During the 1980s a Japanese movement known as Critical Buddhism led by Komazawa University scholars Matsumoto Shirō and Hakamaya Noriaki critiqued original enlightenment as an ideology that supports the status quo, and legitimates social injustice by accepting all things as expressions of Buddha nature. These scholars went even further in their critiques, arguing that the buddha-nature doctrine was not really Buddhist, but a kind of foundationalist substance theory similar to the Hindu doctrine of atman-brahman. Their critiques sparked a heated debate, as other Japanese scholars like Takasaki Jikidō and Hirakawa Akira defended the buddha-nature teachings and original enlightenment thought.[[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_enlightenment#cite_note-:1-5)
The expulsion from Paradise is in its main significance eternal: Consequently the expulsion from Paradise is final, and life in this world irrevocable, but the eternal nature of the occurrence (or, temporally expressed, the eternal recapitulation of the occurrence) makes it nevertheless possible that not only could we live continuously in Paradise, but that we are continuously there in actual fact, no matter whether we know it here or not.