The Eternal Buddha of the Lotus Sutra

[Serenity509]

It's interesting to see that both Shinran and Nichiren, despite their differences, see Amida as the Eternal Buddha of the Lotus Sutra:

Considered in this light, it is evident that Vairochana Buddha depicted in the Flower Garland Sutra as sitting on a lotus pedestal, the sixteen-foot Shakyamuni described in the Āgama sutras, and the provisional Buddhas of the Correct and Equal, Wisdom, Golden Light, Amida, and Mahāvairochana sutras are no more than reflections of the Buddha of the “Life Span” chapter. They are like fleeting images of the moon in the sky mirrored on the surface of the water held in vessels of varying sizes. The wise men and scholars of the various schools are first of all confused as to [the nature of the Buddhas of] their own school, and more fundamentally, they are ignorant of [the Buddha of] the “Life Span” chapter of the Lotus Sutra. As a result, they mistake the reflection of the moon on the water for the real moon shining in the sky.
http://www.nichirenlibrary.org/en/wnd-1/Content/18

Pure Land Buddhism and the Lotus Sutra
https://nembutsumonto.wordpress.com/201 ... tus-sutra/

[Astus]

It's interesting to see that both Shinran and Nichiren, despite their differences, see Amida as the Eternal Buddha of the Lotus Sutra

In your quote: "they mistake the reflection of the moon on the water for the real moon shining in the sky" That is, for Nichiren Shakyamuni is the true buddha, others are reflections. While for Shinran it is Amida who's the true buddha and Shakyamuni is a manifestation.

[Queequeg]

It's remarkable how incredibly wrong you got Nichiren.

For Nichiren, and the Lotus schools in general, the Buddha revealed in the 16th chapter of the Lotus Sutra is the primordial Buddha, of whom all other Buddha's are emanations appearing in response to causes and conditions, including the Shakyamuni who appeared in India and Amida. These emanations are not different than the primordial Buddha, but to mistake them as the primordial Buddha is considered deeply grave. In Tientai, the primordial Buddha is sometimes referred to as Vairocana. I believe Nichiren elected to call the primordial Buddha Shakyamuni because that is how he is presented in the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren wanted to emphasize endeavor in this Saha world and demonstrate that the Primordial Buddha's connection to the beings of this world is through Shakyamuni. This is in distinction to the pessimism for this Saha World and yearning for Sukhavati encouraged by Honen's Pure Land teachings and his encouragement of adoration for an emanation Buddha who has only remote karmic connections to the beings of this world (Amida never appeared here to teach beings). In practical terms, Nichiren found the other world orientation of Amida adoration abhorrent as it caused people to lack hope for the here and now and not make vigorous endeavor in their present precious human life.

[Serenity509]

What you should keep in mind is that, according to Shinran, Amida is the primordial and eternal Buddha, who incarnated as Shakyamuni Buddha:

In Jodo Shinshu, Amida Nyorai is not considered just a Sambogakaya Buddha. He is believed to be the Eternal Buddha, who attained Enlightenment in the infinite past. If the body of Shakyamuni is a manifestation of the Eternal Buddha, for Shinran Shonin and his followers, the Eternal Buddha is Amitabha.
https://nembutsumonto.wordpress.com/201 ... tus-sutra/

As a former Tendai monk, Shinran was well learned in the Lotus Sutra.

Shinran and Nichiren appear to be approaching this from different angles. While Nichiren says that Amida is really the Eternal Buddha, Shinran is saying that the Eternal Buddha is really Amida.

For Nichiren, and please forgive me if I'm wrong, Amida Buddha, Vairochana Buddha, etc., are just provisional ways of describing the Eternal Buddha that was fully revealed in the Lotus Sutra.

[joy&peace]

Each part contains the whole.

Very beautiful sentence dear friend.

Am happy you are there - wishing you much happiness and peace!

Peace to all.

[amanitamusc]

A merging of Purland and Nichiren?

[Serenity509]

A merging of Purland and Nichiren?

No, just different interpretations of the Eternal Buddha.

[amanitamusc]

What you should keep in mind is that, according to Shinran, Amida is the primordial and eternal Buddha, who incarnated as Shakyamuni Buddha:

In Jodo Shinshu, Amida Nyorai is not considered just a Sambogakaya Buddha. He is believed to be the Eternal Buddha, who attained Enlightenment in the infinite past. If the body of Shakyamuni is a manifestation of the Eternal Buddha, for Shinran Shonin and his followers, the Eternal Buddha is Amitabha.
https://nembutsumonto.wordpress.com/201 ... tus-sutra/

As a former Tendai monk, Shinran was well learned in the Lotus Sutra.

Shinran and Nichiren appear to be approaching this from different angles. While Nichiren says that Amida is really the Eternal Buddha, Shinran is saying that the Eternal Buddha is really Amida.

For Nichiren, and please forgive me if I'm wrong, Amida Buddha, Vairochana Buddha, etc., are just provisional ways of describing the Eternal Buddha that was fully revealed in the Lotus Sutra.

Not Amida for Nichiren.

[Serenity509]

Not Amida for Nichiren.

Considered in this light, it is evident that Vairochana Buddha depicted in the Flower Garland Sutra as sitting on a lotus pedestal, the sixteen-foot Shakyamuni described in the Āgama sutras, and the provisional Buddhas of the Correct and Equal, Wisdom, Golden Light, Amida, and Mahāvairochana sutras are no more than reflections of the Buddha of the “Life Span” chapter. They are like fleeting images of the moon in the sky mirrored on the surface of the water held in vessels of varying sizes. The wise men and scholars of the various schools are first of all confused as to [the nature of the Buddhas of] their own school, and more fundamentally, they are ignorant of [the Buddha of] the “Life Span” chapter of the Lotus Sutra. As a result, they mistake the reflection of the moon on the water for the real moon shining in the sky.
http://www.nichirenlibrary.org/en/wnd-1/Content/18

It appears that, according to Nichiren, the various Buddhas of the various schools are actually the Eternal Buddha of the Lotus Sutra.

[DGA]

It appears that, according to Nichiren, the various Buddhas of the various schools are actually the Eternal Buddha of the Lotus Sutra.

Right. All the Buddhas without exception articulate the Eternal Buddha. Dharmakaya is Dharmakaya, after all. But you can't limit Eternal Buddha to only one manifestation thereof.

Queequeg explained this to you with regard to Nichiren's teaching already in this thread. Here:

It's remarkable how incredibly wrong you got Nichiren.

For Nichiren, and the Lotus schools in general, the Buddha revealed in the 16th chapter of the Lotus Sutra is the primordial Buddha, of whom all other Buddha's are emanations appearing in response to causes and conditions, including the Shakyamuni who appeared in India and Amida. These emanations are not different than the primordial Buddha, but to mistake them as the primordial Buddha is considered deeply grave. In Tientai, the primordial Buddha is sometimes referred to as Vairocana. I believe Nichiren elected to call the primordial Buddha Shakyamuni because that is how he is presented in the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren wanted to emphasize endeavor in this Saha world and demonstrate that the Primordial Buddha's connection to the beings of this world is through Shakyamuni. This is in distinction to the pessimism for this Saha World and yearning for Sukhavati encouraged by Honen's Pure Land teachings and his encouragement of adoration for an emanation Buddha who has only remote karmic connections to the beings of this world (Amida never appeared here to teach beings). In practical terms, Nichiren found the other world orientation of Amida adoration abhorrent as it caused people to lack hope for the here and now and not make vigorous endeavor in their present precious human life.

[Malcolm]

Not Amida for Nichiren.

Considered in this light, it is evident that Vairochana Buddha depicted in the Flower Garland Sutra as sitting on a lotus pedestal, the sixteen-foot Shakyamuni described in the Āgama sutras, and the provisional Buddhas of the Correct and Equal, Wisdom, Golden Light, Amida, and Mahāvairochana sutras are no more than reflections of the Buddha of the “Life Span” chapter. They are like fleeting images of the moon in the sky mirrored on the surface of the water held in vessels of varying sizes. The wise men and scholars of the various schools are first of all confused as to [the nature of the Buddhas of] their own school, and more fundamentally, they are ignorant of [the Buddha of] the “Life Span” chapter of the Lotus Sutra. As a result, they mistake the reflection of the moon on the water for the real moon shining in the sky.
http://www.nichirenlibrary.org/en/wnd-1/Content/18

It appears that, according to Nichiren, the various Buddhas of the various schools are actually the Eternal Buddha of the Lotus Sutra.

It's all just a bunch of attachments to names and concepts...it is not very important.

[Astus]

It's all just a bunch of attachments to names and concepts...it is not very important.

What is?

[Malcolm]

It's all just a bunch of attachments to names and concepts...it is not very important.

What is?

The meaning.

[Astus]

It's all just a bunch of attachments to names and concepts...it is not very important.

What is?

The meaning.

And what meaning is that here?

[Malcolm]

And what meaning is that here?

Dharmakāya....

[Serenity509]

Please keep in mind that I am not an SGI member or an Ikeda fanboy. I will stick with Pure Land teachings if, after having some experience with SGI, I come to the realization that it's not going to benefit my life and my Buddhist practice.

The Buddha taught to test things for yourself instead of accepting them blindly, and I think I can only do that if I have experience in more than one school of Buddhism in order to make a fair comparison.

[Queequeg]

It's all just attachment, of course unless it's the truth expounded by brother Malcolm. But, oh, let's not talk about the emperor's clothes.

[Malcolm]

It's all just attachment, of course unless it's the truth expounded by brother Malcolm. But, oh, let's not talk about the emperor's clothes.

Is there anything to discuss?

[Serenity509]

The Buddha says to test things before making a conclusion, and Nagarjuna says that all truth except Ultimate Truth is relative, so I just don't want to judge one school of Buddhism over another until I have all the facts I need.

[Kim O'Hara]

The Buddha says to test things before making a conclusion, and Nagarjuna says that all truth except Ultimate Truth is relative, so I just don't want to judge one school of Buddhism over another until I have all the facts I need.

That seems absolutely fair, but you have to remember that to get "all the facts" on any single school takes at least a whole lifetime so you will have to come to terms with the knowledge that "all the facts [you] need" will be a very superficial knowledge, and you won't benefit much out of postponing a decision while you collect more facts. Better to follow your heart or your instincts ... and if practice in one tradition leads you to the realisation that another tradition has equal or greater benefits, well, that's okay too.


Kim