Regarding “Shakubuku”

I think that in the future (here in the USA) we will not have to worry too much about Shakubuku, in the traditional sense of seeking out people and sharing directly the Mystic Law. Rather, Shakubuku will come to us the more we become a trusted, strong pillar of society - both as individuals and as the organization of the Soka Gakkai International itself. The beauty of Buddhahood is found within everything throughout a peaceful society. Keep fighting for peace, and you will be doing the work of a Buddha.

Regarding the Mystic Law.

The Mystic Law itself is not religion. Rather, religion’s purpose is to work ever more towards describing the Mystic Law, rather than prescribing how to live or prescribing the parameters of how one “experiences” the beauty and value of this Law.

Many in body, many in mind, one in spirit.

In Nichiren Buddhism, the religion that I practice, we often read and speak of the concept, “Many in body, one in mind.” This idea is supposed to illustrate the unity of purpose of those that may be of diverse backgrounds and bodies (“bodies” in its all-encompassing sense). I, for one, think that a better title of this concept would be, “Many in body, many in mind, one in spirit.” And by spirit in this case I do not mean the supernatural or otherworldly notion of spirit, but rather a spirit of purpose and of shared values. I feel drawn to this altered description. Why? Well, at least in the west, the word “mind” connotes cognition, or what lies within the realm of the intellectual and the emotional. Since the mind is squarely within the realm of the body, diversity within population abounds. And in a society which values plurality, that is - a diversity of opinions, viewpoints, and emotional temperaments - it is necessary to maintain, and in fact encourage the diversity, or “many-ness,” of the minds of the people. A healthy society and a healthy organization depend on it just as evolution and biological mechanisms always favor the diversity of genes. In conclusion, that is why I feel that a unity of spirit, rather than a unity of mind, describes better the Buddha’s intent and the intent of the universal Buddha Nature inherent in all living beings for peace, value, and balance.

How do we compromise?

I believe that one can compromise with others, while at the same time not compromising with their beliefs. I do not think that these are mutually exclusive - compromise of ones beliefs and compromise with other people. Furthermore, the platform that these interactions should occur on is one in which both parties view the other person (or people) with an inherent dignity, of which all human life (and all life, as well) has. That way you’re not attacking people, or attacking anything at all, but rather confronting their ideas and beliefs with yours in a way in which to find the best solution to any given problem. People can come together and compromise without giving up on their ideals, while at the same time come together in mutual respect based upon either a realistic interpretation of their ideas, or an understanding of what would be best for everybody.