3. What Should Be Done?

          In the discussions so far we have seen, through the lens of the Aum Affair, the source of the cultural and social disease lurking in the modern age. Although the Aum Affair will no doubt be forgotten in time, this does not mean that the modern ills it exposed have been cured. As long as we feel stifled in modern society the underlying causes of the Aum problem will remain unresolved, and may well give rise to “Aum Affair 2” and “Aum Affair 3.” It remains our problem, just as before.
          What should the Zen tradition do about the Aum problem, and what can it do? The Aum Shinrikyō Discussion Group met eight times to consider these questions (particularly the pressing matter of what might be done to aid ordinary followers of Aum Shinrikyō), and there is no need to review these discussions here. However, it is necessary, I think, to clarify how our proposals relate to the Aum Affair and the Aum organization as we have analyzed them in parts 1 and 2 of these conclusions.
          The heart of our proposals is expressed by Hirata Roshi as “doing our best to live our everyday lives as Zen monks even in the midst of uncertainty.” The problems confronting a priest today are manifold. There are on the one hand challenges associated with the temple’s relationship to the sectarian organization of which it is a part, and, on the other hand, challenges associated with the operation of the temple itself (for example, challenges relating to the danka system, challenges relating to the temple family, and challenges associated with temple finances and maintenance). However, the crucial element in resolving these issues is in every case the manner in which the priest lives his life. The more important the problem, the truer the priest must be to his Zen vocation.
          This does not mean clinging to the customs of the past, as though the problems of modern society had never arisen, but rather indicates a stance from which to seek the resolution of the difficulties that arise. This is probably what Hirata Roshi meant when he commented that monastic practice is the foundation of temple life. The same can be said of seeking solutions to such contemporary issues as the revision of teaching methods and the reform of the organizational structure even as we maintain our traditional lifestyle centered on sutra chanting, zazen, and samu. Practice for the temple priest today should consist of manifesting the Buddhadharma through the actions of his daily life, while teaching should consist of conceptually clarifying the Buddhadharma in terms meaningful for people in modern society. Only when these two aspects of physical manifestation and conceptual clarification are both present will the meaning of true transcendence take on any concrete significance for people today.
          What it means today to be a Zen monk living in accordance with the ideals of the Four Vows is to show modern society the real meaning of transcendence, to indicate how one releases oneself from the karmic fetters of the limited, humanistic worldview, and to reveal the basis on which the ideals of liberty, equality, and charity are truly attained. Before us stand individuals who in their search for liberation entered Aum Shinrikyō, and found themselves in an inhuman, almost demonic, environment. What we are confronting, however, is not just the single event known as the Aum Affair, but the demonic realm generated by the ideologies of the modern world. Any of us has the potential for ending up in a fanatical cult like Aum Shinrikyō. In such a world it is the duty of those wearing Buddhist robes to concretely manifest the world of the Four Vows and to pray for the repose of the victims of the Aum Affair. This duty is certain to become more pressing as time passes. With this in mind we should strive to put into effect the measures presented in our proposal, starting with those most readily implemented.
          That said, with the Zen institutions organized as they presently are there are likely to be various limits on the formulation of policies. I would, therefore, like to conclude by suggesting the establishment of a Rinzai-Ōbaku research institute that would investigate fundamental issues confronting the Zen school (the status of temple families, the education of new priests, the development of new teaching methods, etc.) and possess the authority to promote needed changes and reforms. This institute would not be a short-term assembly of institutional representatives like the present Aum Shinrikyō Discussion Group, but rather a permanent organization composed of qualified personnel designated by the respective Zen traditions.
          We realize that the present proposal will be regarded as rather circuitous. However, we have considered the true nature of the problems confronting us and of what we seek to be, and hope that the true intentions of our proposal will be recognized. Modern society and we ourselves are suffering from a fundamental illness.
 
<<1.What Was the Aum Affair?
<<2.What Was Aum Shinrikyō?