What is the Buddha Realm?

Posted: December 6, 2010 | Author: Doug 陀愚 | Filed under: Buddhism, Hosso, Religion, Shingon | Comments Off

Buddhism, especially in traditional Asian culture, tends to have large pantheon of figures, realms and so on. People new to Buddhism, especially those who are leaving behind another faith, may find this all daunting or even a sign of the degeneracy of Buddhism in the Old World. I know this to be a common perception, based on discussions I see online in Buddhist discussion boards, and even in person among other converts. That goes double for critics of Buddhism too.

So why does Buddhism have such a large array of figures, stories, and realms, when it’s supposed to be about the Four Noble Truths and such?¹

A while back, I purchased a little Buddhist iPhone app called Ashura 360, put out by the folks who run the famous Kōfukuji Temple in Nara, Japan, home of the venerable Hossō (Yogacāra) sect. The application contains comments and quotations by the abbot there, Rev. Tagawa (also author of “Living Yogacara”, a book I particularly enjoy), and one comment about the famous Eight Deva Statues (the first links in the list here) there struck me at the time when I read it:

A statue in a display hall exudes a much different appearance than the same figure when it is in its place in the temple. In a display hall, it is appreciated for its aesthetic beauty. From our point of view, however, the statues represent the beauty of the Realm of Buddha. Behind each statue is the Buddhist culture of truth and ethics. It is through this beauty of the Buddhist Realm that I hope you can interact with these statues.

Rev. Tagawa’s point here raises a question, can religious art be used for something higher, more noble? For Buddhists, the answer is yes.

Recently, I heard a great sermon by a guest minister of the Shingon Buddhist sect here in Seattle. The sermon was for Japanese audiences, but I know the minister from past (positive) experiences and I felt like putting my Japanese skills to the test. The sermon was thankfully easy to follow, and dealt with the same subject. Shingon Buddhism, being a fully tantric branch of Buddhism (as opposed to exoteric sects which incorporate some esoteric elements), has a broad array of artwork, devotional figures and practices (under the guidance of a fully ordained priest in good-standing of course). In an old post, I mentioned that Buddhists in the distant past absorbed deities and practices from other faiths and gave them a Buddhist “spin” of sorts. I like to call this process “Buddhification”, but it shows how people of that time and era expressed deep Buddhist truths through art.

But why such a variety of it? The recent sermon tackled this issue using a story. The minister said to imagine a class of grade-school children learning basic math, starting with 1+1=2. All the other kids grasp this concept except for one little boy who just didn’t get it. He came home dejected and sad because he felt stupid. His mother took great pity on him and tried to explain it in her own way. He liked baseball, so she tried to demonstrate with two baseballs that 1+1=2, but the little boy still didn’t get it. He also liked cookies, so she tried that next, but to no avail. Then she tried baseball bats, toys, and so on over and over until one day he finally got it. When she demonstrated the same truth in the right way, he grasped it never to forget.

In the same way, the minister argued, the vast array of Buddhist art, devotional figures, practices work the same way. A person may see Jizo Bodhisattva, and not find anything interesting about it, but that same person may encounter an image of Fudō Myōō or Shakyamuni Buddha, or hear a really good sermon and something will just click inside. Likewise, the mother’s love for her child, and tireless desire to help and teach him reflects the compassion of the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas.

Buddhism’s strength is in its plurality, and the so-called “Buddha-Realm” with all its stories, figures and artwork is an example of its all-inclusiveness simultaneously expressing the same truths to a variety of people in a variety of ways. That of course is the beauty behind the Buddhist notion of “expedient means”.

P.S. Another post about the legacy of Buddhist art.

P.P.S. Post edited after some feedback, and to avoid detracting from the intent of this post.

¹ Such people, particularly the critics, have such a poor understanding of the Four Noble Truths, and this is often rooted in old, outdated translations into English of Buddhist concepts that persist in spite of better understanding and information. A good example of a proper definition of the Four Noble Truths is the link above, which I’ll also link here again for emphasis.

---