Our study group is on break for July and August 2026 but I thought I’d write a post loosely related to our studies. Although many Buddhists condemn people for doing jobs that go against Right Livelihood, it is not a position we take in Jodo Shinshu. For example, on X/Twitter a researcher I knew disagreed with my saying, “all work is defiled,” because he believed some jobs, like working for a weapons manufacturer are directly related to killing people (this was during a discussion when a widely followed transgender rights commentator was exposed as a Lockheed Martin employee). Although we may think we have a lot of free will in choosing how we make money to support ourselves, I think causes and conditions still steer us into work that we or others would think we shouldn’t be doing because of the harm it causes to some living beings. As Yuien-bo quotes Shinran in Chapter 13 of Tannisho:
There is no difference between people who make their living by casting nets and fishing in the seas and rivers, or who hunt birds and wild animals in the plains and mountains; and people who engage in commerce or cultivate the fields and rice paddies.
-- Translation by Nobuo Haneda, p. 14 in Strategies for Modern Living by Alfred Bloom (Berkeley: Numata Center, 1992)
Shinran is telling Yuien-bo this after making the point that the only thing not making Yuien-bo a murderer is his karma (cumulative causes and conditions) and not his self-powered good conscience. Shinran saw that it was nonsense to condemn working people as precept-breakers when for most of them, whether they were thieves, prostitutes, farmers or merchants, their work was not something they freely chose, but what they ended up having to do due to the circumstances of their lives.
Already in the time of Shakyamuni Buddha, peoples’ lives were controlled by the market economy. Way before capitalism, the elites used markets to profit from the products made by the labor of the non-elites. There have been societies where people did not have to work all day, every day in order to sustain the community – the kingdom of Hawai’i was a recent example, where before the plantations, people spent most of their time enjoying cultural activities. In societies where the great majority of people worked themselves to death were organized with a ruling class that did not have to do much labor except the occasional battle with other kingdoms. I think of those lords and ladies of ancient Japan wearing several layers of heavy robes because they seldom had to be on their feet and use their arms except for writing poetry.
It pains me every time I hear people lauding their parents and immigrant grandparents for being hard workers. Our ancestors’ “hard work” was not something they did to be virtuous but it was what they had to do, like everyone else who is not an elite. Getting “ahead” by hard work is a delusion – those who become rich and powerful are not that hard working, but they had connections, privilege, and training in being immoral (i.e., not caring about harming others).
I’ve been watching movies and thinking about how they show the nature of work in our present day. Korean movies are especially keen at pointing out the increasing economic hardships for generations now and in the near future. “Parasite” (2019) shows how the people who are struggling to survive, have to do work that supports the elites who hardly do any labor. A movie like “Burning” (2018) shows young people burdened with intergenerational debt (I suspect Japan impoverished much of Korea during its occupation), the men having to take on gig labor jobs and the women trying to stay young looking to get jobs as sexy attractions. The villain played by Steven Yeun represents the elites who live luxuriously without laboring and treat everyone, particularly women, as disposable. The recent “No Other Choice” (2025) shows how very skilled and knowledgeable people become ruthless competitors for the dwindling available jobs as artificial intelligence and technology take over the labor that humans used to do. Even the lightweight stories such as “Champion” (2018) and “Sweet and Sour” (2021) show the toll taken on ordinary people, compelled to work hard for very little compensation.
[from "Parasite"]
On the other hand, American movies ignore the problem of structural inequality with so many rags-to-riches stories, holding up the myth of meritocracy. We Americans only have to look at who is in charge in our government and the business world to see that these men did not get on top by any merits (such as intelligence, skills, education). One example in the movies we see of this is “Nine to Five” (1980) where the three women get enough clout to make conditions a little more tolerable for their fellow workers but the profits still go to the nincompoop who owns the company.
Maybe as Buddhists we should contemplate “seizing the means of production” as a way to ease the suffering of those forced to work harder and harder so a handful of billionaires can become richer. Maybe we should advocate for policies that treat food, housing and healthcare as benefits given to everyone and not just to those who “deserve” it according to the current administration’s criteria of race, gender identity, able-bodiedness, and religious affiliation. For us to talk about Great Compassion but have no vision of what it is makes the calling of Namu Amida Butsu rather empty. If we are based in hongan no butchi, the Buddha-ground of the innermost aspiration, it does not matter what the authoritarians label us.






