A lecture delivered at the East-West Center, Hawaii, USA, January 26, 1995Hawaii
draws all people into the beautiful embrace of her nature. East and
West meet here in friendship; diverse cultures mix and blend in harmony;
there is a balance and fusion of the traditional and the modern.
It is therefore an especially appropriate place to consider the
issues of peace and the human being, issues of fundamental importance to
humankind.
I myself began my travels to the world here in Hawaii in 1960, the
year that this Center was established. It had been my earnest desire
since youth somehow to help bring forth a brilliant dawn of global peace
from here in Hawaii, stage of the tragic outbreak of the Pacific War,
initiated by militarist Japan.
Looking back, we can say that the twentieth century has been stained
by the all too common slaughter of humanity at human hands. Our century
has been termed a century of war and revolution; aptly so, for with two
world wars and countless revolutions, it has been an unprecedented and
bloody torrent of conflict and upheaval.
Advances in science and technology have produced a dramatic increase
in the lethality of our weapons; it has been estimated that one hundred
million people died violent deaths the first half of this century. Under
the cold war regime that followed and since, regional and internal
conflicts have claimed more than twenty million lives.
At the same time, the income gap between the North and the South
continues to grow, with some eight hundred million people living in
hunger. We cannot turn a blind eye to the structural violence by which
tens of thousands of precious young lives are lost daily to malnutrition
and disease.
Furthermore, many thinkers point with alarm to the spiritual
impoverishment, rampant in both East and West, that demonstrates the
vacuity of merely material prosperity.
What has twentieth-century humanity gained at the cost of this
staggering sacrifice of human life? As we approach the end of this
century, amid deepening disorder, no one can suppress a sense of anguish
at this question.
Toward the Inner Reformation
I am reminded of the following passage from the Lotus Sutra, which
contains the essence of Mahayana Buddhism: “There is no safety in the
threefold world; it is like a burning house, replete with a multitude of
sufferings, truly to be feared.”
This passage gives voice to an unrestrained empathy for humanity, tormented by the flames of suffering and terror.
In the same sutra, his gaze fixed on this agonized panorama,
Shakyamuni makes the following declaration: “I should rescue them from
their sufferings and give them the joy of the measureless and boundless
Buddha wisdom so that they may find their enjoyment in that.”
This determination is seminal in the thinking of Buddhism, and from
it flows a tradition of dynamic action toward the creation of an
indestructible realm of security and comfort amid the stark realities of
society.
The foundation for this endeavor is always the inner reformation of
the individual and the resultant renewal and invigoration of life and
daily living. My mentor, second president of the Soka Gakkai, Josei
Toda, termed this “human revolution.”
Under the sway of the nineteenth-century cult of progress, in this
century we have feverishly devoted ourselves to enhancing the structures
of society and the state, laboring under the delusion that this alone
is the path to human happiness. But to the extent that we have skirted
the fundamental issue of how to reform and revitalize individual human
beings, our most conscientious efforts for peace and happiness have
produced just the opposite result. This, I feel, is the central lesson
of the twentieth century.
I was greatly encouraged by the fact that President Oksenberg, a
noted authority on security issues, holds similar views on this subject.
When we met in Tokyo last autumn, he expressed himself thus:
“If people live in a spiritual void, they will experience insecurity.
They will not know stability. They will not feel at ease. The nations
and states in which they live will therefore not be offering their
people true security. Real security requires that we consider more than
just the security of the state but that we also include in our
considerations the security of cultures and individual human beings.”
Our task is to establish a firm inner world, a robust sense of self
that will not be swayed or shaken by the most trying circumstances or
pressing adversity. Only when our efforts to reform society have as
their point of departure the reformation of the inner life–human
revolution–will they lead us with certainty to a world of lasting peace
and true human security.
With this as my major premise, I would like to offer some ideas
regarding three transformations that we face on our way toward the
twenty-first century: from knowledge to wisdom; from uniformity to
diversity; and, finally, what I would term “from national to human
sovereignty.”
From Knowledge to Wisdom
The first transformation I would like to discuss is the need to move
away from our present emphasis on knowledge toward a new emphasis on
wisdom. Piercing, I feel, to the heart of the matter, President Toda
stated that confusing knowledge for wisdom is the principal error in the
thinking of modern man.
Clearly, the volume of information and knowledge possessed by
humanity has seen an extraordinary increase compared to one hundred or
even fifty years ago. It can hardly be said, however, that this
knowledge has led to the kind of wisdom that gives rise to human
happiness.
Rather, the suffering generated by the grotesque imbalance between
our knowledge and our wisdom is succinctly symbolized by the fact that
the most sublime fruit of our science and technology has been nuclear
weapons, and by the widening North-South development gap to which I
referred moments ago.
With the advent of an increasingly knowledge–and information–based
society, it becomes all the more crucial that we develop the wisdom to
master these vast resources of knowledge and information.
The same communication technologies, for example, that can be used to
incite terror and hatred in whole populations, could just as easily
produce a dramatic expansion of educational opportunity worldwide. The
difference lies solely in the degree and depth of human wisdom and
compassion.
The consistent intent of Buddhism is to develop the compassionate
wisdom which is inherent in the depths of human life. Nichiren, founder
of the Buddhism which we uphold, wrote the following in a letter to one
of his disciples. Your mastery of the Buddhist teachings will not
relieve you of mortal sufferings in the least unless you perceive the
nature of your own life. If you seek enlightenment outside yourself, any
discipline or good deed will be meaningless. For example, a poor man
cannot earn a penny just by counting his neighbor’s wealth, even if he
does so night and day.
A distinctive characteristic of Buddhism, and of Eastern thought in
general, is the insistence that all intellectual activity be developed
in intimate dialogue with such existential, subjective questions as:
“What is the self? ” and “What is the best way to live?”.
The passage I quoted is representative of this style of reasoning.
There is growing concern that competition for water and other natural
resources will be an increasingly frequent cause of regional conflicts.
In this connection, I am reminded of the wisdom that Shakyamuni
demonstrated in response to a communal conflict over water in his native
state.
When his peripatetic teachings brought Shakyamuni back to
Kapilavastu, he found that a drought had depleted the waters of a river
running between two ethnic groups in the region, bringing them into
conflict. Neither group was prepared to yield, arms had been taken up
and bloodshed seemed unavoidable.
Entering between the two factions, Shakyamuni admonished them thus:
“Look at those who fight, ready to kill! Fear arises from taking up arms
and preparing to strike.”
It is precisely because you are armed that you feel fear–this clear
and simple reasoning reverberated in the hearts of the parties to the
conflict, awakening them to the folly of their actions. All put down
their weapons, and friend and enemy sat down together.
When Shakyamuni finally spoke, he addressed not the rights and wrongs
of the immediate conflict, but the primal terror of death. He spoke
with power and intimacy on overcoming the foremost fear–of our own
inevitable death–and living a life of peace and security.
Of course, compared to the fierce complexity of contemporary
conflicts, this episode may appear all too simplistic in its outcome.
The present war in the former Yugoslavia, to take but one example, has
roots that reach back nearly two thousand years. During that time, the
region has seen the schism between the eastern and western Christian
churches, the conquests of the Ottoman Turks, and in this century the
atrocities of fascism and communism. The tangled animosities of race and
religion are indescribably deep and powerful. Each group emphasizes its
uniqueness; each group knows and draws upon its history for
justification. The result is the deadly stalemate we see today.
It is for just these reasons that I find an urgent meaning in the
pattern demonstrated by Shakyamuni’s courageous dialogue. Our times
demand an embracing wisdom that, rather than dividing, brings into view
that which we share and hold in common as human beings.
The teachings of Buddhism offer a treasure trove of peace-oriented
wisdom. Nichiren, for example, offers this pointed insight into the
relationship between the basic negative tendencies within human life and
the most pressing external threats to peace and security. In a country
where the three poisons [of greed, anger and stupidity] prevail to such a
degree, how can there be peace and stability? . . . Famine occurs as a
result of greed, pestilence as a result of stupidity, and warfare as a
result of anger.
The wisdom of Buddhism enables us to break the confines of the “lesser self” (Jpn. shoga),
the private and isolated self held prisoner to its own desires,
passions and hatreds. It further enables us to contextualize the
deep-rooted psychology of collective identity as we expand our lives,
with overflowing exuberance, toward the “greater self” (Jpn. taiga), which is coexistent with the living essence of the universe.
This wisdom is not to be sought in some distant place, but can be
found within ourselves, beneath our very feet as it were. It resides in
the living microcosm within and wells forth in limitless profusion when
we devote ourselves to courageous and compassionate action for the sake
of humanity, society and the future.
Through this kind of “Bodhisattva practice,” we develop the wisdom to
sever the shackles of ego, and the spheres of our disparate knowledge
will begin to turn with vibrant balance toward a prosperous human
future.
Toward Empathy with Otherness
The second transformation I would like to discuss is from uniformity to diversity.
I deeply appreciate having the opportunity to discuss this theme here
in Hawaii, these “rainbow islands” which are a veritable symbol of
diversity, and now, as we begin the United Nations Year for Tolerance.
The citizens of Hawaii are truly at the forefront of humanity in
their efforts to harmonize and draw forth unity from diversity, for this
will continue to be an issue of singular importance as we move into the
future. Your invaluable pioneering endeavors can, I believe, be likened
to the ‘ohi’a tree, which is the first to sink its roots into the
barrenness of recent lava flows, sending forth lovely deep-red blossoms.
As exemplified by modes of economic development which aim exclusively
at the maximization of profit, modern civilization tends to the
elimination of difference, the subordination of both natural and human
diversity to the pursuit of monolithic objectives.
The result of this process is the grievous global problematic that
confronts us today, and of which environmental degradation is but one
aspect. It is vital that we pursue a path of sustainable human
development based on a profound sense of solidarity with future
generations.
A new appreciation of human, social and natural diversity is, in a sense, an inevitable reaction to the present crisis.
I am reminded of the wisdom of Rachel Carson, marine biologist and
pioneer of the environmental movement. In 1963, one year before her
death, she expressed her views thus: Now, I truly believe that we in
this generation must come to terms with nature, and I think we’re
challenged as mankind has never been challenged before to prove our
maturity and our mastery, not of nature, but of ourselves.
The increasing attention focused on the Pacific Rim relates in no
small way, I am convinced, to the hope that this “experimental sea,”
characterized by such remarkable ethnic, linguistic and cultural
diversity, will play a leading role in bringing together the human
family.
Hawaii is the crossroads of the Pacific and has a rich history of
peaceful coexistence–accepting the contributions of many cultures and
encouraging the mutual appreciation of diverse values. As such I am
convinced that Hawaii will continue to be a pioneering model for the
emerging pan-Pacific civilization.
The wisdom of Buddhism can also shed considerable light on the
question of diversity. Because one central tenet of Buddhism is that
universal value must be sought within the life of the individual, it
works fundamentally to counter any attempt to enforce uniformity or
standardization.
In the teachings of Nichiren we find the passage, “The cherry, the
plum, the peach, the damson . . . without undergoing any change . . .”
This passage confirms that there is no need for all to become
“cherries,” or “plums,” but that each should manifest the unique
brilliance of his or her own character.
This simile points to a fundamental principle of appreciation for
diversity that applies equally to human beings and to social and natural
environments. As the concept of “revealing one’s intrinsic nature”
(Jpn. jitai kensho) indicates, the prime mission of Buddhism is
to enable each and all to blossom to the fullest of our potential. The
fulfillment of the individual, however, cannot be realized in conflict
with, or at the expense of, others, but only through active appreciation
of uniqueness and difference, for these are the varied hues that
together weave the flower gardens of life.
Nichiren’s teachings also contain the following parable, “When you
face a mirror and bow respectfully, the image in the mirror likewise
bows to you.”
I think this beautifully expresses the all-encompassing causality
that is the heart of Buddhism. The respect we demonstrate for the lives
of others returns to us, with mirror-like certainty, ennobling our
lives.
The Buddhist principle of dependent origination (Jpn. engi )
reflects a cosmology in which all human and natural phenomena come into
existence within a matrix of interrelatedness. Thus we are urged to
respect the uniqueness of each existence, which supports and nourishes
all within the larger, living whole.
What distinguishes the Buddhist view of interdependence is that it is
based on a direct, intuitive apprehension of the cosmic life immanent
in all phenomena. Therefore, Buddhism unequivocally rejects all forms of
violence as an assault on the harmony that underlies and binds the web
of being.
The following words of Professor Anthony Marsella of the University
of Hawaii are an excellent summation of the essence of dependent
origination.
I intend to accept and to embrace the self-evident truth that the
very life force that is within me is the same life force that moves,
propels, and governs the universe itself, and because of this I must
approach life with a new sense of awe, humbled by the mystery of this
truth, yet elated and confident by its consequences. I am alive! I am
part of life!
By focusing on the deepest and most universal dimensions of life, we
are able to extend a natural empathy toward life in its infinite
diversity. And it is the failure of empathy, as that great pioneer of
peace studies Professor Johan Galtung notes, that in the end makes
violence possible.
Professor Galtung and I are presently engaged in preparing a
published dialogue. One subject of our discussion has been the education
of children and youth, and the need to instill a spirit of positive
engagement with those whose very difference and “otherness” can extend
and enrich us.
This kind of open-ended empathy enables us to view human diversity as
a catalyst for creativity, the basis of a civilization of inclusion and
mutual prosperity.
I would like to note in passing that the SGI’s efforts to promote
cultural exchange and interaction around the world are based on this
conviction and determination.
From National to Human Sovereignty
The third transformation I would like to discuss is from national to human sovereignty.
Undeniably, sovereign states and issues of national sovereignty have
been the prime actors in much of the war and violence of the twentieth
century. Modern wars, waged as the legitimate exercise of state
sovereignty, have involved entire populations willy-nilly in untold
tragedy and suffering.
The League of Nations and later the United Nations, each founded in
the bitter aftermath of global conflict, were in a sense attempts to
create an overarching system that would restrain and temper state
sovereignty. However, we must acknowledge that this bold project today
remains far from the realization of its original aims. The United
Nations approaches its fiftieth anniversary laden with a trying array of
problems.
It is my belief that, if it is to become a true “parliament of
humanity,” the United Nations must base itself on the so-called “soft
power” of consensus and agreement reached through dialogue, and that the
enhancement of its functions must be accompanied by a shift away from
traditional, military-centered conceptualizations of security. It is to
be hoped that, to offer one suggestion, through the creation of a new
environment and development security council, the United Nations will be
empowered to engage the pressing questions of human security with
renewed energy and focus.
In this effort, it is essential that we effect a paradigm shift from
national to human sovereignty–an idea expressed powerfully by the words,
“We the peoples . . .” with which the United Nations Charter opens.
Concretely, we must promote the kind of grassroots education that will
foster world citizens committed to the shared welfare of humanity, and
we must foster solidarity among them.
In our capacity as a non-governmental organization, the members of
the SGI are engaged in developing effective activities on a global
scale, focusing particularly on youth, to inform and raise the awareness
of the world’s citizens surrounding the unique opportunity presented by
the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations’ founding.
From the viewpoint of Buddhism, the transformation from state to
human sovereignty comes down to the question of how to develop the
resources of character that can bravely challenge and wisely temper the
seemingly overwhelming powers of official authority.
In the course of our dialogues held some twenty years ago, the
British historian Arnold Toynbee defined nationalism as a religion, the
worship of the collective power of human communities. This definition
applies equally, I feel, to both sovereign states and to the kind of
nationalism which, in its more tribal manifestations, is fomenting
regional and sub-national conflicts throughout the world today. Toynbee
further required that any future world religion be capable of countering
fanatical nationalism as well as “the evils that are serious present
threats to human survival.” In particular, I am unable to forget the
profound expectation which Toynbee expressed with regard to Buddhism,
which he termed “a universal system of laws of life.”
Indeed, Buddhism possesses a rich tradition of transcending, and
making relative, secular authority through appeals to, and reliance on,
inner moral law.
For example, when Shakyamuni was asked by a Brahmin named Sela to
become a king of kings, a chief of men, Shakyamuni replied that he was
already a king, a king of the supreme truth.
Seven Questions for Security
Equally striking is the drama of Shakyamuni halting the plans of the
imperial state of Magadha to exterminate the Vajjian republics. In the
presence of the minister of Magadha, who had come with brazen intent to
inform Shakyamuni of the planned invasion, Shakyamuni asked his disciple
seven questions about the Vajjians. With some elaboration, these are:
- Do they (the Vajjians) value discussion and dialogue?
- Do they value cooperation and solidarity?
- Do they value laws and traditions?
- Do they respect their elders?
- Do they respect children and women?
- Do they respect religion and spirituality?
- Do they value people of culture and learning, whether they be Vajjian or not? Are they open to such influences from abroad?
The answer to each of these questions was “yes.” Shakyamuni then
explained to the minister of Magadha that so long as the Vajjians
continue to observe these principles, they will prosper, and not
decline. Thus, he explained, it will be impossible to conquer them.
These are the famous “seven principles preventing decline,” the seven
guidelines by which communities prosper, expounded by Shakyamuni during
his last travels.
It is interesting to note the parallels with contemporary efforts to
establish security, not through military might, but through the
promotion of democracy, social development and human rights.
This incident is also a vivid portrait of Shakyamuni’s dignity and
stature as a king of the supreme truth addressing secular authority.
It was in this same spirit that Nichiren issued his famous treatise,
the “Rissho Ankoku Ron,” in 1260, directed at the highest authorities in
Japan at that time, admonishing them for remaining “deaf to the cries
of the people.” From that time, Nichiren’s life was a series of
unending, often life-threatening persecutions.
He, however, expressed his sense of inner freedom thus: “Since I have
been born in the ruler’s domain, I must follow him in my actions. But I
need not follow him in the beliefs of my heart.”
Elsewhere, “I pray that before anything else I can guide to the truth the sovereign and those others who persecuted me.”
And also, “The occurrence of persecutions should instill a sense of peace and comfort.”
Relying on the eternal law within to rise above the sway of
evanescent authority in pursuit of non-violence and humanity–it is in
the course of this grand struggle that one experiences an indestructible
life condition of comfort and security.
I am further confident that these declarations of soaring human
dignity will resound strongly and deeply in the hearts of world citizens
as they create the global civilization of the twenty-first century.
The three transformations which I have outlined come together in the
process of human revolution, the reformation of the inner life, its
expansion toward and merger with the “greater self” of wisdom,
compassion and courage. It is my firm conviction that a fundamental
revolution in the life of a single individual can give rise to the kind
of consciousness and solidarity that will free humanity from its
millennial cycles of warfare and violence.
During the Second World War, Tsunesaburo Makiguchi, founder and first
president of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai (Value Creating Education Society)
engaged in a spirited confrontation with the military authorities of
Japan. Even in prison, and until his death there at age seventy-three,
he pursued principled debate, leading several among those who had judged
and jailed him to appreciate and even take faith in Buddhism.
Seeking to live up to that spiritual inheritance, I began my own
dialogue with the world’s citizens here in Hawaii thirty-five years ago.
It is my determination to devote the rest of my life to the endeavor,
which I hope I will share with you, of marshaling the manifest wisdom of
peace to create a new era of hope and security in the coming century.
In closing I would like to share the following words of Mahatma
Gandhi, whose lifetime devotion to the themes we have discussed today
has long inspired my profound affection and respect:
“You have to stand against the whole world although you may have to
stand alone. You have to stare the world in the face although the world
may look at you with bloodshot eyes. Do not fear. Trust that little
thing that resides in your heart . . .”
No comments :
Post a Comment