Most of us belong to different Lotus Sutra based sects with different emphasis on Dharma slander. Some sects may take quotes like the above from the Lotus Sutra and various other admonitions from Nichiren Shonin with a grain of salt, and others take it very seriously.
Not possessing ANY item from another sect or religion, not displaying things from shrines or things deemed "heretical", etc. Or the thinking that to not recite the O-Daimoku is tantamount to Dharma slander, to neglect ones practice is to be ungrateful for it and thus Dharma slander.
How about you? What do you feel? What does your particular Nichiren inclination teach about this?
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo
In the Honmon Butsuryu-shu as part of our litrugy we recite a small portion of the verse from Chapter 21 of the Lotus Sutra, which reads:
As the bright light of the Sun and Moon
Can clear away all darkness and obscurity, So this man, practicing in the world,
Can extinguish the darkness of beings. He lets incalculable Bodhisattvas
Dwell absolutely in the One Vehicle.
For this reason one who has wisdom,
Hearing of the advantage of these merits,
After my passage into extinction
Should receive and keep this scripture. This man is sure to attain Buddhaood;
There is no doubt about that.
In this verse I think the " So this man...." refers to Nichiren Shonin and the other Shonins who have helped to propogate the practices of the Lotus Sutra, but it can also refer to those people in general who uphold the practice.
So, following this thought, someone who upholds and spreads the practice of the Lotus Sutra as instructed by Buddha Shakamuni is equal to Nichiren Shonin and the other votaries of the Lotus Sutra.
Thats the way I understand it, anyway.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo
My views are my own. I can't say that they are the views of any sect.
"Those who do not believe this sūtra
But slander it,
Will destroy the seeds of Buddhahood"
It seems to me that there are three general categories.
Obviously, one is the believer. There will be differences of opinion on who qualifies in this category depending on who you ask. I'll put that issue aside for now.
Another is the slanderer. Again, there are differences of opinion on who qualifies as a slanderer, so I'll put that issue that issue aside for now.
There is a third category that I think often gets ignored. That's the person who is neutral toward the Lotus Sutra. This can be broken down into two sub-categories. Those who have heard of the Lotus Sutra and those who have not.
In Nichiren's day, it might have been difficult to find a Japanese person who had not at least heard of the Lotus Sutra, so as far as I know, he didn't have much to say about [EDIT - "people who had never heard the Lotus Sutra"] category. As an aside, though, this might apply to the vast majority of human beings alive today. A deeper investigation of this category might be warranted for present day practitioners.
I'm bringing this up to illustrate my reading of Nichiren that slander requires some negative act - however subtle. Nichiren did not have much to say about individuals, though. I think at the interpersonal level, he was compassionate and understanding in the difficulty of Buddhist practice, especially at the level of subtle mental activity. Instead, his primary concern was institutional Buddhism ie. Buddhism understood through the prism of sectarian doctrine. This is in keeping with institutional Buddhist discourse at least from the time of Shotoku Taishi, so this should not be such a surprise. Its the institutional Buddhism that has the most far reaching affect on society as a vehicle for certain ideas and norms. In Nichiren's view, so long as a sect was at least neutral about the Lotus Sutra, they were not slandering. However, the moment that the Lotus Sutra was denigrated in any manner - this was an act of slander. Anyone who internalized these sectarian views, according to Nichiren, would be destined for avici.
To illustrate this focus at the institutional level, we have Nichiren's analysis of how to determine the appropriate teachings and practice for a given time and place. In a country that only knew the Hinayana teachings, practicing Hinayana is completely acceptable. However, if both Mahayana and Hinayana are present in a country, practicing Hinayana to the exclusion of Mahayana is a detrimental act. In a country where the Lotus Sutra has not been established as the supreme Buddhist teaching, a catholic Mahayana practice that does not denigrate the Lotus Sutra is acceptable. In a country where the Lotus Sutra has been established as the supreme teaching (in Nichiren's view, this happened in China when Zhiyi "defeated" all the other Buddhist teachers in debate; and in Japan when Saicho defeated the teachers of the Six Nara schools and won imperial patronage for Enryakuji), practice must be framed within a Lotus Sutra framework or will be considered slander. Nichiren criticized the major schools of his time for their denigration of the Lotus Sutra: Pure Land, as taught by Honen, because Honen asserted that Buddhist practice in this world at this time is utterly futile and the only hope is in rebirth in Sukhavati by the power of Amida's vow; Zen (I've never been quite clear what he meant by this - but presumably the brand of Zen that the elite Kamakura aristocrats patronized) because they asserted that the true dharma was not contained in the sutras, including the Lotus Sutra, but only passed by personal lineage; Shingon because they considered the Lotus Sutra inferior to not only the Avatamasaka, but the Esoteric texts, particularly the Mahavairocana Sutra; and Tendai because one of the patriarchs, (Jikaku Daishi?) had declared that the Lotus and Esoteric teachings were the same in theory but that the latter were superior teachings because they contained instruction on mantras and mudras.
Nichiren's views on slander seems to be further illustrated through his instructions on practice. The Nichiren sect is known for what we call "Shakubuku" method of propagating the Dharma, for those who don't know - directly refuting wrong views, in contrast to the method of shoju which avoids direct refutation of wrong views and instead focuses on instructing on right views. My impression is that Nichiren only instructed his monastic disciples, and the advanced ones at that, in the practice of shakubuku. These were the people who would be involved in formal debates in an ecclesiastical setting - consistent with his concerns about sectarian Buddhism. He did not encourage lay people to go around refuting others, but rather encouraged them to simply chant the daimoku with faith in the Lotus Sutra for their own practice and to urge others to do the same; if a person so instructed refused, they refused, but at least they have "Heard the Name" of the sublime dharma which will in time germinate and grow into Buddhahood. The question was whether they refused without any disposition (ie. reacted neutrally) or if they reacted in a hostile manner (slander). Obviously the latter would cause one to suffer in the future; however, having Heard the Name, they thereby form a "Poison Drum" relationship with the sublime dharma which can never be severed and will eventually result in full blown Buddhahood.
There are a few incidents that kind of illustrate Nichiren's views further - When Nichiren had retired to Minobu, a woman called on him on the way back from a visit to a shrine in the vicinity. Nichiren refused to see her as he objected to her coming to him as an afterthought, more or less, to her main purpose in visiting the shrine. This is significant because it was not the visit to the shrine per se that he objected to. Another woman had taken up chanting the Daimoku, but still felt attached to chanting the Nembutsu. Nichiren did not proscribe chanting the Nembutsu, but instructed her to exert all of her effort in the Daimoku, and if she had time and energy afterwards, instructed her that reciting the Nembutsu a few times was OK.
Anyway, to really get at what is faith and what is slander, I think you have to explore what Nichiren meant by the Daimoku.
That aside, key is one's disposition toward the Lotus Sutra. So long as activities are carried out within a framework of faith in the Lotus Sutra, it seems practices that do not go against the Lotus Sutra are acceptable. I think the complication comes for people who don't quite think their activities through and hold muddled and conflicting views, some of which might ignorantly go against the Lotus Sutra. No matter, as Nichiren explained, the Daimoku is like an amulet the Buddha ties around the necks of being tossed in the cycle of suffering - once encountered, it can never be lost and inevitably leads to Buddhahood.
As to Jikan's question - for me personally, I'm coming around to the teachings on Bodhisattva Never Disparaging. Nichiren identified his teachings as identical to Never Disparaging's. Never Disparaging is the bodhisattva described in chapter 20 of the Lotus Sutra whose sole practice was bowing to all people he encountered proclaiming that he would never disparage them because they were destined to be Buddhas. Even someone who abuses you deserves this treatment - they are merely the vehicle for the retribution for your past evil deeds; to be angry at them is to be angry at cause and effect and denigrate their innate Buddhahood. How much more is this attitude the case for those vigorously uphold, read, recite, contemplate, teach, and copy the Lotus Sutra?
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
One wonders what would have constituted slander in the times and conditions in which the LS, or the ideas contained therein, were being formulated and popularized. My impression, such as it is, is that it may have had something to do with the egalitarian message of the Sutra, and it might refer to elitist attitudes found in Buddhist circles. Having doubts about other people's or even one's own potential for awakening as they are can be a living hell of a sort.
"Keep The Gods Out Of It. Swear On Your Heads. Which I Will Take If You Break Your Vow."- Geralt of Rivia
Nichiren, in citing the Medicine King Chapter of the Lotus Sutra, he states that the most important principle of this Chapter is not that the Lotus Sutra is king of all sutras but that the votary of the Lotus Sutra is the highest of all people.
"When a votary of the highest order is slandered, then the seven great disasters occur. When a votary of the middle order is slandered, one of the twenty-nine disasters will occur. And when a votary of the lowest order is slandered, one of the innumerable disasters will occur."
Answer: The seventh volume of the Lotus Sutra states: “A person who can accept and uphold this sutra is likewise foremost among all living beings.” The “Medicine King” chapter of the Lotus Sutra lists ten comparisons indicating that this is the greatest of all the sutras preached by the Buddha in the past, present, and future. Of these ten comparison, the eighth is followed by the passage just quoted, and thus it becomes evident that the Buddha’s intention was not only to establish the superiority of the Lotus Sutra in comparison to the other sutras, but also to indicate that the votary of the Lotus Sutra is superior to all other kinds of persons.
The Lotus Sutra says, “The Lotus is the foremost!” It also says, “A person who can accept and uphold this sutra is likewise foremost among all living beings.” And it also says, “[And if one lauds and extols those who uphold this sutra], one’s good fortune will be even greater.”
“A person who can accept and uphold this sutra is likewise foremost among all living beings.” This twenty-two-character passage is the heart of the entire sutra, the eye of all living beings.
“A person who can accept and uphold this sutra is likewise foremost among all living beings.” If this passage of the sutra is to be believed, then the votary of the Lotus Sutra must be like the great sea as compared to the various rivers and streams, like Mount Sumeru among the host of mountains, like the god of the moon amid the multitude of stars, like the great god of the sun amid the other shining lights, like the wheel-turning kings, like the lord Shakra, and like the great king Brahmā among all various heavenly kings.
"This passage means that a person who upholds the Lotus Sutra, if a man, though he may be a mere country bumpkin, is superior to the great heavenly king Brahmā, who is the lord of the threefold world, the god Shakra Devānām Indra, the four heavenly kings, the wheel-turning sage kings, and the rulers of the countries of China or Japan; which means, needless to say, that he is likewise superior to the high ministers and nobles of Japan, the warriors of the Minamoto and Taira clans, and the other people of the country. And if such a person is a woman, she will be superior to Lady Kaushika, the goddess Auspicious, the court ladies Lady Li or Yang Kuei-fei of China, or to all the other countless and boundless numbers of women."
Nichiren give dozens examples of individuals who are slanderers. To say that he only or principally excoriated mistaken beliefs and not mistaken believers, is a narrow application of the teachings and a misunderstanding of the forceful practices. Indeed, saying for example that Zen is the teaching of devils, the person who advances the misleading teaching will fall into hell, not the teaching.
I rebutted a Shin Yatomi essay which touches on another point that you made QQ, the point of reciting the Nembutsu:
Shin Yatomi: IT seems a long time has passed since the priests at Taiseki-ji told the members of SGI that they could not sing Beethoven's "Ode to Joy" in German. To do so, they announced, is tantamount to praising Christianity and thus a "slander" of Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism. This argument seemed rather ominous then, but now such a narrow, dogmatic approach to this Buddhism seems quite laughable. Over the last eight years, we have learned to look at the Daishonin's Buddhism from the standpoint of its essential humane spirit, reason and common sense. And we have come to grasp more deeply a simple yet important truth: religion exists for the sake of people, not vice versa.
Me:
Can you sense the Creator, world?
Seek him above the starry canopy.
Above the stars He must dwell.
Be embraced, Millions!
This kiss for all the world!
Brothers!, above the starry canopy
A loving father must dwell.
Can you sense the Creator, world?
Seek him above the starry canopy.
Above the stars He must dwell. -- From the Chorus of Ode to Joy
Dengyo the Great and Nichiren Daishonin disagree with the late Shin Yatomi. They assert that we prove the validity of the religion, it is we who make the religion great, not the religion that makes us great. The human being is central in Buddhism.
Shinsuke Yatomi: With SGI President Ikeda's constant efforts to communicate the essence of the Lotus Sutra and the writings of Nichiren Daishonin, the Daishonin's Buddhism has entered a new era, no longer confined within the framework of Japan's ethnocentric, esoteric religious culture.
Me: In the SGI's topsy turvy ends justify the means world, win is lose, lies are truth, and evil is good. You can be sure that if an SGI member or leader asserts that the SGI has demolished Japanese ethnocentric, esoteric religious culture, that SGI has exported Japanese ethnocentric, esoteric religious culture. First of all, SGI Japan calls all the shots and even in America, who is the General Director of the Soka Gakkai? A Japanese. Is the mentor Disciple relationship the prime point of the Lotus Sutra or of the Zen Bushido tradition? If you have any questions about this I will gladly answer them for you.
Shin Yatomi: For decades the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood endeavored to impose this culture upon the SGI's efforts to spread the Daishonin's Buddhism as a world religion. This atmosphere--characterized by a tradition of absolute priestly authority and emphasis on formalities--did have a shackling effect. Nevertheless, we were able to maintain our conviction that the Daishonin's Buddhism is a religion that can offer the universal values of humanism to all people of all nations, cultures and ethnicities. It is based on this perspective that we have been deepening and refreshing our understanding of how best to practice and communicate the Daishonin's Buddhism in today's world.
Me: The "Master Professor of the Soka Gakkai" sounds more like any Group Leader of the Youth Division than a Master Professor of Buddhism. SGI is all about conformity of thought [cult]. The doctrines and talking points of the Soka Gakkai are formulated above by people like Shin Yatomi and then it is drummed into the heads of every member, repeating the same messages over and over again. That is why every Group Chief from Japan to the Netherlands to Brazil, spews these very same Gakkai talking points, almost word for word. There is nothing remotely close to the Soka Gakkai conforming to the cultures of the countries it has invaded [Zuiho Bini].
Shin Yatomi: One expression of this refreshed understanding is Article 7 of the SGI Charter: "SGI shall, based on the Buddhist spirit of tolerance, respect other religions, engage in dialogue and work together with them toward the resolution of fundamental issues concerning humanity" (December 8, 1995,World Tribune, p. 5).
Me: More of the east is west, up is down lies of the Soka Gakkai. SGI will respect freedom of religion, and other religions? Then why the never ending war against the Nichiren Shoshu, the Nichiren Shu, and the Kempon Hokke? The true teachings of the Soka Gakkai are only taught to the highest leaders:
"Our enemies are the evil religions. Evil religions drive people to hell. True Buddhism makes Buddhas out of all people. Nichiren Daishonin said the source of all unhappiness and misfortunes of people is evil religion. It was our teacher, Mr. Josei Toda, who repeated this great saying."- Daisaku Ikeda
We are honest and upright. We don't make a show in public of respecting and tolerating all religions and then in private teach that all other religions and practices, save for the Daimoku of the Lotus Sutra, lead to hell. We rain down the Law equally to all persons.
SGI as the Pearl Harbor of "Buddhism" comes to mind. The very heart and soul of the Kempon Hokke is Establishing the Correct Teaching for the Peace of the Land. It is the fifth and final principle of our American charter: 5). Uphold the principles of Establishing the Peace of the Land Through the Propagation of the True Law (Rissho Ankoku Ron).
Shin Yatomi: Some have raised the question: Isn't "respecting other religions" a slander of the Law? Aren't we abandoning the Daishonin's spirit of shakubuku--to lead people to a correct understanding by refuting erroneous teachings' To answer directly, respecting other religions, or those who practice them, does not in itself constitute slander of the Law, nor does it go against the Daishonin's spirit.
Me: Yet, in their top leaders meeting they scheme and plot how to destroy the Nichiren Shoshu, the Nichiren Shu, the Kempon Hokke, and all other religions.
The Daishonin says about all other religions and philosophies:
"On the other hand, even if one does not commit a single evil deed throughout one's entire lifetime, and observes the five precepts, the eight precepts, the ten precepts, the ten good precepts, the two hundred and fifty precepts, the five hundred precepts, or countless numbers of precepts; even if one learns all the other sutras by heart, makes offerings to all the other Buddhas and bodhisattvas, and accumulates immeasurable merit, if one but fails to put one's faith in the Lotus Sutra; or if one has faith in it, but considers that it ranks on the same level as the other sutras and the teachings of the other Buddhas; or if one recognizes its superiority, but constantly engages in other religious disciplines, practicing the Lotus Sutra only from time to time; or if one associates on friendly terms with priests of the Nembutsu, who do not believe in the Lotus Sutra but slander it; or if one thinks that those who insist the Lotus Sutra does not suit the people's capacity in the latter age are guilty of no fault, then all the merit of the countless good acts one has performed throughout one's life will suddenly vanish."
Nichiren also teaches very clearly that Confucianism, Brahmanism [Hinduism], and Taoism are shallow evil religions.
Shin Yatomi: In order to shed light on the meaning of Article 7 of the SGI Charter, we must examine in a little more detail what is meant by "slandering the Law." Prior to 1991, under the influence of the priesthood, the meaning of slander as it applied to our religious faith was ambiguous, and was often misinterpreted and misused. We often heard: "It's a slander to point your feet at the Gohonzon." Or, "It's a slander to put a gongyo book on the floor." We were also told that criticizing a priest constituted inexcusable slander, and that even "singing 'Ode to Joy' in German is a slander."
IN fact, the priesthood's tendency has been to use the term slander to describe any act that displeased them. This might be compared to a religious authority with a dogmatic belief in a Western religion promising his critics that they are "going to Hell" because of their criticism of him. To preserve their authority, the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood used the concept of slandering the Law as a tool to intimidate believers and often to defend their view of certain Japanese cultural traditions as essential Buddhist practice.
Me: That is why we go directly to the source, the Lotus Sutra and the writings of Nichiren Daishonin to determine what is and what isn't a slander and who is and who isn't a slanderer. This is known as the Transmission Through the Scrolls of the Sutra. The Soka Gakkai just replaced one person [Nichiren Shoshu High Priest] for another [Three Presidents] in following persons rather than the Law. We follow the Law and not persons. We ARE as different as night and day.
Shin Yatomi: "The Law" in "slandering the Law" refers to the Lotus Sutra. Of course, as Nichiren Daishonin made clear, the Lotus Sutra of the Latter Day means the sutra's essence, the Law of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. But since the Daishonin expounded the Law of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo on the basis of the doctrines contained in the Lotus Sutra, when we examine the Buddhist concept of slander in terms of its doctrinal meaning, it is appropriate to take "the Law" to mean the Lotus Sutra. "A slander of the Law," therefore, literally means a slander of the Lotus Sutra; it is speech or conduct that denies the teaching and ideal of the Lotus Sutra.
Me: How would the SGI know what constitutes slander of the Law of the Lotus Sutra? They have repeatedly taught that Myoho renge kyo has lost it's power in this age. Let's also not forget the teachings of The Fourteen Slanders Gosho, Letter to Lord Matsuno and Chapters 3 and 10 of the Lotus Sutra. It is equally as bad to slander the Sutras' Votaries. In Nichiren's other writings and Chapter 21 of the Lotus Sutra, we see how doubly bad it is to slander the Supreme Votary of the Lotus Sutra, Nichiren Daishonin. What bigger slander is their of Nichiren Daishonin than to alter his teachings [whether for the the sake of expediency or for the sake of the top Senior Leaders accumulating material riches]? Slandering too, is acting in an underhanded manner when propagating the Law as an envoy of the Thus Come One. Since we of the Kempon Hokke are the only true honest and upright votaries of the Lotus Sutra at this time and in this land, it is a great slander to treat us with any less respect than SGI would their teachers, sovereigns, and parents. Yet, over and over again they slander the faith and practice of the Lotus Sutra, Shakyamuni Buddha of the Original Doctrine, Nichiren Daishonin and we, Nichiren's disciples and believers.
Shin Yatomi: What is the teaching and ideal of the Lotus Sutra? The Daishonin expressed what he saw as the quintessence of the Lotus Sutra in the form of the Gohonzon, using the doctrine of the three thousand realms in a single moment of life (ichinen sanzen) as his theoretical foundation. Based on the Lotus Sutra, T'ien-t'ai expounded the doctrine of three thousand realms in a single moment to explain that all beings are entities of the Mystic Law, endowed with the Buddha nature. In other words, the fundamental message of the Lotus Sutra is that all living beings have the Buddha nature and thus are infinitely precious and worthy of respect.
Me: This is the most important doctrine of the Theoretical Section of the Lotus Sutra. Nichiren taught in the Opening of the Eyes that the most important doctrine of the Lotus Sutra is found in the Essential Teachings, the Immeasurable Lifespan of the Tathagata. This is the reason that all beings are worthy of respect, because all beings are our mothers, daughters, Fathers and sons, and we theirs. In like manner, the Buddha of the Juryo Chapter is very real, our teacher throughout the Three Existences. To deny this Buddha is to deny our own father.
Shin Yatomi: The sanctity of life and the inherent dignity of all people are at the core of the Sutra's teaching.
Me: As we have seen, this is not true in the case of the Soka Gakkai. For the sake of expediency, the Soka Gakkai throws out the fundamental principles of the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren Daishonin. For the sake of advancing itself [financial interests], it throws to the wayside the principle of the sanctity of human life and its inherent dignity. Lastly, for the sake of the binding and shackling SGI principle of living mentor and disciple, it abandons the primary teaching of the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren Daishonin that each and everyone of us is a Three Bodied Tathagata endowed with all the merits and virtues of Shakyamuni Buddha.
Shin Yatomi: From this perspective, we can define slander of the Law as any denial of the sanctity of life or the inherent dignity of all people.
Me: Then, no one is a bigger slanderer than the top SGI-USA Woman's Division Leader and capital murder prosecutor, Linda Johnson. Nothing is more important than Actual Proof. "What does Bodhisattva Never Disparaging's profound respect for people signify? The purpose of the appearance in this world of Shakyamuni Buddha, the lord of teachings, lies in his behavior as a human being."
Shinsuke Yatomi: This interpretation of slander is consistent with the Daishonin's perspective. He criticized major Buddhist sects of his day as slanderous of the Lotus Sutra. His was not merely a criticism of doctrine, however. For example, the Daishonin criticized the Pure Land (Nembutsu) sect not just for denying the Lotus Sutra's validity on a doctrinal level. The Pure Land sect views this world itself as defiled and detestable; it teaches believers that they can only be happy in the afterlife if they are reborn in the Pure Land through reciting the name of the Amida Buddha. What lies at the core of the Pure Land teaching is despair and an escapist attitude.
The Daishonin stated: "If you chant the Nembutsu incantation often, you will come to feel like injuring yourself" (Gosho Zenshu, p. 1509). The Daishonin denounced the Pure Land sect because it denied people's potential to overcome their suffering and thus diminished the inherent dignity of their lives. Historically, the Pure Land sect was often manipulated by the authorities as a tool to oppress and control people. This is in complete opposition to the ideal of the Lotus Sutra, which is to empower people through awakening their inner potential.
Me: Nearly in every paragraph that he writes we see the subtle and advanced persuasive "lies are truth and truth is lies" techniques of the Soka Gakkai. The Soka Gakkai denies the ability of the people to awaken their inner potential by making the people dependent on the mentor and the Soka Gakkai itself. In a sense, they are no different than the Nembutsu, exchanging not Amida for Shakyamuni Buddha but the mentor of the Soka Gakkai and the Soka Gakkai itself for shakyamuni Buddha.
Of course too, several vital points of the Daishonin's refutation of the Nembutsu is not even touched upon. There is no saving power in Amida Buddha, a Buddha who never set foot in this Saha world, unlike Shakyamuni Buddha. Another vital point in the Daishonin's refutation of the Nembutsu is that the Amida Sutras teach that Amida will accept all people into his Pure Land, except those who have committed the Five Cardinal Sins and those men, like the men of the Soka Gakkai, who are of incorrigible disbelief. The concluding Sutra of the Lotus Sutra, the Fugen Sutra, proclaims that those who commit the Five cardinal Sins and incorrigible disbelievers against the Dharma, are the very ones who are saved by the Lotus Sutra. If you are really interested in a refutation of the Nembutsu I have a thesis in three parts by Graham Lamont.
Shin Yatomi: THE Daishonin's criticism was also directed toward the Shingon sect, not merely because it proclaimed its doctrinal superiority over the Lotus Sutra. The Shingon sect was essentially an esoteric teaching in which believers relied on priests to perform rituals so that they might receive blessings from the transcendental Dainichi Buddha; it promoted people's dependence upon an imaginary superior being and diminished their ability to reason. Such an idea fundamentally contradicts the ideal of the Lotus Sutra, which asserts the importance of self-reliance by pointing out the existence of Buddhahood within each person.
Me: "Self reliance" in the Soka Gakkai is an oxymoron. Leaving this aside for a moment, I have already proven the Shingon concept of Master [Lama] and the Gakkai's, are one in substance or are your memories as poor as your illumination? Again and again we see the Gakkai's ends justifying the means, east is west, and lies are truth philosophy. They are a "True sect" who has adopted the provisional teachings. They are as bad as the Shingon, a false sect who has adopted the teachings of Ichinen Sanzen. They get me sick. Were Nichiren alive he would refute them far more vigorously than I.
Shin Yatomi: As we see in those two instances of the Daishonin's criticism of other Buddhist sects, slander of the Law is more than just vilifying the Lotus Sutra; it is to deny the sutra's underlying humanistic principle. For example, if a child speaks ill of the Lotus Sutra or its practitioners while completely ignorant of what he or she is doing and of what the essence of the sutra is about, should we admonish this child as a slanderer of the Law? While maybe in need of some schooling in manners, that child should certainly not be taken to task as a slanderer. On the other hand, what if a government official or a doctor superficially praises the Lotus Sutra or the Daishonin's teachings, but is led by corruption to give tacit approval to the use of contaminated blood supplies while knowing their potential for spreading disease' Some people, although though not directly critical of the Law, act counter to the Sutra's teaching about the inherent dignity of all people.
Me: Non Sequitor. The example of the child hardly follows from the Daishonn's life and death struggles to refute the Nembutsu and Shingon. By the same token, we should not praise the child who slanders the Lotus Sutra nor should we believe that the child is incapable of understanding the Supreme Law of Cause and Effect. To do so is to disbelieve Myo Ho Ren Ge kyo. The Dragon King's daughter was but a child. Nichiren Daishonin explains these concepts much better than I. Yatomi is grasping at straws in order to shoehorn the broad and deep teachings of the Lotus Sutra into the narrow shoe of the Soka value creation philosophy.
Shin Yatomi: WHAT if a Christian minister in your neighborhood church were to ask for your cooperation in a neighborhood watch program to prevent crime or a community cleanup? Is lending this Christian minister your support considered to be a slander of the Law? Of course, it is not. In this case, discussing the safety of your community with those who embrace religions other than Buddhism has nothing to do with slandering the Law.
Me: I would tell the preacher that I already watch out for my neighbors welfare and the cleanliness of my community by chanting Namu Myoho renge kyo. I would also tell him that he should abandon the shallow and embrace the profound and chant Namu Myoho renge kyo if he is really interested in protecting the community.
Shin Yatomi: What is most important is to promote the happiness and peace of all humanity.
Me: Which is impossible, according the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren, were one complicit with slander or failing to utter the lion's roar.
Shin Yatomi: Since Buddhism exists for us to achieve this goal, it is only natural to have dialogue and cooperate with those of different religious beliefs in the process of bringing such a Buddhist ideal to reality.
Me: Only in the Soka Gakkai ends justify the means philosophy [which is antithetical to the teachings of the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren Daishonin] does one abandon the principles of the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren Daishonin in order to realize the Lotus Sutra's goal. This is so absurd as to be incomprehensible. It is teachings like these that will destroy Buddhism and the reason that Shin Yatomi destroyed his own castle from within. To me, it is not even sad. It is instructive.
Shin Yatomi: From this viewpoint, Article 7 of the SGI Charter declares that we "respect other religions." This is not to say that we compromise our religious beliefs and abandon the Daishonin's spirit of shakubuku. The concept of "respecting other religions" is easier to comprehend if we understand its intention, which is to respect the people who practice those religions. It must be pointed out that showing respect to other human beings, regardless of their religious beliefs, is different from accepting or advocating their belief.
Me: The Oneness of Person and Law only functions in those who embrace the Lotus Sutra. It fails to function in the lives of the Muslim, Jewish, Christian, and Soka Gakkai blasphemers. The Soka Gakkai abandons the Lotus Sutra's concept of the oneness of person and Law ["Since the Law is Supreme the person is worthy of respect"]. There is no distinction between the Law [teachings one embraces] and the person who we are. If the Law is inferior, so is the person who embraces that Law, according to Nichiren Daishonin.
Shin Yatomi: What is shakubuku then? Is it not to strictly refute erroneous teachings? Shakubuku may be defined from a number of perspectives. For example, A Dictionary of Buddhist Terms and Concepts explains that shakubuku is "a method of propagating Buddhism by refuting another's attachment to heretical views and thus leading him to the correct Buddhist teaching. The term is used in contrast to shoju, or leading another to the true teaching gradually without refuting his misconception" (pp. 376-77). Ultimately, however, shakubuku is to speak the truth of the Lotus Sutra--the universal potential of enlightenment possessed by all people. So shakubuku is not simply a matter of using harsh words or roundly refuting other religious beliefs.
Me: The "universal potential of enlightenment possessed by all people" is the prime point of the Theoretical Section of the Lotus Sutra. It is not the final truth of the Lotus Sutra:
"When we come to the essential teaching of the Lotus Sutra, then the belief that Shakyamuni first obtained Buddhahood during his present lifetime is demolished, and the effects of the four teachings are likewise demolished. When the effects of the four teachings are demolished, the causes of the four teachings are likewise demolished. Thus the cause and effect of the Ten Worlds as expounded in the earlier sutras and the theoretical teaching of the Lotus Sutra are wiped out, and the cause and effect of the Ten Worlds in the essential teaching are revealed. This is the doctrine of original cause and original effect. It reveals that the nine worlds are all present in beginningless Buddhahood and that Buddhahood is inherent in the beginningless nine worlds. This is the true mutual possession of the Ten Worlds, the true hundred worlds and thousand factors, the true three thousand realms in a single moment of life."
Then, several passages down we read;
"Having pondered this, I am of the opinion that, though the Lotus Sutra teaches that persons of the two vehicles can attain Buddhahood, this view tends to be overshadowed by the opposite view propounded in the sutras that precede the Lotus. How much more so is this the case with the doctrine that the Buddha attained enlightenment in the remote past! For in this case, it is not the Lotus Sutra as a whole that stands in contradiction to the earlier sutras, but the essential teaching of the Lotus Sutra that stands in contradiction both to the earlier sutras and to the first fourteen chapters of the theoretical teaching of the Lotus. Moreover, of the latter fourteen chapters of the essential teaching, all of them with the exception of the "Emerging from the Earth" and "Life Span" chapters retain the view that the Buddha first attained enlightenment in his present lifetime."
Therefore whether it is is shoju or shakabuku that the Soka Gakkai practices it is, at best, the shoju and shakabuku of the Theoretical Teachings of the Lotus Sutra. It is hardly the shoju and shakabuku of the true teachings. How could it be? Were it the true teachings of shoju and shakabuku, there would be no reliance on a living mentor in the seat of the Law, by virtue of the immeasurable lifespan of the Tathagata.
Shin Yatomi: T'ien-t'ai in his Hokke Gengi (Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra) explains that since the Lotus Sutra expounds the truth, it naturally refutes the provisional teachings (i.e., to teach it is to practice shakubuku) while the Nirvana Sutra, which was taught after, and serves to confirm the validity of the Lotus Sutra, accepts the provisional teachings (i.e., shoju).
Put simply, shakubuku is to speak the truth of the supremacy of the Lotus Sutra while shoju is to accept other religious teachings while teaching the benefit of the Lotus Sutra's teachings.
Me: This is precisely why we [the discples and believers of Nichiren] read the Lotus Sutra in light of the Lotus Sutra itself and in light of Nichiren Daishonin. Tientai read the Lotus Sutra [and the Nirvana and other sutras] in light of the Theoretical Section of the Lotus Sutra. Tientai's practices included, reciting the name of Amida and Shikan style meditation. Nichiren teaches:
"Having pondered this, I am of the opinion that, though the Lotus Sutra teaches that persons of the two vehicles can attain Buddhahood, this view tends to be overshadowed by the opposite view propounded in the sutras that precede the Lotus. How much more so is this the case with the doctrine that the Buddha attained enlightenment in the remote past! For in this case, it is not the Lotus Sutra as a whole that stands in contradiction to the earlier sutras, but the essential teaching of the Lotus Sutra that stands in contradiction both to the earlier sutras and to the first fourteen chapters of the theoretical teaching of the Lotus. Moreover, of the latter fourteen chapters of the essential teaching, all of them with the exception of the "Emerging from the Earth" and "Life Span" chapters retain the view that the Buddha first attained enlightenment in his present lifetime.
The forty volumes of the Mahaparinirvana Sutra, preached by the Buddha in the grove of sal trees just before his passing, as well as the other Mahayana sutras except the Lotus Sutra, have not one single word [to say about the fact that the Buddha attained enlightenment in the remote past]. They speak of the Dharma body of the Buddha as being without beginning and without end, but they do not reveal the true nature of the other two bodies, the reward body and the manifested body.55 How, then, can we expect people to cast aside the vast body of writings represented by the earlier Mahayana sutras, the Nirvana Sutra, and the major portion of the theoretical and essential teachings of the Lotus Sutra, and put all their faith simply in the two chapters "Emerging from the Earth" and "Life Span"?"
Cast aside NOT Accept.
Shin Yatomi: Because we communicate the Daishonin's teachings based on our firm belief in the universal potential of enlightenment possessed by all people as expounded in the Lotus Sutra, and we hold these principles to be supreme, our method of communicating the Daishonin's Buddhism is basically shakubuku. The distinction between these two methods, however, may not be always clear-cut. Sometimes it is more appropriate to adopt shoju based on the spirit of shakubuku...
Me: Ornate rhetoric and meaningless talk.
Shin Yatomi: ...Nichiren Daishonin stated: "T'ien-t'ai declared that the practice should 'accord with the times.' His disciple Chang-an interpreted this to mean, 'You should distinguish between shoju and shakubuku and never adhere solely to one or the other.? The Lotus Sutra represents a single truth, but its practice and propagation vary according to the people and the time" (MW-1, 175)...
Me: From he perspective of the immeasurable lifespan of the Tathagata, this, the Latter Day, is the very time for shakabuku. Nichiren Daishonin only practiced shoju among those who had already taken faith in the Supreme Law, his beloved disciples. The Soka Gakkai pratices more shakabuku against their own disciples than they do those of the provisional teachings or non-Buddhist teachings. Even towards his teacher Dozenbo, Nichiren practiced shakabuku but not towards his beloeved disciples.
Shin Yatomi: ...Instead of being overly concerned about which method to choose, what is most important to keep in mind is the goal of propagation--people's happiness. RELIGION is inextricably bound with culture. Even if we recognize a need to examine the value and philosophical correctness of various religious doctrines, it is very difficult to justify being critical of another culture.
Me: Practicing as the Soka Gakkai teaches one will never realize the promise of the Lotus Sutra, Supreme and Perfect Enlightenment nor will one encounter the Three Obstacles and Four Devils, particularly the King Devil of the Sixth Heaven [persecutions by the Government]. If the culture is a culture based on the belief in a creator and the saving power of Jesus Christ, Allah or Brahma, it must be thoroughly refuted in light of the immeasurable lifespan of the Tathagata and the Law of Myoho renge kyo [the simultaneity of cause and effect[, and the ultimate responsibility of the individual for both weal and woe. The Time and not the country, sequence of propagation, or capacity of the people is the most important consideration in the propagation of the supreme Law. The Soka Gakkai has become complicit in slander of the Suprme Law by accepting rather than casting aside inferior teachings. Honest and upright is the way of a votary of the Lotus Sutra not to defeat an enemy through stealth and cunning.
Shin Yatomi: In countries with little relation to Buddhism, and where religious values and cultural values are deeply intertwined, to disrespect or denounce a religious belief is tantamount to disrespecting and denouncing the culture.
Me: Nichiren Daishonin would love baseball, football, and basketball, he might even love the music of the Eagles and Michael Jackson and he would be playing poker instead of Go. Somehow, I don't believe he would have much use for the mega churches and phony preachers who suck the life and money out of their congregations. Had he found himself in a Muslim country he would be known as the Aryasinha of Mappo.
Shin Yatomi: ...Buddhism makes clear that its teachings should be spread while showing respect for and taking into consideration the culture and traditions of the place where it is being propagated...
Me: Ornate rhetoric and meaningless talk. Nichiren Daishonin showed no consideration for the provisional teachings of his own country. Would he have accepted the provisional teachings of another? He was highly critical of Confucianism, Brahmanism, Taoism, Shintoism, and provisional Buddhism, wherever and whenever it was found. The ends justifying the means philosophy of the Soka Gakkai is what has watered down the religion of the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren Daishonin and were it to continue to advance, it would destroy the Mystic teachings of Buddhism.
Shin Yatomi: Although the basic attitude of the Daishonin?s propagation was shakubuku, his writings indicate that he exercised flexibility in his method of propagation. He states: "It is natural for a rooster to crow in the morning but strange for him to crow at dusk. Now when the true and provisional teachings are utterly confused, it would be equally unnatural for one to seclude himself in the mountains, carrying out the easy practice of shoju, and avoid refuting the enemies of the Lotus Sutra. He would lose all chance to practice the Lotus Sutra"(MW- 1, 105). In this passage, the Daishonin refers to a situation in which the true and provisional teachings of Buddhism are confused. In such a case, the Daishonin suggests that a clear distinction be made between what is a true Buddhist teaching and what is a provisional Buddhist teaching through the method of shakubuku.
THIS situation, however, may not represent today's American society where the majority of people are unfamiliar with Buddhism. In this regard, the Daishonin states: "When the country is full of evil persons without wisdom, then shoju is the primary method to be applied, as described in the Anrakugyo [Peaceful Practices] chapter. But at a time when there are many persons of perverse views who slander the Law, then shakubuku should come first, as described in the Fukyo chapter"(MW-2, 183).
Me: Yatomi conveniently left out the next paragraph that goes on to explain his contention; "In the Latter Day of the Law, however, both shoju and shakubuku are to be used. This is because there are two kinds of countries, the country that is passively evil, and the kind that actively seeks to destroy the Law."
Muslim, Hindu and Christian countries are, in fact, countries that actively seek to destroy the Law. The SGI of course has nothing to worry about in this regard. It is hardly based on the Law of Namu Myoho renge kyo [in principle]. China too, for limiting the freedoms of speech and religious expression may be counted among the actively evil countries. America is not a monolithic society. it is composed of states, some secular that are only passively evil and others like the bible belt states that are actively evil. The SGI always practices shoju except against other Nichiren sects. How perverse is that?!
Shin Yatomi: The Daishonin explains that when a society is ignorant of Buddhism, shoju, the tolerant way of propagation, may be a better approach...
Me: Nichiren doesn't say that at all. A society may be ignorant of Buddhism and be actively evil in trying to destroy Buddhism and the Law. And the Brahmans are not ignorant of Buddhism. We see how well the tolerant approach has worked in the United states, all those hundreds and thousands of Bodhisattvas abandoning their faith in Namu Myoho renge kyo thanks to the tolerant approach [shoju] of the Soka Gakkai.
Shin Yatomi: However, when confusion in the realm of Buddhism is the chief concern, shakubuku, the method of strictly refuting error and directly revealing the truth, may be the primary method. The strict stance the SGI has taken toward the errors and abuses of the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood accords with this idea.
Me: The criticisms of the orthodox sects, however, are totally unwarranted and a cause for the Soka Gakkai members for falling into the Lower Realms of existence. Just look at Clown and CL.
Shin Yatomi: In another writing, the Daishonin said: "However, slander can be either minor or serious, and there are times when we should overlook it rather than attack it. The adherents of the Tendai and Shingon sects slander the Lotus Sutra and should be refuted. But without great wisdom it is very difficult to differentiate correctly between their doctrines and the teachings which Nichiren expounds. Therefore, at times you might be well advised to refrain from attacking them, just as I did in the Rissho Ankoku Ron""(MW-1, 158). In the "Rissho Ankoku Ron," the Daishonin refutes the teachings of the Pure Land sect, but does not refer to the teachings of the Shingon or Tendai sects. Here the Daishonin explains that although other religious sects, such as the Shingon and Tendai sects, contradict the Lotus Sutra, if the timing and condition of people are not appropriate, it is wise not to refute them.
Me: Within eleven years of the writing of the Rissho Ankoku Ron however, the Daishonin was revealing that the evils of the Tendai and Shingon are a thousand, a hundred thousand, ten billion times more evil than the Nembutsu. The Soka Gakkai teachings are far worse than the Tiendai and Shingon becuase it has brought confusion to the teachings of the Great Pure Law of Namu Myoho renge kyo. Just as the Nembutsu was far easier to refute than Tiendai and Shingon, the Soka Gakkai is far easier to refute than the Nichiren Shu. When the time is right, we of the will turn our attention to the Nichiren Shu's aberrant religious practices.
Shin Yatomi: In a letter written to a believer who had previously practiced the Pure Land sect and chanted the Nembutsu incantation, the Daishonin writes as follows: "Women who put their faith in the Lotus Sutra should chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo sixty thousand, a hundred thousand, or even ten million times a day, and after that, if they still have some time to spare, they may now and then murmur to themselves the name of Amida or one of the Buddhas"(MW-3, 26-27). Of course, if you chant daimoku one hundred thousand times a day, you would not have time to even sleep, let alone to chant the Pure Land sect's incantation. In this letter, although the Daishonin clarifies the erroneous teachings of the Pure Land sect, he does not tell her to stop chanting the name of Amida Buddha. The Daishonin simply tells the recipient to chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. Once again, we can see the Daishonin's flexible stance toward communicating his teaching to others. Had this believer been told never to chant the name of the Amida Buddha, she may have been unable to accept the Daishonin?s teaching. Religious beliefs and attitudes are deeply rooted in people?s minds; our sensitivity and understanding toward those to whom we are communicating are therefore critical, as the Daishonin demonstrates.
Me: If Nichiren Daishonin taught the above to any man or woman of even a modicum of faith and understanding, that person would get the message. Certainly, he didn't say they may now and then genuflect before the cross, lay twillum, or face Mecca and offer a prayer.
Shin Yatomi: THE ultimate purpose of communicating Buddhism to others is to help them become happy, not to prove the superiority of Buddhism over other religions. As we can see in the Daishonin's examples, he was always concerned about how to lead people to the truth revealed in the Lotus Sutra--to their inherent enlightened potential. The Daishonin's views transcended narrow, religious sectarianism. He wrote, "I, Nichiren, am not the founder of any sect, nor am I a latter-day follower of any older sect" (MW-5, 195).
Me: The strawman reveals his ugly self, yet once again. It is impossible to become Buddha failing to embrace the exclusive faith and practice of the Lotus Sutra, having absolute faith in the superiority of the Lotus Sutra. What teachings is Shin Yatomi propounding? the provisional teachings, at best.
Shin Yatomi: He did not try to spread his teachings to prove his own greatness; his sole concern was people's happiness, as he states: "Nichiren has been trying to awaken all the people of Japan to faith in the Lotus Sutra so that they too can share the heritage and attain Buddhahood"(MW-1, 24). Based on his clear sense of purpose in propagation, he exercised a great deal of flexibility, while not compromising in proclaiming what constitutes the true essence of Buddhism.
Me: To Shin Yatomi, "murmur a few Nembutsu now and then after chanting ten million Daimoku", is a great deal of flexibility. He is as phony as a three dollar bill and is not a disciple of Nichiren Daishonin. He is [was] a disciple of Ikeda. This is precisely why he was unable to lessen his karmic retribution.
Nope, Mark. You can't deny that Nichiren said saying the Nembutsu was OK under the limited conditions he explained. This does not become a total proscription because you suggest that's the real message. We have to deal with the record he actually left. There are plenty of passages where Nichiren embraced not only the complete corpus of Buddhist teachings within a Lotus Sutra framework, but also non-Buddhist teachings. He conditioned these teachings but he did not become the caricature you've conjured.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
For those who are curious and would like to investigate for themselves what Nichiren's views on slander were, please see, for instance, Rissho Ankoku Ron (On Securing the Peace and Security of the Nation through the Establishment of the True and Correct Dharma), Kaimoku-sho (Opening of the Eyes), and Kanjin no Honzon-sho (The True Object of Devotion for the Contemplation of the Mind).
For the time, I'm going to focus on one text as I think it directly addresses the underlying thinking at issue.
In Kaimoku-sho, Nichiren explained the significance of the person who teaches the Lotus Sutra in the Degenerate Age of Dharma, generally identifying it with all people who accept and uphold the Lotus Sutra, and specifically identifying it with himself. It is particularly relevant to this topic because a good portion of the treatise explains Nichiren's views on the relation of the Lotus Sutra to non-Buddhist as well as other Buddhist teachings.
This treatise opens with the following line:
There are three categories of people that all human beings should respect. They are the sovereign, the teacher, and the parent. There are three types of doctrines that are to be studied. They are Confucianism, Brahmanism, and Buddhism.
Nichiren then goes on to explain how teachings such as Confucianism (a label under which he includes Taoism) and Brahmanism (a generic term by which he means all non-Buddhist Indian teachings known in Japan in the 13th C.) fit into a Buddhist framework, summarizing:
Erroneous teachings such as these are too numerous to be counted. Their adherents pay as much respect and honor to the teachers who propound them as the heavenly deities pay to the lord Shakra, or the court ministers pay to the ruler of the empire. But not a single person who adheres to these ninety-five types of higher or lower non-Buddhist teachings ever escapes from the cycle of birth and death. Those who follow teachers of the better sort will, after two or three rebirths, fall into the evil paths, while those who follow evil teachers will fall into the evil paths in their very next rebirth.
This is the standard Mahayana Buddhist view of non-Buddhist teachings.
And yet the main point of these non-Buddhist teachings constitutes an important means of entry into Buddhism. Some of them state, “A thousand years from now, the Buddha will appear in the world,” while others state, “A hundred years from now, the Buddha will appear in the world.” The Nirvana Sutra remarks, “All of the non-Buddhist scriptures and writings in society are themselves Buddhist teachings, not non-Buddhist teachings.” And in the Lotus Sutra it is written, “Before the multitude they seem possessed of the three poisons or manifest the signs of distorted views. My disciples in this manner use expedient means to save living beings.”
Contrary to Illaraza's arguments that everything but the Lotus Sutra is evil, Nichiren, on the basis of the Lotus Sutra, redeems these non-Buddhist teachings by incorporating them into a Lotus Sutra framework. This is a simple application of Zhiyi's teaching on "Opening the provisional to reveal the real" based on the Lotus Sutra.
From a limited perspective, these non-Buddhist teachings are just Wrong View.
From the perspective of the Lotus Sutra, however, these non-Buddhist teachings prepare people to hear the Buddhist dharma, despite their limitations. For instance, Confucianism, to put it very simplistically, teaches the ideal of filial piety. As many contemporary Neo-Confucians in Asia these days will tell you, study and observance of the Analects will bring peace and harmony to society. Confucianism has its merits - it makes society peaceful, a requisite for the engagement with BuddhaDharma; Buddhadharma cannot take root in the minds of beings when human life is nasty, brutish, and short. However, it has its limitations because it can only address human society. Taoism, which Nichiren lumps in with Confucianism, is addressed to Ultimate Truth, but is meek in comparison to the teachings you find in Indian traditions, let alone Buddhism. Brahmanism, in Nichiren's view, which predated Buddhism, introduces a broader scope - the workings of cause and effect and karma over lifetimes. These are basic concepts that are prerequisites to understanding Buddhadharma. Like Confucianism, however, these teachings are limited, in this case to the scope of samsara. These teachings ultimately fail because they do not lead to cessation; ie. they do not lead to release from samsara. Despite these limitations, however, they set the groundwork on which the Buddha could expound on nirvana. If he had to start at the beginning with cause and effect, he would not have been able to teach what we today know as Buddhism.
The words of the sages and worthies preserved in the scriptures and teachings of Confucianism and Brahmanism, as we have noted, are free of error, and the words match the spirit in which they were spoken.
The shortcomings of these non-Buddhist teachings are not in the fact that they are mistaken, but rather their utility is limited by their limited scope.To suggest a somewhat dated illustration in this day of smartphone GPS - a map of Los Angeles is not going to help you on a road trip to Anchorage. As long as you are in Los Angeles, that map will help you get around. Hit the I-5 and go North, however, and you can throw the map out the window.
According to Nichiren, the problems with these non-Buddhist teachings really arose after the introduction of Buddhadharma. Historical or not, Nichiren basically says that Buddhism exposed the shortcomings of the various teachings causing their adherents to entrench in the various wrong views - ie. adopt the disposition, "Only this, my tradition, is true, everything else is false." They compounded the problem by trying to appropriate Buddhadharma into their own teachings, thereby causing confusion
To illustrate, in the period before the appearance of Buddhism, the proponents of the non-Buddhist teachings in India were not so bound up in their own views. But after the appearance of the Buddha, when they had listened to and observed the Buddhist teachings, they became aware of the shortcomings of their own doctrines. They then conceived the clever idea of appropriating Buddhist teachings and incorporating them into their own doctrines, and as a result they fell into even deeper error than before. These are examples of the errors known as “appropriating Buddhism” or “plagiarizing Buddhism.”
The same thing occurred in the case of non-Buddhist scriptures in China. Before Buddhism was brought to China, Confucianism and Taoism were rather naive and childish affairs. But in the Later Han, Buddhism was introduced to China and challenged the native doctrines. In time, as Buddhism became more popular, there were certain Buddhist priests who, because they had broken the precepts, were forced to return to secular life, or who elected to join forces with the native creeds. Through such men, Buddhist doctrines were stolen and incorporated into the Confucian and Taoist teachings.
In volume five of Great Concentration and Insight we read: “These days there are many devilish monks who break the precepts and return to lay life. Fearing that they will be punished for their action, they then go over to the side of the Taoists. Hoping to gain fame and profit, they speak extravagantly of the merits of Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu, usurping Buddhist concepts and reading them into their erroneous scriptures. They twist what is lofty and force it into a mean context; they destroy what is exalted and drag it down among the base, striving to put the two on an equal level.”
Nichiren goes on to discuss the various Buddhist teachings and how this same general course of events applies within Buddhism. Nichiren's basis of distinguishing the Buddhist teachings generally follows the Tientai 5 Flavors/Periods system, with each division being more or less profound than the others, with the Lotus being the most profound. Nichiren then specifically criticizes the founders of the Kegon (teachings based on the Avatamsaka) and Shingon for having appropriated the Lotus Sutra teachings on Ichinen Sanzen and incorporated them into the reading of their respective texts. If they stopped there, that would have been just "Opening the provisional to reveal the real. However, when they denigrated the value of the Lotus Sutra in comparison to the Avatamsaka and Mahavairocana Sutras, respectively, denying the enlightening influence of Saddharma of the Lotus Sutra, they thereby slandered the Lotus Sutra.
Whether historically accurate or not, this work sheds significant light on Nichiren's view of how the Lotus Sutra relates to all other teachings, and informs his views on what he considers slander.
As I argued above, this is the problem of slander - not recognizing the Lotus Sutra as the Buddha's ultimate teaching, and its worse if you've been exposed to the Lotus Sutra and then actively turn away.
One last note: if one assumes that the Lotus Sutra is limited to a reference to a text, we're missing something. The Lotus Sutra is another word for the Ultimate Reality known only by Buddhas.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Hi QQ. How wrong you are! Let's see what Nichiren really wrote about Confucianism, Brahmanism, and Taoism in the Opening of the Eyes:
"A man should respect these three: his ruler, his teacher, and his parents. Everyone should study three disciplines: Confucianism, Brahmanism, and Buddhism.
First of all, in Confucianism the Three Emporors (Fu-hsi, Shen-nung, Yellow Emporor), Five Rulers (Shao-hao, Chuan-hsu, Ti-hung, Yao, Shun) of ancient China are called the most respected under heaven. They are reguarded as the leaders of the people and the bridge for them to cross the river of illusions. Until the time of the Three Emperors, people like birds and beasts had no idea who their fathers were. However, since the time of the Five Rulers, people became aware of who their parents were and acted dutifullytoward them. King Shun, for instance, treated his stubborn and ignorant fatherrespectfully despite his father plotting to have him killed in favor of his younger half-brother. Han Kao-tze, the Founder of the Former Han dynasty, continued reverencing his father even afterhe became the emperor. King Wu, the founder of the Chou dynasty, had a wooden statue of his late father, King Wen, carved and carried it in battle with the last king of Yin (Shang). A man called Ting-lan of Later Han in China, is said to have had a statue of his mothermade and treated it respectfully as though it were alive. These are examples of filial devotion.
It is said that Pi-kan of the Yin (Shang) dynasty, worrying about the downfall of the dynasty, dared to speak up against Chieh, and was beheaded by the king. Returning from a political mission, a man named Hunh-yen of Wei found that his ruler, the Duke of I (Yee), had been killed. The northern barbarians had cannabilized the duke leaving only his liver on the road. Hung-yen picked the liver up, cut open his own stomach to insert it, and died. These are examples of loyal subjects.
I-shou was the teacher of Yao, Wu-shih was that of Shun,, T'ai-kung-wang was of King Wen of Chou, and Lao-tsu was of Confucious. They were called the Four Sages. Even the kings and rulers, who were most respected under heaven, bowed low and all the people respectfully held their hands together in front of them.
These sages wrote some 3,000 scrolls including the San-fen (Records of Three Emperors), Wu-tien (Records of the Three Rulers), and San-shih (Records of Three Dynasies). Explained in them was nothing more than the "Three Mysteries." The "Three Mysteries" mean, first of all, the "mystery of being," which maintains that everything is createdfrom an original substance called tai-chi. This is the philosophy established by the Duke of Chou and Confucuious.
The second is the "mystery of non-being," set forth by Lao-Tsu, who insisted that the source of all beings is an indefinable mystic principle called wu-chi.
Finally, the "mystery of being and non-being" is the philosophy of Chuang-tzu. He stated that beings are created sometimes from tai-chi, but other times from wu-chi.
Mystery can mean profoundness, but it also can mean darkness. In explaining the meaning of life: positions in society, happiness and sorrow, right and wrong, or gains and loses, some of these sages (like Confucious) state that these all arise from tai-chi, while other sages (like Lao-tzu) maintain that they are merely spontaneous. Though exquisite their philosophies may appear, they actually know nothing of life in the past or in the future. As they are in darkness their philosphies are mysterious. Knowing only the present, they insist that in this present worldwe have to protect ourselves and maintain peace in our country by establishing benevolence and righteousness to avoid bringing ruin upon our families and our country.
These wise and holy men are sages, but they are as ignorant of the past just as men can not see their backs, and they can not see into the future just as blind men dcan not see in the front. They merely maintain that if one manges his house well, performs filial devotion, and practices the Five Virtues (benevolence, righteousness, politeness, wisdom and fidelity) in this world, people will revere him, and his fame will spread so widely in the land that a wise king will invite him to be his minister or teacher, or even put him on the throne. Even heaven will come to defend and serve him! For instance, they say, King Wu of Chou had five elders who served him, and twenty eight constellations came to assist Emperor Kuang-wu of the later hanas his twenty eight generals.
Ignorant of the past and future, however, these sages can not help in the future lives of their parents, rulers, and teachers. Not knowing what they owe to them in the past, they can not be considered to be truly holy and wise. This is why Confucious said, "Truly wise and holy men do not exist in China, but in the land to the west, there is a man called Buddha. He is a true sage."
Confucious thus indicated Confucianism to be the first step toward Buddhism knowing that Confucianism was not the true way for a wise and holy man. It would be easier, Confucious knew, for the people to understand the fundamental Buddhist teachings of commandments, meditation, and wisdom if they first learned the fundamental Confucian concepts of rituals and music. He therefore, taught the kings' subjects to be loyal to their rulers, children to be devoted to their parents, and students to respect their teachers. Grand Master Miao-le, therefore declared: "The dissemination of Buddhism in China indeed depended on Confucianism. Buddhism found its way by following on the heels of the rituals and music of Confucianism."
Citing the Konkomyo-kyo (Sutra of the Golden Light), T'ien-t'ai stated in his Mo-ho-chih-kuan (Great Concentration and Insight): "Since all the right teachings in the world are based on Buddhism, those who truly know the worldly teachings know the teachings of the Buddha." He also states: "The Buddha sent three sages to convert the people of China." Miao-le's commentaryon this (Chih-kuan fu-hsing-chuan-hung chueh, 6) is: "According to the Shojo hogyo-kyo (Practicing the Pure Dharma Sutra), Bodhisattva Gakko reincarnated as Yen-hui in China; Bodhisattva Kojo as Confucious; and Bodhisattva Kasyapa, as Lao-tzu."
Commentary:
All teachings are ultimately the revelation of Buddhist truth and they may [or may not if they are a source of confusion] serve as an introduction to Buddhism. Nichiren Shonin writes in the Gift of Rice:
"The true path lies in the affairs of this world." The Golden Light Sutra states, “To have a profound knowledge of this world is itself Buddhism.” The Nirvana Sutra states, “All of the non-Buddhist scriptures and writings in society are themselves Buddhist teachings, not non-Buddhist teachings.
When the Great Teacher Miao-lo compared these passages with the one from the sixth volume of the Lotus Sutra that reads, “No worldly affairs of life or work are ever contrary to the true reality,” he revealed their meaning and pointed out that although the first two sutras are profound, since their meaning is still shallow and fails to approach that of the Lotus Sutra, they relate secular matters in terms of Buddhism, whereas the Lotus Sutra explains that in the end secular matters are the entirety of Buddhism."
To explain further the position of of non-Buddhist teachings according to Nichiren Daishonin, we can look at the Lotus Sutra, another [more important] passage of the Opening of the Eyes, and the entire body of his writings:
"In Tung-ch’un we read: “Question: While the Buddha was in the world, there were many who were resentful and jealous. But in the age after his passing, when someone preaches this [Lotus] sutra, why do so many oppose that person? Answer: It is said that good medicine tastes bitter. This sutra, which is like good medicine, dispels attachments to the five vehicles and establishes the one ultimate principle. It reproaches those in the ranks of ordinary beings and censures those in the ranks of sagehood, denies [provisional] Mahayana and refutes Hinayana. It speaks of the heavenly devils as poisonous insects and calls non-Buddhists demons. It censures those who cling to Hinayana teachings, calling them mean and impoverished, and it dismisses bodhisattvas as beginners in learning. For this reason, heavenly devils hate to listen to it, non-Buddhists find their ears offended, persons of the two vehicles are dumbfounded, and bodhisattvas flee in terror. That is why all these types of people try to make hindrances [for a practitioner of the Lotus Sutra]. The Buddha was not speaking nonsense when he declared that hatred and jealousy would abound.” -- The Opening of the Eyes
"In this age, the provisional teachings have turned into enemies of the true teaching. When the time is right to propagate the teaching of the one vehicle, the provisional teachings become enemies. When they are a source of confusion, they must be thoroughly refuted from the standpoint of the true teaching. Of the two types of practice, this is shakubuku, the practice of the Lotus Sutra. With good reason T’ient’ai stated, “The Lotus Sutra is the teaching of shakubuku, the refutation of the provisional doctrines.” -- On Practincg the Buddha's Teachings
"Now, in the Latter Day of the Law, who is carrying out the forceful practices of the Lotus Sutra in strict accordance with the Lotus Sutra? Suppose someone, no matter who, should unrelentingly proclaim that the Lotus Sutra alone can lead people to Buddhahood, and that all other sutras, far from enabling them to attain the way, only drive them into hell. Observe what happens should that person thus try to refute the teachers and the doctrines of all the other schools. The three powerful enemies will arise without fail."-- Ibid
Nichiren Daishonin's teachings are in perfect accord with the Lotus Sutra:
“If I convert by a smaller vehicle
Even but one human being,
I shall fall into grudging
A thing that can not be.” (Lotus Sutra Chapter 2)
“In all the Buddha’s lands of the universe there is but one supreme vehicle, not two or three, and it excludes the provisional teachings of the Buddha.”(Ibid)
“Honestly discarding the provisional teachings, I will now expound the Supreme Way.”(ibid)
“The World-honored One has long expounded his doctrines and now must reveal the truth.” (ibid)
“These nine divisions of my Law
Preached according to the [capacity] of all creatures
Are [but] the introduction of the Great-vehicle
Hence I preach this sutra.”(ibid)
“…desiring only to accept and embrace the sutra of the great vehicle and not accepting a single verse of the other sutras.” (Lotus Sutra Chapter 3)
“If I were to describe the punishments [that fall on persons who slander this sutra], I could exhaust a kalpa and never come to the end.” (ibid)
“If a person fails to have faith but instead slanders this sutra, immediately he will destroy all the seeds for becoming a Buddha in this world. . . . When his life comes to an end he will enter the Avichi hell.” (ibid)
“Suppose that someone coming from a land of famine should suddenly encounter a great king’s feast.” (Lotus Sutra Chapter 6)
“At that time the World-Honored One addressed Bodhisattva Medicine King, and through him the eighty thousand great men, saying: ‘Medicine King, do you see in this great assembly the immeasurable number of heavenly beings, dragon kings, yakshas, gandharvas, asuras, garudas, kimnaras, mahoragas, human and nonhuman beings, as well as monks, nuns, laymen, and laywomen, those who seek to become voicehearers, who seek to become pratyekabuddhas, or who seek the Buddha way? Upon these various kinds of beings who in the presence of the Buddha listen to one verse or one phrase of the Lotus Sutra of the Wonderful Law and for a moment think of it with joy I will bestow on all of them a prophecy that they will attain supreme perfect enlightenment.” (Lotus Sutra Chapter 10)
“The scriptures I preach number in the countless millions. Among all those I have preached, now preach and will preach, this Lotus Sutra is the most difficult to believe and the most difficult to understand.”(Ibid)
“I constantly expounded the Lotus Sutra of the Wonderful Law alone.” (Lotus Sutra Chapter 12)
“Among all the Sutras it holds the highest place” (Chapter 14)
“At that time the Buddha addressed Emminent Conduct and the host of other Bodhisattvas: “The divine powers of buddhas are so infinite and boundless that they are beyond thought and expression. Even if I, by these divine powers, through infinite, boundless hundred thousand myriad kotis of asemkheya kalpas, for the sake of entailing it, were to declare the merits of this sutra, I should still be unable to reach the end of those [merits]. Essentially speaking, all the laws belonging to the Tathagata, all the mysterious, essential treasuries of the Tathagata, and the very profound conditions of the Tathagata, all are proclaimed, displayed, revealed, and expounded in this sutra.Therefore you should, after the extinction of the Tathagata, wholeheartedly receive and keep, read and recite, explain and copy, cultivate and practice it as the teaching. In whatever land, whether it be received and kept, read and recited, explained and copied cultivated and practiced as the teaching; whether in a place where a volume of the sutra is kept, or in a temple, or in a grove, or under a tree, or in a monastery, or in a lay devotee’s house, in a palace or a mountain, in a valley or in the wilderness, in all these places you must erect a caitya and make offerings.
Wherefore? You should know that [all] these spots are the thrones of enlightenment. On these [spots] the buddhas attain Perfect Enlightenment; on these [spots] the buddhas roll the wheel of the Law; on these [spots] the buddhas [enter] parinirvana.” (Lotus Sutra, Chapter 21)
“Just as Mount Sumeru is the highest among the various mountains , so this Lotus Sutra holds the highest position among all the sutras.”(Chapter 23)
“Amongst all the sutras preached by tathagatas it is the profoundest and greatest.” and “…, so it is also with this Law-Flower Sutra; amongst all the sutras it is the highest,” and “… it is the most illuminating.” and “…it is the most honorable.” and “…it is the king of all sutras.” and “…it is the father of of all the wise and holy men” and “…amongst all the sutras preached by tathagatas, bodhisattvas or preached by sravakas, it is the supreme.”(ibid)
“Star Constellation King Flower! This sutra is that which can save all the living; this sutra can deliver all the living from pain and sufferings; this sutra is able to greatly benefit all the living and fulfill their desires. Just as a clear, cool pool is able to satisfy all those who are thirsty, as the cold who obtain a fire [are satisfied], as the naked who find clothing, as [a caravan of] merchants who find a leader, as children who find their mother, as at a ferry one who catches the boat, as a sick man who finds a doctor, as in the darkness one who obtains a lamp, as a poor man who finds a jewel, …., so it is with this Law-Flower sutra; it is able to deliver all the living from all sufferings and all diseases, and is able to unloose all bonds of mortal life.”(ibid)
“Even the Buddha wisdom could never finish calculating their [benefits] extent.” (ibid)
“If in future ages there should be one who accepts and upholds, reads and recites this sutra,…his wishes shall not be in vain, and he will receive his reward of good fortune in his present life.”(Chapter 28)
We should not become enamored of the non-Buddhist teachings as has the perverse SGI mentor Daisaku Ikeda, lest we be led upon the paths of evil. We should as our Master Nichiren Daishonin, become thoroughly familiar with the non-Buddhist and provisional Buddhist teachings in order to logically compare, contrast, and thoroughly refute them. Many of us are actively following in the footsteps of Nichiren Daishonin. We will be praised by the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas of the universe.
Chapter I Confucianism, Brahmanism, and Buddhism continued:
"Next, in Brahmanism of India, the three-eyed and eight armed god and goddess, Siva and Vishnu, are considered to be the compassionate parents and supreme lords of all the people. The Masters named Kapila, Uluka, and Usabha, who lived about 800 years before the time of Sakyamuni Buddha, are called the Three Hermits. The teachings of these Three Hermits, 60,000 in number, are entitled the Four Vedas. Thus at the ttime of Sakyamuni's birth, six powerful Brahmiin masters who had studied these Brahmin scriptures had become teachers of kings all over India. Their branch schools numbered in the 90's, each of which was dividedinto many sub branches. They all took pride in themselves, each claiming to be higher than the top of heaven(Hisoten), and sticking to their own rock-like contentions. Their teachings are incomparable more profound and exquisite than those of the Confucian masters. They see through not only two, three, or seven lives in the past and future but also 80,000 kalpa past and future.
Their teachings may be summed up in three categories: (1) Some maintain that all phenomena arise from causes, (2) while others claim that all phenomena are spontaneous without any relationship between cause and effect. (3) Still others insist that such relationship may or may not exist between cause and effect.
Among these Brahmin schools, better ones observe the Five Commandments or Ten Commandments, practice preliminary meditation, and work their way up inch by inch like a measuring worm to the summit of heaven (Hisoten). They take it for the world of Nirvana but as soon as they reach their heaven, they all plunge into the Three Evil Realms (hell, realm of hungry souls, and that of beasts) at the bottom. none remain in their heaven although they believe that those who reach Hisoten remain there forever enjoying complete freedom from the cycle of life and death.
Still they are less objectionable compared to other Brahmin schools, which stubbornly insist on following what they had inherited from their masters. Some of them bathe in the Ganges River three times a day in the midst of winter, while others pull out hairs, throw themselves against rocks, roast themselves in fire, burn their limbs and heads, or stay naked. They sacrifice a number of horses, burn grass and trees, or worship every tree, hoping to gain happpiness.
These evil teachings are numerous in number, and their teachers are revered as highly as Indra is by the gods and an emperor by his subjects. Nevertheless, followers of the 95 brahmin schools, whether they are beeter or worse, are unable to leave the cycle of birth and death. Those who follow better masters will fall into evil realms in two or three lives, while those who follow worse masters are bound to plunge there in the next life.
After all, the most important thing for Brahmanism is, like Confucianism, to prepare the way to Buddhism. This is why some Brahmans maintain that the Buddha will be born 1,000 years later, while others insist on 100 years later. It is said, therefore, in the Nirvana Sutra that what is written in all the Brahman scriptures is nothing but the teaching of the Buddha. Again, it is said in the Lotus Sutra that disciples of the Buddha sometimes pretend to be contaminated with the Three Poisons of greed, anger, and ignoranceor show the heretic viewdenying the law of cause and effectas an expedient means to save the people.
In the third place, Sakyamuni Buddha is the supreme leader and excellent eyes for all the people. He is the bridge that enables them to cross the river of evil passions; He is the skipper who guides them over the sea of live and death; and He is the fertile field in which they plant the seed of merits. The so-called Four Sages of Confucianism and Three hermits of Brahmanism, despite their worthy names, are actually unenlightened men unable to rid themselves of the Three Delusions (all delusions and evil passions). Although their names suggest they are wise men, in reality they are as ignorant as infants, who know nothing of the principle of cause and effect. How can we cross the sea of life and death aboard a ship steered by such men? How can we pass through the winding streets of the Six Realms of delusions and evil passions over to the world of Nirvana by means of a bridge constructed by such men? Our Sakyamuni has already crossed the sea of life and death for Arhats, not to speak of that for the unenlightened. He has already extinguished fundemental ignorance, not to speak of delusions and evil passions deriving from it.
Throughout his life ---- fifty years since attaining enlightenment at the age of thirty to His death at the age of eighty ---- Sakyamuni Buddha preached His holy teaching. Each of His writings and words represent the truth. Not a sentence or line does not ring true. Even sages and wise men of Confucianism and Brahmanism never spoke falsely in presenting their thoughts. They spoke the truth. How much more so with Sakyamuni Buddha, who was a man of truth since uncountable kalpa in the past? Therefore, what He preached during His life of fifty years is greater as a teaching of salvation when compared to Confucianism and Brahmanism. Ever since his attainment of Buddhahood till the eve of His death, He preached only the truth.
Considering the 80,000 teachings preached by the Buddha in various sutras for fifty years, however, we see differences among them, such as those between Hinayana and Mahayana Buddhism, provisional and ultimate sutras, exoteric and esoteric teachings, general and rough expressions, genuine and expedient words, or true and false opinions.
The Lotus Sutra alone among them represents the true words of our Lord Sakyamuni Buddha and various Buddhas residing in the worlds throughout the universe in the past, present, and future. Sakyamuni Buddha declared that, although the scriptures preached during the first some forty years are as numerous as sands of the Ganges River, they did not reveal the truth, which would be explained in the Lotus Sutra during the following eight years. At the moment Taho Buddha emerged from the earth and attested it all to the truth. Then various Buddhas in manifestation (funjin) came crowding together from various worlds in the universe attesting it to be true and rejoicing by touching the Brahma with their long tongues. The meaning of these words in the Lotus Sutra is shiningly clear --- brighter than the sun in the blue sky, and the full moon at midnight. Look up and put your faith in it. Prostrate yourself before it and think hard about it."
Commentary:
In this section of the Opening of the Eyes, we first hear that the Eternal Buddha Sakyamuni has been preaching the truth since the infinite past.
Here, I only wish to discuss the last paragraph:
"The Lotus Sutra alone among them represents the true words of our Lord Sakyamuni Buddha and various Buddhas residing in the worlds throughout the universe in the past, present, and future. Sakyamuni Buddha declared that, although the scriptures preached during the first some forty years are as numerous as sands of the Ganges River, they did not reveal the truth, which would be explained in the Lotus Sutra during the following eight years. At the moment Taho Buddha emerged from the earth and attested it all to the truth. Then various Buddhas in manifestation (funjin) came crowding together from various worlds in the universe attesting it to be true and rejoicing by touching the Brahma with their long tongues. The meaning of these words in the Lotus Sutra is shiningly clear --- brighter than the sun in the blue sky, and the full moon at midnight. Look up and put your faith in it. Prostrate yourself before it and think hard about it."
How inconceivable is it that Taho Buddha and the Buddhas from thoughout the universe came from all over to testify to the validity of the Lotus Sutra! In the True Object of Worship St. Nichiren states:
"People can attain enlightenment in two ways: by meeting the Buddha and hearing the Lotus Sutra, or by believing in the sutra even though they do not meet the Buddha. Even before the advent of the Buddha, some Brahmans in India realized the correct view of life through the four Vedas. In China before the arrival of Buddhism, some realized the correct view through Taoism and Confucianism. Many bodhisattvas and ordinary people, endowed with keen faculties, perceived [even before they heard the Lotus Sutra] that Shakyamuni had planted the seeds of Buddhahood within them in the days of the Buddha Great Universal Wisdom Excellence or in the far more distant past [when he attained his original enlightenment]."
Coming from throughout the universe means that these men, animals and other beings (Arhats, Pratyekabuddha's and those in the other various realms of existence) had been reborn in India and obtained the Supreme Jewel [Enlightenment] by listening to Sakyamuni Buddha preach the Lotus Sutra. Believing in Myoho renge kyo (Lotus Sutra), we receive the exact same benefit as those disciples who heard the Lotus Sutra from the Buddha. It is not enough for the men and women in the latter age to hear the Lotus Sutra, they must be led to believe in the Lotus Sutra.
Question: of course many people have different ideas of what Slander of the Dharma is, and of course we have many lists of punishments for slander...... Now what does Ven. Nichiren say about a person(s) who has already slandered the LS, and now accepts the LS and what they should do to go about removing the negative karma of their past slander?
Notwithstanding all that, there are still statements like this:
"All the teachings that Shakyamuni Buddha expounded during his lifetime—all the eight volumes and twenty-eight chapters of the Lotus Sutra, the first four flavors of teachings that preceded the sutra, and the Nirvana Sutra that came after the Lotus—make an unbroken series of teachings like one perfect sutra."
Kanjin no Honzon Sho
You have to resolve these. You can't just ignore them.
I assert that there is nothing contradictory in Lotus exclusivism and these kinds of statements. I refer you to my previous post.
In the meantime, let me spare the further bandwidth - there are plenty of passages more than you've already posted that you can cherry pick from Nichiren's writings to support your position. However, when his entire body of work is taken in context, Nichiren's full body of writings as we have them, as well as the Lotus Sutra and Lotus Sutra exegesis, a subtler message than you are willing to acknowledge emerges. And this point about context actually is the heart of what we're talking about when we talk about the Lotus Sutra. There are several parables in the Lotus Sutra; the main theme being the critical nature of context - the father luring his children out of the burning house with promises of toys; the father luring his lost son home by wearing a disguise and descending to his meager expectations; the guide conjuring a city for weary travelers; the doctor who reports his own death to shock his children into taking medicine; Bodhisattva Never Disparaging, etc. If you don't know the context of any particular, then you don't know what you are looking at. This is Buddhism 101 and is Buddhism Lotus Sutra.
The Context is always the Lotus Sutra. Full Stop.
After all these years, I don't have any expectation that you are capable of viewing things in anything but the most the most rudimentary binary manner.
For those satisfied with Mark's message, I wish you speed down that path. We'll meet again and again, and when we do, let's compare notes about where our practices have taken us.
For those who find Mark's message amiss but don't know what else there might be, I assure you, there is more to Nichiren than what Mark presents. Find the context in which Mark, and you and I and everyone else, floats and you will find the Lotus Sutra.
Matthew
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Son of Buddha wrote:Question: of course many people have different ideas of what Slander of the Dharma is, and of course we have many lists of punishments for slander...... Now what does Ven. Nichiren say about a person(s) who has already slandered the LS, and now accepts the LS and what they should do to go about removing the negative karma of their past slander?
l
By praising and upholding the LS while encouraging others to do the same.
Son of Buddha wrote:Question: of course many people have different ideas of what Slander of the Dharma is, and of course we have many lists of punishments for slander...... Now what does Ven. Nichiren say about a person(s) who has already slandered the LS, and now accepts the LS and what they should do to go about removing the negative karma of their past slander?
l
By praising and upholding the LS while encouraging others to do the same.
yep.
Everyone has slandered the Lotus Sutra - ie. been in denial of ultimate reality. Karma plays out, sooner or later - we reap what we sow. For Nichiren, it is best to expiate negative karma immediately, by orienting to the Lotus Sutra now and not wavering in the slightest. Doing so will bring down the s**tstorm of Three Obstacles and Four Devils. Nichiren likened it to a share-cropper deciding to quit the farm; as long as they stay on the farm, their debt balance rolls over from year to year, but the moment they go to leave, all the debt collectors descend at once.
Nichiren held out his own life, particularly his persecutions, as the model of Lotus Sutra practice.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Son of Buddha wrote:Question: of course many people have different ideas of what Slander of the Dharma is, and of course we have many lists of punishments for slander...... Now what does Ven. Nichiren say about a person(s) who has already slandered the LS, and now accepts the LS and what they should do to go about removing the negative karma of their past slander?
l
By praising and upholding the LS while encouraging others to do the same.
yep.
Everyone has slandered the Lotus Sutra - ie. been in denial of ultimate reality. Karma plays out, sooner or later - we reap what we sow. For Nichiren, it is best to expiate negative karma immediately, by orienting to the Lotus Sutra now and not wavering in the slightest. Doing so will bring down the s**tstorm of Three Obstacles and Four Devils. Nichiren likened it to a share-cropper deciding to quit the farm; as long as they stay on the farm, their debt balance rolls over from year to year, but the moment they go to leave, all the debt collectors descend at once.
Nichiren held out his own life, particularly his persecutions, as the model of Lotus Sutra practice.
Is there any quotes from Ven. Nichiren that goes into detail on removing the negative karma of their past slander?
also I see a lot of Nichiren Buddhists who accept and uphold the LS, but yet claim that each other are slanderers, so how can they be slanderers if they already accept and uphold the LS?
also LOL yea Ven. Nichiren's is the poster story of bringing down the S***storm, he got stabbed in the face and had his arm almost hacked off, they tried to freeze him to death on an island, tried to execute him........ he was a straight gangster.
when he was poking at his executioner...........priceless.
Nichiren was reportedly hit across the face with a wooden scroll of the 5th roll of the Lotus Sutra which contains the Never Disparaging chapter which describes a bodhisattva being beaten with sticks for unflinchingly honoring people's Buddha Nature. A bit of poetry there.
I think just picking quotes would not be particularly helpful. Kaimokusho Opening the Eyes part II is Nichirens investigation as to why he faced such persecution if he was indeed delivering the Buddha's message. Briefly, citing injuries to even the Buddha, Nichiren explains that the hardship of practicing the Lotus Sutra is not due to karmic retribution but the forces of ignorance rising in response to the threat of awakening - think the battle with Papiya on the eve of the Buddhas awakening. Ignorant beings hate the truth because it exposes them to what they are. Its like having a mirror raised up to them to expose their ugliness. They lash out by trying to destroy the mirror.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
The Nirvana Sutra teaches the principle of lessening one’s karmic retribution. If one’s heavy karma from the past is not expiated within this lifetime, one must undergo the sufferings of hell in the future, but if one experiences extreme hardship in this life [because of the Lotus Sutra], the sufferings of hell will vanish instantly. And when one dies, one will obtain the blessings of the human and heavenly worlds, as well as those of the three vehicles and the one vehicle. Bodhisattva Never Disparaging was not abused and vilified, stoned and beaten with staves without reason. He had probably slandered the correct teaching in the past. The phrase “when his offenses had been wiped out” indicates that, because Bodhisattva Never Disparaging met persecution, he was able to eradicate his offenses
Wow, such great replies. Thank you! It will take a while to understand all of this.
So once exposed to the Practices of the Lotus Sutra and once having accepted them, to reject or abandon them can be construed as slander?
At what point did you "accept and uphold" the teachings of the Lotus Sutra?
