Encyclopedia of Buddhism

Bareau, André. Les sectes Bouddhiques du Petit Véhicule.Saigon,
Vietnam: École Française d’Extrême Orient, 1955.

Prebish, Charles. “A Review of Scholarship on the Buddhist
Councils.” Journal of Asian Studies33, no. 2 (1974): 239–254.

CHARLESS. PREBISH

CRITICAL BUDDHISM (HIHAN BUKKYO
)

The term critical Buddhism(hihan Bukkyo
) refers to
Hakamaya Noriaki (1943– ) and Matsumoto Shiro
’s
(1950– ) critique of Buddha-nature (TATHA
GATAGAR-
BHA) and ORIGINAL ENLIGHTENMENT(HONGAKU)as
not Buddhist. Theological and apologetic in nature, yet
using the traditional textual and philological methods
of academic scholarship (both scholars are specialists
in Indian and Tibetan Buddhist studies), critical Bud-
dhism asserts that Buddha-nature and similar doc-
trines are examples of Hindu-like thinking of a
substantial self (a
tman), which Buddhism opposes
with the doctrines of no-self and causality (prat
ltya-
samutpa
da). Critical Buddhism further asserts that
these monistic doctrines deny language and thinking
in favor of an ineffable and nonconceptual mysticism
contrary to the discriminating awareness (prajña
)
and selfless compassion that constitutes Buddhist
awakening.

Critical Buddhism is therefore critical in at least two
senses: It is critical of certain widely held Buddhist doc-
trines, and it asserts that the critical discrimination of
reality and the judicious use of reason and language to
teach that reality are the hallmarks of buddhahood.

A third aspect of critical Buddhism is a fierce cri-

tique of Buddhist schools, thinkers, and social pro-

grams that, based on the triumphalism inherent in a

doctrine of ineffable truth, support the status quo and

perpetuate social injustice. Hakamaya and Matsumoto

are especially concerned with the role of Buddhist doc-

trine in various forms of Japanese nationalism and, as

ordained Zen monks teaching at Zen universities, sin-

gle out their own So
to
Zen teachings for particular crit-

icism, raising questions about how the founder DO
GEN

(1200–1253) has been interpreted within the So
to


school and about the proper role of theology within

academic as well as sectarian practice. They have also

written about HO
NEN(1133–1212), SHINRAN(1173–

1263), Myo
e (1173–1232), the Kyoto School, and oth-

ers, as well as critiquing the ideal of objective acade-

mic scholarship in the study of Buddhism.

See also: Chan School; Hinduism and Buddhism;

Modernity and Buddhism

Bibliography

Bodiford, William. “Zen and the Art of Religious Prejudice: Ef-

forts to Reform a Tradition of Social Discrimination.” Japan-

ese Journal of Religious Studies23 (1996): 1–28.

Heine, Steven. “After the Storm: Matsumoto Shiro
’s Transition

from ‘Critical Buddhism’ to ‘Critical Theology.’ ” Japanese

Journal of Religious Studies28 (2001): 133–146.

Hubbard, Jamie, and Swanson, Paul, eds. Pruning the Bodhi

Tree: The Storm over Critical Buddhism.Honolulu: Univer-

sity of Hawaii Press, 1997.

JAMIEHUBBARD

CRITICALBUDDHISM(HIHANBUKKYO
)