Dharma World Buddhist magazine

From Disagreements to Dialogue and Understanding

by Yasuaki Nara

From his own wide range of experience, the author has become convinced that meaningful dialogue can help to bring about mutual understanding, compassion, and self-reform.

It seems that there is conflict between the followers of different religions all over the world and sometimes it appears that the conflict will never end. The world is now an unsafe place, with strife between Catholics and Protestants, discord among the followers of various sects of Islam, acts of war between followers of Judeo-Christianity and Islam, troubled relations between Hindus and Muslims (in India) and Hindus and Buddhists (in Sri Lanka), bad blood between Buddhists and Christians in South Korea, and more.

Even though I have referred to "conflict" between the followers of religions, few of the current conflicts actually stem directly from religious dogma or observances or lifestyles. Rather, they have much more to do with disharmony involving the interests of the cultural, racial, or national groups of the followers of the various religions; however, the sense of belonging that followers have toward their own religions is intense. There is no doubt whatsoever that it is their religious worldviews that are the ultimate cause of the strife.

It seems obvious that the desire to end such conflicts everywhere and to bring about lasting peace should be shared by all, and should also be all that is necessary for us to strive toward a spirit of better mutual understanding and a deeper sense of tolerance among the followers of different religions. The recent dialogues among religions have become increasingly more concerned with a sense of crisis regarding the situation and with an even stronger longing for peace; thus, these dialogues have assumed still greater importance.

Mutual Understanding and Self-Reform

Various dialogues have been taking place in Japan in recent years. Among the first was the Zen-Christian Colloquiums that began in 1967, which is scheduled to hold its forty-third regular meeting this year. In the Conference on Religion and Modern Society, which was inaugurated in 1971, religious scholars and leaders of different faiths in Japan get together once or twice a year, in order to "explore the possibility, value, and methods for dialogue and cooperation among diverse religions" as the primary objective. The East-West Spiritual Exchange program, started in 1979 by the Rinzai denomination of Zen Buddhism, brings Japanese Zen clerics and Catholic monks and nuns mainly from Europe together to experience each other's monastic life; these programs have taken place several times, the tenth being held last year. Also, the Japan Society of Buddhist-Christian Studies, established in 1982, conducts dialogues that strive to achieve deeper mutual understanding and self-reform from an academic standpoint. Its twenty-fifth general meeting is planned for this year.

In 1991, shortly after the twenty-fifth anniversary of the ending of the Second Vatican Council, the Vatican designated four types of dialogue to pursue--dialogue concerning life, deeds and collaboration, theological exchange, and religious experience. The projects described above, however, are principally meetings for dialogue of an academic nature and programs for spiritual exchange.

It has been my good fortune to have been involved with almost all of them, and I have participated in particular in the Zen-Christian Colloquiums from the very beginning, learning many things from the dialogue.

The colloquiums were started with the participation of people in Zen and Christian leadership positions. Some of them are now deceased, and today the colloquiums include people from outside Zen, such as those connected with other Buddhist groups or with Shinto. The themes for the first colloquium were "Inward Journey" and "The Social Responsibilities of People of Religion." We lived together for four days, during which time we took turns expressing our thoughts; there were some disagreements, but we developed a generalized mutual understanding. For many of the participants, it was the first time to take part in a dialogue format, so the process began on a sort of trial-and-error basis. As experience grew, doctrine and ideology came to be discussed as well, but I believe that one fortunate aspect of the colloquium is that all the participants knew of the futility of indulging in doctrinal disputes and were also aware of the value of spiritual exchange. At no time was there a struggle for superiority or an attitude of teaching the other person a lesson. Rather, in the spirit of acknowledging each individual's personal beliefs, there was a great deal of discussion of contemporary issues, agreement, and shared compassion. Such is the type of mutual understanding that comes about through true dialogue.

At the same time, we were all able to strengthen our own faiths by learning about the faiths and practices of other religions, which encouraged us to look at things from new perspectives. Furthermore, encountering a marvelous state of mind, spirituality, or action in followers of other faiths, it was not rare for that to lead to reflection upon our own religious beliefs. It is through these things that I have become convinced that dialogue helps to bring about better mutual understanding and self-reform.

From Disagreement to Dialogue

Other types of dialogue have also been held in Japan, such as the World Conference of Religions for Peace or the Religious Summit Meeting on Mount Hiei, first advocated in 1987 by the Venerable Etai Yamada, the late chief priest of the Tendai sect of Japanese Buddhism. Religions for Peace began in 1970 with the Kyoto World Assembly. Its Eighth World Assembly was held this year in August, once again in Kyoto. In the meantime, a network of the leaders of many religions has been created, resulting in continuous interaction between various faiths, deeper mutual understanding, and movements for peace. Leaders of the world's religions have on several occasions assembled there to pray for peace and to hold symposiums.

It is significant that such large-scale meetings for dialogue are continuing and that their activities have developed. One reason is that the leaders of many world religions have met under one roof, have prayed together for peace, and have deepened mutual understanding and compassion to the point of jointly undertaking efforts toward peace.

It is good to look back at world history. When different religions and cultures encountered each other in the past, we do not find from the very beginning any broadmindedness of mutual understanding or tolerance of other religions. When Christianity arrived in Japan in the sixteenth century, debates between Catholic priests and Buddhist monks occurred, but these could not be called "dialogues" so much as verbal exchanges in which each side did nothing more than strongly criticize the other. The famous "Panadura Controversy," which took place in Sri Lanka in 1873, was one of a series of public debates between Protestant clergymen and Buddhist priests. The debates were conducted in an extremely systematic manner, but from the start each side pointed to what it called the other's "falsehoods" and "deceptions." The debates became fiercely competitive doctrinal arguments and cannot be considered "dialogue" of any kind. There was similar friction when Christianity entered China; even in Korea today, relations between Christianity and Buddhism are not conducive to dialogue.

When one looks back over this history, the fact that gatherings such as the World Conference of Religions for Peace and the Religious Summit Meeting on Mount Hiei have led the leaders of the world's religions to a posture of dialogue is extremely meaningful. We must place the highest value on these efforts, which have resulted in religious leaders from all over the world gathering in one place to acknowledge the meaning and value of one another's faiths and thus achieving the strengthening of an attitude of commitment to working for peace.

Dialogue at the Regional Level

We have now reached a stage in which the leaders of the world's religions are meeting in the same place to work together to solve mutual problems. The various groups have shown tolerance for other religions, have continued their dialogue, and have adopted an attitude of peaceful coexistence. I believe, however, that the issue for the future is the need for these activities to permeate down to the level of the ordinary citizen.

Mutual understanding among religions is not an issue for the select leadership alone; if the general public is not involved, the dialogue's effectiveness will be low. Ultimately, the religious dialogue of Religions for Peace is a means of seeking and achieving peace, and a peace movement must be a mass movement in order to be effective. At the same time, the efforts of people of religion in working for peace can also be seen as a kind of validation of their faith.

Looking over the trends in the dialogue meetings that have taken place over the past few years, I can say that they have dealt in various ways with how Buddhism is succeeding as a religion of peace, and as a religion that can coexist with other faiths. Subjects that have been explored include "the compassionate spirit," "the idea of harmony," "the Four Immeasurables: loving kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity," "becoming one with others," "benefiting others," "tolerance," "knowing satisfaction with little," and "taking on the pain of others." Although these are important as an ideological basis while the peace movement is growing, theories are still only theories, and I believe that how they are actually put into practice is much more important. The peace movement from here on must grow systematically, from theory to practice, and from dialogue among a small elite to dialogue among the peoples of the world.

If such dialogues were to be based on the Buddhist idea of dependent origination, the relationship between the overall organization (the whole; the global community as the largest such entity) and the individual members (separate elements) could be described as follows. First, (1) individual elements exist because there is a whole. Conversely, the whole is made up of individual elements. However, (2) a mere assemblage of individual elements does not constitute a whole; the whole is the aggregate of complex individual relationships. (3) Individual elements are always individual to the end and will not accept being lost in the whole. The dictatorial approach is not the correct one for organization. At the same time, (4) individuals must collaborate toward achieving major ideals, such as peace. In that sense, the whole is the venue for cooperative action along with enabling the individual to exist.

Concerning future religious dialogue, people must be encouraged to undertake small-scale dialogues among themselves. It would be good if small dialogue groups could themselves serve as venues for people working together for peace as a major objective while respecting the different ways of thinking and lifestyles of the individual participants. These small dialogue groups could then go on to form the individual units in ever larger venues for collaboration.

It is my sincere hope that the many Buddhist-related non-profit organizations in Japan will provide a starting point for specific movements in this direction. They are the groups that are already working together through volunteer activities to overcome the differences between the many religious denominations and faiths. In that sense, they are putting into practice the Vatican's "dialogue of deeds and collaboration." A Buddhist NGO network already put together by the various organizations is at this time working out a collaborative posture.

At the same time that they are individually developing movements on their own, the small dialogue groups are also responding to the demands of the times. They will serve as models for the regional dialogues that will grow in the future, and at the same time they are already putting their beliefs into practice. I also believe strongly that mutual understanding and self-reform are vital principles for such movements. As Mahatma Gandhi once said, "You must be the change you wish to see in the world."

Until he retired in March 2006, Yasuaki Nara served first as president and later as chancellor of Komazawa University, where he is now a professor emeritus. The author of numerous books on Buddhism, he received a Litt.D. from the University of Tokyo in 1973 and taught the history of Buddhist culture at Komazawa University. He is currently a member of the Peace Research Institute of the Japanese Committee of the World Conference of Religions for Peace.

This article was originally published in the October-December 2006 issue of Dharma World.

back to this issue's table of contents