Nichiren, TienTai, and Lotus Sutra

[DGA]

There were some attempts at a reasonable conversation back in this thread, which unfortunately went sideways

http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f= ... 20#p345711

I'd like to try to recuperate an evidence-based discussion on the historical continuities and discontinuities among three cycles of texts: the Lotus Sutra, the teachings attributed to Zhiyi (also known as TienTai &c), and the teachings of Nichiren.

What are the continuities from the Lotus Sutra to Tientai? Put differently, how much of TienTai thought can be directly attributed to the style and substance of the Sutra, or at least a particular approach to the same? And what distinctive aspects of TienTai cannot be attributed to the Lotus Sutra--that is, are there aspects of TienTai teaching that exceed or clearly draw on different traditions from the Lotus Sutra?

The same questions emerge with regard to TienTai and Nichiren. How much of Nichiren's teaching, in substance and style, directly reproduce the discursive forms and doctrines of the TienTai school? And what is there in Nichiren's teaching that departs from it, or includes material not found in TienTai?

Finally, do the teachings of Nichiren identify and extrapolate aspects of the Lotus Sutra that are not legible in TienTai thought? Does Nichiren pick up certain elements or textures in the Sutra that Zhiyi missed?

What do you all think?

My purpose in raising this thread in this way is to bring some clarity across traditions that is grounded in historical and textual evidence, and not conjecture or hyperbole.

[DGA]

and then there are moments like this to account for, in which supporters of Nichiren re-reinterpret the Sutra in novel ways:

[quote=JazzIsTVRicky]Nichiren is the only Buddha who revealed and put into concrete form all of the teachings of Buddhism by all of the Buddhas in the Ten Directions and verified by Shayamuni and Taho Buddha who sat in the Treasure Tower side by side.[/quote]

I don't recall reading Nichiren's name anywhere in the Lotus Sutra. Where exactly do Buddha Shakyamuni and the Buddha Ancient Treasure make such a claim regarding Nichiren?

[Queequeg]

What are the continuities from the Lotus Sutra to Tientai? Put differently, how much of TienTai thought can be directly attributed to the style and substance of the Sutra, or at least a particular approach to the same? And what distinctive aspects of TienTai cannot be attributed to the Lotus Sutra--that is, are there aspects of TienTai teaching that exceed or clearly draw on different traditions from the Lotus Sutra?

I doubt this can be answered succinctly. I try to keep up on the Tiantai scholarship, and other than the observation that Zhiyi considered the Lotus Sutra the key teaching of the Buddha, its hard to explain how Zhiyi's sprawling teaching relates to the Lotus in a few hundred words. The three works considered his most important concern the Lotus Sutra - Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra (in which the Lotus is analyzed in terms of its title); The Words and Phrases of the Lotus (a line by line explanation of the sutra), and the Great Cessation and Contemplation (concerning Zhiyi's own insight and practice based on the Lotus Sutra).

Zhiyi's philosophy is ... bewildering. Its all moving parts. Its like trying to predict where a particular molecule of water will be in 100 years. In that sense, its like an impressionist painting of emptiness/conditioned/middle interplay (I think there is a strong argument that the Lotus itself is an impressionist painting of the Buddha and his teachings). Notwithstanding, I find reading the Lotus Sutra through Zhiyi's eyes (or what I can gather of his eyes) makes sense and brings a richer meaning, and you can see how his teachings flow from the text.

For further info, I punt to Brook Ziporyn. Emptiness and Omnipresence is his full length book attempt to explain TienTai.

The same questions emerge with regard to TienTai and Nichiren. How much of Nichiren's teaching, in substance and style, directly reproduce the discursive forms and doctrines of the TienTai school? And what is there in Nichiren's teaching that departs from it, or includes material not found in TienTai?

The biggest difference, what breaks Nichiren from the Tendai tradition - Zhiyi did not identify a specific teaching that would get you from delusion to enlightenment. In Tiantai theory, everything leads to enlightenment, if you follow to its end. As such, the Tiantai approach can subsume and assimilate anything. Ziporyn's study, "Evil as/and/or the Good" is a study of a later Tiantai patriarch Zhili, who threatened to kill himself as his practice. In Japan, this openness led to Tendai being one of the most eclectic traditions. Any practice can be opened into the Perfect Path.

That kind of high minded openness, in the hands of us many, though, chances are it turns into all sorts of grotesque oddities, most grotesquely, the obscuration of that original simplicity and high minded openness. In the 13th c. a few unique attempts were made to cut through the confusion. Honen/Shinran (and others) advocacy of Pure Land; Dogen and his just sitting; Nichiren and the devotion to the title of the Lotus Sutra. (those three traditions all come from Tendai)

Nichiren held Zhiyi in the highest regard. He considered him the most enlightened person who appeared in China. His teaching on the 3000 in One thought was considered by Nichiren to be the highest teaching other than the sutras; only short of its actual practice. For Nichiren, the title of the Lotus Sutra contained this highest teaching and was the way to return to the essence of Buddhism. As Zhiyi had argued in his Profound Meaning, the entire Lotus Sutra can be found in its title. Moreover, the Lotus itself repeatedly asserts the benefit of holding and transmitting just a line or two of the sutra, or just its name. It seemed to follow for Nichiren, then being devoted to and transmitting the title is as good, if not the best possible way to practice the Lotus.

When you ask about the discursive forms of Tiantai, are you asking about the manner the teachings are presented? Zhiyi in places was very direct in criticizing rival teachings of his day. I think its obvious that a teaching is often most effectively presented by contrasting with another. Zhanran took it to another level. People who are surprised at Nichiren's rhetoric might be surprised to read Zhanran who Nichiren quoted extensively and paraphrased. Zhanran went after contemporary rivals vigorously. Nichiren echoed and upped the rhetoric in attacking his contemporary rivals, but he's definitely borrowing from the shakubuku rhetoric that was already part of the Tiantai tradition. Well, in my opinion.

Finally, do the teachings of Nichiren identify and extrapolate aspects of the Lotus Sutra that are not legible in TienTai thought? Does Nichiren pick up certain elements or textures in the Sutra that Zhiyi missed?

I mentioned above that Zhiyi did not leave any specific teachings on how to become enlightened. The teaching that I think Nichiren thought he was pulling out from the Lotus that Zhiyi missed was the Daimoku specifically, but more generally, the idea of reading the sutra with the body (and actually, Nichiren st times did not seem to think Zhiyi actually missed it, but held back on it because the time to reveal it had not come). Nichiren specifically understood this through the example of Bodhisattva Never Disparaging, a previous incarnation of Shakyamuni, who went around saying to everyone, "I would never disparage you because you will be a Buddha!" Nichiren declared that his Daimoku is the same as Never Disparaging's "24 Character" teaching, ie. "I would never disparage you because your will be a Buddha." Never disparaging was attacked for honoring people that way, by the very people he honored. Nichiren felt he was doing the same when he propagated the Daimoku. He understood that he was telling people of their imminent enlightenment and people did not like that, because it did not agree with their particular practice (I think there is evidence that many, even thought they did not fully accept his teaching, were sympathetic, including people in the top levels of the Kamakura government). So they persecuted him, culminating in his near beheading and banishment to Sado Island that was intended to be an alternative death sentence. In this way, Nichiren read the the sutra, and met the opportunity to give his life, literally, for the sake of Dharma, as is recounted in numerous Jataka tales, and particularly Never Disparaging's story.

I'm sorry I'm not documenting this with quotes and citations. This answer is off the top of my head. If you have any specific inquiry, I'll see what I can find for you.

[Queequeg]

and then there are moments like this to account for, in which supporters of Nichiren re-reinterpret the Sutra in novel ways:

Nichiren is the only Buddha who revealed and put into concrete form all of the teachings of Buddhism by all of the Buddhas in the Ten Directions and verified by Shayamuni and Taho Buddha who sat in the Treasure Tower side by side.

I don't recall reading Nichiren's name anywhere in the Lotus Sutra. Where exactly do Buddha Shakyamuni and the Buddha Ancient Treasure make such a claim regarding Nichiren?

Nichiren = True Buddha is the teaching of one branch of Nichiren Buddhism - Nichiren Shoshu and its splinters, which includes Soka Gakkai. Most Nichiren Buddhists scoff at this. To make this argument takes a lot of footnotes and annotations on the original writings of Nichiren.

[narhwal90]

As former Nichiren Shoshu and later SGI, I was told the Nichiren as True Buddha principle. The argument went along the lines that the persecution he predicted that would befall the votary of the Lotus Sutra occurred

http://www.nichirenlibrary.org/en/wnd-1/Content/49

thus proving his assertion that he was The Votary and and argument made for him being an incarnation of the Buddha, or at least a Bodhisattva made on the strength of that proof. I never quite saw the link from Nichiren's propositions to that conclusion but in my case I haven't found adopting the position important to me so I don't spend time considering it. I have the impression the modern SGI de-emphasizes the argument relative to the old days, which isn't to say its not still part of the doctrine but the focus of study is more about what Nichiren is teaching wrt the Lotus Sutra and how to apply it to oneself ie transformation of ones circumstances being the proof of the practice.

[mansurhirbi87]

Very nice discussion. Thank you, brothers. It's a privilege learn with you

[thecowisflying]

I mentioned above that Zhiyi did not leave any specific teachings on how to become enlightened. The teaching that I think Nichiren thought he was pulling out from the Lotus that Zhiyi missed was the Daimoku specifically, but more generally, the idea of reading the sutra with the body (and actually, Nichiren st times did not seem to think Zhiyi actually missed it, but held back on it because the time to reveal it had not come).

What do you mean by Zhiyi did not leave any specific teachings how to reach enlightenment? What else would he be writing bout then in texts like Mo He Zhi Guan?

[Queequeg]

I mentioned above that Zhiyi did not leave any specific teachings on how to become enlightened. The teaching that I think Nichiren thought he was pulling out from the Lotus that Zhiyi missed was the Daimoku specifically, but more generally, the idea of reading the sutra with the body (and actually, Nichiren st times did not seem to think Zhiyi actually missed it, but held back on it because the time to reveal it had not come).

What do you mean by Zhiyi did not leave any specific teachings how to reach enlightenment? What else would he be writing bout then in texts like Mo He Zhi Guan?

Can you point out these specific teachings?

[thecowisflying]

I mentioned above that Zhiyi did not leave any specific teachings on how to become enlightened. The teaching that I think Nichiren thought he was pulling out from the Lotus that Zhiyi missed was the Daimoku specifically, but more generally, the idea of reading the sutra with the body (and actually, Nichiren st times did not seem to think Zhiyi actually missed it, but held back on it because the time to reveal it had not come).

What do you mean by Zhiyi did not leave any specific teachings how to reach enlightenment? What else would he be writing bout then in texts like Mo He Zhi Guan?

Can you point out these specific teachings?

I only have the Chinese copies of his texts so uh... prepare for the butchering of Masters Zhiyi's fairly eloquent classical Chinese.

At the start of Zhiyi's text "修习止观坐禅法要" Essentials on the Sitting Meditation of Samatha and Vipassana he says: 若夫泥洹之法，入乃多途，论其急要，不出止观二法。"There are many entrances to Nirvana, to sum up the most important areas it does not leave the faculties of Samantha and vipasyana . "

Samantha and Vipasyna meditation were core aspect to the meditational practices of Zhiyi's TianTai School. In fact, in an introduction to this text written in the Song Dynasty states "To abandon Samantha and Vapasyna one cannot bring light to the Tiantai path, one is unqualified to discuss the Tiantai teachings"

In Zhiyi's work "Six Sublime Dharma Gates" he is another text that describes the breath meditation he and presumably his teachers developed:
"The six sublime dharma gates are the base of practice and attainment of the three vehicles. "
Then he describes the method in detail, there's a lot of stuff.

[Queequeg]

At the start of Zhiyi's text "修习止观坐禅法要" Essentials on the Sitting Meditation of Samatha and Vipassana he says: 若夫泥洹之法，入乃多途，论其急要，不出止观二法。"There are many entrances to Nirvana, to sum up the most important areas it does not leave the faculties of Samantha and vipasyana . "

And what is the first V&S on the path? What is his ultimate V&S he discusses?

In Zhiyi's work "Six Sublime Dharma Gates" he is another text that describes the breath meditation he and presumably his teachers developed:
"The six sublime dharma gates are the base of practice and attainment of the three vehicles. "
Then he describes the method in detail, there's a lot of stuff.

That text is not unproblematic. That and his other short meditation manual arguably are not Perfect and Sudden instructions.

[thecowisflying]

At the start of Zhiyi's text "修习止观坐禅法要" Essentials on the Sitting Meditation of Samatha and Vipassana he says: 若夫泥洹之法，入乃多途，论其急要，不出止观二法。"There are many entrances to Nirvana, to sum up the most important areas it does not leave the faculties of Samantha and vipasyana . "

And what is the first V&S on the path? What is his ultimate V&S he discusses?

In Zhiyi's work "Six Sublime Dharma Gates" he is another text that describes the breath meditation he and presumably his teachers developed:
"The six sublime dharma gates are the base of practice and attainment of the three vehicles. "
Then he describes the method in detail, there's a lot of stuff.

That text is not unproblematic. That and his other short meditation manual arguably are not Perfect and Sudden instructions.

What kind of practice in your opinion would be sudden and perfect?

[Queequeg]

What kind of practice in your opinion would be sudden and perfect?

What does my opinion matter? Look at what Zhiyi had to say about it.

[rory]

What kind of practice in your opinion would be sudden and perfect?

What does my opinion matter? Look at what Zhiyi had to say about it.

In Tendai this is called Endon Sho;
here is what Jacqui Stone says in Original Englightenment

However, Chih-I defines as superior the contemplation in which all three truths are discerned simultaneously; this is the "perfect and immediate calming and contemplation" (yuan-tun chih-kuan, endon shikan

p.178.

I'm with thecowisflying; that's the technique and it seems pretty explicit to me.
gassho
Rory

[Queequeg]

What kind of practice in your opinion would be sudden and perfect?

What does my opinion matter? Look at what Zhiyi had to say about it.

In Tendai this is called Endon Sho;
here is what Jacqui Stone says in Original Englightenment

However, Chih-I defines as superior the contemplation in which all three truths are discerned simultaneously; this is the "perfect and immediate calming and contemplation" (yuan-tun chih-kuan, endon shikan

p.178.

I'm with thecowisflying; that's the technique and it seems pretty explicit to me.
gassho
Rory

There's also the option of going to the horse's mouth instead of invoking yet another person's opinion.

[thecowisflying]

What does my opinion matter? Look at what Zhiyi had to say about it.

In Tendai this is called Endon Sho;
here is what Jacqui Stone says in Original Englightenment

However, Chih-I defines as superior the contemplation in which all three truths are discerned simultaneously; this is the "perfect and immediate calming and contemplation" (yuan-tun chih-kuan, endon shikan

p.178.

I'm with thecowisflying; that's the technique and it seems pretty explicit to me.
gassho
Rory

There's also the option of going to the horse's mouth instead of invoking yet another person's opinion.

Ok in Mo He Zhi Guan which was originally named 圆顿止观/Yuan Dun Zhi Guan which means "Perfect and Sudden Samantha and Vipsyana" states"

"The initial Reflection(观/Vipsyana) uses emptiness, the later Reflection uses "fake"(Conventional Existence of things), these are the double upayas, when entering the Middle Way, one can reflect on both truths(Emptiness/Conventional Existing). ....... The Two Vehicles and Connected Teaching (通教）Bodhisattvas have the first reflection, this has much Dhyana but little Wisdom, one does not see the Buddha Nature, Specific Teaching (别教) Bodhisattvas have the Later reflection, this has much wisdom and little Dhyana, one also can't see the Buddha Nature. The two Reflections are Upaya, If one enter the Third Reflection, one sees the Buddha Nature"

Zhiyi is clearly saying that of the Three Contemplations of One Mind, the first two Contemplations belong to the Connected and Specific Teachings while the last is the Perfect Teaching that allows one to see the Buddha Nature.

[narhwal90]

That leads me to a question that has come up tangentially a few times here, what was Nichiren's attitude towards samantha and vipsyana as practice vs daimoku? From an NSA/SGI standpoint I never heard the words till I started exploring outside the organization's standard material- but he obviously would have been trained in them. I wonder if its due to cherry-picking his material to support a convenient single practice or if he really intended daimoku to replace all other practices, at least for laity. I can see a daimoku single practice as doctrinally useful, and expedient for householders as well- but would Nichiren have been in favor of efforts like million-daimoku campaigns to the exclusion of samantha and vipsyana practices for those in a position to pursue them. I ask it because such considerations are outside my range of scholarship at present...

[Queequeg]

Narwhal, the Study Group thread in the Nichiren forum is on Kanjin no Honzon Sho. "Kanjin", translated as "Contemplation" in SGI materials is Vipasana. Its a translation issue, not cherry picking or anything else.

[narhwal90]

Thanks Q I remember the thread. I do apologize if the question sounds stupid, its not meant to be so. Being in NSA/SGI so exclusively leads to unknown unknowns so I trip over them regularly. It may be you are answering the question and I'm not recognizing it and if so I beg your pardon.

What I was hoping to develop was the question of Nichiren's attitude towards vipassana etc, and why those practices are not emphasized in his gosho. We've seen single-practice Nichiren folks come and go here and the focus is always on the daimoku sometimes to the exclusion of recitation and not a hint of vipassana/samatha techniques. What I'm seeking for was something along the lines of how Nichiren intended the gohonzon & daimoku & recitation as a practice to fit with vipassana/samatha practices, if at all. No argument with the translation of the gosho's title & associated translation issues, but the focus of the work seems more exclusive to me. I'm not trying for a syncretic position, I'm perhaps looking for how Nichiren might be viewing these things from a Tendai standpoint.

[Queequeg]

What I was hoping to develop was the question of Nichiren's attitude towards vipassana etc, and why those practices are not emphasized in his gosho.

I think this thread has the potential to go there - right now we're just kind of circling around, but Zhiyi's take on Vipasana is... expansive, and might not fit into other proposed definitions of Samatha and Viapasana. If you understand Zhiyi's take on Pefect and Sudden V&S, the leap to Nichiren is not as big.

[Seishin]

If you understand Zhiyi's take on Pefect and Sudden V&S, the leap to Nichiren is not as big.

you mean the Daimoku? As an outsider to Nichiren I'm struggling to understand that. Would you care to elaborate?