A Dialogue on the Exclusivity of Nam Myoho Renge Kyo between two laypersons.

Dialogue between an SGI (Soka Gakkai International) member strong in faith and a doubting SGI member.

SGI Member Strong in Faith = SF (Strong in Faith)

SGI Member with Strong Doubts = DM (Doubting Member)

DM: Thank you for taking the time to dialogue with me.

SF: Of course. Dialogue is the foundation of peace.

DM: My question today is this: Does the SGI hold exclusivity to happiness?

SF: No, of course not. People being happy is independent of belonging to any organization.

DM: So why should people join the SGI?

SF: I think you mistake the purpose of the organization. We are not trying to get people to be "in the SGI" just for the sake of being in it. On the contrary, we want to encourage others to take up the Mystic Law since we believe that that is the best way to live a victorious and happy life. We use the organization (the SGI) for that purpose, and so, yes, we invite people to meetings and encourage them to receive the Gohonzon and to participation in activities, not so that people will become members of the SGI, but so that people can become happy.

DM: So if I am getting this correct, you believe that by chanting NMRK (Nam Myoho Renge Kyo), doing SGI activities, spreading this Buddhism, and having faith in the Gohonzon and yourself, that one can become happy?

SF: Yes.

DM: Again, is that the only way to become happy?

SF: No, you seem to be stuck in this point.

DM: If It seems that I am stuck on this point, it is only because of what I encounter in SGI literature. For example, I often read in the writings of both Nichiren Daishon and Daisaku Ikeda that only through faith in the Gohonzon and chanting NMRK can one become truly happy. I read and come upon this superlative statement all of the time. Take for instance a quote from Ikeda in V. 2 of the New Human Revolution, pg. 244, where Ikeda (as Shin'ichi) is speaking to members in Morioka, Japan, "He [Shin'ichi] stressed that the path to happiness is found only in faith in this Buddhism." Another selection that wish to point to is from V. 8 of the Human Revolution, pg. 1104, where President Josei Toda is stated to have said, 

"We must make sure that the followers of other schools as well as those who are indifferent to religion come to give deep consideration to the Daishonin's warning, to determine for themselves whether what they follow is true or false and without exception to take faith in the one correct religion." 

I take from this that one cannot be truly happy without chanting NMRK, having faith in the Gohonzon, and belonging to the SGI (since the SGI claims to be the only "correctly" practicing Buddhist organization). Am I to believe that these statements are only hyperbole?

SF: Are these the only pieces of textual evidence from which to draw your conclusion about the hyperbole usage, and subsequently the exclusivity of NMRK? 

DM: At this current time, yes. I thought there was more, but when I looked recently, I could only find these two instances after a short perusal of the material. 

SF: Okay, well there is a lot to unpack here. I will first break down what you say in the beginning, that in the literature of the SGI there is often the mention that "only by chanting NMRK can one become truly happy." What you say is true. This does emerge in SGI Buddhist literature, although I feel you have singled out certain excerpts to support your claim which, when put in context, become more understandable. 

Let's look at determining the value of NMRK like it is a math problem. NMRK = devotion to the Mystic Law of Cause and Effect. It also means a lot more, but for the simplicity of this exchange, let's keep it at that. The Mystic Law flows through everything and is everything. It is cause and effect. We cannot fathom its depths, nor its consequent actions and reactions, immediate and latent effects, nor the simultaneity of the Law. We can only live in the moment and make causes filled with value. Could you at least agree that our existence is made up of this Mystic Law of cause and effect?

DM: Yes, that I can agree with you on.

SF: Okay, good. Since one should live according to this law of cause and effect to be truly happy (since being happy means being in sync with the universe), and only by being in touch with the Law can we be truly happy, then what is meant by "only by chanting NMRK can one become truly happy" means that by invoking the name of the Mystic Law, one becomes in sync with the universe and therefore along the path to happiness. I can continue with my next point, but do you have any questions?

DM: Yes, I do, actually. I suppose that what I still have a problem with understanding is the connection between NMRK and the Mystic Law. I can agree that, yes, for one to live the best life, filled with the most connections, benefit for themselves, others, and the environment (i.e. live life with the most value), they must be in touch with the Mystic Law. Plants, other animals, microbes, and even inanimate objects are all manifestation of this Law, as are we. But herein lies my quandary: NMRK is simply the title given to this Mystic Law by one man, in one language, in one country, at one period of time (specifically a Buddhist monk in 13th century Japan). It is not even the original Sanskrit pronunciation of the title of the Lotus Sutra - it is a Japanese version of it. How can this title, then, be the universal and sole claimant to the Mystic Law, if it comes from such a worldly place?

SF: The Mystic Law is exclusive; NMRK is not. NMRK is just the way that we in the SGI as Nichiren Buddhists express our devotion to the law. 

DM: Okay, THAT I can get behind. In this case, what if I wanted to give the Lotus Sutra the title "Nam Lusatra in Buddha," for example. I just made that up as a combination of Lotus + Sutra + in the Buddha (us). If I chanted that, would you regard that as an incorrect faith?

SF: Does it matter what I think of your faith? You should try it out and see if it works. If it does, I will be happy for you.

DM: Will you really, though? I have a sneaking suspicion that you don't want it to work.

SF: Don't worry about what I want. By presuming - I am sorry to say - you are being a little arrogant, are you not?

DM: I suppose I am. Okay, well I will chant "Nam Lusatra in Buddha" and report back how I feel. Is that okay?

SF: I am your friend always, whether you practice or not. Yes, I want you to be happy, so yes, report back and let me know how it goes.

DM: Thank you, friend.

SF: Thank you!

The Law, The Mentor, The Sangha, and Our Purpose

The Mystic Law states, in short, that we are all one being. There is no life more or less valuable than another - the difference is just in frequency. We can sometimes perceive this interconnectness, but for the most part it is a fleeting experience of our consciousness. The rest of the time, in order to best be in rhythm with the Law, we use faith. We have faith that there is more than meets the eye. We have faith that we are one. We have faith that we are a microcosm of the macrocosm. We have faith that we are the Buddha, and since we are the Buddha, all other life must be so as well. It is apparent when one experiences the law that all life is sacred, that sentient life is especially so, and that all causes have their effects, whether immediate or latent.

The Mentor is the action from which we seek inspiration. It is not a single person, nor even a person, per say, but the actions of a person. They set our examples and pave the way. In our perception of them they press forward with value and dignity, and we can look to them for guidance. We are drawn to the energy of the action, not the person themselves. A dejected drunkard, an enemy, a colleague, a religious elder, a political leader, a teacher, a janitor, a friend, a tyrant - these can all be, at times, mentors. We are all mentors to someone, and we all have mentors, in many different aspects of our lives.

The Sangha are our communities. We are born in to our communities and they also things of which we choose. They are the beautiful, the ugly, the horrific, the honest, the tranquil, the boring, the imaginative, the energetic, and the boastful. They are everything that makes up a group of sentient beings. We cannot be apart from, nor wholly dissolved into, our communities.

Our Purpose is to bring peace and balance to our communities through practice of the Law, with the guidance of our mentors.

Three within the one. One encompassing the three.

An organization and oneself.

An organization's goal is, in one way or another, to propagate itself. But that is neither good nor bad. What I must come to terms with is whether or not my personal goals align with those of the SGI, and whether that contributes to my well-being and happiness. If it does, and to the extent that it does, I will continue to be involved with the organization. When it fails to align with my personal goals of happiness and fulfillment, then I am in no way obliged to continue in the organization, or at least not to the same extent. Avoid an "all-or-nothing" mentality about being in the organization. Take what works and don't think too hard about the rest.

What about the pressure one feels by peers in the organization for "shakubuku," or an uncomfortable feeling with certain strict Soka Spirit guidelines, or a feeling of reliance upon chanting? These issues you must deal with - with the help of others and through your own realizations and work. No one else can figure them out for you. Know this, however: whatever you are going through with regards to the organization and how that relates to yourself is undoubtedly being undergone by many others.

Overcoming these obstacles will help lead to others doing the same.

We know that faith is important. And it's important in my life. I feel better with it. It makes sense to me. It gives me the strength to connect with others more. Hold on to that. Hold on to your faith - whatever that may be.

Much love,

Paul

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.