Grandmother's Writing Tablets

I've come to the Seicho-No-Ie Main Temple in Nagasaki to attend the 14th Year Memorial Service for my grandmother. The four of us--my parents, wife and I--stayed at the Seicho-No-Ie official residence where she spent her later years. The room next to the Japanese style room on the first floor is the one my grandmother used to write her manuscripts or letters. There is still a small writing table there--about 1.2 meters wide and 60 centimeters deep--and, although its owner has long gone, it looks as though it is resting rather quietly and peacefully. There's a built-in household Shinto shrine in the same room. Whenever we stay here, we make it a practice to recite the Amatsu Norito, a Shinto prayer, and read the Holy Sutra before breakfast. After doing so today, I happened to walk over and sit at the writing table and opened the drawer on the right side. Because it's been over ten years since my grandmother died, I thought that it would be empty, but, not so--all the things that she'd used when she was alive had been left as is.

In the top drawer, there were several tablets mixed in with her writing materials. They were the tear-off kind of pads, a little smaller than the ones you can get at a bank as a gift, and it had the name of the local bank on it. I opened one and saw that it was full of some sort of writings, written in blue-black ink in very small letters. It was my grandmother's writing, and it brought back such memories. There were no blank pages at all--each page was completely filled. Counting, I found that there were 20 pages in total. The other tablets were also filled with my grandmother's writing. Each letter was about 2-5 millimeters in size, so, since my eyesight is slowly deteriorating, it was difficult for me to read the sentences. My wife and mother, too, looking at the writing said, "Oh, my, how small!" and tried to decipher what was written.

At first, I thought they were drafts of the articles that my grandmother used to write for monthly magazines. The reason for this was that the part that I read dealt with conversations she'd had during a trip abroad. Grandmother would, of course, take her writing paper whenever she traveled, but the first time she went abroad was in 1963 when she was gone for seven months, so there was a possibility that she had run out of her writing paper. It made sense that she'd use the memo pads in the hotels, but judging from the fact that the one I was looking at was from a local bank, the basis for this theory was shaky. Furthermore, there was a 2-year calendar printed on the back cover, and it was for 1978 and 1979. Grandmother had not gone abroad during that time.

My wife guessed that the writings were notes for the lectures grandmother had given in Nagasaki. The proof seemed to be in on the front cover where she had written "(1)Completed" or "Finished" in pen. My wife thought that it meant, "These contents have already been used in a lecture." Yes, that made sense. However, when I prepare for a lecture, I may, at times, jot things down on a small piece of paper, but those are only "bullet points" or an "outline" of what I'm going to be talking about. Grandmother's tablets, though, were just like manuscript copy for a magazine, with full, complete sentences. The content was about her first lecture trip abroad in 1963. Why would she write about it 15 years later, in a small memo tablet from a local bank? The answer to that could only be that it was something she'd written for a lecture. 1978 was the year in which Ryugu Sumiyoshi Hongu was dedicated at the Seicho-No-Ie Main Temple.

I'd listened to my grandmother speak on a number of occasions , and at the time she impressed me as "being able to speak freely and flowingly." This impression was probably due in part to the fact that she used to tell "folk stories" to all the grandchildren. Anyway, I'd always thought of grandmother as having no problem talking to others, so this "preparing for a lecture by writing copious detailed notes in a note pad" was refreshingly surprising to me. And, on top of that, my mother told us that, before a lecture, grandmother preferred to stay quietly in a room alone, and disliked having people around her. I found this aspect of grandmother quite surprising.

At the same time, though, I also felt a special closeness to her. That part of her was similar to my own situation as well. My own feelings and nervousness before a lecture, and grandmother's writing detailed notes before hers, overlapped into one. I, myself, don't take notes, but rehearse my lecture using my computer. The tools may differ, but the feelings going through us both are not so very different. With this new affinity in my heart, I was happy we were able to visit grandmother's grave.

Today, I tried to draw the dendrobium that was in the room in which we stayed.

Shakyamuni and the Pilgrim

On a blustery day in April, someone, looking quite pale and dressed as a pilgrim, approached Shakyamuni who was meditating in a cave halfway up the Himalayas.

Pilgrim: It's been a while, Shakyamuni? How've you been?
Shakyamuni: (Looking up with his eyes half open) And, you are...??
Pilgrim: It's me. Remember? I came here before about ten years ago, although I may have had horns back then. Those fell off when you taught me that "There is no evil""
Shakyamuni: Ohhhh, right--It's you. The one who kept insisting that he was The Devil? You don't look well at all.
Pilgrim: I know. I've got a problem and it's really getting to me. That's why I came here to ask for your help.
Shakyamuni: What's wrong now?
Pilgrim: Thanks to what you told me before, I realize that there is no first and foremost reason for evil--there is no "Devil", so I'm free of the preconception that "I am the Devil." I can't begin to tell you how much I appreciate that. That's why I decided to become a monk and learn more about your teachings, but, no matter how much I study, I can't attain enlightenment.
Shakyamuni: What to you is "attaining enlightenment"?
Pilgrim: Well, that's being free of all worries and problems.
Shakyamuni: And your problem would be?..?
Pilgrim: That evil exists.
Shakyamuni: Can't evil exist?
Pilgrim: Of course not. The Buddhist monks have taught me that we must be compassionate to all living things. That's why it pains me when I see innocent people and other living creatures being randomly killed. It's depressing. And then I blame myself for not being able to do anything.
Shakyamuni: Why do you think there is a need to prevent evil?
Pilgrim: Because I feel the regret and chagrin of those people and things who have died or are suffering--their passion to "want to live some more", to "want to be put at ease", to "want to express myself more." I think they're all reasonable and legitimate feelings, but they are cruelly and tragically denied by death, illness or disasters. I can't stand to just sit idly by and look at all of this happening.
Shakyamuni: So, the "evil" to which you are referring is people or other living things not being able to realize their hopes?
Pilgrim: It's not just their hopes. They're being cruelly deprived of their "lawful rights."
Shakyamuni: How do you know that these rights are "lawful"?
Pilgrim: Newborns die, innocent young girls are raped, trains with newlyweds crash, an artist loses a hand, a mathematician becomes an invalid from a brain tumor--Aren't these evil things things that shouldn't happen?
Shakyamuni: Why shouldn't they happen?
Pilgrim: Because they're innocent victims, they shouldn't have to go through all that.
Shakyamuni: There are those who have accumulated this karma from a past life, and choose unhappiness on their own.
Pilgrim: But the person doesn't know anything about his or her past life.
Shakyamuni: In the majority of cases, it's best not to know?
Pilgrim: No, I disagree. If one knows that his suffering has to do with something that happened in a past life, he can better comprehend the situation.
Shakyamuni: Are you saying that there's value in living a life of resignation?
Pilgrim: Not a life of resignation, but one of acceptance.
Shakyamuni: But would understanding or comprehending enable the person to improve and overcome the situation?
Pilgrim: ?..
Shakyamuni: Would it really help for people to know that their unhappiness or the unhappiness of others comes from karma accumulated from a past life?
Pilgrim: I don't know. But, if nothing else, there would be no more anger and cursing to a Creator who is "unreasonable" and "irrational."
Shakyamuni: A social psychologist in the 20th century called the perceiving of things as being "unreasonable" or "irrational", "Cognitive Dissonance." He thought that the ability to perceive things as being such gave rise to individual change and social reform.
Pilgrim: What you're saying, then, is that evil exists for the sake of good?
Shakyamuni: I'm not saying that "evil exists""
Pilgrim: Well, are death, rape, injury and obstacles all "good" and not "evil"?
Shakyamuni: As long as there is a Law of Cause and Effect, good actions produce good results and negative actions produce negative results. If you're looking only at the bad or evil result, things do, indeed, appear bad, but the fact that negative actions produce negative results means that the Law of Cause and Effect is working, so, in a way that is "good." It's much worse for a Law not to work than it is to have these negative results. The reason for this is that it would follow, then, that there would be no guarantee that a person could get good results no matter how hard he tried. And, also, it would mean that bad actions could result in good, so people would stop their acts of goodness. Knowing for certain that negative actions produce only negative results, people will eventually elect good.
Pilgrim: But, if people have no recollection about their past life, how would they know that the bad in their lives now stems from something in the past?
Shakyamuni: People don't need to know the cause of everything in their lives now.
Pilgrim: Why not?
Shakyamuni: Because it would be too much for them. The fact that memories and recollections fade with time is a blessing. Would you be able to bear the tremendous strain and pressure of remembering every single thing that has happened to you since birth?
Pilgrim: ?..
Shakyamuni: Being born through your mother's birth canal, seeing for the first time, bruising yourself as you fall down time and time again, eating something that is actually inedible, being hurt, feeling hopelessly lost when you got separated from your mother in a crowd, all kinds of fears of the unknown--Man's mind is made so that it can overcome unbearable pain and fear by "forgetting."
Pilgrim: Then does that make negative results, oblivion and ignorance all good?
Shakyamuni: When you change your point of view, that negativity or evil disappears. That's originally what evil is.
Pilgrim: But, if the cause for all our suffering now goes back to a past life, this is something I'd like to know.
Shakyamuni: For what reason?
Pilgrim: If I knew, then I would be more proactive in doing good things.
Shakyamuni: Yes, but those would not be good deeds in the true sense of the word. Doing good deeds in order to get good results is, in a sense, a type of utilitarianism. You're trying to use these good deeds to get something for yourself. Doing good just for the sake of doing good, that's what a true good deed is. Sometimes strange theories and reasons get in the way of doing so.
Pilgrim: Shakyamuni, now I know what's wrong with me. I wanted to do something really big--something that I could show off to people, like getting rid of all the "evil" in the world. I realize now that it's really a form of egoism.
Shakyamuni: A Jewish saint once said, "Verily I say unto you, whatever you have done unto one of the least of these my brethren, you have done it unto me." Let your conscience be your guide.
Pilgrim: I understand now, Shakyamuni. Thank you very much.

- MT

Planting a Flower Bed

I wrote in a previous entry about the "Yellow Garden" at our mountain villa. In the fall of last year, we started bringing in some topsoil to a certain area to make a flower bed in this "desert-like" sterile ground. I'm at our villa today, along with my wife and daughter, and the daffodils and trumpet daffodils that my wife planted at that time now have some lovely, delicate flowers. The entire plant, as well as the flowers, are smaller than the ones that grew a couple of months ago in our garden in Tokyo, but, since there are practically no other plants with flowers around, these really make us feel rich. Flowers do that. Besides the daffodils, there are also tulips in this as-yet-unfinished garden, but they still only have the green leaves and stems--the flowers are still buds.

My wife bought various flowers and plants in an array of colors at a nearby home and garden store. My job today was to make the flower bed a little larger so as to accommodate everything she'd purchased. As I wrote in my April 5th entry, I have some misgivings about bringing "foreign" plants into the garden of our mountain villa. The residents of this area agree, but it's really not necessary to bring in any plants. There are a lot of different types of plant life around here and, with the birds and the wind helping to carry different kinds of seeds, in 2-3 years the garden should look fine. The problem is that the people who build the villas "can't wait until then."

In this way, the plants that people like or prefer make their way into the mountains. It's not easy to predict how these plants will effect the ecosystem here. So, if one were to ask the residents of the villas, "Should we bring them" or "Shouldn't we bring them", they would probably have to answer the former. The reason for this being that the villas were built, not to preserve the mountain ecosystem, but because people have found something that suits their taste. In order to make this suitability complete, they make a garden. Even if they're concerned about the ecosystem, they shouldn't build a villa in the mountains in the first place if they are going to make it a priority. So, although they may feel some inconsistencies, they generally go ahead and pursue their own choices.

That may be true, but "continuing what you start to the very end", like some athletes believe, is something you should think about. It's like saying, "Once you start smoking, you should continue smoking until you die of lung cancer." It may be wrong to compare the addicting effects of nicotine to choices of flowers, but one should never overdo things. The reason that you build a villa in the first place is because you feel an attraction to a new environment, so it's meaningless if you fill that area with plants that you already know. It's probably best to make use of the plants of that particular area as much as you can. No, the problem probably stems from thinking that we should "use" them in the first place. We need to look for a happy medium--balancing the plant life of that area, where it demonstrates its own innate strength, and our own choices, "a point of co-existence" between man and nature.

By the way, I thought of all this after my wife had bought the flowers and we had planted everything. While she and my daughter were deciding on the types and colors of flowers, I was in a different part of the store trying to see if they had any cherry tree saplings. The basis for this, of course, is very human. The cherry trees in the lowlands of Ohizumi Village are in full bloom now, and I wanted to recreate that beauty next year, or in a few years, near our villa. Right now, we have a wild cherry tree in the middle of the deck on the south side of our villa. But, because it's had to "fight" with a larch tree for the sunlight in the forest, it's grown long and thin, and the branches with all the flowers are located way up high. What I wanted to see, without straining my neck, was not the white cherry blossoms (of the wild cherry trees) but pinkish blossoms of the cherry tree. Humans are, indeed, very selfish and self-centered.

The flowers that my wife bought the day before were pansies, blue daisies, escortia, Arenaria Montana, and lupines. Since you have to write all these names in "katakana" you can just about guess the "birthplace" of these flowers. I used my hoe and dug up the ground on the east side of the Yellow Garden. After sifting out the stones and rocks, leaving only fine soil, I took the ashes from our wooden stove and mixed it with the dirt. I then mixed the compost that we'd brought from Tokyo, and was finally able to extend the flower bed by about 6 square meters. The compost that we brought was made of some leaves from our garden there. So, there were different seeds, the eggs of different insects, larva, and even worms in it. In this way, parts of the "nature in Tokyo" and "nature from abroad" were transplanted to a part of the Ohizumi Mountains, and will search for a "point of co-existence" within nature here.

- MT

The Flight of Birds

"Desertification" as a result of cutting down the trees in a forest is an effect that we can clearly see. But, in building a house in the forest, there must be a great number of ways, not necessarily visible to the eye, in which it effects the surrounding ecosystem. We tend to think, "How could building one mountain villa...", but, in order to build that house, we need a road for the heavy machinery used in the foundation work, and we also need the construction work for the electricity and water lines. And, to do all this, trees at and outside the immediate construction site are cut down, the topsoil is dug up, and gravel is brought in. Additionally, any landscaping would bring more new insects and fungi along with the new topsoil. And, in raising these plants and trees, hitherto unknown plants and animals may be transported (sometimes even from abroad) into that area.

This sort of effect on the ecosystem can be repaired to a certain extent through nature's "resilience." Or possibly, after a period of disturbance to the ecosystem, it may stabalize and attain a new system or order. But, probably no one knows just how extensive that "certain extent" is. So, it's totally unclear as to how much my building a villa has effected the ecosystem in and around Ohizumi Village. I hope it's something from which it can bound back. But, when I think about it, probably everyone who builds a mountain cottage thinks the same thing and cuts down the trees, digs up the ground, and brings in plant and animal life not there before. It's like dealing successive punches to nature's resilience. It's not that my "punch" is any lighter than any other.

At the beginning of August 2001, my wife and wife spent a little over a week at our newly built home. It was during that time, one morning, as I stepped out onto the deck and breathed in the slightly foggy air? The morning in the Southern foot of the Yatsugatake was filled with the sound of birds. It wasn't the combined sound of a lot of different kind of birds, but what I heard was the sound of the coal tit coming from all over the sky and mountains. The sound was of a higher frequency than the highest note on a grand piano. It was in no way abrasive--instead it was perfectly clear. The sound came from all over the nearby woods, resounding as if they were calling each other, and then disappeared into the distant fog. Listening, enchanted with this sound, after a while I heard the rhythmical sound of the Kohmi Line train which eventually grew further and further away.

Although it had been 5 days since we arrived at our villa in Yatsugadake, this was the first morning I was able to spend a leisurely morning out on the deck. It had, up until the day before, either been raining in the morning, or, because of the thick fog, the tables and chairs there had been soaking wet. But, that morning, the chairs were dry for the first time in a while. I sat down, stretched my legs out in front of me, and looked up at the sky. The cries of the birds were like waves washing slowly ashore. The birds were not flying individually that morning, but it seems that they were flying around in the forest together in a group. Closing my eyes and listening carefully, the same cries seemed to come in waves of musical harmony in the round, and then, after a while, would fade into the distance, like the waves receding from the shore. In its place would be the cries of a different group of birds, and, as if in answer to those cries, similar cries could be heard coming from a forest in the distance.

The coal tit is approximately 10 centimeters long, and a little smaller than a sparrow or chickadee. The tail is shorter than a great tit, and the wings are a bluish gray, the head black, and there is a black stripe on the side of its face that runs from its eye to the beak. It's white from its cheek to its throat, and its stomach is white as well. It also has a black patch on its chest. This bird doesn't seem to mind humans, and sits on the branches of the wild cherry and dankobai trees(lindera obtsusiloba) that are by the deck and also sit atop the railing on the deck itself. That's when I noticed that it makes a low kind of groaning sound. I thought at first that this bird has a strangely low voice despite it being so small. But, after studying it more closely, I found that it was actually the sound of its short wings rapidly oscillating and shaking the air.

When they come to the trees near our house, these birds move so lightly and freely up and down, from branch to branch of the trees that stand so straight and vertical, and pick at the little bugs that they find there. After about two or three times of repeating this, they then move on to a separate tree, leaving a high pitched sound behind. The birds that fly down onto the deck search for the little bugs that are apparently in between the wooden floor boards.

Suddenly, what I thought was the shadow of a small rock flying by in front of me hit the sliding glass door of the house with a loud thud. Looking down, I saw a bird lying with its white stomach face up, writhing and struggling. It looked as though it had suffered a concussion and lost its balance. I watched it thinking that it would eventually recover, but it had gotten one of its feet caught between the wooden floor boards and wasn't able to get up. I bent down and scooped the bird up in my hands, with just its head peeking out. It tried to resist for a while, but eventually calmed down. Its eyes fluttered about as if it was trying to figure out what was going on. I don't know why, but, feeling the warmth of this small living thing in my hands, I felt very happy. It's not because, coincidentally, I had been able to get this bird without any effort on my part, but it was because this small creature wasn't thinking of me as an enemy, but was quietly leaving things to me. We stayed that way for about ten minutes with me warming the birds in my hands and stroking its head occasionally with my thumb, praying for its quick recovery. I then put the bird down on a table. The bird stood with its feet braced, and it seemed that it was still unable to put any weight on its left foot. I scooped the bird up in both hands again, and walked slowly around the deck of the cottage. The trees near me shook from the rapid wing motions of the companion birds, and, as if in reaction to this deep short resonating sound, the bird in my hands moved its eyes and head looking here and there at the sky.

After about 15 more minutes, I extended my forefinger to the bird in my hand. Although a little clumsily at first, I could feel the bird anchor its left foot onto my finger. I then opened up my hand, and the bird did not even fly away, but, instead, stood on my finger. When I tried to get up out of the chair, the bird, again letting out that whirring sound, flew away and landed on a branch of a nearby wild cherry tree. It was about a meter above me, and, the way the bird was perched looking down, it seemed as though it was looking directly at me. It stayed in that same position for about ten minutes, and then it started to give out that high-pitched cry every now and then. After about another five minutes, the bird changed its position, flew nimbly about 2 meters up the trunk of the tree, and looked up at the sky and began to sing. "Oh, it's all better now," I thought looking at the bird somewhat sadly. I wanted it to hurry lest it be left behind by its friends.

In one of his books, essayist Jimpei Arakawa wrote about a bird flying into a glass window. At first I thought these things happened because birds weren't able to see or recognize the clear colorless "glass", and, trying to fly into the house, flew into the glass instead. However, according to Mr. Arakawa, if the glass is between the bright sky and a dark room, the glass hides what's inside the house, and, instead, reflects the sky. So, the bird, seeing only sky, doesn't slow down and ends up crashing into the glass. In some cases the bird may end up, not with a concussion, but dead. Mr. Arakawa writes that he's found the carcasses of these poor birds on his veranda ever since he built his cabin. And he finally came to the conclusion that the reason for it was that his "cabin was blocking the flight course of the birds."

The same may apply to what happened before my very eyes. Fortunately, this was the first time I found an unconscious bird on the deck of our villa, and, though it's been seven months since then, it has not happened again. Coal tits apparently move through the mountains in flocks--it may be that the birds have stopped flying over our villa. I can't say for sure, but, whenever we leave our villa, we have, for safety sake, too, made it a habit of closing the curtain on the inside of the glass doors and windows.

- MT

The Buddha and the Devil

One particularly lovely March afternoon, the Devil came up quite unexpectedly to Shakyamuni Buddha, who was sitting in meditation under the Bodhi tree, and began to question him:

Devil: Hey there, Shakyamuni! Meditating on a beautiful day like this? I've heard something strange, and wanted to ask you about it.
Shakyamuni: And what would that be?
Devil: Well, you know--I usually hang out in the area west of Israel, so there's a reason why I'd come all the way to India today. It seems that there's a religion that started in the 20th Century in this country called Japan, and they teach that "there is no evil." That in itself is pretty strange, but they also say that you teach the same thing, too. I thought, "You gotta be kidding," but, since I'm not exactly up to par on the Buddhist teachings, I thought I'd come here and ask you straight out.
Shakyamuni: You mean, you want to ask me whether or not I teach "there is no evil."
Devil: Right.
Shakyamuni: And why do you want to know this?
Devil: Well, it's really very important to me.
Shakyamuni: And why is that?
Devil: Why, I'm the Devil. If there's no evil, that means that there's no me.
Shakyamuni: Who said you're the Devil?
Devil: Who said??? Everyone! On earth, in the heavens, in the Spiritual World, in the Astral World. Every living thing calls me the "Devil" and I think so myself!
Shakyamuni: Why do you think you're the Devil?
Devil: Because I'm bad and evil. I mean, really evil!
Shakyamuni: What do you consider "evil"?
Devil: Hahahahah. Listen to what I've done just recently?
Shakyamuni: What have you done?
Devil: September 11, 2001.
Shakyamuni: What happened on that day?
Devil: What??? You mean to tell me you don't know????
Shakyamuni: What exists around me is only Paradise.
Devil: Oh, well, that makes it worth telling you all about it, then. To put it simply, I crashed an airplane, with hundreds of passengers, into a building where thousands of people work. That was really something. Not only once, either, I did it twice. I tried it a third time, but, unfortunately it was a little off target, so there weren't that many victims.
Shakyamuni: Isn't there about the same number of victims when there's a large earthquake?Devil: What? Are you saying that an earthquake is worse than I am?
Shakyamuni: No, I'm not saying that.
Devil: When I said, "really evil", I meant the fact that I blamed all the stuff that happened in those disasters on God. In the human world, none of those things happened because of the Devil. They blame everything on people--the very religious Muslims--who claim they were doing it in the name of God. So the Muslims are being condemned, and it's not only that the Christians have started a war of retribution to retaliate, but now there's even fighting going on between the Muslims and the Hindis. With all this happening, there are a bunch of people who've stopped believing in God. "There's not one good thing about religion", is about it. No earthquake could do this.
Shakyamuni: So, that's what you mean by "really evil"?
Devil: Right. There's nothing in this world, or any other world for that matter, that's even close to being as bad or evil.
Shakyamuni: Why do you think what you did was evil?
Devil: What? You mean to say, you don't think so?
Shakyamuni: If the same kind of meteorite that dropped on the earth millions of years ago, and destroyed the dinosaurs were to drop again, Man might start a world war in order to save himself. In such a case, they can't be bothered by religion.
Devil: Oh, right. There you go bringing up all that cataclysmic stuff. Trying to put me down again. You're really mean.
Shakyamuni: For Tathagata, there is no such thing as that. Aren't you the one who is trying to be obstinate?
Devil: What do you mean?
Shakyamuni: You insist on being the most evil.
Devil: Why, of course. After all, I am the Devil.
Shakyamuni: By the way, what makes you think that September 11 was the worst thing ever to happen?
Devil: I think I've already answered that question. I've already explained why I'm really evil.
Shakyamuni: No, not that. How can you determine things to be "a little evil" or "pretty evil" or "the worst"? How can you measure "evil"? What type of scale do you use to measure it with?
Devil: I've never thought of that. But, now that you mention it, I guess I have been putting evil in rank order. Yup, I think so. That scale that you were asking about is this--How much I can disappoint humankind by destroying everything people hope for. The level or magnitude of evil depends on how much I can crush their hopes. I'm the Devil, so, for humankind, I cause the most desperate and hopeless situations.
Shakyamuni: So then, that means that all humankind hopes for "good."
Devil: Oh, very keen observation. You can't necessarily say that, though. When one comes over to my side, he wants evil. Like that Osama guy.
Shakyamuni: So that Osama guy is sometimes more evil than you.
Devil: No. He just did those things because I gave him the idea.
Shakyamuni: So, does that mean that he wouldn't have created those disasters if it hadn't been for you?
Devil: That's right.
Shakyamuni: Then, that makes Osama a good guy at heart.
Devil: Well, I guess you could put it that way, but there's no way that there could be a "without me", so he is evil.
Shakyamuni: Hmmmm. Well, does that only apply to Osama? In other words, if the Devil, who is you, did not exist, does that mean that only Osama could be a good person, or all other persons could be good as well?
Devil: Shakyamuni, I am the root and source of all evil. If it weren't for me, humankind would still be in the Garden of Eden.
Shakyamuni: Well, if the cause for evil is not with Man, then it all comes back to the question of whether you, the Devil, are really evil.
Devil: You know, you talk just like Socrates.
Shakyamuni: I've been in Ancient Greece, too.
Devil: And I've been there, too.
Shakyamuni: So, should we ignore the details regarding humankind, and concentrate on whether or not you are evil?
Devil: Sure. It's really quite obvious.
Shakyamuni: What's obvious?
Devil: That I am the most evil.
Shakyamuni: I don't think it's so obvious. Let's talk about that "scale of evil" you mentioned.
Devil: Sure.
Shakyamuni: How much or how far does that scale measure? In other words, you say that "the worst", or most evil thing, were the incidents on September 11, but do you have a way of determining "fairly evil" and "a little evil"?
Devil: That all depends on how crafty I am. The craftier I am, the worse it gets.
Shakyamuni: You said that the "evil" depends on how much you can disappoint or betray humankind, did you not?
Devil: I did.
Shakyamuni: Which means that you know what humankind's hopes are.
Devil: I guess so. If I didn't know, I wouldn't be able to disappoint or betray them.
Shakyamuni: Then you know when someone is thinking about doing something good.Devil: Yes, and I try to prevent that from happening.
Shakyamuni: And that's because you recognize the fact that what that person wants to do is "good."
Devil: Yes.
Shakyamuni: Which means that you have something within your mind that is divinely inspired by "good."
Devil: I don't like the word, "divinely inspired." I have something that "detests" the good in humankind.
Shakyamuni: But, if you weren't able to be divinely inspired by it, then you wouldn't be able to detest it.
Devil: Then I'm divinely inspired by it and detest it.
Shakyamuni: That's why you have within you, the ability to be divinely inspired by "good."
Devil: What if I do? What happens then?
Shakyamuni: That which is divinely inspired by good is only good.
Devil: Even if one creates evil as a result?
Shakyamuni: That's because you detest it. Just stop doing that.
Devil: Stop kidding around, Shakyamuni. If I stopped doing that, I wouldn't be the Devil.
Shakyamuni: You don't have to be the Devil. You have sensors for "good" within you.
Devil: Ohhhhhh. I'm all confused. Those sensors are there for me to be able to hate. It's for me to perceive goodness and destroy it. It's like a mouse trap or a snare. It's to perceive the prey and kill it.
Shakyamuni: Mouse or bear traps don't perceive prey. The animals perceive the bait in the traps and come up to it.
Devil: Same with me. Humankind perceives evil and comes to me.
Shakyamuni: Don't fool yourself. You just said that you perceive good and destroy it.
Devil: Just what are you trying to say?
Shakyamuni: I'm not trying to say anything. You said it.
Devil: What???
Shakyamuni: That you have sensors to perceive good.
Devil: And?
Shakyamuni: Only good can perceive good.
Devil: So?
Shakyamuni: So you are good.
Devil: Hahahahahaha. If the Devil is good, then there is no evil.
Shakyamuni: That's right.
Devil: But, the Devil is "evil" because evil exists.
Shakyamuni: You know that evil is evil because you have sensors to perceive good.
Devil: Then why is it that I create evil even if I have the sensors to perceive good?
Shakyamuni: That's because you refuse to accept the compassion of the Buddha.
Devil: Shakyamuni, There is no "Buddha" in my world.
Shakyamuni: Then "God." You refuse God's love, so you hate good even though you know what it is. That mind of hatred manifests evil.
Devil: There's no way I, the Devil, can accept God's love.
Shakyamuni: Why not?
Devil: Well, God doesn't love the Devil.
Shakyamuni: That's only what you think. God loves you.
Devil: What are you saying? Don't say things that you can't prove.
Shakyamuni: The fact that you have sensors that detect good is proof in and of itself.
Devil: But, I abuse that.
Shakyamuni: There, that's what I mean. The fact that you realize you are "abusing" things is proof that you know what needs to be done to use it for good. All you have to do is follow that knowledge of good.
Devil: Are you saying that the Devil has knowledge of good?
Shakyamuni: Stop calling yourself the Devil. Having sensors that recognize good, and having knowledge of good--that is not the Devil.
Devil: I don't have any reason for living, then.
Shakyamuni: God loves you and has given you sensors to perceive good as well as the knowledge of good. Recognize these things and live as a part of God.
Devil: Then there will be no evil.
Shakyamuni: There was no evil in the first place. Don't get attached to things that are non-existent and think of them as being yourself. Evil always translates into good. That's because evil is a pretend existence. The extinction of dinosaurs led to the birth of humankind on the earth. Slavery eventually led to multiracial coexistence. The second World War led to the formation of the United Nations and the international monetary system. The events of September 11 will, some day, lead to something positive. It's meaningless to become attached to evil which will eventually disappear entirely. The Devil and such do not exist.
Devil: I don't exist?..
Shakyamuni: No, that's not it. You are actually an angel, a Buddha.
Devil: Oh, Shakyamuni! I'm disappearing!
Shakyamuni: That which disappears is not real. You will be reborn as a child of God.
Devil: Ahhhhhhhh....

- MT

Proclamation that "There is No Evil"

Spring is early this year. I'm a little concerned, thinking it might have to do with the effects of global warming, but when the cold begins to let up and it begins to get warmer, it just naturally makes you feel cheerful and lighthearted. The temperature in Tokyo yesterday went up to a high of 23.9 degrees (Centigrade), which was 11.3 degrees (Centigrade) warmer than usual--the kind of weather we usually have at the end of May. In our garden at home, the iris started blooming a few days ago, the magnolia are in full bloom, and the golden bells are blooming as well. The snowflakes (flowers) started blooming yesterday and the toads in the pond have begun their grand love story. It was also proclaimed that the first strong winds of spring blew in the Kanto region. And the Meteorological Agency made an announcement that the cherry trees in Tokyo have started to blossom--the earliest ever recorded.

In this way, if we make such proclamations through words, we really feel like it's happening. It isn't as if the strong winds that we experience at the beginning of spring just started yesterday, and it's not as if the many cherry trees in Tokyo didn't have flowers before yesterday. However, when a public agency takes the opportunity to make solemn proclamations such as, "the first strong winds of spring are here" or "the cherry trees are in bloom", it's amazing that we are then able to switch our thinking over to "spring is here at last." While we're at it, it would be nice if someone would proclaim that "the Japanese economy has made it out of the recession" or "terrorists have been irradicated", but these aren't the same as the natural changes in the seasons that occur. Rather, it is a matter of Man's mind, so whether or not we can acquire any sort of credibility along these lines is questionable.

Then, how about the grand proclamation that "There is no evil"? Seicho-No-Ie has been saying this for over 70 years now, but, unfortunately, the number who don't believe this outnumber those who do. Despite this, the mayor in a town in the southern United States made this proclamation, and has created quite a stir. More precisely, this mayor signed and stamped a proclamation that said, "Satan is not now, nor ever again will be, a part of this town." She then placed it on four posts at the town borders, reports today's edition of the International Herald Tribune.

This person is Carolyn Risher, mayor of Inglis, a town with a population of approximately 1400, located about 120 kilometers north of Tampa in West Florida. Risher said she wrote the proclamation, guided by the "voice of God" that she heard on Halloween night of last year. The idea of placing the proclamation on the posts was suggested by a minister of a church in the town. Behind all this, however, is the fact that the young people of the town have started wearing strange types of clothing, have been rumored to be using drugs, and the increase of domestic violence. There is a big difference between, "There is no evil" and "banning Satan." The former denies the existence of evil itself, while the latter recognizes the existence of evil, and goes on to proclaim that it will not be a part of one's existence. To introduce a part of this proclamation, it says, "Satan, ruler of darkness, giver of evil, destroyer of what is good and just, is not now, nor ever again will be, a part of this town of Inglis. Satan is powerless and can no longer control or have any influence on any of our citizens." This is clearly recognizing the existence of Satan, so perhaps, in this case, the principle of "That which is recognized, appears" applies.

Immediately after issuing the proclamation "banning Satan", the Town Hall phones began to ring. And, when someone answered, there would be a voice that said, "This is Satan. Is the Mayor in?" "Is this Caroline? This is Satan. I know you really like me." Of course, these are tasteless pranks, but even worse was when, in the beginning of March, the posts on which the proclamation had been attached were stolen. The town immediately made duplicate copies of the proclamation, and, this time, put them inside the posts, and, last week put the posts in concrete blocks. The police authorities say that there are very few people on Satan's side, and the majority of the citizens are united together to "obey the law."

In the United States, where the "separation of church and state" is emphasized, it's surprising that all this actually happened. That's probably how much Christian thinking has permeated American society. Let's think about whether or not there is a possibility that this could happen in Japan. It doesn't seem possible, but perhaps the Japanese custom of scattering beans to ward off evil spirits corresponds to this. The Japanese word "oni", when translated into English, is "demon", and there are some dictionaries that translate "demon" as "Satan". Strictly speaking, though, "oni" is neither "devil" nor "Satan", but something close to that. So, if they had this bean scattering ceremony in the town and city halls of Japan, would it be a violation of the "separation of church and state?" Now we're getting a bit complicated, but it seems that, as far as that type of proclamation is concerned, it is already being done in various places throughout Japan. So, I guess we can think of it as being just one more step before they proclaim, "There is no evil."

- MT

Is the Mind of Man Imperfect?

There was a Seicho-No-Ie Public Lecture in Nagoya City, and, as always, when we asked for questions regarding my lecture in the morning, I received about 30 forms. When there are this many, it's difficult to answer them all, due to time constraints, so we need to select the ones that I can answer. Since there were many questions asking that I "explain in more detail the principle of the world being a reflection of the mind", I used the first half of the afternoon session to do so. I explained this teaching during the morning session as well, but it was probably insufficient. When I said, "Since Man's five senses are imperfect, we cannot perceive existence exactly as it really is", it must have been because I emphasized the part of the senses being "imperfect", a 21 year old male student from Tokorozawa City asked the following question:

"How can Man view a perfect world (perfect and harmonious) with an imperfect mind? As long as we have a mind, I don't think it's possible to see the True Image. Can it not be said, then, that, as long as we are alive, we cannot ever realize Heaven on this Earth?"

What I said was that, "Man's senses are imperfect," but this person understood it as meaning, "The mind of Man is imperfect." It seems that I did not explain it thoroughly enough. What I meant in my explanation was that, Man's five senses are all imperfect and cannot perceive all things, and, when we construct a world from the information perceived through our five senses in our minds, we cannot do so perfectly as in the Reality. So, I guess it can't be helped if this was interpreted as meaning that "the mind, too, is imperfect." But, in the same context, I said, "The reason that Man seeks truth, goodness and beauty is because Man knows what they are." Since "truth, goodness, beauty" are also known as the "Virtues of God", they can be used interchangably with the word, "perfection." If we assume that, then we can say that "Man seeks perfection because Man knows what it is." "Man knows what it is" is the same as "Man's mind knows what it is", namely Man's mind knows "perfection." That which knows perfection has the basis for "perfection" within. In that sense, the mind of Man is perfect.

Let's discuss this in more detail. I touched on this in my lecture, too, but, watching the Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, I was really quite impressed at "how Man strives so hard to reach 'perfection'." How did you readers feel? There were speed skaters who tried hard to beat times within 100ths of a second. In figure skating, it used to be that "triples" were the best skaters could do, but this time "3 and a half" jumps and "quads" were performed. In cross-country skiing, there were athletes trying to test the human body to the extreme limits. Why does Man try to push himself "higher and higher" still? Skating one second faster, or jumping one meter further, or making half a revolution more does not make that person's existence any more fit than another's. At the very least, it's not something that one has to do in order to survive. Despite that, people make great sacrifices and expend a tremendous amount of energy to do so. Watching it all, people throughout the world excitedly respond and are deeply moved. Is this not Man trying to express the perfection within?

This is not only the nature of athletes. Artists, musicians, actors, writers, directors, businessmen, inventors, engineers, scientists, farmers, chefs--trying to do something a little better, a little more excellent is what they live for. In other words, Man is an animal that finds great joy in achieving a certain level of excellence in all aspects of daily life. We can't help but think that there is an image of "perfection" in the mind of that kind of Man.

To recognize or feel the "perfection" within ourselves is what we believe in Seicho-No-Ie. When the young student said, "Man cannot perceive perfection with an imperfect mind", he probably wanted to say, "We cannot perceive God with a deluded mind." When we bring out a deluded mind into time and space, the undeluded, true mind appears. In other words, if we do something with a deluded mind, and, even if the result is unsuccessful, Man has the ability to look at that result and get a more perfect understanding. Hasn't that been the case with the history of mankind? Through these activities, it is possible for Man to create "Heaven" on this earth, and I think such activities are actually happening around us.

That's why we must look more towards the perfect, find more aspects of excellence, and pay more attention to those things on earth that show truth, goodness and beauty. That's what I think. Focusing on the mistakes, scandals, corruption, killings and cheating of people will only cloud one's mind with "imperfection", and then, the "perfection" that we should know deep within ourselves is hidden, and there are instances when we may not be able to express that perfection. This is the state of "delusion." There is no better way to rid ourselves of delusion than to look towards perfection. There is no reason why Man, who has that perfection within, cannot do this.

- MT

Animal's Love

This morning's edition of the Asahi Shimbun had an article regarding how it's possible for a lion and a herbivore to have a "parent-child" relationship. Although I think this type of relationship is quite rare, I was surprised to hear that it really does happen. It all occurred at a wildlife preserve in central Kenya, where someone saw a 5-6 year old lioness walking alongside a newborn oryx (an antelope, belonging to the cow family, an herbivore). The lion wasn't thinking about "eating it", but would lie next to the oryx when it was sleeping, and, in order to protect her "child", she did not eat anything for about ten days. However, on January 6th of this year, other lion, attacked the oryx and ate it, while the "mother" was taking a drink of water. They say that for some days afterwards, the lioness would not get up and appeared to be mourning the death of her child.

This lioness didn't give up here. In the middle of February, she again accepted another oryx "child." But this second child was so weak that it couldn't stand. Seeing this, the Kenya Wildlife Service, which maintains the national parks in Kenya, moved the oryx to an animal hospital in Nairobi. According to the newspaper article, this lioness lost two cubs of her own last year, got separated from her herd and was living on her own.

Both male and female oryxes have long, spear-like horns, and are about as big as a cow--about 47 inches at the shoulder, weighing anywhere from 250 to 390 pounds. They live in the deserts and savannahs of Arabia and Africa. Their diet consists of grasses, buds, leaves, and also eat roots and tubers, that have a lot of moisture, digging them up with their front legs. They usually give birth to one calf, but, in rare instances, two. They leave the herd to give birth and hide the calf for 2 or 3 weeks. That's probably when the mother oryx was killed by a carnivore. Since their "natural enemies" are lions, panthers, and wild dogs, it seems that its "natural enemy" was playing the part of the "parent."

Whether or not "animals have (the ability to) love" is sometimes a topic of debate amongst biologists. This example effectively illustrates how different types of animals can establish a "love-like" relationship. In his book, When Elephants Weep, Freudian scholar and psychoanalyst, Jeffrey Masson introduces some examples of how a "parent's love" can transcend species. In one experiment, a rat which had children, was given baby mice and rabbits. Not only did the rat take them in as her own, but also "adopted" a kitten. When scientists tried to separate it from the rat, the "parent" showed signs of resistance. And, while cats lie on their side and feed their young, rats feed their young while on all fours. This rat tried desperately to feed the kitten in a standing position. Fascinated, the scientists decided to give the mother rat a Japanese bantam chick. There was a lot of excitement when the rat tried to hold the neck of the chick in its mouth and bring it into its nest.

These experiments, however, are conducted with a lot of human intervention, so, when one considers that the "minds" of the humans and animals are intermingling, one can't say necessarily that it's a "natural state" of things. But, in the first case with the lioness in Kenya, it was something that happened in the wilds, without any human involvement at all. One can feel the strength of a "higher power", and one would have to be pretty brave to call it "coincidental." One might also call this type of behavior in animals, "instinct", but then we should also call "love" that we humans feel "instinct" as well.

In Hindu and Buddhist teachings, it is said that, "Animals are reborn as humans, and humans are also reborn as animals." In the Jataka stories of Buddhism, there are examples of Shakyamuni Buddha, in his previous lives as an elephant or monkey, appearing as a Bodhisattva and performing altruistic acts of love. Many people may think that these are "pretend stories" written to support the teaching of reincarnation, but, when there are examples such as these where this lioness loves a baby "cow", I'm probably not the only one who feels that this type of "high spirit" lives on amongst the animals to this day.

While romanticizing, I also thought of something else, and that is what was written in The Book of Isaiah of the Old Testament. In Chapter 11, there is the following reference reminiscent of the "Final Judgment", describing a time when carnivore and herbivore would eat and sleep together:

The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb,
and the leopard shall lie down with the kid;
and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together;
and a little child shall lead them. And the cow and the bear shall feed;
their young ones shall lie down together:
and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
And the suckling child shall play on the hole of the asp,
and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice den.

It's true that people have wanted this kind of world for many a year. However, it's difficult to explain why this is true.

- MT

Star Princess

In Osaka for a Seicho-No-Ie Public Lecture, I greeted the morning on the 48th floor of a hotel there. I opened the curtains and the sweeping view of Osaka Bay appeared hazy due to the clouds that had spread out across the sky. I remembered that the weather report on TV the night before mentioned that, while it would be cloudy in the morning hours, it would clear up in the afternoon. I freshened up, changed my clothes and went out for breakfast. After eating, I came back to my room, glanced through the morning paper, and checked to make sure that the presentation I would be giving using my laptop was all in order. While doing all this, I happened to look up and saw that the clouds that had covered the sky had broken, and a soft ray of light shone down on the harbor and the rest of the city. In the middle of this, partially hidden in the shadow of a bridge, I saw a large white passenger ship anchored in the harbor. Comparing it to the buildings and bridge nearby, I could tell that it was quite a large ship. It's unusual to come across such a large passenger ship.

As a young newspaper reporter in Yokohama, it used to excite me when these passenger liners would come into the harbor. In those days, I used to belong to the "Yokohama Maritime Affairs Reporters Club" which was located on the first floor of the Yokohama Customs office. We dealt with the various events that developed in the port of Yokohama and surrounding areas, and this club was a "hangout" for us reporters. This club was nicknamed, "Umikura (Ocean Club)", and, in reporting on customs-related events, we'd write on the import of unusual items or unmask contraband. And, in the Third Division of the Maritime Safety Headquarters, which is under the umbrella of the Maritime Safety Agency, we would write about shipwrecks and other accidents at sea or about refugee boats that would drift ashore. We would also receive lists of incoming and outgoing ships from the Yokohama Port Authority that patrols and takes care of the port of Yokohama, and write about them.

Since there weren't that many ocean-going passenger ships that would come in during those days, when one did, the harbor would come alive with activity, with the Yokohama City Fire Department Band giving a welcome performance at the port on Large Pier, and Miss Yokohama giving a floral presentation to the captain of the ship. When that happened, we reporters, pretending to be "on assignment" would board and enjoy the gorgeous atmosphere of the ship. Being able to take a peek at the inside of the largest and foremost passenger ships of those days, the Queen Elizabeth II (QE2, 67,140 tons) and the Canberra was a true "emolument." And, when the Ministry of Transport fleet of training sailboats would reach shore, and carry out their sailing drills all at once, the harbor and surrounding areas would be jammed with people.

In the morning, immediately before the Public Lecture, when I saw the cruise liner, all those memories came back to me, and I thought it would be a nice idea to go to the harbor and take a look at the ship following the lecture. But, in order to do so, the ship would have to remain in port until evening. I had my assistant look into that, and we found out that, fortunately, the ship would be there until that night. We found out that the ship was the "Star Princess." I couldn't recall ever having heard that name, but I guess that's understandable since it's been more than 20 years since I was a "Ocean Club Reporter."

After the Public Lecture, I asked the driver to park the car on the opposite side of where the ship was docked. It was right by Universal Studios Japan. Despite that, compared to the commotion and excitement of the times when a cruise liner would come into Yokohama Harbor, I was amazed to see that there were unbelievably few people around. It was where ferries from the opposite shore arrive and depart, and, when the ferry boats did arrive, there were several dozens of people going in and out. These people would look up at the gorgeous ship and ready their cameras. Not wanting to get in the way of their picture-taking, I climbed up on a fence that was a little higher up and began sketching. I couldn't help but be even more surprised at the tremendous size of the ship.

The Star Princess is a huge 10,900 ton, 951 foot long, 201 foot wide, amenity-filled passenger ship which made her inaugural debut in February of this year. To make it easier to understand, it's taller than the Statue of Liberty, and longer than three football fields placed side by side. It has 16 decks so that makes it as high as a 16-story building, and it has 1,300 cabins that can accommodate 2,600 people. The crew in and of itself numbers 1,150. P&O, the owners of the Star Princess, have other ships which are also named "Princess": "Grand Princess", "Golden Princess", "Ocean Princess", etc. for a total of 12 ships. Together, they are called the "Princess Fleet." The Star Princess is a sister ship to Grand Princess, and is the largest in the fleet. This was the maiden voyage for the ship. She left Singapore on February 13th, and went on to Thailand on the 15th, Hong Kong on the 19th, Taiwan on the 20th, and Okinawa on the 21st, arriving in Osaka on the 23rd. After this, she is scheduled to go on to the United States, be in Hawaii on March 2-3, and reach its final destination, Los Angeles, on the 8th. I don't know how many Japanese citizens can go on that kind of cruise, but, as I left Osaka behind, I couldn't help but think, "Man certainly has made something really unbelievable."

- MT

"Gold, Silver, Bronze" and "Pine, Bamboo, Plum"

For the first time in the history of the Olympics, a final decision in the awarding of medals was overturned at the Figure Skating competition of the Winter Olympics being held in Salt Lake City. Because there were some serious controversies regarding the Gold Medal which was awarded to the Russian pair, it was decided that the Canadian pair, who had been previously awarded the Silver Medal, would share the Olympic gold with the Russians. In other words, there are two gold medals and no silver. In the initial decision, out of the nine judges, five, Russia, China, Ukraine, Poland and France, placed the Russian skaters in first place, and four, Canada, U.S., Germany and Japan, placed the Canadian skaters first. Controversy arose from the actions of the French judge. Looking at the judging, there appears to be a "pattern/scheme", with the former Eastern Powers voting for Russia and the former Western Powers choosing Canada. Moreover, it's somewhat like the Aesop fable, "The Bat, the Birds, and the Beasts", with France, which, during the Cold War, emphasized its relationship with the Eastern Powers.

The true spirit of the Olympics is actually devoid of political relationships, emphasizing only true ability. However, in many instances, it may be that this very spirit is all too often clouded over. Incidentally, dividing the medals into gold, silver and bronze, based on socio-economic value, clearly defines ranking. Gold is better than silver, silver is better than bronze, and bronze is better than 4th place--This is the thinking behind it all, and, no matter how narrow the margin is between first and second, there is a clear distinction of which is superior. That's probably why, in the 500 meter speed skating, Hiroyasu Shimizu, whose time was only 3/100th's off of the person who came in first, looked so very disappointed. We in Japan also focused on the "gold" and "silver" more than the difference of "3/100th's." The headlines in the papers was "Shimizu--Silver""

In Japan, however, there seems to be some resistance against such clear, cut-and-dried, definition of rank. I think that's when the categories "pine, bamboo, plum" are used. Isn't there a "kind sense of caring" in the names "pine, bamboo, plum"? It's like saying, "First, second third all have good points, everyone tried their best, let's not put clear ranking labels on everyone." I'm in Kyoto today for a Seicho-No-Ie Grand Lecture, and that's exactly what Takamasa Kusakada, a writer for the Kyoto Shimbun local news desk wrote.

According to this article, in sushi restaurants, one of the terms "pine, bamboo, plum" is used to name the types of sushi, from the most to the least expensive. The President of The Association of National Sushi Guild for Sanitation in Tokyo says that, around 1952, these terms replaced the "jyou (best), chu (medium), nami (ordinary)" that had been used previously. There was too much of a distinction in the terms "jyou, chu, nami"--so much so that one ordering "nami" might be embarrassed and say apologetically, "Uh, excuse me, I'd like an order of the "ordinary" sushi, please." So that's when they began using "pine, bamboo, plum" which are considered lucky. These "rankings", however, are not used consistently throughout the nation. The finest Japanese meal in a restaurant in Higashiyama Ward of Kyoto City that specializes in Kyoto cuisine is called "plum."

The idea that the terms "pine, bamboo, plum" are propitious apparently came from China. The reason for this is that none of these three plants die even in the coldest of winters. "Pine" is a must when it comes to New Year decorations. "Bamboo" remains a luscious green even in the thick of winter and is also used for New Year decorations. In order to retain that luscious green, they just redid the entire old bamboo fence in my father's yard next door. But, in contrast to the pine and bamboo which do not flower in the winter, the plum tree blossoms brilliantly and fully in the cold wind. So, it's not at all surprising that the plum be considered the best amongst the three. In other words, it's really difficult to distinguish these three plants in ranking.

The mislabeling of the place of origin of beef has surfaced recently and become quite an issue. This type of falsifying information on items sold for consumer consumption is a very serious matter. If they're going to write a bunch of lies on the food, it's better not to write anything at all. How about throwing away the "Japanese beef", "Made in the U.S"", or "Made in Australia" labels, and just use "Pine", "Bamboo" and "Plum"? No matter where the cow is from, its life is valuable and precious. The problem is that humans go around and, arbitrarily and willfully and put labels on things, calling them superior or inferior. From that perspective, it does seem that the Olympics are a very "human" event.

- MT

Is This World a "Work of Man"?

I received a lot of questions concerning my morning lecture from those who attended the Seicho-No-Ie Grand Lecture in Chiba Prefecture. I received more than 20 forms with questions. Due to time constraints, I could not answer them all, but I was grateful to see that there was such a tremendous reaction to what I talked about. There was a mixture of different questions, but those that are more complex require more time to answer. Knowing that, there was one question that, although I thought it important, I decided not to answer. It was a question that went something like this:

"There was something in your lecture that referred to this world as being the 'work of man.' Couldn't this expression easily be subject to misinterpretation? I think it would be better to say that we ourselves (including other living things) are being sustained by this Earth. The fact that there is Life that exists on this planet is thanks to the life called Earth."

According to the form on which she wrote her question, this was from, Ms. "T", a designer living in Ichikawa City. Basically, I think what she is saying is correct. The statement that "This world is a "Work of Man" could easily be misconstrued. Even then, however, the way it is stated is also true, so we cannot say that it is incorrect. This is where it gets difficult. If we're talking only about things that are "right/correct" when it comes from a standpoint of common sense, then it doesn't necessarily have to be religion. Then again, if "common sense is correct" then we don't need religion. And, while all this may be true, religion should not lack common sense either.

The phrase, "This world is the work of man" is used on page 51 in the book, Seito Shino Oshie (Lessons on Life and Death)* by Rev. Seicho Taniguchi (Nihon Kyobunsha). This means that all events that occur in this world are a reflection of the mind of Man, and, once you understand this, you will realize that it is a "lesson" to Man. That's what the written words amount to, but it would take one or two volumes to explain in its entirety all that is contained within these words. Despite that, I am trying to explain that within a one-hour lecture. It's probably not surprising that those who are listening get a little anxious and frustrated.

Which brings me to the question of the "correct expression" to which Ms. T referred, the realization that "Man's life itself is sustained by the Earth." Is this that much different than "This world is the work of Man"? To me, it seems that the former is explaining the latter in greater detail. Allow me to explain: What I would like you to note first is that, to render the recognition, "Man is sustained by the Earth", valid, we must be able to recognize that we are "human", different than any other category of living thing on the Earth. In other words, if there were not a "consciousness" or "self-consciousness" that exists within us, the concept or notion of "self" or "human being" would not be possible. Next, even amongst humans, very few have actually seen the planet "Earth", so it's extremely doubtful whether there is anything other than humans who know that the planet called "Earth" exists. For example, chimpanzees probably don't say, "I'm a living thing belonging to the life on the Earth." Chimpanzees apparently have the ability to differentiate between "me" and "you", but do not have a vocabulary that includes the terms "the Earth", "living things", or "a member of"" It's hard to think of them as being conscious of the world in the same way that humans are.

Moreover, "sustained by" is probably something that only humans can understand. The term "sustained by" can only be used with the premise of "cause" and "effect." For example, saying that ""Man is sustained by the Earth" means that the present global environmental condition is the cause for our existence, and from that comes the effect that within that environment, Man breathes the air, and is able to get water and food. The ability to grasp this type of advanced cause and effect relationship based on scientific knowledge, is probably not something even a smart chimpanzee can do. It's probably safe to conclude that things that primates with brains as developed as the chimpanzee can't do, cannot be done by other living things that are considered to be of a "lower level" either. If that's true, the idea that "Man is being sustained by the Earth" is something that cannot exist other than within the mind's of Man. Saying that it is "a work of Man" to describe something that exists only in the minds of Man is really not that absurd.

So, the realization that "Man himself is sustained by the Earth" is something that belongs "to Man", not to chimpanzees, gorillas or dolphins, but to Man only. We can say that all these types of realization/recognition/thinking, believing that one is "right" is "a work of Man"" And isn't it that Man often times refers "all the things that he feels or recognizes as being right" as "this world"? It follows, then, that "this world" is a "creation of Man""

I thought it would be easier to understand if explanations such as these regarding logic are explained through the written word rather than at or through a lecture. Of course, it's not that this fully explains all the vast meanings behind the phrase "This world is a work of Man." That's why I would be grateful if you, the readers, would consider this only a partial explanation taken from only one point of view regarding this subject.

- MT

*Not available in English

Spare Body Parts

As one gets on in years and you use your body, different places, different parts start getting bruised, worn, and start to unravel. At the end of last year, I wrote about the infection I got in my front tooth and gums, and the horrible details that ensued. In order to repair the damage, I had to have the "nerve" removed. Having the "nerve removed" in a dental procedure, involves more than simply removing the nerve cells. In the center of the "tooth pulp", there are, not only nerve cells, but capillaries and lymph nodes as well, and it's through them that the tooth receives nutrition and is protected from microbes. In other words, teeth are "alive." To "extract a nerve" means that you are extracting the entire pulp. So, after the procedure, the tooth no longer receives any nutrients and does not fight against bacteria. And, in time, it is worn down from eating and chewing, becomes dark and discolored, and falls out. In other words, the tooth that I had treated is much like a prisoner sentenced to death some time in a few years. There are "caps" and "crowns" available nowadays, but this, too, is a type of "false tooth." So, if someone were to tell me that my "living tooth" could be brought back to life, I would be overjoyed.

I have also been experiencing some decline in my vision recently. I've been nearsighted since high school, and have been wearing contact lenses for some time now. Nowadays, however, I've begun having problems distinguishing small print--in the newspaper and dictionaries. I've bought a magnifying glass and had a pair of glasses made to help me with this. There's a procedure now where you can correct near-sightedness through laser surgery, but, since the success rate isn't 100%, and because of the exorbitant cost, I'm not interested in doing that. So, if someone were to say that my own eyes could be "regenerated" and vision restored to "as good as new", I'm not sure how long I'd be able to resist the temptation to do something. The same can be said about my thinning head of hair, the elasticity of my skin, my physical strength, memory, and stamina--all of which are far from what they used to be. In other words, the "rejuvenation" of my physical body, and "maintaining youthful performance" are, for me (and probably for most of the readers) an "unreachable dream."

We can look at the development of "spare body parts", beginning with prosthetic hands and legs, as a means of trying to make these dreams attainable. So, there's probably no one who can prevent this, and trying to would not be right. However, sacrificing others in order to realize your own dreams is not right either. If that is the case, then, the question arises as to whether one should take from another in order to receive a spare. The answer to this question may seem quite simple, while, in actuality, it is not. For one thing, the definition of "what is another" differs from person to person. Those who believe that "another" refers to "other people" and does not include "animals", approve of "taking from animals." Then how about "taking from people who are dead?" How about from aborted fetuses? From fertilized eggs? From unfertilized eggs? These are the questions that we who live in these times are confronted with, and, while the answers all differ from person to person, it seems as though technology just keeps going on and on.

In the field of regenerative medicine particularly, there have been one new development after another just in this year. In a previous entry, I mentioned how researchers "tricked" a monkey's egg cells into forming an early embryo--without the use of sperm--that yielded stem cells that then turned into heart, brain and other specialized tissue. According to news reports today, the company responsible for these findings has now said that they have used cells derived from cloned cow embryos to grow kidney-like organs that function, and are now producing urine, and are not rejected when implanted into adult cows. The purpose of this study is not the treatment of cows, but, of course, how it can be used to help humans. Stem cells have been used before to create blood and muscles "tissues", but scientists said that it would be a while before they could create "organs"" With this research, however, we are that much closer to growing personalized, genetically matched organs for transplantation.

In the January 29th edition of the Sankei Shimbun, there was a report on how scientists from Kyoto University's School of Medicine successfully triggered human embryonic stem cells to form human neurons that secrete the crucial chemical, dopamine. The reason for this study is also for eventual use on humans, and has paved the way for use of human stem cells in the treatment of Alzheimers, etc. Moreover, today's Asahi Shimbun ran an article on a surgical procedure performed at Tokai University, in which, using the bone marrow cells from a mouse, blood forming cells in the umbilical cord were caused to multiply and were then transplanted into a woman (a human!) in her 50's who had a malfunctioning bone marrow disorder.

As I've written before, questions of morality come into play when fertilized eggs are destroyed to create stem cells. But procedures have now been developed whereby stem cells and other similar versatile cells can be gained from unfertilized eggs. On the other hand, as in the studies mentioned above, experiments using stem cells to create specialized body parts have been done repeatedly on laboratory animals. So, from now on, it's quite possible that the technology of creating various tissues and organs of the body from the cells of unfertilized egg and bone marrow cells will develop even further. If that happens, we will be able to exchange or replace the parts of our body that have worn down with age with "living parts" created from this technology. If I'm still alive at that time, I may be able to create a new set of teeth, exchange my eyes for "new ones" and replace my old blood vessels.

However, one will undoubtedly have to be prepared to pay a considerable amount of money for this type of treatment. A fraction of people in "developed nations" may be able to do this, but for the overwhelming majority of the people in the world, this would remain an "unreachable dream." And, if the money that it would cost to replace my eyes alone could be used for the people in those countries, we could undoubtedly save dozens--no, hundreds of lives. In this way, when the money that would save one person in a "developed country" could save hundreds in developing nations, I wonder which of the two the conscience of humankind would shout out loud for us to choose?

- MT

Pigs and Spinach

There was an article in the January 24th edition of the Sankei Shimbun about an experiment by a research team at Kinki University who were successful in breeding pigs implanted with spinach genes. This was the world's first success in breeding mammals with plant genes. The purpose of this project was to produce the vegetable oil, linolic acid, in a mammal that is normally unable to produce this acid by itself, thereby creating pork which is "more healthy" than normal pork. The genetically engineered pigs born from this experiment have approximately two times more linolic acid than normal in their fat and have carried that trait through three generations.

Two days later, in the January 26th edition of the Asahi Shimbun, there was a report stating that a genetically engineered papaya, not yet approved by the Japanese government, was being sold at a supermarket in Saitama Prefecture. This papaya was grown in the United States, and is already approved and sold in stores there, but, in Japan, the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Labor is still in the investigating stages. More than likely, the fruit was genetically altered to make it "stronger against viruses", but, if it passes inspection, the papaya will be labeled with a "genetically engineered" sticker, and circulated and sold throughout the country. But, in this particular instance, it was sold, before government approval, and without a label/sticker.

I have spoken out about my doubts and skepticism regarding genetically engineered foods on many occasions, and, looking at these two "new products", I question them even more, particularly when it comes to the genetically engineered pig. If there is a concern with high cholesterol levels and other "adult diseases" resulting from too much intake of animal fats, one should just cut down on their intake of pork and other meats and eat spinach. Why must we invest exorbitant amounts of money on research to genetically alter pigs to make "healthy meat"? Are they trying to get the same results from eating pork only as they would from eating pork and vegetables? If they go to these extremes, would this just not increase the number of children who already eat very little vegetables as it is? And, as those pigs increase, so will the need for land to raise them, taking over rice fields and forests. The underlying "motive for development" of these genetically engineered pigs may, at first, seem impressive, but I feel it looks at things in a very narrow-minded way.

Or could it be that scientists are thinking about something on a larger scale? Could it be that this experiment combining pigs and spinach is simply the beginning--a "foothold" to something broader that has to do with combining plants and animals? Or is it that pigs were just used for testing, and what they are really aiming at is the re-engineering of the human body so that humans themselves will be able to internally manufacture linolic acid?

These questions are more than likely pretty extreme. Basically, I believe that scientists have good sense, but we cannot be sure that the results from experiments, conducted with even the best of intentions, will always be used by the average person and/or industries for the good of all. With the recent report that a large food company in Japan repackaged beef and falsified where it came from, we seem to have gotten a glimpse of the low morals of those people who work in these large companies, and, it is, indeed, depressing. Workers in a company that sells food are suspected of systematically falsifying the place from where the beef originally came for the sake of company profit, not giving any consideration to the health and well-being of the consumers who would be buying and eating their products. Repackaging beef from Australia and pretending it came from Japan would win government compensation, since the Japanese government offered to buy unsold beef after news of Japan's first case of BSE prompted a sharp fall in beef sales, but that's the same as putting the tax payer's money into the coffers of this major company. And, the decision to pretend that beef from Hokkaido, that had an undeniable high probability of having been infected by BSE, was from Kumamoto Prefecture, more than likely came from the mentality that, if by some chance, someone should die from eating the meat, company profits would not be affected. If these are the kinds of people who are working at these major food companies, what's the point in scientist researching and producing genetically engineered foods for the promotion and advancement of healthier foods for the general public?

If this type of repackaging of foods is constantly being done in other companies as well, there is a possibility that it won't stop at falsifying place of origin, but extend beyond that to falsifying date of expiration and quality, or falsifying labels on genetically engineered foods. This decline in human morals not only renders any advancement in science meaningless, but it is also very possible that it could actually broaden the damage suffered by the consumer. So, in a technologically advanced society such as we have today, we must work more on moral and ethical development. Or, should we just not believe in any of the labels on the foods that we buy, and just raise our own pigs and grow our own spinach?

- MT

New Year's Day sunstroke

I could not participate in this year's annual New Year's Day Ceremony, a New Year's Day tradition, held at the Seicho-No-Ie Headquarters in Tokyo. This is really quite embarrassing--the first time since I became an executive of Seicho-No-Ie. This is probably what they call "the devil getting sunstroke", but I had a fever of over 100 degrees (Farenheit), and the right side of my face was completely swollen. Although I feel a little awkward, I'll write about all the things that led up to my being like this.

Around the 29th of December, the root of my upper front tooth began to hurt. I'm not sure why. Although I've had some dental work done in the past, I haven't had a toothache in over a year. The last work I had done was on one of my lower molars, and even that wasn't for a new cavity, but was only to replace a filling that had come out. The tooth that was giving me trouble now, however, was totally unrelated--the upper front tooth--where there couldn't possibly have been a cavity. I say this with confidence because even my dentist compliments me on how carefully and thoroughly I brush my teeth. On past visits, my dentist taught me the proper way to use a toothbrush and I've been following those directions faithfully, brushing after every meal, every day of the week. I pay particular attention to brushing after breakfast, and I use not only one, but three different kinds of toothbrushes. In addition to the traditional one, I use a brush with long bristles that can reach into the back-side of the rear molars, a toothbrush with a pointed end, and, finally, one that I use to clean between the teeth. Since I'm so thorough, I didn't think there was any way that I could have gotten a cavity.

But, since the reality was that I had a toothache, some sort of bacteria must have managed to get into my front tooth somehow and created an infection. I made light of it at first, thinking that the pain would eventually subside, but by the afternoon of the 29th, I had a sharp pain that shot from my upper jaw to my head. Even then, I managed to finish writing my journal entry for that day, drew a picture, took a digital photo of it, and somehow posted it all on the website. After that, though, all I could do was sleep. Being Saturday, my dentist's office was closed. Worried, my wife tried to find an emergency room with a dental department, but was unable to locate one. The next morning, we found a dentist office nearby which was on-call and open during the end of the year and through the New Year's holiday.

At 9 AM on December 30th, I rushed into "Y" Dental Office in Sendagaya. My gums had swollen from the area under my nose to the upper right of my face. It was painful and depressing. I couldn't open my mouth enough to talk freely. Unless I had this taken care of, I didn't feel much like greeting the New Year, and I wouldn't be able to give my message at the New Year's Day Ceremony? I became panicky thinking about this. A small, slightly plump dentist in his sixties looked at my tooth and said, "You must've hit it somewhere--It's discolored." I replied, "I don't remember hitting it on anything," and explained, "It's always been this color." Actually, I have some dark brown spots on the backsides of my teeth that are like "tea stains." My mother tells me it's due to some antibiotics that I took when I was a child, and my family dentist told me that they "aren't cavities." This slightly plump dentist, however, took an x-ray of the tooth in question, and, looking at it, seemed to reach some sort of conclusion. If he'd told me what he had in mind, I would have been able to prepare myself, but, instead of explaining, he put the chair in a reclining position and began treatment.

This was a first-time experience for me. I'd always thought that, after examining a patient, a doctor was supposed to talk to the patient about the results of that exam, discuss treatment options, and get the patient's approval before doing anything. This dentist, however, while mumbling some medical terms to the female assistant, gave me a shot of novocaine, and began scraping away at the tooth. Then, exerting a lot of pressure with his hands, he screwed something into the hole he'd just opened, pulled it out, twisted it in and pulled it out again, continuing for about 3-4 times. Lying in the dentist's chair, all I could do was groan, "Ahhhh" and endure the pain. After it was all done, the dentist was to tell me, "We did a root canal." It was an explanation after the fact, and he let his assistant do the rest of the explaining. She said, "We packed some cotton into the hole, but this is just a temporary emergency procedure. Please be sure to see your own dentist within a week." That's all the explanation there was, so I headed home, without any medication, and my face numb from my nose to my mouth.

"I'll feel better for sure now," I thought, but I couldn't have been any more wrong. As the novocaine wore off, I again had a throbbing pain shoot up from the bottom of my nose to my head. I wondered why since the nerve had been removed, and thought, doubting the dentist, "Maybe he didn't get it all." It was because he'd been so different from my own dentist. My own dentist always explained things thoroughly prior to treatment, and, after explaining, even before starting on the tooth, would say caringly, "We're just going to do a little scraping so it shouldn't hurt," or, "If it hurts, please frown or grimace." This difference between dentists was leading to mistrust. Then I decided to change my way of thinking to, "I'm grateful for simply having been able to get treated during this busy end of the year season." But, no matter how I looked at it, the pain and condition was growing, not better, but progressively worse.

On the afternoon of the 30th when I had the root canal, the right side of my face started swelling up. The sides of my nose were really swollen, so much so that I could see my right cheek with my right eye. As time went on, I could see my own eyelid with my right eye. In other words, the area around my eye had become thick and swollen, but, since my eyeball was still in the same place, my eye had become "caved in" within the swelling. The area under my nose was swollen so much that, looking at myself in the mirror, I thought I looked more like a "dog" than a "human."

Concerned as to how I was doing, my wife peeked at my face, and I said, "Woof" and brought my hand to the side of my face, like the front paw of a dog. I wanted to make her laugh, but she just looked kind of sad and puzzled. I guess I really must have looked like a dog. The pain got so severe that I had to go to bed, and eventually was able to fall asleep. I'd wake up every one in a while and have some of the liquid foods my wife had made, but, other than that, I slept a deep, undisturbed sleep. It was much the same on the 31st, and, when I took my temperature, I found that I had a fever of 100 degrees (F). I felt a little better on New Year's Day, but my face was still very swollen--not something I'd want people to see--and a fever of over 100, so I reluctantly had to forego the New Year's Day Ceremony.

In the afternoon on New Year's Day, I went to see another dentist in Shinjuku Ward. After listening to my explanation of the previous treatment, and looking at my face, he explained the reason for the swelling immediately. "In order to do the root canal, the dentist opened a hole on the backside of your tooth and then packed it with cotton. If it's packed too tightly, however, there is no ventilation and swelling results. Patients usually get antibiotics to prevent infection, but, since this wasn't done in your case, the bacteria must have spread and caused the severe infection." I listened saying, "Oh. Oh." The dentist continued, "The worst seems to have passed, so we'll remove the cotton, clean the tooth up, and you should feel much better." I shouted, "Ouch!" as the dentist pulled up my upper lip. It hurt. He looked relieved, however, and said, "I thought we were going to have to cut your gums to let the pus out, but they're already cut and bleeding. It should come out naturally now."

"Hmm," I thought. Even if the right half of my face, from the gums to my right eye was swollen, there comes a point when the skin just naturally breaks and the body tries to rid the system of this infection. This mechanism is something the human body possesses by nature. Even if the person involved doesn't have any idea what's happening, the body knows how to heal itself. Thanks to the treatment given by this second dentist, and the medication prescribed, the swelling of my face and gums went down after that, day by day.

Having gone through all this and experienced this "pain", I've come to realize that one's view of the world can be changed by just one tooth. Please, everyone, be sure to take good care of your teeth.

- MT

Reflecting on the Year 2001 (2)

The incident that moved and had the most profound effect on the entire world this year is definitely the September 11th terrorist attacks that happened in the United States. It's been said that, "The world changed drastically after that day" which means that the way we, the general public, look at things has changed. The reasons--religious, idealogical and political ways of thinking--for this act of terrorism came as a result of years of the history of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and other countries of the Middle East. Not only the United States, but all Western countries, including Japan, are in part to blame. Introspective discussions on how to proceed are being held all over the world. The important thing from a religious standpoint, however, is the question of "fundamentalism" and "religion and politics."

At the Seicho-No-Ie Fall Festival ceremony on November 22nd of this year, I spoke on the former, and it is also recorded in an entry on the website entitled, "Seicho-No-Ie Is Not Fundamentalism." Today, I would like to touch briefly on the latter.

Although I'm not too familiar with Afghanistan, according to a Pakistani journalist who has reported on this country for over 20 years, 90% of the people in Afghanistan are of the moderate Sunni group of Islam. Moreover, they also belong to the "Hanafi Sect" which is considered the most liberal. In this doctrine, it is believed that, in order to implement the Koran and other scriptures in the present, it is more important to draw conclusions through analogies and explanations from what is written there, rather than to respect/honor the "authority." In contrast, those of the "Maliki Sect" suppress their own interpretations and emphasize the details as written in the "scriptures."

The Taliban which controlled Afghanistan got their theological principles from the Wahhabi Deobandism, a strict by-product of Sunni Hanafi Islam. According to this journalist, "They fitted nowhere in the Islamic spectrum of ideas and movements that had emerged in Afghanistan between 1979 and 1994" and its interpretation of Islam, the Holy Wars, and social reform was heresy in Afghanistan." For this "heresy" to gain control of the government, there were many serious problems with society, one of which was the fighting and the intervention by foreign forces. This can be surmised by the fact that Osama Bin Ladin himself is from Saudi Arabia, and the Taliban is made up of many Arabs, Pakistanis and other foreigners. But we need to emphasize the fact that in Islamic teachings, the Taliban are "heretics"" Their policies of banning "frivolities" like television and video, and the way they deny modern-day law enforcement and strictly enforce public stoning and amputation, and forbid women to show their face and body in public is not the true Islamic society. It is the cruel result of what happens when a small heretical group of believers gain control of government policies. The traditional and historical Islam of Afghanistan has always hoped to decrease government intervention and want a "small government", but, when the country is in danger, a "large government" is established through force and strength, with a movement to "foreign" elements, influences and control of the smallest detail of people's lives--similar to what the Japanese people have experienced in the past as well.

In Islamic society, the unification of religion and government has been a given, but, when we consider the background and history of this incident, we find that this does not always bear the best results.

References:Ahmed Rashid, Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia.

- MT