By Rev. Ken Yamada
When temple visitors ask, “Where’s the Pure Land,” I usually say, it’s in “a state of mind.” Is that correct? Many people thought differently, and some were persecuted for their views.
Even today, some Jodo Shinshu followers think when they die, they’ll go to the Pure Land, comforted by the thought of reuniting with deceased loved ones. For hundreds of years in Japan, such beliefs were common.
Nowadays it’s absurd to think the Pure Land exists as a real place. There’s no proof and it’s never been scientifically verified. But just 150 years ago, a debate erupted over the Pure Land’s actual existence.
That debate focused on Mt. Sumeru, which according to Buddhist sutras, was by far the largest mountain, and thus, the center of the universe. Legend placed the great mountain in the northern-most region of the Indian subcontinent. It was believed Mt. Sumeru actually existed, although no one had seen it. According to sutras, the Pure Land was west of Mt. Sumeru, and Buddhist hells lay beneath it.
It was feared “if the Mt. Sumeru theory was shown to be irrational, the existence of the Pure Land and the hells would also be subject to criticism, resulting in Pure Land Buddhism being overturned from its very foundation,” Kashiwara Yūsen wrote, in his essay, “Changes in the Conception of the Pure Land in Modern Japan” (The Eastern Buddhist, Third Series, Vol. 2, 2021).
When Japan opened its borders in 1868, transforming from feudalism to a modern society, new ideas and influences rushed in, including Christian missionaries, who criticized Buddhist beliefs as superstitious and unscientific, prompting the two largest Jodo Shinshu denominations to mount a staunch response.
According to Kashiwara, Higashi Honganji ordered the study of astronomy, stating, “Western astronomy and its view of the position of the earth in the solar system posed a grave threat to Buddhism.” Nishi Honganji created an “anti-heretical studies” program that included astronomy, aimed at combatting Christianity. This debate began earlier during the Edo period (1603-1867) but was coming to a head. However, the Meiji government adopted the Western calendar, based on solar dates and the earth’s orbit around the sun, quashing the controversy.
If Mt. Sumeru, and by extension the Pure Land, did not physically exist, what were they exactly and what’s their purpose? The debate turned towards developing a new interpretation that could counter doubts raised by science and stand up to modern sensibilities.
Among the loudest voices was Nonomura Naotarō, a Nishi Honganji priest and professor at Kyoto’s Bukkyo University, which later became Ryukoku University. In 1923, he began publishing essays called “Renewal of Pure Land Buddhism,” later republished as a book, “A Critique of Pure Land Buddhism.”
According to an essay, “Nonomura Naotarō: The Man Who Would Destroy the Pure Land,” by Kigoshi Yasushi (The Eastern Buddhist, Third Series, Vol. 2, 2021), Nonomura argued the Amida Buddha story and birth in the Pure Land were “religious myths” created after Shakyamuni Buddha’s time. He wrote, “Instead of accepting that these ideas are objective facts, we can recognize that these ideas are nothing but words and thereby use them to fully express the spirit of Pure Land Buddhism.”
According to Nonomura, “There is nothing more urgent now than, on the one hand, to proclaim Pure Land Buddhism as a genuine religion and, on the other, to vanquish the Pure Land Buddhism that has fallen into superstition.” Nonomura meant to tear down old beliefs and reconstruct Shinshu with a modern understanding.
However, Nonomura’s position contradicted the popular belief of being born in the Pure Land after death, which, according to Kigoshi, “appealed greatly to those people whose daily life was fraught with suffering. By hoping for birth in the Pure Land after death, they could look forward to being released from the difficulties of their everyday lives in the next life.”
Kigoshi wrote, “For Nonomura, Pure Land Buddhism had lost sight of its true essence, and it was for this reason that he felt compelled to destroy it.” Instead, Nishi Honganji expelled him from the priesthood and he resigned his teaching position.
Four viewpoints of the Pure Land eventually emerged, according to Kashiwara. They were:
- Mount Sumeru and Pure Land versus Science
- Pure Land and Hell as transcendent mystical realms
- Pure Land used metaphorically as an expedient device
- Pure Land as an inward subjective reality found in individual believers
The first view holds Pure Land doesn’t exist because it cannot be proven scientifically. The second view says only greatly awakened beings, such as Shakyamuni Buddha, can see the Pure Land. The third view interprets Pure Land as a symbol giving ignorant people a focus for their thoughts. The fourth view holds a person of faith feels and understands Pure Land, which becomes an individual’s subjective reality.
Regarding the first view, Shimaji Mokurai (1838-1911), a Nishi Honganji priest, wrote: “Mt. Sumeru is something that followers of Brahmanism [developed and] frequently argued over even before Śakyamuni Buddha appeared in the world. It is a legend unique to India… It is an imaginative theory from the past. How can it survive much longer in the present age when we can actually measure and calculate [the size of] the heavens and the earth and dissect [the mechanisms of] the sun and the moon?” Likewise, Higashi Honganji priest Inoue Enryō (1858-1919) wrote it’s a story found in sutras that no logical person would find essential, being an old theory from Brahmanism.
Regarding the second view, Akegarasu Haya (1877-1954) wrote that hells arose from the Buddha’s spiritual experience, therefore it was impossible to say whether they exist or not in an objective way.
Regarding the third view, Higashi Honganji thinker Kiyozawa Manshi (1863-1901) wondered why sutras say Buddha lands in ten directions are all Pure Lands, then give a specific location in the West?
Kiyozawa wrote:
However, there will surely come a time when I die. At that moment, my spirit (seishin 精神), or soul (shinrei 心霊), will separate from my body. This is what everyone firmly believes, in the past and in the present, as well as in the Orient and in the Occident… If this is so, at that time, the World of Supreme Bliss (Gokuraku Sekai 極楽世界) will manifest itself.
However, in order for a result to appear, there must surely be a cause… If we want the World of Peace and Bliss [Anraku Sekai 安楽世界, i.e. the Pure Land] to appear at the moment of death, our efforts will surely be rewarded. Is this not the truth disclosed by our school of Buddhism?
The reason why this world [i.e. the Pure Land] is said to reside in the west is to indicate the place to which we will return when we die. This is because [our death] may be likened to the sun setting in the West. Unless the Pure Land is said to exist in a certain direction, ignorant people will find it difficult to concentrate their thoughts on it. Only then can we determine the place to which we will return [when we die].
Regarding the fourth view, Kiyozawa found the greatest meaning. He wrote:
Religion is a subjective fact. “Subjective fact” means that each one of us searches for and determines the veracity of such facts within our own minds. It is not like some objective fact that we can determine is true or false from our relationship with something outside of us or through other people’s opinions…
If so, how can we explain the existence of the gods and Buddhas or discuss the existence or nonexistence of the hells and the Land of Supreme Bliss as a subjective fact? It is extremely difficult to do so… But if I am forced to explain it, we do not believe in the gods and Buddhas because they exist. The gods and Buddhas exist for us because we believe in them.
Moreover, we do not believe in the hells and the Land of Supreme Bliss because they exist. When we believe in the hells and the Land of Supreme Bliss, the hells and the Land of Supreme Bliss exist for us…
Kiyozawa argued religion cannot be judged by science or objective truth. Rather, religion serves the inner mind through faith, resulting in truth that’s subjectively felt. He wrote:
If religion is indeed a subjective fact, it is wrong to ask whether or not the contents of our religious beliefs are objectively correct. That is to say, when it comes to the contents of our religious faith, we should ask whether or not such content is true apart from our inner minds.
All religious facts are subjective facts, the reality of subjective fact depends on whether one believes it or not. Existence of hells and the Pure Land are in the subjective realm, only opened up through religious faith.
Kiyozawa wrote:
The same can be said concerning the question of whether the hells and the Land of Supreme Bliss exist or not. Some people may fly over a hundred thousand million lands to investigate whether the Land of Supreme Bliss exists or not, or dig a thousand yojanas into the earth to see if the hells exist or not. But they are both attempts to investigate whether the hells exist or not in an objective sense.
Moreover, some people may argue as follows. The hells and the Land of Supreme Bliss are taught in all religions. They are found in Christianity and they are found in Buddhism. Therefore, the hells and the Land of Supreme Bliss must exist. But this is also an attempt to determine the existence of the hells and the Land of Supreme Bliss in an objective sense.
However, we understand both attempts as academic matters and not something related to religion. The reason for this is because people who take such approaches do not know that religion is a subjective fact and try to study and determine religion objectively.
Here, Kiyozawa explicitly states the world of science and the world of religion are completely different realms. Therefore, religious truth cannot be judged in terms of science. What is felt and intuitively understood cannot be measured and objectively proven.
Mokurai, a reform-minded priest with Nishi Honganji, also adopted a subjective interpretation. However, his influence dissipated with his death in 1911.
Mokurai wrote:
What kind of entities are the hells and the Land of Supreme Bliss? If we consider this matter from the standpoint of Buddhist teachings, it must be said that they are none other than alternate names for the realms of suffering and bliss.
Therefore, the hells and the Land of Supreme Bliss are retributions deriving from good and evil causes. Good and evil arise from an instant of thought in my mind. Hence the source from which the hells and the Land of Supreme Bliss arise is also this instant of thought in my mind. The parting of the ways that leads to the hells or to the Land of Supreme Bliss resides in this instant of thought in my mind.
That is to say, if I arouse an evil thought for even an instant, I will start walking on the path to the hells but if I arouse a good thought for even an instant, I will start walking on the path to the Land of Supreme. Although the hells and the land of Supreme Bliss are as far apart as the heavens above and the deep waters below, the point at which the path to them parts is found in just the instant of thought that arises in my heart.
Kashiwara cites other influential teachers at Higashi Honganji who followed Kiyozawa’s thinking. For instance, Sasaki Gessho (1875-1926), who served as Otani University president, wrote:
There is no need to look far away for proof that the hells and the Land of Supreme Bliss actually exist. We should look for them nearby. There is no need to look for them outside ourselves. They should be sought within ourselves…
Proof of the existence of the hells that are said to be found several tens of thousands of yojanas under the ground and the Land of Supreme Bliss that is said to be found beyond a hundred thousand million lands in the distance can be discovered within our breast and in our hearts.
In other words, we should not seek objective proof that the hells and the Land of Supreme Bliss actually exist. By all means, we should look for them in a subjective way. We should abandon [our search for] their objective existence, which is ambiguous and uncertain, and seek the proof for their existence in our own minds, which [we can apprehend] most clearly and most reliably…
This is truly self-awakening (jikaku 自覚) based on spiritual experience… It is the ultimate self-realization; it is something we ourselves attain (jitoku 自得).
It is the actually existing hells that the self explains to the self and that the self actually experiences. It is the actually existing Land of Supreme Bliss. Yes, the hells and the Land of Supreme Bliss in the realm of religion are hells and the Land of Supreme Bliss that actually is bliss. This is religious faith.
Here, Sasaki clearly points to one’s inner turmoil and suffering as the existence of hell. Likewise, one’s inner bliss manifests the Pure Land. These states manifest themselves in our present life, not in some sort of afterlife.
According to Kashiwara, Higashi Honganji priest Sakai Shūgaku (1882-1944) felt Pure Land was not something one discovers through reason but something one realizes. Kashiwara wrote: “When one harbors doubts concerning the Pure Land, the flower in which one is born in the Pure Land does not open, but if one’s faith is pure, the flower will open and one will see the Buddha. [Shūgaku] also stated that people believe in the objective existence of the Land of Supreme Bliss when young, reject it as a subjective creation in middle age, but finally come to believe in the subjective reality of a blissful land, even though people of common sense reject it as superstition.”
Following Kiyozawa, Kaneko Daiei (1881-1976) also wrote about how Pure Land represented the realm of the spirit, meaning a world found within ourselves. Kashiwara described Kaneko’s thought from the standpoint of the ideal—this world is a dream and the ideal realm is real. It is the foundational world that we cannot see in our lives. It is this realm that all things return. Kaneko maintains Pure Land as a real world established from the Pure Land as an ideal realm, representing a subjective reality.
Another influential Higashi Honganji teacher, Soga Ryōjin (1875-1971) wrote, “The Tathāgata exists because I have faith in him. Where there is no faith, the Tathāgata does not exist… This means that, according to Kiyozawa, the Tathāgata is determined through faith.” The Higashi Honganji denomination expelled Kaneko for his views, but he was later reinstated.
Today there remains varying viewpoints of the Pure Land. Modern people typically consider themselves believers of science and reason, which is why it’s easy to think Pure Land belongs in the realm of superstition or the supernatural. It’s important to clarify just where our thinking stands. These teachers from the past who debated and tried to clarify where exactly the Pure Land lays serve as important guides.
-Rev. Yamada is editor at Higashi Honganji’s Shinshu Center of America