What's new

Buddhist meditation and Japanese lay people

Azomyr

先輩
18 Feb 2013
47
2
18
Hello. Understanding meditation as the axis of Buddhist practice (together with the heavily interrelated morality) I'm wondering if Japanese Buddhists go beyond the popular rituals of funerals and praying being meditation an extended practice among lay followers in modern Japan. Could someone get me a little out of my doubt?

Thanks
 
When I listen to Buddhist podcasts in English or read anything about Buddhism as taken up in the West, all I hear is meditation this, meditation that, meditation the other thing, mindfulness, mindfulness, mindfulness.

When I listen to Buddhist podcasts in Japanese or read Japanese books about Buddhism, it is seldom mentioned.

The thing you have to realize is that in the world of Buddhism, Japanese Buddhism is rather different than what you will find elsewhere, especially the Tibetan flavor which seems so popular in the West. Tendai nun and Buddhist scholar Dr. Karen Katsumoto has written:

日本の仏教伝来は、仏の教えが伝わったというより、仏像と仏教建築、仏教文化の一部が伝わったと言うべきであろう。

and

もし釈尊の説かれた教えだけを仏教とみなすなら、日本仏教はほとんど「仏教」とは言えない。

and

仏教世界で一番異質なのは日本仏教ということになる。
 
When I listen to Buddhist podcasts in English or read anything about Buddhism as taken up in the West, all I hear is meditation this, meditation that, meditation the other thing, mindfulness, mindfulness, mindfulness.

When I listen to Buddhist podcasts in Japanese or read Japanese books about Buddhism, it is seldom mentioned.

The thing you have to realize is that in the world of Buddhism, Japanese Buddhism is rather different than what you will find elsewhere, especially the Tibetan flavor which seems so popular in the West. Tendai nun and Buddhist scholar Dr. Karen Katsumoto has written:

日本の仏教伝来は、仏の教えが伝わったというより、仏像と仏教建築、仏教文化の一部が伝わったと言うべきであろう。

and

もし釈尊の説かれた教えだけを仏教とみなすなら、日本仏教はほとんど「仏教」とは言えない。

and

仏教世界で一番異質なのは日本仏教ということになる。

My knowledge of Japanese language is just beginner level. Could you please translate the Japanese text?
 
Roughly:


The transmission of Buddhism to Japan was more a transmission of a portion of Buddhist statues, architecture, and culture than a transmission of Buddhist teachings.

If you consider Buddhism to consist of the teachings of (Gautama) Buddha, then Japanese Buddhism can barely be called Buddhism.

In the world of Buddhism, Japanese Buddhism differs most greatly (from that in other countries).
 
Last edited:
Roughly:


The transmission of Buddhism to Japan was more a transmission of a portion of Buddhist statues, architecture, and culture than a transmission of Buddhist teachings.

If you consider Buddhism to consist of the teachings of (Gautama) Buddha, then Japanese Buddhism can barely be called Buddhism.

In the world of Buddhism, Japanese Buddhism differs most greatly (from that in other countries).

Thanks for the linguistic approximation. I also have to say that if you and that Tendai nun are referring to that after the introduction of Mahayana Buddhism in Japan, these teachings lost its essence or its metaphysical depth, I completely disagree. I don't know very much about the group of schools that comprise the Japanese Tendai, but if you look at the teachings of the old Japanese masters Eisai (栄西), Dōgen (道元), Kūkai (空海) or the modern Japanese ones like Taisen Deshimaru (弟子丸 泰仙) or D. T. Suzuki (鈴木 大拙 貞太郎), you can find the same fundamental essence seen in the teachings of Nagarjuna (龍樹), Bodhidharma, Rinzai or, if I may say, Gautama Buddha himself.

In all Mahayanist trends, from Tibetan schools to Zen, the primary search is the undestanding of the insubstantiality of all phenomena, the absence of being in itself and by itself of things, the true form of reality. Each school or sub-school has its own way to approach this, but all they are looking for the same truth.

If "popular Buddhism" is the point, I must say it is true that some less philosophically-complex schools emerged and their teachings are numerously followed in China or Japan, but they were created for people without the time or dedication enough for an in-depth study and practice.
 
Well, if I am misguided tell me please what was the question.

Buddhism and the Japanese laity, or so I thought.

Thanks in very large part to Kukai, if Gautama were suddenly dropped down in modern day Japan I believe his reaction would be to marvel at how far Hinduism managed to spread. Regardless of what it may or not may be among the priests and monks, among the laity in much of Japan there is either total ignorance of the foundations of Buddhism, minimal knowledge of it, or a semi-disregard for it. Things are focused much more on the supernatural and the pantheon of various Buddhas, Bosatsu, borrowed Hindu deities, etc. None of which have the first thing to do with the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path, the philosophical aspect of Buddhism, nor anything else that Gautama seems to have been about. Things here are, in my opinion, largely 180 degrees out of phase with what Buddhism started out as. Buddhism here is very largely based on and strongly influenced by the Lotus Sutra, with an especially strong adoption of the bits referring to Amida Buddha (the Pure Land sects) and Kannon (practically everybody). Have you ever read the Lotus Sutra? Thanks in large part to it, the Japanese have managed to turn Buddhism into something practically indistinguishable from a theistic religion to the casual observer.
 
Thanks in large part to [the Lotus Sutra], the Japanese have managed to turn Buddhism into something practically indistinguishable from a theistic religion to the casual observer.

You can say that again ! (And as would be known by some, what I'd prefer to word as 'a theist-involved religious belief system'

I did have a little bit of a problem in catching the more precise intent of the wording in the latter portion of the OP--and if wrong, stand to be corrected--but I find that any, more readily corresponding act to 'praying,' would be that done in Shinto practice here, rather than in Buddhist practice, among the laity.
 
Buddhism and the Japanese laity, or so I thought.

Thanks in very large part to Kukai, if Gautama were suddenly dropped down in modern day Japan I believe his reaction would be to marvel at how far Hinduism managed to spread. Regardless of what it may or not may be among the priests and monks, among the laity in much of Japan there is either total ignorance of the foundations of Buddhism, minimal knowledge of it, or a semi-disregard for it. Things are focused much more on the supernatural and the pantheon of various Buddhas, Bosatsu, borrowed Hindu deities, etc. None of which have the first thing to do with the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path, the philosophical aspect of Buddhism, nor anything else that Gautama seems to have been about. Things here are, in my opinion, largely 180 degrees out of phase with what Buddhism started out as. Buddhism here is very largely based on and strongly influenced by the Lotus Sutra, with an especially strong adoption of the bits referring to Amida Buddha (the Pure Land sects) and Kannon (practically everybody). Have you ever read the Lotus Sutra? Thanks in large part to it, the Japanese have managed to turn Buddhism into something practically indistinguishable from a theistic religion to the casual observer.

Apart to say that I don't think Gautama Buddha in 21th century would actually see any major perversion in the tantric paraphernalia or techniques transmitted by Kukai and other Vajrayana masters, I have say that despite the majority of Korean, Chinese or Japanese Buddhists ignore most of the philosophical meaning regarding Aum syllabe, non-composite phenomena, anatman, middle way or Fudo-myoo, popular or folk Buddhism is not true Buddhism inasmuch is an incomplete Buddhism. The true Japanese Buddhism is a priori the Buddhism of Japanese monks, nuns, scholars and practitioners.

I have to say also that I would not want this to become a Buddhism quiz. If you don't think I could be taking Buddhism seriously (whether I am wrong or not) this conversation has no sense.
 
Last edited:
Well, there's no doubt that it is impossible to treat Buddhism as a single, unified, and consistent phenomenon across the centuries and in various countries. So it is impossible to say "Buddhism is x" or "Buddhism is y" when speaking in broad general terms. What Buddhism is depends entirely on the where, the when, and even the who being discussed. So while Japanese Buddhism is of course the Buddhism of people in Japan, it doesn't really require a great stretch of the imagination to consider that it is vastly different from the Buddhism of Gautama Buddha. I happen to share Dr. Katsumoto's opinion that Japanese Buddhism has very little to do with the teachings of Gautama Buddha. The Lotus Sutra was certainly composed long after his death and the contents are pretty much a thin foundation of Buddhism with a huge accretion of Brahman cosmological characters and all sorts of supernatural mumbo-jumbo nonsense....the very sort of thing that the rationalistic foundation of early Buddhism was an active rejection of. It is essentially what Buddhism looks like after a bunch of Hindus got through messing with it and a bunch of Chinese monks got through translating, mistranslating, editing out stuff, and just making up other stuff to insert. I can't imagine any way on earth Gautama Buddha would recognize either the Buddhism that arises from it or....more importantly....himself as presented in it. And Japanese Buddhism is very largely based on it. Especially as far as the laity are concerned, it is all about Kannon, Jizo, Fudo Myo-o, etc....none of which had anything whatsoever to do with what Gautama Buddha taught. You can't tell me that he would come to Japan and see all the zillions of Jizo statues....an earth god borrowed directly from Hinduism....and say, "Oh, yes. That's what I taught". Same for the great pantheon of gods, devas, etc. that the esoteric schools (Shingon, primarily....founded by Kukai) have also imported from Hinduism.

Japanese Buddhism, especially as practiced by the laity, is by and large all about supernatural superstitions and characters. It is hardly distinguishable from theistic religions such as Christianity, with Kannon and Amida Buddha being pretty good analogs for Christ and Dainichi Nyorai being damned near an analog for God the Creator. One prays to them for intercession and salvation. I've yet to find where Gautama Buddha taught that salvation comes from outside one's own self or that I'm supposed to pray to anybody at all. What started out as probably the only religion in the world teaching total personal responsibility for one's surroundings and eventual fate, without reliance upon any sort of deus ex machina, by the time it reached Japan ended up being twisted around to almost entirely consisting of chanting/praying to various cosmic characters for personal salvation and divine intervention in everything from epidemics, natural disasters, and practically anything else that the theistic religions pray to their Creator about. No...Gautama wouldn't even begin to recognize Japanese Buddhism as being the end result of what he started. Interestingly, while revered, he is a rather minor character in Japanese Buddhism.

Have you read the Lotus Sutra? Are you aware that Shingon Buddhism holds that Kukai is still alive?
 
Well, there's no doubt that it is impossible to treat Buddhism as a single, unified, and consistent phenomenon across the centuries and in various countries. So it is impossible to say "Buddhism is x" or "Buddhism is y" when speaking in broad general terms. What Buddhism is depends entirely on the where, the when, and even the who being discussed. So while Japanese Buddhism is of course the Buddhism of people in Japan, it doesn't really require a great stretch of the imagination to consider that it is vastly different from the Buddhism of Gautama Buddha. I happen to share Dr. Katsumoto's opinion that Japanese Buddhism has very little to do with the teachings of Gautama Buddha. The Lotus Sutra was certainly composed long after his death and the contents are pretty much a thin foundation of Buddhism with a huge accretion of Brahman cosmological characters and all sorts of supernatural mumbo-jumbo nonsense....the very sort of thing that the rationalistic foundation of early Buddhism was an active rejection of. It is essentially what Buddhism looks like after a bunch of Hindus got through messing with it and a bunch of Chinese monks got through translating, mistranslating, editing out stuff, and just making up other stuff to insert. I can't imagine any way on earth Gautama Buddha would recognize either the Buddhism that arises from it or....more importantly....himself as presented in it. And Japanese Buddhism is very largely based on it. Especially as far as the laity are concerned, it is all about Kannon, Jizo, Fudo Myo-o, etc....none of which had anything whatsoever to do with what Gautama Buddha taught. You can't tell me that he would come to Japan and see all the zillions of Jizo statues....an earth god borrowed directly from Hinduism....and say, "Oh, yes. That's what I taught". Same for the great pantheon of gods, devas, etc. that the esoteric schools (Shingon, primarily....founded by Kukai) have also imported from Hinduism.

Japanese Buddhism, especially as practiced by the laity, is by and large all about supernatural superstitions and characters. It is hardly distinguishable from theistic religions such as Christianity, with Kannon and Amida Buddha being pretty good analogs for Christ and Dainichi Nyorai being damned near an analog for God the Creator. One prays to them for intercession and salvation. I've yet to find where Gautama Buddha taught that salvation comes from outside one's own self or that I'm supposed to pray to anybody at all. What started out as probably the only religion in the world teaching total personal responsibility for one's surroundings and eventual fate, without reliance upon any sort of deus ex machina, by the time it reached Japan ended up being twisted around to almost entirely consisting of chanting/praying to various cosmic characters for personal salvation and divine intervention in everything from epidemics, natural disasters, and practically anything else that the theistic religions pray to their Creator about. No...Gautama wouldn't even begin to recognize Japanese Buddhism as being the end result of what he started. Interestingly, while revered, he is a rather minor character in Japanese Buddhism.

Have you read the Lotus Sutra? Are you aware that Shingon Buddhism holds that Kukai is still alive?

Still noting that we don't know exactly what Gautama Buddha actually said, I agree with you that Hinayana Buddhism differs from Mahayana Buddhism, specially in the notion of anatman (無我). Except the Pudgalavadin tradition, all Buddhist schools and trends existing today consider the individual self without a real and consistent entity, being a mere composition of its five aggregates (五蘊), but in regard to the external phenomena, while Mahayana consider it as insubtantial as the internal phenomena (二空 double emptiness), Theravada Buddhism (the only surviving Hinayana school) assume that external phenomena has a real existence.

I also agree with you that Vajrayana Buddhism (part of the Mahayana umbrella) incorporated elements of Hindu Tantrism, but I don't think it changed the fundamental essence of Mahayana. In my opinion the Cittamatra/Yogacara school (唯識派) has much more dramatical deviation affirming that there is no existence of any phenomena but the conscience. Aside from the folk Mahayana Buddhism, the Mahayana pantheon with its Ten, Bosatsu, Nyorai or Myo-o, is also considered a group of philosophical and psychological archetypes, and despite being exclusivities among schools, the Myo-o express ideas as well found in Mahayanist non-Mikkyo schools.

Japanese Buddhism, especially as practiced by the laity, is by and large all about supernatural superstitions and characters.

It is an error to believe that non-folk Japanese Buddhism is at a large extent all about superstition stuff. Shingon Buddhism maybe has some "magical character" but to reduce all the abundant philosophical teachings, the sophisticated use of mandalas as an insight method and other practices to that categorization is a vast exaggeration. In regard to Zen it is still more incorrect. Even with its deep philosophical doctrine and trying to made understand the true thusness (真如) in a more direct way, Zen is characteristically simple and austere giving less emphasis on Buddhist texts or pantheons. It is not difficult to found Zen monks talking about how absurd is to believe in heaven, hell or gods. There is a koan that maybe is somehow related:

A Zen master was asked:

-Master, what is there after death?

The master replied:

-I don't know, I'm not dead yet.
 
Last edited:
You asked about the laity, but every time I try to tell you something about them based on personal observation from actually LIVING amongst them for quite a while you counter by telling me about the monks and priests based on what you've read. This isn't a very productive use of my time.

Have you read the Lotus Sutra.? (I'll give up asking if you ignore the question this time; three times is enough).
 
Back
Top Bottom