Soka Gakkai & the Alleged Compatibility Between Nichiren Buddhism & Modern Science by Ted J. Solomon

In the March 1980 issue of the Japanese Journal of Religious Studies Ted J. Solomon wrote an article titled Soka Gakkai and the Alleged Compatibility between Nichiren Buddhism and Modern Science. He took a critical scientific approach to deciphering arguments for a harmonious relationship between, as the title reveals, some philosophies upon which the school of Nichiren Buddhism is based and the branch of modern science known as Theoretical Physics. Topics include the Quantum Field Theory, Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, and Causality, a.k.a. the Statistical Law of Causation. The article is centered on statements posed by Daisaku Ikeda, president of the world’s largest peace organization and Underground Railroad for the resurgence of Nichiren Buddhism, the Soka Gakkai International (SGI).

Solomon first poses the stated purpose of the SGI’s points, and then he lays out the SGI’s claims of credibility for each argument, and adds his own critical comments of each claim based on what appears to be his own background knowledge of physics including examples and quotes from prominent physicists. Solomon seems to take a fairly unbiased approach, supporting parts of Ikeda’s claims and discrediting others.

The SGI is positive that the interaction between Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism and modern science has the potential to be a harmonious one. They deduce of this proposition that Nichiren Buddhism is the ethical framework needed to steer science in a positive direction in which humankind can peacefully thrive. They firmly believe that without a “true religion”, science will never actualize its potential with concerns to the human mind and moral values. The SGI defines ‘religion’ as a “kind of science which makes special study of human life”.

Ikeda points out that from its commencement Nichiren Buddhism has been scientific, that both religion and science base their beliefs on the assumption that everything happens in accordance with the laws of causality and that both religion and science aspire to multiply the well-being of humankind. Ikeda then offers examples of how real life applications of various scientific theories of physics and chemistry have improved our lives and makes an analogy to Nichiren Buddism’s explanation of how we can also apply the Statistical Law of Causality to our daily choices of actions to create desired results which can also improve our lives.

Ikeda more specifically delves into the following related accounts of compatibility between Nichiren thought and modern Theoretical Physics: Nichiren Buddhism’s “Universal Law of Cause and Effect” and physics Statistical Law of Causation and Nichiren Buddhism’s “Shiki-Shin-Funi” (oneness of matter and mind) and “Ku” (latent potentiality and interconnectedness of all) and physics Quantum Field Theory and Theory of Relativity. After each comparison the author of the article inserts his own critique of the SGI’s arguments for similarity and compatibility, some supportive and some oppositional.

On one hand, the SGI says that Nichiren Buddhism and science have similar views on the Statistical Law of Causation, but they also argue that Nichiren’s view is broader, as it encompasses Causality as not merely exclusive to physical phenomenon, but it expands to include mental and spiritual phenomena, and acceptance of the Law of Karma. Nichiren Buddhism understands causality as continuous- even where science denies it-on the microscopic/atomic level, where there appears to be breaks in the continuum. Science differs in that it can’t apply this concept to elementary particles in motion. Physics explanation for this apparent discontinuity lies in the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The SGI agrees that indeed, things are more uncertain in regards to human life than they are considering non-moving objects or other life forms.

Nichiren Buddhism’s doctrine of shiki-shin funi (shiki=physical/matter; shin=mental/mind; funi=different but inseparable) is just like Mahayana views that nirvana and samsara are the same. The SGI believes that field and matter are one and compare Einstein’s Theory of Relativity to Nichiren’s concept of shiki-shin funi because mass and energy can transform from one to the other depending upon field conditions. Heisenberg notes that every elementary particle consists of different forms of energy. The SGI says that this was first described in the Avatamsaka Sutra as “mind only”, that mind and matter are impossible to separate.

Solomon comments that the field does explain shiki-shin funi, albeit not perfectly and he feels that the SGI was a bit rash in its comparison because, although physics has proven mass/matter and non-matter/energy are the same, in reality the field becomes material when condensed, but the SGI counters that studying only the material side is incomplete, but, alas, science doesn’t take into account the spiritual. On the other hand, Solomon quotes Erwin Schrodinger, discoverer of wave mechanics, and former professor of physics at the University of Vienna saying, “the scientific concept of the material world…the world around us… was developed by excluding mind or self from the realm of nature”, that, “our picture of the world is a mental construct” and that “the material world has only been constructed at the price of taking the self, that is, mind, out of it”.

The SGI thinks that the Quantum Theory and the Theory of Relativity are approaching a holistic perception analogous to ku, which is “latent potentiality” or the “potentiality-charged void from which everything phenomenal derives”; in science language the “field” or “space”. Ikeda describes it as where elementary particles are produced and changed. The SGI says that Einstein “described matter as close composition of fields…the field can produce new matter”. In addition to matter, unlike science, ku includes the mental and spiritual. Physicist Fritjof Capra is quoted agreeing that, “the conception of physical things and phenomena as a transient manifestation of an underlying fundamental entity is not only a basic element of the Quantum Field Theory, but is also a basic element of the Eastern world view”. Capra, like Nichiren Buddhism, describes the field as the “basis of all particles and their mutual interactions…that the being and fading of particles are merely forms of motion of the field”. Both Nichiren Buddhists and the physicist Capra view ku and the Quantum field, respectively, as essentials in their areas of study. The SGI says of Einstein that he “confessed he had failed to formulate a physics of field as an established branch of learning…we must still assume in all our actual theoretical constructions TWO realities: field and matter”. Physicist David Bohm alleges that, “inseparable quantum interconnectedness of the whole universe is the fundamental reality” and physicist Fritjof Capra is in accord stating that “the basic oneness of the universe becomes apparent at the atomic level and manifests itself more and more as one penetrates deeper into matter, down into the realm of subatomic particles”. The SGI and some theoretical physicists perceive the universe as an interconnected whole where all phenomenon are “fluid and ever changing”.

Solomon concludes that Nichiren Buddhism’s real purpose of studying parts of nature is to motivate the greater world community toward enlightenment and he prophesizes that SGI’s bringing attention to these parallels between science and Nichiren Buddhism may be an attempt to gain “respectability and prestige in the Scholarly community and… in the world community”.

Solomon was correct with his prophecy because this article was written in 1980 and in 2000 the SGI established it’s own university, Soka University. I also agree with Solomon, although he doesn’t say it in exact words, that the SGI was using Upaya in order to reach Western minded audiences. Solomon leaned toward being somewhat harsh on the SGI, but he probably couldn’t help it if he was knowledgeable in physics. On the contrary, from my less than sparse physics perspective, the dichotomous philosophies and theories of religion and science in this example do, to the lay reader, seem to concur to some degree. Nonetheless, the ideas presented in this article were interesting to ponder. What they seem to inspirationally infer is that we are on a kind of karmic cruise control, but we have the option of taking control of the wheel and steering the direction our lives take – our “destinies”.

I’m surprised the article neglected to point out the Eastern thought that the macrocosm is contained in the microcosm because of the inadvertent scientific discoveries that appear to “prove” this. Scientists who build super powered telescopes that enable them to see swirling galaxies and universes are essentially seeing the same thing as when they break down particles in giant centrifuges and observe them under super powered microscopes visually confirming, in a way, that the largest thing is contained in the smallest! It is indeed, a fractal universe.

What Solomon quoted physicist Schrodinger saying about the material world being built only via taking the mind out of it invokes an understanding of the dualistic foundation that science is built upon which definitely accounts for the discrepancies between science and Buddhism, which was built on a monistic foundation.

Yet hope prevails. The SGI believes that in the future science will “prove the profound depths of Buddhist philosophy making more remarkable progress than ever before”. I also intuitively agree with inventor Nikola Tesla, who said, “The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence”.