Sakyamuni’s time. The seeds were actually Sakyamuni’s closest followers. Each disciple approached the practice in his own special way, depending on his personality and talents. Ananda was interested in hearing the Buddha’s teachings. Mahakasyapa was interested in ascetic practice. Upali’s specialty was keeping the precepts. Others specialized in debating, or cultivating supernormal powers. Variations existed right from the start.

When Buddhism was introduced into China through certain sutras and sastras by different Dharma masters, a number of sects developed. There are different forms of practice, each one appealign to a particular interest. Before the T’ang dynasty, there were many Buddhist sects in China, but by the end of that dynasty, the methods of practice had reduced mainly to those taught by the Ch’an and Pure Land schools.

Is there a great difference between Ch’an and Pure Land? There is in Japan. Ch’an and Pure Land, as all Chinese sects, were transmitted to Japan in the same way Buddhism was transmitted to China from India. In the process, changes occurred, and the sects that emerged in Japan were flavored by the distinctive personalities of the particular Dharma masters who founded them. So, in Japan, Ch’an and Pure Land are distinctively different schools.

In Korea, Pure Land does not even exist. There are a few philosophical schools, such as Hua-yen and T’ien-tai Buddhism, but the only method of practice in Korea is Son (Ch’an). When Japanese and Korean Buddhists look at China, they wonder how Ch’an and Pure Land can co-exist so harmoniously. Actually, Ch’an and Pure Land developed together in China. During the T’ang dynasty they were distinct schools, but by the end of the Sung dynasty, Ch’an and Pure land had blended together. Today, Pure Land Buddhists use Ch’an methods, just as Ch’an teachers are not opposed to Pure Land methods.

In fact, the term “Pure Land” did not exist in Chinese history until recently. It was borrowed, ironically, from Japan. Up until then, people who used Pure Land methods referred to themselves as the Lotus school. Since that school holds that every Buddha sits on a lotus blossom, any Buddha’s name was acceptable in the practice. Today, which consists primarily in reciting a Buddha’s name, the method is called “reciting Amitabha’s name, ” as Amitabha is the only Buddha whose name is recited. However, in the past the Chinese referred to it as the “Dharma method of reciting the Buddha’s name, ” because they were not limited to Amitabha Buddha. Truthfully, I do not care for the name “Pure Land” when referring to that particular sect.

Some say today that Ch’an has disappeared from China. I don’t agree. Buddhism remains there. Buddhist practice cannot be separated from Ch’an. If in practicing Pure Land you reach a level where there are no wandering thoughts ─ one-mindedness ─ it is the same as attaining the concentrated mind of Ch’an.

In Ch’an there are sudden and gradual methods. After reaching one-mindedness, typically by a gradual method such as reciting Amitabha Buddha’s name, a person can be given a question, or hua-t’ou, by the master, in order to raise the doubt sensation. At this point, practice shifts from the gradual to the sudden method.

In Ch’an, there is a saying: “Great doubt leads to great enlightenment, small doubt leads to small enlightenment, and no doubt leads to no enlightenment.” There is no guarantee of enlightenment, even if you practice diligently for a long time. Although the effort is never a waste of time, many people lack the faith and determination to pursue sudden methods. For these people, Pure Land Buddhism is very good. With Pure Land Buddhism, at least you have a chance of attaining the Pure Land. For this reason, Pure Land is a good expedient method for those who cannot practice with the vigor demanded by Ch’an.

This is not to say that Pure Land practitioners cannot reach deep levels, the most profound being to experience the Pure Land everywhere. This is the Pure Land of the mind, where practitioners realize that their nature is also Amitabha Buddha’s nature. This is not different from Ch’an enlightenment.

From the viewpoint of sentient beings, there are differences among the schools of Ch’an, just as there are differences between Ch’an and Pure Land. But from the Buddha’s point of view, all Buddhist methods are the same. All paths lead to the same goal, so all methods are Buddhist practice, and all teachings which accord with the Dharma are Buddhist teachings.

STUDENT:
Is Nichiren Shoshu a true sect of Buddhism?

SHIH-FU:
Even at its best, Nichiren Shoshu is not traditional Buddhism, since it has displaced the historical Buddha with its founder, Nichiren Daishonin. At its worst, Nichiren Shoshu is not Buddhism at all, being a nationalistic Japanese religion that has existed for several centuries in various forms. Nichiren Daishonin lived in the thirteenth century, when Buddhism was already thriving in Japan. He preached that only his teachings were true Buddhism, that all other sects had deviated from genuine Buddhadharma. He maintained that anyone who chanted the Buddha’s name would eventually find himself in hell. He said that Ch’an practitioners were following the teachings of heavenly demons.

His intentions were to drive out all forms of Buddhism, so that only his sect remained. But he failed. His extremist behavior only served to unite the different schools of Buddhism against him, and Nichiren himself was almost executed.

In the centuries that followed, there was a metamorphosis within his religion. Followers of Nichiren realized how extreme his teachings were, and returned to traditional Buddhism. However, after World War II, followers of the Buddhist version of Nichiren’s teachings decided that they wanted something that was distinctively and uniquely Japanese. They returned to Nichiren’s teachings and followed them explicitly, calling themselves the True Followers of Nichiren. They refused to accept any other sect of Buddhism, even the old sect of Nichiren. Today, they use the name of Buddhism to spread their own teachings. In the United States, this religion is called Nichiren Shoshu. It is not Buddhism as I understand or teach it.

Followers of Nichiren claim that Sakyamuni is a Buddha of the past, that he is dead and has entered nirvana. But, they claim, Nichiren is an eternal Buddha; he will never enter nirvana. They divide Buddhism in two: one false, the other true, one temporary, the other eternal. Because of these ideas, Nichiren Shoshu’s teachings are not in accordance with the teachings of Buddhadharma. The beliefs of the modern religion of Nichiren Shoshu are hinted at subtly in Nichiren’s writings, but he never outwardly claimed that he was an eternal Buddha.

The Nichiren school derives its ideas from only one sutra ─ the Lotus Sutra. Really, they only use two chapters of the sutra: “Expedient Methods” and “Length of the Life of the Buddhas.” In fact, of those chapters, they only choose specific paragraphs. They do quote from a few other sutras, but emphasis is placed on two chapters of the Lotus Sutra.

When spreading the religion to other countries, followers of Nichiren Shoshu downplay its nationalistic elements. In fact, many followers of Nichiren Shoshu in the U.S. have never read Nichiren’s writings. Only in Japan is the extreme nationalistic spirit emphasized. Extreme nationalism is, by its nature, narrow in scope. If Nichiren Shoshu, in its pure Japanese form, were espoused on a worldwide scale, it would be doomed.

To be fair to everyone, Nichiren’s writings should be translated into English, so that people here can read his work and decide for themselves if his teachings suit them.
Of course, every religion has its benefits. Followers of Nichiren Shoshu claim correctly that their hopes and desires are often fulfilled when they chant the name of the Lotus Sutra (Namu myoho renge-kyo). But this not unique, nor is it very special. It is a phenomenon found in all religions. Those who have faith when they pray or chant will often find that their hopes and desires are satisfied. The idea behind the Nichiren Shoshu sect is to chant in large numbers, so that the power generated is amplified. This is part of the mystical religious experience, but it is common. Christians pray, followers of Pure Land chant Amitabha Buddha’s name.

I also believe that followers of Nichiren Shoshu will eventually return to traditional Buddhism, just as people did after Nichiren Daishonin’s death. The reason is that right now it is a religion without roots, without heritage. There is no body of wisdom, theory and concepts to base their religion on. Eventually, they will trace their roots, and it will lead them to the Great Tripitika of the Dharma. Now they are like a people without a heritage, an empty shell without internal wealth. It cannot sustain itself, and when the followers of this sect realize it, they will go back to Buddhism. For this reason, I am not opposed to the religion of Nichiren Daishonin.

PREVIOUS: SOCIAL ISSUES | Zen Wisdom
NEXT: CHINESE CH’AN AND JAPANESE ZEN | Zen Wisdom