Perspectives on Parables of the Lotus and the Gospel

Dennis GiraLet me first thank the Soka Cultural Association of France, theTokyo Institute of Oriental Philosophy, and their partners for what
they have done to enable this exhibition on the Lotus SËtra to take placehere in France. I would also like to thank the organisers for inviting me,
in a spirit of dialogue, to reflect with you on the place of parables in the
Lotus SËtra and in the Gospels.
In this brief paper we will pay special attention to two parables on
which much has been written in the Buddhist and Christian traditions,the ‘poor son’ in the Lotus SËtra and the ‘prodigal son’ in the gospel of
Luke.1 Our intention is not to establish any direct relationship between
the two, as this would be extremely dangerous. Rather our aim is topoint out some similarities and differences between these parables that
can help us all to discover what inspires others and so revisit and cometo a deeper understanding of our own tradition.

The Purpose of Parables
To understand the importance of parables in these source texts, let’s discover more about what each of them says about this literary genre. We’ll
start with an excerpt from Chapter 2 of the Lotus SËtra where the Buddha explains how the Enlightened Ones (buddhas) teach:
The Buddha said to Shariputra, “A wonderful Law such as this ispreached by the buddhas, the thus come ones, at certain times. But likethe blooming of the udumbara, such times come very seldom. Shariputra, you and the others must believe me. The words that the buddhas
preach are not empty or false. Shariputra, the buddhas preach the Law inaccordance with what is appropriate, but the meaning is difficult tounderstand. Why is this? Because we employ countless expedientmeans, discussing causes and conditions and using words of simile andparable to expound the teachings. This Law is not something that can beunderstood through pondering or analysis. Only those who are buddhas

85

86

perspectives on parables of the lotus and the gospel

can understand it. Why is this? Because the buddhas, the world-honored
ones, appear in the world for one great reason alone. Shariputra, what
does it mean to say that the buddhas, the world-honored ones, appear in
the world for one great reason alone? The buddhas, the world-honored
ones, wish to open the door of buddha wisdom to all living beings, toallow them to attain purity. That is why they appear in the world.”2

The phrase ‘We employ countless expedient means, discussing causes
and conditions and using words of simile and parable to expound theteachings’ is repeated over and over again in the Lotus SËtra, mostly toshow how the Buddha adapts his teaching in line with the people’s character and capacity. He does this to help them move towards ‘supreme
perfect enlightenment’.3 And in Chapter 16, where the Buddha reveals
the full truth, we read that it is ‘because living beings have different
natures, different desires, different actions, and different ways of thinking and making distinctions’ that he wants to ‘enable them to put down
good roots’ by using parables and other expedient means.4
The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke explain the reasons why
Christ uses parables but here we will only share three excerpts from
Matthew and Mark.5 In Matthew, Christ, answering a question on thesubject, says:
The reason I talk to them in parables is that they look without seeing,
and listen without hearing or understanding. So, in their case, thisprophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled: ‘You will listen and listen again,
but not understand, see and see again, and not perceive. For the heart ofthis nation has grown coarse, their ears are dull of hearing, and they
have shut their eyes, for fear they should see with their eyes, hear with
their ears, understand with their heart, and be converted, and be healedby me’.6

A little further, Matthew adds:
In all this, Jesus spoke to the crowds in parables; indeed, he would neverspeak to them except in parables. This was to fulfill the prophecy: “I
will speak to you in parables and expound things hidden since the foundation of the world.”7

Finally, Mark addresses the issue at the end of a series of Christ’s parables on God’s Kingdom,8 as told to ‘the great crowd that had gatheredaround him’:perspectives on parables of the lotus and the gospel

87

Using many parables like these, he spoke the word to them so far as
they were capable of understanding it. He would not speak to them
except in parables, but he explained everything to his disciples when
they were alone.9

To grasp better the meaning of these extracts, we must consider the
dilemma facing the Buddha and Christ when they wanted to teach ineffable truths to others. In his teachings, the Buddha uses terms likenirvana, emptiness, Buddha-nature, and non-duality to express theunsayable, but ultimately, none are adequate. Only a silence like that ofVimalakirti, known as ‘the thundering silence’ rings true. Manjushri, thevery symbol of Buddhist wisdom, recognises the correctness of thissilence when he declares, “This is the entrance for Bodhisattvas into
non-duality. In this matter, phonemes, sounds and ideas are useless.”10
Much has been written about the silence of the Buddha.11 What is
important to us is that when he decides to teach, he never lets people
think that there may be an equivalence between the words he uses tohelp people approach the ultimate reality and that reality itself.
This is why the parables were precious to him and to his audience.
Instead of directly describing the indescribable, parables, through comparisons drawn with nature or everyday life,12 allow those who arewilling to hear them, to better open up to this reality and finally to enter
it. From what we know, parables, perhaps because of the excesses intheir language, can gradually help people to familiarise themselves withwhat is beyond them, what is unknown or hidden from them. This isclearly demonstrated in each of the seven parables in the Lotus SËtra.13
As for Christ, he teaches that everyone is invited to enter the life of
God himself. But what can be said about this God and his life? Silence
is obviously not unknown to Christ. Think of all the situations in which
he imposes it on others, the clearest example being his injunction to his
disciples just after the transfiguration when God ‘gives a glimpse of theglory of his Son’:14 “Tell no one about this vision until the Son of Man
has risen from the dead.”15
The parables in the Gospels helped people ‘so far as they were capable of understanding’ to move forward at their own pace toward a better
understanding of unknown truths, even ‘things hidden since the foundation of the world.’ By really listening to these parables, people could
even hope to become ‘his disciples’, which would allow them to receive
explanations from Christ ‘away from’ other people. But when this openness was missing, the same parables were used to obscure the truth frompeople who, in the words of the prophet Isaiah, have ‘ears that are dull

88

perspectives on parables of the lotus and the gospelof hearing and have shut their eyes, for fear they should see with theireyes, hear with their ears, understand with their heart, and be converted,and be healed by me.’ So we see how the same parable may be heard
and understood by some, while remaining an enigma to others,16 andespecially to outsiders, that is to say, those who are not open to Christ.
To summarise, we can say that the use of parables by the Buddha andChrist first of all reflects the gap between the depth of truth which eachof them, in their own framework, experienced, and the difficulty (ofwhich they were aware) of talking about it. It also reflects the efforts
made, despite everything, by Buddha and Christ to communicate something of their truth to everyone, according to each person’s innercharacter and degree of faith. Finally, the parables, through their‘excess’, upset the status quo and call everyone to an inner conversion,
to an opening to deeper truths than they could imagine before such a
conversion.
Without this change, nobody can advance along the way of the
Buddha, nor on the path of Christ. The refusal of some to follow thesemasters shows that all of this was difficult to accept. Consider, for example, the five thousand ‘arhats, monks, pious lay nuns and pious laymen’
who withdrew from the meeting because they did not want to hear thetruth about the opportunity for everyone to attain ‘supreme perfectenlightenment’. As for Christ, many of those with whom he shared theparables simply turned their back on him.

Parables of the Poor Son and the Prodigal Son
Let’s begin Part Two with a summary of the parables of the poor son
from the Lotus SËtra and the prodigal son from the Gospel of Luke. In
Chapter 4 of the Lotus SËtra, four arhats,17 having understood that they
could achieve supreme perfect enlightenment,18 used a parable to explain
their experience to the Buddha. They recount the tale of a very young
man who leaves his father and flees to another land where, over time, his
circumstances become extremely difficult.
One day, looking for work, he arrives in the place where his now
extremely wealthy father has settled. He sees him without recognising
him and certain that such a rich man would not give him work, he flees.
The father, however, recognises his son and sends servants to bring him
back. But the son faints from fright. Knowing that the splendour of his
lifestyle had anguished his son, the father orders that he be set free. His
servants obey, and the son goes joyfully to a poor village where hehopes to find enough to feed himself.

perspectives on parables of the lotus and the gospel

No Image89

No Image

Left: Wall painting of ‘The Parable of the Wealthy Man and His Poor Son’. Cave 98,
Dunhuang Magao Caves; Five Dynasties period, 10th century (Dunhuang shiku
quanji, Vol. 7, Shanghai Renmin Chubanshe, 2000), Right: ‘The Return of theProdigal Son’ (detail), Rembrandt van Rijn, c.1668. 262×206 cm. Hermitage
Museum, Saint Petersburg

To attract the attention of his son, the father sends other well disguised servants to him who invite him to come and work with them. As
the work is humble, the son agrees. The father, filled with compassion atseeing his son, dresses himself in rags and, shovel in hand, joins theworkers. In this way he can approach his son without frightening him.
As time passes, he entrusts him with increasingly important responsibilities and says that he would like to consider him as a son. Over time,
trust is established between them.
When the father falls ill, he asks the son to manage his affairs. The
son agrees, but he remains convinced of his inferiority. The relationshipbetween father and son becomes closer and closer until the father, atdeath’s door, tells him the whole truth, in the presence of everyone. At
this moment the son is ready and accepts this unexpected truth withhuge joy, amazed that priceless treasures belong to him even though he
had never sought them out.
The parable of the prodigal son in the Gospel of Luke is told by Jesus
in the context of his teaching about how God regards people who are
despised (tax collectors and sinners) by established religious society (thePharisees and scribes).19 The parable begins with the story of a father
who yields his worldly goods to his two sons, because the younger of90perspectives on parables of the lotus and the gospel

the two demands his share of the inheritance. The latter leaves for a faraway land and scandalously squanders all of it. Due to famine, his
situation deteriorates and he is obliged to look after pigs that eat better
than he does.
Coming to his senses, he decides to return home, where the workers
eat well, to ask for forgiveness, because he is conscious of having sinned
against his father and against heaven. He knows how unworthy he is.
When his father sees him from afar, he is moved with pity and runs tomeet him. Ignoring the statement his son had prepared, he tells the servants to dress him in the most beautiful clothes, to put a ring on his
finger and even to prepare a feast.
When the eldest son, returning from the fields, learns all this, hebecomes angry. He complains because despite his obedience, his father
had never even offered him a goat to feast on with his friends. The parable ends with the father trying to persuade his eldest son to enter thehouse: “My son, you are with me always and all I have is yours. But it is
only right we should celebrate and rejoice, because your brother here
was dead and has come to life; he was lost and is found.” We do notknow how the eldest son replied.

Similarities and Differences
The obvious similarities in these parables concern the two sons (theyounger son in the case of the Gospel)—each of whom leaves his home,wanders for a long time and lives in poverty—and the compassionate
fathers who want to find their sons. But the differences are numerous,
and even more significant, because they help us see how Buddhism andChristianity are radically different. And that is why, in dialogue, it isessential to recognise and reflect on these differences. They also allow
us to grasp better both the true greatness of the compassion of Buddhas
as well as God’s love for all, whatever flaws and failures people are burdened with.
Among these differences, let us note first of all the ‘framework’ inwhich these parables are recounted. In the Lotus SËtra, the parable istold to the Buddha by a group of arhats, but in the presence of a multitude of bodhisattvas, arhats, deities and all kinds of other beings who
had gathered on Eagle Peak. Since, according to tradition, the Buddha
gave many very important sermons there, this location lends weight to
the Lotus SËtra. In Luke’s Gospel, Christ tells his parable to just a few
people at a meal where the despised of society could come to eat andlisten to him, which troubled the Pharisees and scribes, who neverperspectives on parables of the lotus and the gospel

91

ceased castigating.
The manner in which each son is reunited with his father is also very
different. The rich man’s son arrives in his father’s city without realisingit, whereas the son in the Gospel of Luke, decides, in his misery, toreturn to his father seeking forgiveness, a request that was certainly triggered by his survival instinct but whose sincerity becomes apparent
fairly quickly.
Then there is the way that the two fathers express their compassion
when they recognise their sons. In the Lotus SËtra parable, the father
would love to approach his son, but he holds back because he sees that
his son is not ready. In the parable of the Gospel, the father, when hesees his son in the distance, runs to him, embraces him, covers him withsymbols of his lineage and organises an exceptional feast to celebrate
his return. Everything happens very quickly.
This rapidity is at the heart of another key difference. In the Gospel,
the relationship between father and son is immediately restored because
the power of love overcomes everything. It quickly becomes clear thateven if the change of heart and the request for forgiveness were necessary for the son, they were not so for the father who welcomes him
home as if nothing had happened.
As eloquent as this parable is regarding the father’s love for his son,some questions remain. How did the younger son feel inside about thisreconciliation? Was he ready to absorb, in such a short time, this overwhelming welcome? The parable gives no answer to such questions, nordoes it speak about the father and son’s future relationship. The essential
point is that the love of God the Father seems to be totally free.
The parable in the Lotus SËtra describes the capacity of the father(i.e., the Buddha) to lead his son from an extremely limited awareness of
who he really is to a full awareness of his fundamental nature. All thistakes lots of time and patience. Here the truly admirable teaching of the
Buddha unfolds. Everything speaks of his compassion, a compassion
which, like the supreme wisdom of Buddhas, lies at the heart of the
Lotus SËtra and of the experience of those who trust in it. It is therefore
normal that this compassion is also found at the heart of the parables.
Finally they explain in various ways how the vehicles (or ‘means ofprogress’) of the listeners, self-enlightened Buddhas, and bodhisattvas,20
as well as the teachings that correspond to them, were only provisional.
But in terms of being salvific expedient means they can, when they areskillfully employed, lead living beings beyond the ‘limited’ awakeningthat they propose, to the one and only vehicle that allows them to attainthe so precious ‘supreme perfect enlightenment.’

92

perspectives on parables of the lotus and the gospel

The true and great compassion of the Buddha is that he helps beings
to reach this supreme enlightenment. This is truly the ‘one great reason’mentioned at the beginning of my paper, the one for which the Buddhas
appear in the world, the one through which they open the door of
Buddha wisdom to all living beings and to a vision of Awakening andcause them to attain purity.21
A final important difference is the presence of the elder son in theparable of the prodigal son. Some biblical scholars consider him to be
the main character of the parable.22 In fact, his lack of response to hisfather’s invitation calls upon readers or listeners to give their own
answer! They have the choice to respond—or not—to the love of God(the father in the parable). Saying no would correspond to the refusal of
the Pharisees and scribes, for whom the parable was intended, to believethat God could love sinners (the younger son in the parable). And that iswhere this parable remains relevant today, never ceasing to invite those
who read or hear it to welcome God’s intense love for humanity.

Conclusion
Since a spirit of dialogue gave rise to all these thoughts, I would like, inconclusion, to indicate some areas for dialogue that open up when Buddhists and Christians read these texts intelligently.
The first area relates to the human condition. Both parables show thedissatisfaction and fragility that run through mankind, a dissatisfaction
which nevertheless cannot define who we really are. Like the two sons,
we have the unfortunate ability to cut ourselves off from our true roots,
and then to reap intolerable fruits. Those who meditate on these texts
have much to say about this condition, which is common to both ofthem.
A second area concerns the chance that everyone has to discover who
they really are. Neither parable suggests that man is by nature a prisonerof his unsatisfactory condition. In fact, in their own way, they both show
us how to escape from it. This hope should allow those inspired by the
Lotus SËtra and those inspired by the Gospel to work together for peacein a world that sometimes shows signs of a disturbing spiritual fatigue.
A third and very important area for dialogue concerns the way out ofhumanity’s unsatisfactory condition. This area may seem very narrow
when we compare the parable of the prodigal son which speaks of God’s
intense love coming from grace, as a gift, with the Lotus SËtra parable
which seems to highlight a slow evolution towards the full awarenessthat we can have of our true nature. But this area definitely grows wider

perspectives on parables of the lotus and the gospel

93

in the light of a word that recurs several times in the sËtra:spontaneously.
In this regard, the son’s reflection at the end of the parable, after
learning from his father who he really is and receiving immense treasures, is extremely interesting: “I originally had no mind to covet or
seek such things. Yet now these stores of treasures have come spontaneously of their own accord.”23 The interpretation by arhats sharing thisparable uses the same word: “Today we have gained what we never had
before; what we previously never hoped for has now come to us of itself[spontaneously]. We are like the impoverished son who gained immeasurable treasures.”24 This is not about imagining that ‘spontaneity’ and‘grace’ are identical, but about reflecting on the importance of not calculating what has to be done to gain enlightenment or salvation which is at
the heart of both ‘spontaneity’ and ‘grace’.
Unfortunately, we must stop here, even though there are many otherinteresting areas of dialogue to discover. Before stopping, we must nevertheless respond to another question; how do we move about withinthese areas of dialogue? The answer is simple! It’s a bit like swimming:
you learn to move about in dialogue... by doing it! And when things get
difficult you just have to remember that in a dialogue, you are neveralone. Thank you for your attention.
Notes
	These parables are, respectively, in Chapter 4 (Belief and Understanding) of the
Lotus SËtra and Chapter 15 of the Gospel of St. Luke (Luke 15: 11–32).
2
The Lotus Sutra translated by Burton Watson, Soka Gakkai, 2009, p. 64. This translation will be used throughout the English version of this paper.
3
Ibid., p. 107, p. 265.
4
See Ibid., p. 267.
		 Robert, op. cit., Chapter 16 (The Life Span of the Thus Come One), p. 283.
5
In the English version of this paper, quotations from the Gospels are taken from The
Jerusalem Bible, Doubleday & Company, Inc., Garden City New York, 1966. The original text in French used quotations from Traduction œcuménique de la Bible (TOB)(Oecumenical translation of the Bible), Société biblique française/Éditions du Cerf,
1984.
6
Matthew 13, 13–15.
7
Matthew 13, 34–35.
8
The parables of the sower, the lamp, the measure and the mustard seed.
9Mark 4, 33–34.
10
In this regard, it is difficult not to think of the ‘thundering silence’ of Vimalakirti.
The Teaching of Vimalakirti recounts what happened during a ‘spiritual joust’ famous in
the Buddhist world, around the theme of non-duality. After opinions on non-duality frommany bodhisattvas (‘beings vowing to be enlightened’), Manjushri, the very symbol of
Buddhist wisdom, gives his view: “Gentlemen, you have all spoken well; however, in1

94

perspectives on parables of the lotus and the gospel

my opinion, everything you have said still implies duality. To exclude all words and say
nothing, express nothing, pronounce nothing, teach nothing, name nothing, is to enter
into non-duality.” Then, Manjushri asked Vimalakirti to speak on the issue... and Vimalakirti stayed silent. Manjushri’s reaction was immediate as the text says: “Crown Prince
Manjushri gave his assent to Vimalakirti and said: Well, well, son of the family: this is
how bodhisattvas enter non-duality. In this matter, phonemes, sounds and ideas are useless.” For the French text of this whole discussion, see L’Enseignement de Vimalakirti(Vimalakirtinirdesa), translated by Etienne Lamotte, Louvain/Leuven: Publications Universitaires, Institut Orientaliste, Bibliothèque du Muséon, vol. 51, 1962, pp. 316–317.
11See, for example, Le silence du Bouddha et autres questions indiennes (The Silenceof the Buddha and other Indian issues), Roger-Pol Droit, Hermann, 2010.
12
See the analysis of the function of the parables in Les paraboles du Royaume: Jésuset le rôle des paraboles dans la tradition synoptique (Parables of the Kingdom: Jesus
and the Use of Parables in the Synoptic Tradition), M.A. Getty-Sullivan, dans la collection « Lire la Bible », Éditons du Cerf, 2010, pp. 9–32.
13
The seven parables are called: the three carts and the burning house, the wealthy
man and his poor son, the three kinds of medicinal herbs and two kinds of trees, thephantom city and the treasure land, the jewel in the robe, the bright jewel in the topknot,
the skilled physician and his sick children.
14
See note ‘s’ in the TOB translation, p. 90.
15Matthew, 17, 9.
16
On the enigmatic nature of parables, see Getty-Sullivan, op. cit., p. 52.
17
The arhats are those who are ‘worthy of’ respect because they have done everything
within the framework of ‘ancient’ Buddhism to obtain the enlightenment promised bythis tradition. This word is also translated as ‘deserving’.
18
These four arhats—Subhuti, Mahakatyayana, Mahakashyapa, and Maudgalyayana—
have understood the Buddha’s teaching on the possibility for them to also achieve
supreme, perfect enlightenment thanks to the parable of the three carts and the burning
house recounted in Chapter 3 of the SËtra.
19
Claude Tassin, Jacques Hervieux, Hugues Cousin and Alain Marchadour, Les évangiles: textes et commentaires (The Gospels: texts and commentaries), Bayard Compact,
2001, p. 733.
20
Not to be confused with the Small Vehicle, the Great Vehicle and the Diamond Vehicle.
21
Watson, op. cit., p. 64
22Les évangiles: textes et commentaires (The Gospels: texts and commentaries),
p. 734.
23
Watson, op. cit., p. 123.
24
Ibid., p. 131.

perspectives on parables of the lotus and the gospel

95

Author Biography
Dennis Gira was born in Chicago in 1943 and spent eight years in Japan (1960–1977),
studying the language, the culture and the religions of Japan, especially Buddhism. In
1977, he moved with his family to France where he continued his research, obtaining adoctorate in East Asian studies at the University of Paris VII (1981) and the diploma of
the École Pratique des Hautes Études (1982). He was an assistant director of the Institute of Science and Theology of Religions at the Catholic University of Paris between
1988 and 2007. Now retired, he continues to give courses on Buddhism and Interreligious Dialogue in several Catholic Universities in France (Lyon, Paris and Angers) andin several seminaries throughout France. He has published more than a dozen books onthese subjects.