Concerning the ongoing discussion about the existence of God, I agree with William Johnston's May 25 letter, "The reconciliation of opposites," for the simple reason that in the Zen Buddhism tradition, Peter Singer (with his doubts expressed in his May 19 article, "If there is a god, then why is there suffering") would be very much encouraged to find out by himself what all the suffering in this world is about rather than be attacked for daring to question the existence of God.

If Singer came to a solution by his reasoning, that would be just fine, but if not, combined with a good dose of personal suffering, he would probably be glad just to sit down and try to come to terms with the reality that everything -- including us -- is transient and therefore at some point exposed to suffering. This is the simple truth that the Buddha taught.

Johnston is right about the Christian mystic tradition, but mainstream Christianity developed into a theology proclaiming dogmas about right and wrong and what ordinary people have to believe. This culminates in our present pope, a university professor who claims that the Christian God is the God of reason. Yet he demands, in God's name, unreasonable things such as refraining from the use of condoms. This causes much suffering to those who contract AIDS, for example.

While going back to the Middle Ages is not an option, we must ask ourselves whether our happiness has progressed on the same scale as scientific and material progress. Somehow we have to marry science with spirituality, and I think a nondogmatic and tolerant religion such as Zen Buddhism is suitable.

Japan would be in an ideal position to take over that role because it has mastered the Western material concept, and Zen played an integral part in traditional Japanese culture. But I get the feeling that most Japanese have forgotten about the latter.

peter link