PACIFIC WORLD - The Institute of Buddhist Studies

56Pacific WorldWest, but in relation to its sources and to its internal variants in the traditionthat gave it birth. When the history came together with the concerns of thepresent, something new happened. There was space to imagine the traditionin a new and authentic way.The essay that follows is meant to honor Professor Nagatomi’s legacyin a way that I believe he would have recognized, in the aspiration, at least,if not in the execution. It attempts to locate the contemporary reconstructionof Shin Buddhist tradition in a creative encounter with its Indian past.Whatever success this project may have is due, in no small part, to theexample Professor Nagatomi set as a scholar of the Mahåyåna.Why “Buddhist Theology”?No matter how many times we hear the word, it is still impossible notto be startled by the mention of a Buddhist “theology.” 1 There are at leasttwo reasons for this reaction. The first is that the word seems to mark adeliberate shift from the “objective” study of Buddhism toward a morepassionate, committed engagement with Buddhist values. In the academicstudy of religion, where scholars pride themselves on the way they holdvalue commitments at a distance, this move seems fraught with danger. 2There probably is no religion professor in America who has not had toexplain to a colleague from another department: “No, the Religion Departmentis not trying to convert anyone. If you want conversion, you can goto the chaplain’s office (if there is such a thing). And never, I mean NEVER,confuse us with the chaplain’s office.” Many scholars of religion would saythat the study of religion should analyze, describe, and in some casescompare, but should not advocate one position over another. To dootherwise, they say, would forfeit the claim of scholarly objectivity thatmakes the discipline a respected part of American academic life.Another reason for surprise has to do with the word “theology.” Thereis an old story about the Hindu philosopher Udayana, who came to atemple one day for his morning worship and found that the door waslocked. In his frustration, he addressed the deity and said: “Drunk with thewine of your own godhood, you ignore me; but when the Buddhists arehere, your existence depends on me.” 3 Udayana was a key figure in thelong-running dispute between Hindus and Buddhists in India over theexistence of God. Many Hindus, Udayana included, claimed that there wasa God who created the world. Udayana’s Buddhist opponents said no. Andtherein lay the source not only of much learned commentary but of manypassionate debates. To put the word “Buddhist” together with the word“theology” suggests that Buddhists have a positive word to say about theconcept of God. On the face of it, this is a deliberate incongruity. There is