3 ms·

This was a great article, thanks so much for sharing. As a buddhist who started in Tibetan Vajrayana as a teenager and has ended up chanting NMRK in the SGI, I

This was a great article, thanks so much for sharing. As a buddhist who started in Tibetan Vajrayana as a teenager and has ended up chanting NMRK in the SGI, I can appreciate that faith, like human beings, adapts to its time and surroundings. While personal gain and financial enrichment and the like have infected almost every faith there is on earth (we are all fallible to some extent) the through line of an ever-narrowing compression of practice makes sense on the pursuit of enlightenment. And, while study is essential in any pursuit of the mind, the mind is sometimes our biggest adversary. Here is what I wrestled with for years, and I think it’s worth sharing because I suspect some of you have wrestled with it too. Every Buddhist tradition agrees that all living beings possess Buddha nature. The Lotus Sutra’s parable of the Jewel in the Robe says it plainly: you already have a priceless jewel sewn into your clothing. You always have. You just don’t know it’s there. Enlightenment isn’t something you earn or achieve. It’s something you already are. So if that’s true — if the jewel is already there — why is it so hard to find? And this is where I kept getting stuck. Because the tool we use to look for the jewel is the same tool that hides it from us. Our consciousness. Our thinking, analyzing, questioning mind. The very thing that makes us human is also the thing that stands between us and what every tradition says is our birthright. Each school of Buddhism is, in its own way, a set of gymnastics designed to get the mind out of its own way. Zen tries to crash it with paradox. Tibetan practice tries to transmute its energy. Pure Land tries to exhaust it into surrender. And each one works, for some people, some of the time. But the fundamental problem remains: you cannot use the mind to escape the mind. This is the contradiction I brought with me to Nichiren Buddhism. And to be honest, I found the same contradiction here, stated more plainly. We say that a single sincere recitation of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo contains the entirety of Buddhahood within it. And I believe that. But we also say: don’t stop chanting. Keep going. Practice daily. Because your delusions will reassert themselves by tomorrow morning. So which is it? Is one moment enough, or isn’t it? The contradiction dissolves when you stop thinking of practice as a means to an end and start seeing it as living itself. Each breath you take is a complete act. No single breath is insufficient. But you keep breathing — not because the last breath failed, but because you’re alive and that’s what living things do. Each moment of chanting or meditating, each act of compassion, each time you turn toward someone else’s suffering instead of away from it — that’s not a step on the path to enlightenment. It is enlightenment, expressed through action. Kierkegaard wrote that life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards. Perhaps that’s why Pure Land buddhists seek this fundamental meaning at the time of death, that that is when enlightenment will reveal itself. But remember the jewel? It’s right there, any moment you honestly reach for it. Thank you again for this fantastic perspective on the trajectory of this universal search for truth!

sls 6mo ago
For readers from outside the Buddhist context, it's worth noting that the above comment is written from an entirely Mahāyāna perspective. For example, it isn't true that "every Buddhist tradition agrees that all living beings possess Buddha nature," that's a very specifically Mahāyāna idea that arose centuries after the death of the mendicant Gotama who is known as the Buddha. The concept of "religion" as it is meant in the modern context is only a few centuries old, as is the idea of "Buddhism", but to the extent that we can think of the teachings of the Buddha as a religion, it's probably most helpful to think of Mahāyāna and Theravāda as different "religions." I frankly think that the Vajrayāna subset of Mahāyāna probably is best thought of as a different "religion" as well, but it's not my area and I wouldn't suggest anyone take my thoughts on that topic with any great heft.
- prieveschl 6mo ago
  Correct, my bad, I should have said “many”, not “every”. Thanks for the correction!
snayan 6mo ago
I'll admit I know very little about Buddhism beyond what I learned at a Vipassana retreat a little while ago. My own journey has led me to believe that it is the ego that stands in the way of us realizing our true nature. I believe we are born into a state of non-duality, and over time our lived experience is harnessed by the ego to create the separate false self. To use your jewel example, our perception is distorted by the egoic lens through which we view the world, hiding the jewel within all of us. And, in my experience, this process is confusing as fuck because it is one of subtraction rather than addition, only by directly questioning our beliefs can we begin to shed them. As we shed them, the jewel will begin to shine through. Is one moment enough? I mean, in theory, if someone could update their priors to understand that the only truth is that I am consciousness and all other beliefs are ultimately bullshit we perceive as real, then sure, done, enlightenment obtained. But, the ego has spent decades for most of us building up walls of false belief around the jewel, so, they likely need to be slowly and sometimes excruciatingly dismantled. I also think it bears mentioning that the ego evolved in times when safety and food/shelter/physiological needs in general were not pretty much guaranteed as is today(Yes, I recognize this is not globally true at the individual level, but generally speaking, we're better off than we were at any point in history on this front.) The environment ego was borne out of was also stable over a human lifespan. Although it's been accelerating for I dunno, 10000 years or so, these statements were likely still true in the times of Buddha for the most part, so we are likely playing a slightly different game now in some senses. The ego has jumped the shark in modernity. I'd peg it as speeding up noticeably since the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment Era, getting really fucking weird post WW2, and being absolutely fucking insane since the dot com era, and yet, still accelerating noticeably. We now live in an exponential age of abundance and the ego is simply not build for it in my opinion. John Vervaeke calls it the meaning crisis, I think it's simply the manifestation of many humans reaching their abstraction limit. Most of us would benefit from fostering awareness of the machinations of ego so we are not a slave to them, a slave to all the abstractions. Are the ego's stories serving you? Or are you serving the ego's stories? And, all of this is not to villainize the ego. A life driven by fear is often a productive one. Ego brought us the vast majority of the technological advancement that provides many of us with a comfortable life. That allows us to discuss the universal search for truth with someone on the other side of the world, through a screen. And, set aside whether all this technology and advancement is good or bad. If there was no ego, if everyone was enlightened, life would probably be a hell of a lot more boring. Ego gets full credit for making Humanity the greatest show on earth.

sls 6mo ago

For readers from outside the Buddhist context, it's worth noting that the above comment is written from an entirely Mahāyāna perspective. For example, it isn't true that "every Buddhist tradition agrees that all living beings possess Buddha nature," that's a very specifically Mahāyāna idea that arose centuries after the death of the mendicant Gotama who is known as the Buddha. The concept of "religion" as it is meant in the modern context is only a few centuries old, as is the idea of "Buddhism", but to the extent that we can think of the teachings of the Buddha as a religion, it's probably most helpful to think of Mahāyāna and Theravāda as different "religions." I frankly think that the Vajrayāna subset of Mahāyāna probably is best thought of as a different "religion" as well, but it's not my area and I wouldn't suggest anyone take my thoughts on that topic with any great heft.

prieveschl 6mo ago
Correct, my bad, I should have said “many”, not “every”. Thanks for the correction!

snayan 6mo ago

I'll admit I know very little about Buddhism beyond what I learned at a Vipassana retreat a little while ago. My own journey has led me to believe that it is the ego that stands in the way of us realizing our true nature. I believe we are born into a state of non-duality, and over time our lived experience is harnessed by the ego to create the separate false self. To use your jewel example, our perception is distorted by the egoic lens through which we view the world, hiding the jewel within all of us. And, in my experience, this process is confusing as fuck because it is one of subtraction rather than addition, only by directly questioning our beliefs can we begin to shed them. As we shed them, the jewel will begin to shine through. Is one moment enough? I mean, in theory, if someone could update their priors to understand that the only truth is that I am consciousness and all other beliefs are ultimately bullshit we perceive as real, then sure, done, enlightenment obtained. But, the ego has spent decades for most of us building up walls of false belief around the jewel, so, they likely need to be slowly and sometimes excruciatingly dismantled. I also think it bears mentioning that the ego evolved in times when safety and food/shelter/physiological needs in general were not pretty much guaranteed as is today(Yes, I recognize this is not globally true at the individual level, but generally speaking, we're better off than we were at any point in history on this front.) The environment ego was borne out of was also stable over a human lifespan. Although it's been accelerating for I dunno, 10000 years or so, these statements were likely still true in the times of Buddha for the most part, so we are likely playing a slightly different game now in some senses. The ego has jumped the shark in modernity. I'd peg it as speeding up noticeably since the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment Era, getting really fucking weird post WW2, and being absolutely fucking insane since the dot com era, and yet, still accelerating noticeably. We now live in an exponential age of abundance and the ego is simply not build for it in my opinion. John Vervaeke calls it the meaning crisis, I think it's simply the manifestation of many humans reaching their abstraction limit. Most of us would benefit from fostering awareness of the machinations of ego so we are not a slave to them, a slave to all the abstractions. Are the ego's stories serving you? Or are you serving the ego's stories? And, all of this is not to villainize the ego. A life driven by fear is often a productive one. Ego brought us the vast majority of the technological advancement that provides many of us with a comfortable life. That allows us to discuss the universal search for truth with someone on the other side of the world, through a screen. And, set aside whether all this technology and advancement is good or bad. If there was no ego, if everyone was enlightened, life would probably be a hell of a lot more boring. Ego gets full credit for making Humanity the greatest show on earth.