Question:
Recently a F.B. friend of mine has starting posting statements
that "I and Amida are one and the same." This person is an avid
reader of Ippen Shonen, the Hijiri, and has come to share many of
the Zen / Pure Land views that Ippen taught concerning
interconnection of all things. Personally I cannot agree with this
line of thought as I see it as presumptuous, arrogant and quite
possibly slanderous.
Please give me your take on this line of thinking and tell me
if you think it goes against the teachings of our Pure Land
Masters.
Gassho _/l\_
Dave Kruemcke
Dave Kruemcke
P.S.
Please feel free to share this conversation with others if you feel it will be in any way beneficial to The Dharma.
Please feel free to share this conversation with others if you feel it will be in any way beneficial to The Dharma.
My answer:
Dear Dave,
That person is wrong and not in agreement with the teaching of
our lineage. As long as we are unenlightened we and Amida are
different, and NOT the same. If we were the same with Amida, why
don't we manifest as Amida now? :) Why don't we dwell in the
ultimate Dharmakaya where there are no blind passions, and no
ignorance? Why don't we have transcendental manifestations, like a
Sambhogakaya body and a Pure Land? :) As long as we are
unenlightened there will always be a dualism between Amida Buddha,
the One who saves, and the one to be saved, that is, us who entrust
to Amida Buddha.
When we will attain perfect Enlightenment in the Pure Land,
after death, we will have access to the same Dharmakaya (ultimate
Buddha nature) as Amida and all Buddhas. Then and only then, we
will be able to say that we and Amida are the same. But if we say
those words while we are unenlightened, we are fooling ourselves,
and we lie.
All beings and the Buddhas have the same Buddha nature, but
because we do not see this Buddha nature until birth in the Pure
Land, to say now that we are one and the same with Amida or any
Buddha, is arrogance.
I repeat this because its very important:
When we ourselves attain Buddhahood in the Pure Land, we’ll
have access to the ultimate reality beyond forms (Dharmakaya),
which is common to all Buddhas, we’ll dwell forever in transcendent
form (Sambhogakaya) in Amida’s Pure Land, and in the same time
we’ll go in all the places of the universe in various Bodies of
Accomodation or Transformation (Nirmanakayas) to save all beings.
This is the true Jodo Shinshu teaching.
Here and now we can only be in a communion or unity with Amida
Buddha like a child is in unity or communion with his Parent. But
certainly, as long as the child is still a child (unenlightened/not
a Buddha yet) he cannot be the same with his Parent (the
Buddha).
Interconnection of all things is a general Buddhist concept,
but it has nothing to do with the false idea that we are the same
with Amida Buddha while we still dwell in samsara. Amida Buddha is
of course, interconnected with all sentient beings, but the level
of His attainment is not the same with ours. If we, unenlightened
beings, were the same with Amida and all Buddhas, then the
aspiration to attain Buddhahood for us and all beings, or the wish
to be born in Amida's Pure Land would be futile. Such theories make
unenlightened beings forget the importance of aspiration to be born
in the Pure Land, which is part of the recquirements of the Primal
Vow: "entrust yourself to me, say my Name and wish to be born in my
Land". If we think we are already the same with Amida now, then we
will not wish to be born in His Land. Why wanting to go there, to
the Pure Land, if we are already the same with Amida now? Such is
the inverted thinking of one who supports this kind of ideas. Not
having the wish to be born in Amida's Land, we cannot entrust to
Him too, because the goal of faith (shinjin) is to go to the Pure
Land. Not having this faith with birth in the Pure Land as the
goal, our Nembutsu is not the genuine Nembutsu of the Primal Vow,
too.
Eiken Kobai Sensei told me the following about the difference
between Ippen and Shinran:
"Ippen thinks that pople have been saved ten kalpas before.
Even without Shinjin, if people utter Nembutsu, then they will get
salvation and become Buddhas in the present. Continue to keep
saying Nembutsu and expect the welcoming of the aspirant into the
Pure Land by Amida. Shinran Shonin thinks that Shinjin is
necessary. When people get Shinjin, it is definite to be born in
the Pure Land, entering into the Rightly Established group in the
present, so we do not need the welcoming into the Pure Land by
Amida. Also we do not become Buddhas in this world. We are born in
the Pure Land after death and then we become Buddhas the same as
Amida."
I have nothing against people following other Pure Land paths,
but if we are trully Jodo Shinshu followers, we should NOT mix what
we learned from Shinran and Rennyo with the teachings of Ippen.
Ippen Shonin was not recognized by Rennyo as a Jodo Shinshu teacher
and so he is not in the same spiritual lineage with Shinran. More
than this, Rennyo tried his best and was succesful in converting
many followers of the school (Jishu) which was founded on the
teachings of Ippen. As far as I know, when Rennyo wrote against the
heresy related with the idea that "beings were saved when Amida
attained Buddhahood, ten kalpas ago", he did it in order to help
people who came from the school founded on the teachings of Ippen.
I explained this here, in my article, A Question on Faith
(Shinjin) and Amida's Attainment of Buddhahood . Please read it
carefully.
Yours in
Namo Amida Bu,
Jōshō
(Dave Kruemcke is the owner of a youtube channel where he
posts his experience as a Jodo Shinshu Buddhist follower.)