I. INTRODUCTION

Issues Facing Shin Buddhist Studies Today

TODAY, IN THE EARLY STAGES of this new twenty-first century, the walls of our national borders are gradually starting to fall. As we cross over these national boundaries, we find ourselves entering an age in which people, cultures and religions will all have to engage in a broad range of interchange. It has been my experience that, in the midst of this situation, a growing number of persons from outside of Japan are taking interest in Japanese Buddhism, and particularly in Shin Buddhism. In this new age, Shin Buddhism must be able to open itself up even more widely to the world. In spite of that, however, the doctrinal study of Shin Buddhism today remains mired in a conservative traditionalism. As long as it remains that way, it will never be able to mesh fully with the aspirations of the people of the world. The world is looking toward Shin Buddhism with heart-felt expectations. Yet, as long as it fails to attempt to become modernized and globalized, all of those hopes will certainly end in disappointment. This is what I have been feeling quite keenly, as of late.

I would also like to ask this question of Shin Buddhism: Just what message does it have for contemporary society and how does it intend to respond to the myriad problems of today? Our twenty-first century scientific culture is now exposing a variety of contradictions within human life. Certainly, those aspects that fail to take account of the human intellect are being severely brought into question. In addition, an assortment of new themes have arisen, including bio-ethics and environmental ethics, as well as the problems of peace, human rights and other issues that are common to all humanity. In that sense, the present situation requires the involvement of religion within it. However, how on earth is Japanese Buddhism - and we must include Shin Buddhism here - going to be able to respond to the truly perplexing problems of this new twenty-first century? If I might offer my frank opinion, it is very uncertain whether it will likely be able to do so. If Shin Buddhism is unable to say anything in regard to the new problems found in today's globalized society, then inevitably it will find itself abandoned not only by persons from outside of Japan, but also eventually by the Japanese people themselves.

Thus, Shin Buddhist Studies of today is directly faced with the problems of a new globalized society, and it is being asked how it will respond to them. More than anything else, I believe that Shin Buddhism of today and the future must cast off its traditional framework, which not only deviates from fundamental Buddhist principles, but also consists of convenient interpretations of them from institutional or sectarian levels. Shin Buddhism must be restored as a truly Buddhist school. As long as it fails to do so, it will be unable to respond to today's societal problems or to issues that are global or international in scope. A variety of recent experiences have convinced me of this.

Posing the Problem of the True and the False in Contemporary Shin Buddhist Studies

Contemporary Shin Buddhist Studies must clearly return to the fundamental purport of Shinran and to the true Buddhist teachings. However, prior to that Shin Buddhism must face the task of addressing the problem of what teachings it considers to be true and false. That is to say, we must be able to construct a clear theory for discerning and distinguishing "true Shin Buddhism" from "false Shin Buddhism." Shinran had earlier made critical classifications vis-?-vis traditional Buddhist teachings and other Japanese religions of his era, distinguishing between "true," "provisional" and "false" teachings. Today, the same kind of clear discernment of "true," "provisional," and "false" teachings must be made, in a way that accords with the actual situation that Shin Buddhism finds itself within. Since time will not permit me to take up this entire issue today, I will not touch upon the discussion of "true" versus "provisional" teachings. Instead, I would like simply to present a few of my thoughts regarding "true" versus "false" Shin Buddhism.

As we consider the problem of the true and the false in Shin Buddhism, what basic standard should we apply in order to distinguish between true Shin Buddhism and false Shin Buddhism? The first consideration should be whether or not Shin Buddhism is clearly grounded in the logic of the East, or, that is, in the logic of Mahayana Buddhism. Secondly, we must consider whether Shin Buddhism is being interpreted through the logic of the Primal Vow, as it is set forth in the Muryojukyo (the Larger Sutra of the Buddha of Immeasurable Life), the fundamental Pure Land sutra. Third, we must take up the question of whether or not it correctly comprehends the fundamental purport of Shinran himself. Any criteria or logic that falls outside of these three considerations ought to be excluded. Yet, these three points are not very clear in today's understanding of Shin Buddhism. What is evident instead is the blending of Shin Buddhist thought with sectarian and institutional ideologies. It is here that an array of problems exists.

Thus, a Shin Buddhism that correctly corresponds to the three theoretical points above is what we can call, "true Shin Buddhism." Any form of Shin Buddhism that contravenes those principles must be called, "false Shin Buddhism." It is not possible to avoid the fact that Shin Buddhism of today deviates in large part from those standards. I must firmly assert that, unless Shin Buddhism can return to its original state and take a correct stance with respect to these three principles, then, without question it will soon forfeit its societal and international position, and be reduced to just another Japanese folk religion.

It is from this context that I would like to discuss the contents of a theory of the true and false in Shin Buddhism. Although there are many ideas that I would like to take up along this line, time is limited, and so I will address the problem of the distinction between "true Shin Buddhism" and "false Shin Buddhism" from the perspective of three questions...