the buddhist-christian monastic and contemplative encounter

The Buddhist-Christian Monastic and Contemplative EncounterAuthor(s): Morris J. AugustineSource: Buddhist-Christian Studies, Vol. 9 (1989), pp. 247-255Published by: University of Hawai'i PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1390017 .

Accessed: 11/07/2014 08:40

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of Hawai'i Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Buddhist-Christian Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 5.198.113.170 on Fri, 11 Jul 2014 08:40:40 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uhp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1390017?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


NEWS AND NOTES

The Buddhist-Christian Monastic and Contemplative Encounter

MorrisJ. Augustine Kansai University

Since the Berkeley conference in 1987, many interesting and highly relevant kinds of monastic and contemplative encounters have occurred. In this report we pass on news of the latest stages in two centrally important ongoing monastic encounters. One is the "Third East-West Spiritual Exchange," which occurred between Zen and Catholic monks in seven countries of Europe in the fall of 1987. The other is "Phase Four of the Intermonastic Hospitality Pro- gram," primarily between North American and Tibetan Buddhist monastic men and women, which took place in 1988 when a group of Tibetans visited many different Christian monasteries and convents in North America and Europe. Our report ends with a "views" section, contributed by Roger Corless of Duke University, on the central role of the monastic exchange in the Bud- dhist-Christian dialogue. Finally, we invite our readers to begin to think about and discuss ideas concerning appropriate themes and directions for the Monas- tic and Contemplative Encounter Group's section at the next international conference, to be held in 1991.

THE THIRD EAST-WEST SPIRITUAL EXCHANGE

EDITOR'S NOTE.-The following is a somewhat abbreviated translation of the French report on the Third East-West Spiritual Exchange written by the Belgian Benedictine Pierre de Bethune, who is also a member of the Monastic and Con- templative Encounter Group and its Christian representative for the area of Europe. It appears here with his approval.

The First East-West Spiritual Exchange took place in Europe in September of 1979. Some forty Buddhist monks and nuns lived for three weeks in different monasteries of Germany, Holland, Belgium, France, and Italy, and then reas- sembled in Rome. During the Second Exchange (October 1983), seventeen Christian monks and nuns resided in Zen monasteries in Japan. Most recently, from August 21 through September 17, monks and nuns once again met for the Third Exchange. The Reverend Hirata Seiko Roshi, president of the Insti-

Buddhist-Chrnstian Studies 9 (1989). ? by University of Hawaii Press. All rights reserved.



248 NEWS AND NOTES

tute for Zen Studies of Kyoto, and the Reverend Toga Masataka, director of the same Institute, led a group which included the Reverend Aoyama Shunto Roshi of the (female) Aichi Monastery in Nagoya, and the Reverend Sakuirai Koko and the Reverend Azuma Ikuyu, professors at Eihei-ji and Soji-ji, respectively. All of the Schools of Zen monasticism-Rinzai, Soto, and Obaku-were repre- sented in this delegation of twenty-eight monks and nuns.

The Buddhists lived for fifteen days in Benedictine and Cistercian monasteries and convents representative of the monastic life of Europe (Sankt Ottilien in West Germany; Mount Saint Bernard in England; Slangenburg and Zundert in the Netherlands; Pradines, En Calcat, at Bellefontaine in France; Monserrat in Spain; and Camaldoli in Italy). On September 8, everyone met in Rome where Dom Viktor Dammertz, Abbot Primate of the Benedictine Order, received them at Sant' Anselmo, the International Benedictine College. There, a symposium was held in the Chapter Hall to evaluate the stay in the monasteries and convents. Members of the Council for Interreligious Dialogue, the Auxiliary Archbishop of Rome, Monsigneur Rossano, and others interested in the dialogue took part in the discussion. We will return to this symposium later.

On September 12, the monks and nuns were received at Monte Casino (the monastery which Benedict himself founded and ruled). At the end of the visit to the monastery, they prayed in front of the tomb of St. Benedict for all of the monks and nuns of the world. The Zen monks and nuns recited the Hannya Shingyo. Afterward the Archabbot, Don Bernardo D'Onorio, encouraged them to attend a Chapter meeting and to dine with the community in the large refectory.

But the most important day of the stay in Rome was the visit to the Vatican. The group of Buddhist and Christian monks and nuns was first brought to the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue (previously named the Secretariat for Non-Christians) where Cardinal Arinze, together with all his collaborators, presided over an exchange of views. Cardinal Arinze recalled that such encounters should be collaborations in the common search into a mystery which surpasses the powers of all the searchers. Then they went for a private audience with the Holy Father. Even though it was the day before his departure for the United States, the Pope took the time for a meeting with these visitors. In his discourse, he told them that this kind of interreligious dialogue is a part of the monastic vocation within today's church.

Dear friends, I am very pleased to welcome you, the participants in the "East-West Spiritual Exchange." In particular I greet Reverend Hirata Seiko, president of the Institute for Zen Studies, as well as the Japanese monks and nuns who have come to Benedictine and Cistercian monasteries in order to gain a deeper understanding of Christian spiritual traditions. Through the attentive listening and the mutual respect which characterized these exchanges, interreligious dialogue can reach an increas- ingly profound level.



MONASTIC AND CONTEMPLATIVE ENCOUNTER 249

At the previous intermonastic exchange, the Christian monks who lived at your monasteries had the occasion to appreciate your time-honored traditions. They were very moved by your fraternal hospitality. I wish to thank you for your exquisite courtesy and I would hope that such encounters will continue in the future.... I also wish to offer a cordial greeting to the Christian monks and nuns who have organized this meeting under the leadership of the Abbot Primate of the Benedictines. I am happy that a Commission for Interreligious Monastic Dialogue is carrying out this work in close contact with the Secretariat for Non-Christians.

Your specific contribution to these initiatives consists not only in main- taining an explicit dialogue, but also in promoting a deep spiritual encounter, for your life is above all one devoted to silence, prayer, and a witness of community life. There is much you can do through hospitality. In opening your houses and your hearts, as you have done these days, you follow well the tradition of your spiritual father, Saint Benedict.... In doing so you offer a setting wherein a meeting of mind and heart can take place, a meeting characterized by a shared sense of brotherhood in the one human family that opens the way of ever deeper spiritual dialogue.

May all of you-partners in interreligious dialogue-be encouraged and sustained by the knowledge that your endeavors are supported by the Catholic Church and appreciated by her as significant for strengthening the bonds which unite all people who honestly search for the truth. God bless you all.

The initiative for these "Spiritual Exchanges," which had already been recog- nized by leaders within both the Zen Buddhist and the Christian communities, thus received here official recognition from the highest ecclesiastical and monastic authorities of the Catholic church. This is surely a great encourage- ment for the interreligious monastic dialogue.

The principal characteristic of the interreligious encounter was, however, not this official aspect. As the Pope underlined, the contribution of monastic men and women to this dialogue is rather the silent encounter within the interior of their monasteries. The most important part of this exchange was the stay in the monasteries. The example of Monserrat renders testimony to this central part of the Spiritual Exchanges. Here is a report from that monastery presented by Bar- tomeu Ubach, O.S.B.

For our community this was an absolute first in the field of interreligious dialogue. Our community had not had any experience in this domain. The Abbot and his council accepted the invitation extended to us by the D.I.M. (Dialogue Interreligeux Monastique) because they considered it to be a serious advance in the life of the Church. . .

An important principle was to attempt to elicit an openness to interreligious dialogue from all of our monks and to avoid identifying with the interests of those occidental Christians who are themselves interested in the practice of Zen. This was not just because interreligious dialogue



250 NEWS AND NOTES

should be carried on by all members of the church, but also because the practice of Zen in the West had aroused a negative reaction among a large part of us.

But it was the reverend monks Gensho Hozumi Roshi and Genkai Sugi- moto themselves who secured the sympathy of the whole community by their very simple and discrete presence. We sensed them to be persons of great authenticity. Some of the monks came into close contact with them, and some even sat in Zen meditation with them. Others had practically no personal contact at all. But in everyone a feeling of sympathy and love for them grew stronger and stronger. On the last evening after Compline, we asked them to conduct a prayer in the presence of the whole community in the spirit of the 1986 encounter at Assisi. The community greatly appreciated this prayer. This was a remarkable thing, particularly because our community is reticent in the presence of "exotic" manifestations.

We sensed a great concern on their part to follow the whole of our style of living. In the salutation of the Abbot Hozumi Roshi, he expressed his desire to learn very much from us, and he asked us to help him in this "spiritual exchange." Not only did they take part in all the liturgical cele- brations with great reverence and adapt themselves to our diet and style of eating and to the work in the sacristy, they also took an interest in other aspects of our life which were more difficult to communicate.

Their manner of observing our life helped us as well. Communication was very limited not only because of language barriers but because of cul- ture. But one can say nevertheless that in general we were stimulated to better carry on our own monastic observance because of the observance of our visitors. . .

Our monastery is located in a sanctuary of the Blessed Virgin. We were struck by the signs of devotion paid her by our Buddhist brothers and sis- ters.

Now we will return to the last days of this "Spiritual Exchange." The last three days were consecrated to meditation. The monks left Rome and went to Camaldoli in Tuscany. On the way they stopped at Assisi, where they recalled the interreligious prayer meeting for peace in October of 1986. During the days passed at Camaldoli they formed one community of Buddhist and Christian monks. Beginning at 5:30 in the morning, they meditated Zen style and then went into the church for the office of Lauds. The whole day was passed in a monastic climate wherein the two traditions came together. Thus, this exchange was terminated by a deepening of dialogue thanks to the fraternal climate evoked at Camaldoli.

In conclusion, from this experience we are able to say a few things about this kind of dialogue. Verbal exchanges were necessarily limited both because of the language barrier and because only a small amount of time is given over to explicit dialogue. Even the symposium at Sant' Anselmo, where formal verbal dialogue was attempted, was only a moment within a much vaster dialogue. At every stage of their stay, the Japanese monks posed many questions, just as had




their European counterparts during their stay in Japan. It would take months to list all such questions, not to mention their answers. It should be noted that such questionings issued out of very concrete experiences, very simple in nature, but also very significant for revealing the attitudes of the religions being encountered.

For example, the Christian monks had questions about the source of the force and fervor which they observed in the Japanese unsui (Zen monks living in the training hall). They had been impressed with the faith of the Buddhists, which sustains the whole life of the monasteries, so they asked about the object of this faith. The very special serenity experienced in the course of a sesshin (periods of intensive zazen or seated meditation) was also the object of much questioning. On the Japanese side, they posed numerous questions on the role of the Abbot in the monastery and the source of his authority, on the place of monasteries in the society as a whole, and on the manner in which they may realize a renewal within secular societies. And again, "What is the source of your joy?" or simply, "Why so many keys in the monastery? What are you afraid of?" One sees that all of these questions do not concern merely problems inherent in spiritual methods. The field is much vaster. Just the fact of being able to directly witness another religion by actually living within its spiritual milieu which it has created is itself a questioning-tacit, but very provocative. Such an encounter within a climate of mutual confidence and respect poses in a very clear manner the issue of the existence of other religions as ways of salva- tion.

If one considers the responses given to these questions, by one side or the other, it becomes clear that the dialogue surpasses what can be said in explicit exchanges. To respond to new experiences, one most often brings forth sponta- neous explanations which, though brief, are massive. I received the impression that when one tries to respond to questions with peremptory arguements, one fails to respond adequately to the concrete demand. Here, too, the Reverend Hozumi had the motluste: "The important thing is to keep asking the question." Well-received and well-asked questions can become a task that is both stimulating and purifying for our faith. The experience of not having a true response (at least for the moment) is also a positive one, for it frees us from pre- sumption, which is a form of superficiality. As a Zen saying puts it, "A good exchange does not even attempt to explain everything." It respects the mystery inherent in every really basic reality.

Definitely, these Spiritual Exchanges do not serve so much for mutual enrichment as-one may easily understand-for mutual impoverishment. That is, it gives us a better hold on that spiritual poverty which is a joy; in fact, this is not a matter of exchanging riches. These contacts have indeed permitted us to catch sight of treasures both artistic and spiritual, but the specific contribution of these monastic exchanges is something else. It consists in being better able to discern the essential and disengage it in a precise manner from the dogmatic and ritual formulae that express it. And after all this, it is impossible still to live



252 NEWS AND NOTES

one's own religious life without referring to that of others. And this new situa- tion is certainly beneficial. Hozumi Roshi cited a Chinese saying apt for this sit- uation, "To polish jade one needs another piece of jade, coming from another mountain."

THE INTERMONASTIC HOSPITALITY PROGRAM

EDITOR'S NOTE.-The following is taken from reports by Sr. Pascaline Coff, M.M., who is also a member of the Monastic and Contemplative Group. She serves as its Christian representative for the area of North America. Her reports have also appeared in the Bulletin of the North American Board for East-West Dialogue, of which she has been the editor for ten years. She has recently retired from that editorship and the new editor isJames Conner, O.C.S.D.

The North American "Intermonastic Hospitality Program" began in 1981 by the North American Board for East-West Dialogue. Phase 4 of this exchange was completed when three Tibetan Monastics finished their three-month visit to some twenty-five Benedictine and Cistercian monasteries and convents on August 1, 1988. Venerable Kunchok Tsering, at fifty-four the elder in this group, is the principal lecturer from the Gardens Thartse School for Tibetan Buddhist training in Mundgod, India. He was accompanied by Venerable Nga- wang Samten, who translated for him, and who is thirty-five years old and is research editor at the Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies in Sarnath, India. The third was Venerable Tenzing Dunsang, twenty-four, a nun from the Geden Choeling Nunnery in India. At each place they gave talks, shared discussions, showed slide presentations, and took part in the prayer life of the community. They also gave interviews to some newspapers. They emphasized the need for dialogue between the religious traditions of the world, highlighting such similarities as the achievement of true human happiness and world peace.

During one of the dialogues, Venerable Kunchok was asked what he thought was the most admirable trait he observed in the American monasteries he visited. Without hesitation he said: "The kindhearted, loving care and sharing among the members of the communities." His characterization is somewhat similar to Christ's description in John 13:35: "This is how all will know that you are my disciples: by your love for one another." He also had high praise for the Benedictine hospitality he enjoyed in each of the monasteries: "I felt like I was in my father's house, my mother's house." All three said it was a marvelous experience for them to feel like members of each community. It minimizes the differences and highlights the similarities. Love and compassion are shared as the basic principles of both religions. Among the similarities they cited the place of meditation, the role of the Abbot, and even the habit.

The three Tibetan monastics ended their tour in Rome with a meeting with PopeJohn Paul II and also Cardinal Francis Arinze, the president of the Ponti- fical Council for Interreligious Dialogue. The meeting took place August 10,




1988. In their conversations, they commented that they were surprised to see how much time is given to work in Christian monasteries. They suggested that where Christian monasteries have an institution apart from the monastery-for example, a school-the two should be united to a greater extent. In Tibetan monasteries, the students live the monastic life fully with the monks. This extends not only to studies, but also to debates and to meditation. Young people are taken into schools at age nine or ten because at that age they more easily memorize the sacred writings and thus acquire a great deal before going into further studies. They are also trained in monastic living. The monastics also said there is a need for Tibetan translations of Western spiritual books, beginning with the Bible, so as to be able to understand Christianity. It is desirable that some specialists in Tibetan should collaborate with native Tibetans to work at a new translation of the Bible. Besides this, other spiritual books and books about Christianity (history, explanation of teachings, etc.) need to be made available.

The exchange was a great success and a true spiritual enrichment for the monastic communities in North America that participated in the Intermonastic Hospitality Program. The North American Board for East-West Dialogue expects to begin a new phase of this exchange in the early 1990s.

THE CENTRALITY OF MONASTICISM IN THE BUDDHIST-CHRISTIAN DIALOGUE

EDITOR'S NOTE. -This contribution is by Roger Corless of Duke University.

One of the largest dialogue groups at the Buddhist-Christian conference in Berkeley, California, in 1987, was that on Monasticism. As a lay member of this group, I wish to say something of how important I think monasticism is to Bud- dhist-Christian relations.

A few years ago a student in my Buddhism course at Duke University com- plained that teaching Buddhism without meditation was like teaching swim- ming without water. I took the point, since I had been wondering about this myself, and I now have meditation workshops built into the course. I tell the students that these workshops are the 'lab sessions' for the class.

My choice of words is deliberate. There is a curious split in our universities which C. P. Snow has identified as 'two cultures.' The differences between these two cultures, I suggest, lies in whether practice is united with theory or divorced from it. A student who takes an introduction to chemistry will be expected not only to learn about chemistry but also to believe that it is true, and to enter the laboratory on a regular basis, not indeed to become all at once a major chemist but in order to find out what kind of things a major chemist does, what sort of a thing chemistry is, and wherefrom is its data. A student of religion, on the other hand, is merely asked to learn about religion as one might learn the plot of a novel. If the student believes the religion, any religion, to be true, and attempts to experience it, not indeed to become all at



254 NEWS AND NOTES

once a major mystic, but in order to find out what kind of things a major mystic of that religion does, what sort of a thing that religion is, and wherefrom is its data, then he or she must either keep very quiet about it or risk being denounced as a fanatic.

In the United States, there are legal and historical reasons for this, and I value very much the American constitutional separation of religion and public life. But it is this very freedom of religion which is compromised by the separation of practice from theory in religion but not in science.

Since the Middle Ages the players have changed but the game has remained the same. Back then, a university professor would be required to be Catholic, to pray, and to be seen to pray (to go to Mass, etc.). That is, he would be required to unify theory (his teaching) with practice (his contact with God through prayer). It was because Anselm did this that his proof for God is so attractive, and it was because Abelard did not do this that the dove-like Bernard became a hawk and attacked him.

Today, the tables are turned. The rationalists (i.e., the scientists) have wrested control of the ideological machine from the Holy Office, and Abelard defeats Bernard. The Creationists have a point: science has become religio and religion has become pietas. There is not as much freedom of religion in the United States, or the modern world in general, as we might think, though the Creationists overstate their case by weighting the argument in favor of their own particular religion.

I suggest that a principal reason why we tend to upgrade science as objec- tively true (religio) and trivialize religion as subjective opinion (pietas) is that Christians no longer meditate as a matter of course. They present Christianity as a philosophy. God must exist, they say, for how else could the world have come to be? Well, Buddhists are more than ready to show that this apparently rhetorical question is just muddy thinking, and they do this, largely, by appeal- ing to experience. A Gelugpa monastery, for example, functions very much like Oxford in the good old days. Meditation is the laboratory.

What sort of a question is this, anyway? It looks like a proof for God, but Anselm would immediately spot that it is upside down. Anselm did not argue that there must be a God. He knew there was, in his experience, and he presented us with a meditative exercise ("Think of the biggest thing you can. Done it? Right, now, can you think of something bigger? Yes? Now do it again. . . ." ) to lead us to the same experience.

The basis for the Dharma is the experience of bodhi by the Buddha, and the experience of that same bodhi by Buddhists. Christians must likewise remem- ber what the early Church knew-the basis of the Gospel is not argument but experience, God approaching mankind and inviting humans into the mystery of divinization. The Christian God is not a philosophical proposition. He is, rather, a philosophical embarrassment. Buddhism is right: things make more sense without God.

It is abundantly clear that, as Emperor Ashoka said, it is Bhikshus and Bhik-




shunis who are the principal guardians of the Dharma. Their profession is the cultivation of the bodhi, which the Buddhas cultivated. Lay Buddhists need the Bhikshus and Bhikshunis, not only as a field of merit (!) but as a source of Dharma which is authentic because it has been tested in experience-the only test that the Buddha accepted as reliable.

Christianity must realize that it is just as clear that it is the monks and nuns who are the principal guardians of the Christian vision, for it is also theirpro- fession to engage in contemplation, to come to know God in their personal experience. Lay Christians are, like lay Buddhists, dependent on the authenticity of the experience of contemplative monks and nuns, not because monks and nuns are always better meditators (the Desert Fathers set us straight on this more than once) but because that is their job, they are the specialists.

The marginalization of monasticism is, in my opinion, the greatest disaster to have befallen the Christian tradition as a result of the upheavals which we call the Renaissance, the Reformation, and Secularization. When monasticism, and therefore contemplation, is restored to centrality in Christianity, a centrality it still largely has in Buddhism, both Buddhists and Christians will be able to speak of their traditions out of their own experience. And then the Bud- dhist-Christian dialogue will cease to be an academic exercise with a lot of professors waving their arms and legs on dry land.



the buddhist-christian monastic and contemplative encounter

Documents