Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 2111
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by Minobu » Sat Jan 20, 2018 11:56 pm

So is it possible that the acceptance of Hongaku in Lotus buddhism is just that...Lotus buddhism unfolding.
If we had an authentic writing of Nichiren Daishonin explaining hongaku and how it is to be interpreted....then i would argue it is parcel to the evolving Lotus buddhism..

This come from a guy who actually still does not understand hongaku...
it's not that i have not tried ...
that in and of itself says something about it..

when i went to read this.

The True Aspect of All Phenomena

i had this urge to pause, and take it up later

i get this from time to time..and wonder if it is my Teacher/guide at work..

ok some may laugh...but this is a personal thing that happens to me..i usually ignore the feeling and just go ahead..

but i'm sincere...and really want to get it together...

markatex
Posts: 283
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 1:33 am

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by markatex » Sun Jan 21, 2018 5:35 pm

I'm not able to follow Dharma Wheel as closely as I'd like, so I haven't gotten too deeply into the hongaku threads that have popped up lately. What exactly is it that people have issues with? I know not everyone agrees with tathagatagharba teachings, but at this point it's fairly mainstream Mahayana, and as far as the Nichiren tradition goes - the Nirvana Sutra is a tathagatagharba text, isn't it? I can't imagine that's the issue here.

There seems to be a fine line between Buddha Nature and Original Enlightenment. Is the idea that "all is perfect just the way it is" what people take issue with? If that is what is meant by "hongaku", then I agree that it's a troubling teaching and not at all in line with Nichiren Buddhism. It's fairly prevalent in Zen, Soto in particular (as much affection as I feel for that tradition).

User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 2111
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by Minobu » Sun Jan 21, 2018 6:53 pm

markatex wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 5:35 pm
I'm not able to follow Dharma Wheel as closely as I'd like, so I haven't gotten too deeply into the hongaku threads that have popped up lately. What exactly is it that people have issues with? I know not everyone agrees with tathagatagharba teachings, but at this point it's fairly mainstream Mahayana, and as far as the Nichiren tradition goes - the Nirvana Sutra is a tathagatagharba text, isn't it? I can't imagine that's the issue here.

There seems to be a fine line between Buddha Nature and Original Enlightenment. Is the idea that "all is perfect just the way it is" what people take issue with? If that is what is meant by "hongaku", then I agree that it's a troubling teaching and not at all in line with Nichiren Buddhism. It's fairly prevalent in Zen, Soto in particular (as much affection as I feel for that tradition).
i accept Tathagatagarbha even though i could never articulate it.
As far as Original Enlightenment....to me it's like knowledge that has always been there and it took a Buddha to experience it..or more aptly a very special human being to experience it and transform both mentally and physiologically into a Buddha.

I cannot articulate that either...Well i believe Myoho Renge Kyo somehow becomes the gate way
Also..a question if I may.

When it is said the Nichiren Shonin describes Myoho Renge Kyo as the "Entity" ...is this from 100% verifiable writing.

if it is not then we have a problem...if it is i can rest easy and continue to meditate on this ...

It's pretty much a huge leap into something else besides just saying , like i was taught in the beginning, "That IT is the Law of the universe".

think about it...entity and law or both together are all very much different paradigms and facts.

so..someone please...

When it is said the Nichiren Shonin describes Myoho Renge Kyo as the "Entity" ...is this from 100% authentic verifiable writing???

illarraza
Posts: 579
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by illarraza » Sun Jan 21, 2018 8:02 pm

According to the Nichiren scholar and practitioner, HONGAKU IS NOT A NICHIREN DOCTRINE:

FORGERY: HONGAKU NOT NICHIREN'S DOCTRINE by Graham Lamont

(Here Lamont refutes Rev. Yasahara's view of Hongaku)

It is has been stated that opposition to hongaku is wrong and that
the “Matter of the Ten Thusnesses” (Junyoze no koto) is a
genuine work simply because it is recorded in the “Rokunai gosho”
collection.

1) The “Rokunai” catalogue is not any guide to authenticity; although
at one time it was a slightly better standard for genuine works than
the “Rokuge” collections, the naive belief that it was compiled on the
first anniversary of Nichiren’s death has long since been discredited;
it is a catalogue from long after. (“Nichiren Shonin Ibun jiten”,
1212c); as far as I can see the first reference to such collection is
by Honjobo Nichijitsu of the Nakayama Lineage in 1461. Clearly given
the state of Nichiren Buddhism then under the influence of the most
corrupt monistic tendencies of the Medieval Tendai (chuko Tendai)
establishment, the “Rokunai mokuroku” is by no means any guarantee
of authenticity; in light of the sophisticated studies done in modern
times when access to texts of various sects and lineages became
easier, to cling to the notion that any document in this collection is
ipso facto reliable and genuine is the height of ignorance and
naivete.

[Note: in Maltz’s so-called “Kempon Hokke Vision, v. 3, no.
6, p. 7, Yashuhara admits that this was compiled not later than 120
years after Nichiren; plenty of time for all sort of forgeries to be admitted
to the canon.]

Of all the forgeries under Nichiren’s august name, this particular
document is perhaps the most egregious fake, because it can be shown
to be derived from a work FALSELY attributed to Genshin (Eshin sozu:
942 1017) and included in “Eshin sozu zenshu”, v. 3, the “Essential
Notes on Attaining Buddhahood in this Very Body by the ‘Hokke’”
(“Hokke sokushin jobutsu yoki”); the “Junyoze no koto” itself was long
ago a subject of dispute even in traditional times and was once
regularly attributed to (of all people) Jikaku Daishi (Ennin:
794-864), a man whose errors Nichiren sharply attacked! As to the
“Essential Notes on Attaining Buddhahood in this Very Body by the
‘Hokke’”, of which this work is clearly a revision or adaptation, at
various times it was also attributed to Kakucho (960 1034); textual
studies by Shigyo Kaishu showed decades ago that the present “Junyoze
no koto” and the “Essential Notes on Attaining Buddhahood in this Very
Body by the ‘Hokke’” extremely close. (See Asai Yorin, “Nichiren
kyogaku no kenkyu”, pp. 275-277, 303); this conclusion, far from being
overturned in recent years has been adopted by standard reference
works: (See“Nichiren Shonin Ibun jiten”, 503c) Moreover, even the
editors of the “Showa Teihon” in the Nichiren Sect, who were not very
strict in separating out forgeries decided to put this “Junyoze no
koto” in the Continuation Section (zokuhen) which is reserved for
questionalbe texts. (v. 3, 2030-2033; no.3)

[Note, even if one were to concede that this work is by Nichiren, it
is supposedly from the year (Shoga 2 = 1258) and thus would have less
significance than Sado and post-Sado writings.]

Let us now turn to the assertion that Honda Nissho was fervent believer
in this hongaku monism, so beloved of Maltz and other “ex” Gakkai “New Agers”.

From the Kanjin Honzon-Sho, Nichiren Dai Shonin (trans. Kyotsu Hori),
Chapter 4 (Upholding the Lotus Sutra and Attaining Buddhahood),

Pages 88-96


Question (20): You have not responded to the serious question raise earlier regarding the Buddha residing in our minds, have you?
Answer: It is said in the Sutra of Infinite Meaning (Muryogi-kyo), an introductory teaching to the Lotus Sutra: "though unable to perform the six kinds of practice leading to Buddhahood: charity, observing precepts, perseverance, effort, meditation and wisdom, upholders of this sutra will inevitably receive merits from practicing them." The second chapter of the Lotus Sutra states: "We wish to hear the way to perfection;" and in the Nirvana Sutra it is said: "'Sad' in the Saddharmapundarika (Lotus Sutra) means 'perfection'." Bodhisattva Nagarjuna says in his great Wisdom Discourse (Daichido-ron) that "sad" means "six" while the Annotations on the Four Mahayana Treatises (Wu-i wu-te ta-cheng ssu-lun hsuan-i chi) by Hui-chun of T'ang China means "perfection" in India. The Annotations on the Meaning of the Lotus Sutra (Fa-hua i-su) by Chi-tsang states that "sad" is translated as "perfection"; whileGrand Master T'ien-t'ai states in his Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra (Fa-hua hsuan-i) that "sad" is a Sanskrit term which is translated as "miao" (wonderful) in China.

I fear that I may debase these passages if I try to interpret them, but I dare do so in order to answer your question. The gist of these passages is that Sakyamuni Buddha's merit of practicing the bodhisattva way leading to Buddhahood, as well as that of preaching and saving all living beings since His attainment of Buddhahood are altogether contained in the five words of myo, ho, ren, ge, and kyo (Lotus Sutra of the Wonderful Dharma) and that consequently, when we uphold the five words, the merits which He accumulated before and after His attainment of Buddhahood are naturally transferred to us. Thus, it is stated in the Lotus Sutra (chapter four, "Understanding by Faith) that four great sravaka such as Kasyapa rejoiced in their understanding of the teaching of the Lotus Sutra enabling sravaka to attain Buddhahood, and reported to the Buddha that they had been given invaluable jewels without asking for them. This represents the attainment of Buddhahood by the sravaka realm contained in our minds.

Not only the sravaka but also Sakyamuni Buddha is within us. For we encounter such a statement like this in the second chapter of the Lotus Sutra: "It was My (Sakyamuni's) original vow to let all beings become like Myself. My vow has now been fulfilled. I have helped them all enter the way of the Buddha." Does this not mean, that Sakyamuni Buddha, who has attained Perfect Enlightenment, is our flesh and blood, and all the merits He has accumulated before and after attaining Buddhahood are our bones?

Moreover, the eleventh chapter of the Lotus Sutra "Appearance of the Stupa of Treasures", states: "Those who uphold the teaching of this sutra are deemed to serve Me, Sakyamuni, and Taho Buddha. They also serve Buddhas in manifestation here who adorn and glorify their respective worlds." This means that Sakyamuni Buddha, Taho Buddha, and all the Buddhas in manifestation are in our minds, and that we, upholders of the Lotus Sutra, will follow their steps and inherit all the merits of those Buddhas.

This is the meaning of the passage in the tenth chapter of the Lotus Sutra,"The Teacher of the Dharma", which reads: "Those who hear of this Lotus Sutra even for a moment, will instantly attain Perfect Enlightenment." A passage in the sixteenth chapter of the Lotus Sutra, "Duration of the Life of the Buddha", contends: "It has been many hundreds of thousands of billions of nayuta of kalpa (an incalculably long period of time) since I have attained Buddhahood." It means that Sakyamuni buddha, within our minds, is an ancient Buddha without beginning, manifesting Himself in three bodies, and attained buddhahood in the eternal past described as 500 dust-particle kalpa ago.

In the same chapter, another passage reads: "The duration of My life, which I obtained through the practice of the way of bodhisattvas, has not yet expired. It is twice as long as the length of time stated above: 500 dust-particle kalpa." This reveals the bodhisattva-realm within out minds. The bodhisattvas described in the fifteenth chapter, "Appearance of Bodhisattvas from Underground", who have sprung out of the great earth, as numerous as the number of dust-particles of 1,000 worlds, are followers of the Original Buddha Sakyamuni who resides within our minds.

They are like T'ai-kung-wang and Duke of Chou, retainers of King Wu of the Chou dynasty in ancient China, who at the same time served the King's young son, King Ch'eng; or Takeuchi-no Sukune of ancient Japan, a leading minister to Empress Jingu, who concurrently served her son, Prince Nintoku. Just like them Bodhisattvas Jogyo, Muhengyo, Jogyo and Anryugyo, the four leaders of those bodhisattvas sprung up from the earth, are simultaneously followers of the Original Buddha and Bodhisattvas who reside in the minds of us, ordinary people.

Therefore, Grand Master Miao-le has declared in his Annotation on the Mo-ho chih-kuan (Mo-ho chih-kuan fu-hsing-chuan hung-chueh): "You should know that both our bodies and the land on which we live are a part of the 3,000 modes of existence which exist in our minds. Consequently, upon our attainment of Buddhahood, we are in complete agreement with the truth of '3,000 existences contained in one thought', and our single body and single thought permeate through all the worlds in the universe."

------------------------------------------------------------

Let us take a look at Honda’s “Hokekyo kogi”
(“Lectures on the Lotus Sutra”); commenting on the “Chapter of the
Measure of Life of the Tathagata”: in volume 2, p. 215, he
specifically states in commenting the first line of the central “Jiga
ge”:

“The saintly patriarch relying on the vast numbers preaches the
innumerable, and therewith judges it to reveal the Beginningless
Really-existing Original Buddha of Concrete (or Tangible) Character
of the Enjoyment and Response [Bodies], when as he says it ‘is the
Beginningless Ancient Buddha of kalpas as many as the dust of
countries touched or not by the dust of five hundred of tens of
trillions of nayutas of asamkheyas of great trichiliocosms (gohyaku
jinden gô) and so on to the Three Bodies that are revealed’, it is
this. Although in discussing this Original Buddha there are those who
cull out the Buddha Who practiced and manifested the Effect and point
to the Ideality (Abstraction) of Unmanifest Original Enlightenment
(hongaku no ritai) and take this Abstract Buddha (ributsu) that is the
unenlightened worldling (bombu) to be the Original Buddha (hombutsu)
and take the Actual Buddha (jibutsu) as the Manifestation Buddha
(shakubutsu);"

"This is by no means (kesshite) the conclusion of the
faith and practice of [the Bodhisattva] Converted by the Original
Buddha (honge). However, among the Saint’s latter lineages they
frequently assert this doctrine and advocate that it is the sublime
doctrine revealed by the ‘[Chapter] of the Measure of Life’ alone and
the Ultimate Theory exceeding the {Bodhisattva] Converted by the
Original Buddha (honge); the ignorant heedlessly would follow suit.
Alas! This child is to be pitied !”

The passage is reasonably clear: in interpreting this central part of
the “Lotus Sutra” Honda makes it clear that the Buddha spoken of in
Chapter Sixteen is of a concrete or tangible character (gutaikaku)
relating to the Enjoyment and Response Bodies (hojin and ojin) and he
utilizes a phrase from the “Kanjin honzon sho” to describe this
Buddha; although there are some who have tried to twist the phrase to
mean something else Honda is fairly clear: he believes in the “Actual
Buddha” (ji butsu) and dismisses the theory of the Abstract or Ideal
(ritai) Original Enlightenment, which, as every scholar should know,
is oriented towards the Dharma Body (hosshin) of the Buddh

(See the comparison between the two views, the “Beginningless
Ancient Buddha” and the “Hongaku Uncreate Three Bodies” in Asai Yorin,
“Nichiren kyogaku no kenkyu”, pp. 287-315, especially the summary on
p. 295)

It should be noted that Honda’s description tallies with the idea
found in the “Kaimoku sho” (STN, v. 1, 5536-8) where Nichiren says the
feature that separates the “Hokekyo” from all other Mahayana Sutras is
the concept of the “revelation of the original” (kempon) of the
Enjoyment Body (hojin) and of the Response Body (ojin). (Shigyo
Kaishu, “Nichiren no ‘Kanjin honzon sho’ no busshin ron ni tsuite” p.
181, cites this “Kaimoku sho” passage to show Nichiren was NOT
oriented towards the Hosshin based hongaku view of the Buddha

Significantly Honda then goes on to criticize in no uncertain terms
those ignorant people who willy-nilly follow those who take ri hongaku
to be the Original or Fundamental Buddha and take the Actual Buddha to
be a a mere Manifestation Buddha. (This hongaku doctrine is clearly
expressed in “On the Reality of the Dharmas” (Shoho jisso sho) (STN,
v. 1, 724 l. 11)), a work much praised by Taisekiji and the Soka
Gakkai. Surely this fact is significant: the position vehemently
proclaimed by the Fuji Branch is the very position which Honda
condemns as being by no means the final doctrine of Nichiren Shonin;
he then continues by noting the prevalence of this view among the
latter-day religious groups of the Nichiren movement he pities the
children who blindly take this view point. Could there be a better
description of Maltz and his Soka Gakkai followers? Truly they are to
be pitied !

As for Yasuhara’s claim that Honda cited the “Junyoze no koto” in the
“Daizokyo yogi” (“Essential Doctrine of the Great Sutra Store”), I do
not doubt it; but in what context did he use it?

Moreover, as the title implies this appears to be an over-all view of the
Buddhist canon, not the quintessential Truth of all Truths, the “Lotus Sutra”.

Nor again can Yasuhara wriggle out of the charge of promoting
Medieval Tendai by saying that the Medieval Tendai (Chuko Tendai) idea
required no practice; of course, the people who introduced this sort
of thought into the Nichiren canon tack on chanting the Daimoku and so
on in order to make their fundamental alteration of Nichiren’s world
view more acceptable and plausible.

Moreover, even some Chuko Tendai works included some kind of nod in the
direction “practice”. The sin here is to twist Nichiren’s doctrine of an
actually-existing Buddha into this abstract Hongaku in which the worldling is
the Original Buddha.

In fact, those people who passed off such works as these as genuine
writings of Nichiren fundamentally changed the metaphysics behind his
religion from the concept of an objective, actual Eternal Buddha Who
is omnipresent and even in our minds and Who out of Great Compassion
grants us His merit through the Daimoku into that of a highly
subjective monistic view in which the Buddha Body is reduced to a mere
projection of ourselves. (Again: see the writings by Shigyo and Asai
cited above.)

Despite attempts by various groups (such as the forerunners of the
modern so-called Nichiren Shu) to reconcile the two concepts of the Buddha Body,
they are fundamentally different and the people who combined them always gave
the Hongaku view precedence.

Because of the relative complexity of some of the issues I will defer
this. (Again: see the writings by Shigyo and Asai cited above.)
I have to say Maltz’s recent statements seem to bear out my belief
that he and his followers really do not understand the difference
between hongaku thought and the historical Nichiren’s hommon thought.

The terms “hombutsu” (original Buddha) or “hondo” (original land)
do not of themselves imply the hongaku monistic world view. Likewise the
concept of the Buddha in our minds does not imply the Tathagata of
Original Enlightenment. [Likewise on rare occasions “hongaku” can be
synonym for the actual Original Buddha but this appears to be a
relatively rare usage and that is clearly not what is meant in these
forgeries attributed to Nichiren.] Denying “Hongaku” is not equivalent
to denying the Original Buddha (hombutsu). Quite the contrary it is
defending and giving honor to the Original Buddha Shakyamuni!

There is much more I could say and possibly will say on this subject but I
want to make the following observations: First: Maltz has declared on the basis of
one passage in Stone’s book that every one who dares to oppose his Soka Gakkai
Hongaku philosophy is “out of bounds” and “in the penalty box”. Who gave him
authority to cut off rational discussion in this preemptive and dictatorial
way?

Cannot anyone see what is happening here? Not only is he chiming in
with the Gakkai/Taisekiji metaphysical view (he only differs from them
where he needs a hook to pull in their members or ex-members to build
his own organization) but he is acting like an absolute ruler in
cutting off discussion!

Well, let us see who is in the “penalty box” with me:
Most of the Old Jumonryu (followers of Nichiju) before the lineage
began to decline. (Unless, of course, Kubota and Yasuhara want to
show me that these men were gung-ho for “Ri hongaku”.)

The above cited scholars, Asai Yorin and Shigyo Kaishu, two of
the best historical and textual scholars of the mid-twentieth century
Tamura Yoshiro, author of the monumental work, “Kamakura Shin Bukkyo
no kenkyu” (“A Study of the New Buddhism of Kamakura”)
Miyazaki Eishu (I believe he is an acquaintance of Rev. Kubota) who
says in his excellent little reference work “Nichiren jiten” p. 261,
where he labels the “Ongi kuden” and “Onko kikigaki” forgeries and
notes that if Nichiren used these concepts it was as a warning and was
exceptional, for Hongaku was not really part of the original Tendai
doctrinal system."

User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 2111
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by Minobu » Sun Jan 21, 2018 8:09 pm

I really need to know about this entity thing...illazara can you help me out here please?

illarraza
Posts: 579
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by illarraza » Sun Jan 21, 2018 8:18 pm

By the way, though not a scholar, I am a practioner of Nichiren's authentic teachings who agrees 100 % with Mr. Lamont's view. I chant daily and have nearly every English scholar and scholar priest writing on the subject' Tientai and especially Nichiren. If someone emails me, I will send them dozens and dozens of writing proving that HONGAKU is not Nichiren's Teaching.I am very passionate about this subject because faith in HONGAKU is not a faith in the Lotus Sutra and a faith in Nichiren. Those who profess and believe in HONGAKU will not only fail to attain Buddhahood themselves but will cause others to go astray. I will defend what the Buddha and Nichirenn has entrusted to me. I will defend the teachings of Nichiren from those who would alter his doctrines, for example, the Soka Gakkai.

User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 2111
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by Minobu » Sun Jan 21, 2018 8:37 pm

illarraza wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 8:18 pm
By the way, though not a scholar, I am a practioner of Nichiren's authentic teachings who agrees 100 % with Mr. Lamont's view. I chant daily and have nearly every English scholar and scholar priest writing on the subject' Tientai and especially Nichiren. If someone emails me, I will send them dozens and dozens of writing proving that HONGAKU is not Nichiren's Teaching.I am very passionate about this subject because faith in HONGAKU is not a faith in the Lotus Sutra and a faith in Nichiren. Those who profess and believe in HONGAKU will not only fail to attain Buddhahood themselves but will cause others to go astray. I will defend what the Buddha and Nichirenn has entrusted to me. I will defend the teachings of Nichiren from those who would alter his doctrines, for example, the Soka Gakkai.
So then....Hongaku means that MyoHo RenGe Kyo is an entity and you are saying it's not..

or are they two differing subjects...
i don;t know...do not assume i know anything...please plain as day...
is there something in Nichiren Shonin's writings that states in His hand that Myo Renge Kyo is an entity.

by the way i respect you more than you think ....i applaud your life.
i would not ask you if i thought you untrustworthy in letting us in on the true teachings.

i might think you a little harsh at times...but we need someone who's exactly that.

sigh...need to know ...please.
and if you show me an authentic gosho or something that says it is an entity i will be in your debt.

illarraza
Posts: 579
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by illarraza » Sun Jan 21, 2018 10:27 pm

"Since time immemorial all people on the earth have been the Buddha Sakyamuni's beloved children. We have not realized the relationship, because we had been undutiful children. It is a unique relationship. As the moon reflects on calm water, the Buddha appears in our mind." -- Hokke Shuyo Sho

illarraza
Posts: 579
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by illarraza » Sun Jan 21, 2018 10:46 pm

A correct faith, according to Nichiren, depends on: Proper relationships with the Law; Gohonzon; A correct master/disciple relationship with Shakyamuni as Master and we as disciple and not the othemr way around. Were we to follow the instructions in the Shoho Jisso Sho, we are the teachers of Shakyamuni Buddha and we become puffed up with arrogance, as the SGI.

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 5465
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by Queequeg » Sun Jan 21, 2018 11:14 pm

Doc,
Instead of posting walls of copy pasta, in your own words, define Hongaku.
Let's start there.
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 2111
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by Minobu » Sun Jan 21, 2018 11:23 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 11:14 pm
Doc,
Instead of posting walls of copy pasta, in your own words, define Hongaku.
Let's start there.
All i want is to know where this whole Myoho Renge Kyo is an entity concept sprung from.

if it isn't an entity as far as Nichiren Shonin is concerned ... i don't want to go where i am being drawn into...

but i need an authentic source outta Nichiren Shonin's writings to confirm it.

so for the umpteeeeth time...please for the sake of my faith answer me ...someone ..anyone....


This is exactly how i feel right about now ...watch for a few secounds at least
you can see me at around time stamp 1:46 ...the whole thing is Minobuesque so have a heart and help me out ...


User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 2111
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by Minobu » Sun Jan 21, 2018 11:39 pm

With all do respect i started to read this and something occured to me...
is this fake gosho reading...did you paste filth or purity for me to read?



i'm ticked for i turn to you illaraza to post purity and then i think in order to show us that it is wrong you did not warn us that it could be filth.


so is any of the below from fake gosho...
if it is i don;t want it to enter my mindstream at this juncture.



illarraza wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 8:02 pm
According to the Nichiren scholar and practitioner, HONGAKU IS NOT A NICHIREN DOCTRINE:

FORGERY: HONGAKU NOT NICHIREN'S DOCTRINE by Graham Lamont

(Here Lamont refutes Rev. Yasahara's view of Hongaku)

It is has been stated that opposition to hongaku is wrong and that
the “Matter of the Ten Thusnesses” (Junyoze no koto) is a
genuine work simply because it is recorded in the “Rokunai gosho”
collection.

1) The “Rokunai” catalogue is not any guide to authenticity; although
at one time it was a slightly better standard for genuine works than
the “Rokuge” collections, the naive belief that it was compiled on the
first anniversary of Nichiren’s death has long since been discredited;
it is a catalogue from long after. (“Nichiren Shonin Ibun jiten”,
1212c); as far as I can see the first reference to such collection is
by Honjobo Nichijitsu of the Nakayama Lineage in 1461. Clearly given
the state of Nichiren Buddhism then under the influence of the most
corrupt monistic tendencies of the Medieval Tendai (chuko Tendai)
establishment, the “Rokunai mokuroku” is by no means any guarantee
of authenticity; in light of the sophisticated studies done in modern
times when access to texts of various sects and lineages became
easier, to cling to the notion that any document in this collection is
ipso facto reliable and genuine is the height of ignorance and
naivete.

[Note: in Maltz’s so-called “Kempon Hokke Vision, v. 3, no.
6, p. 7, Yashuhara admits that this was compiled not later than 120
years after Nichiren; plenty of time for all sort of forgeries to be admitted
to the canon.]

Of all the forgeries under Nichiren’s august name, this particular
document is perhaps the most egregious fake, because it can be shown
to be derived from a work FALSELY attributed to Genshin (Eshin sozu:
942 1017) and included in “Eshin sozu zenshu”, v. 3, the “Essential
Notes on Attaining Buddhahood in this Very Body by the ‘Hokke’”
(“Hokke sokushin jobutsu yoki”); the “Junyoze no koto” itself was long
ago a subject of dispute even in traditional times and was once
regularly attributed to (of all people) Jikaku Daishi (Ennin:
794-864), a man whose errors Nichiren sharply attacked! As to the
“Essential Notes on Attaining Buddhahood in this Very Body by the
‘Hokke’”, of which this work is clearly a revision or adaptation, at
various times it was also attributed to Kakucho (960 1034); textual
studies by Shigyo Kaishu showed decades ago that the present “Junyoze
no koto” and the “Essential Notes on Attaining Buddhahood in this Very
Body by the ‘Hokke’” extremely close. (See Asai Yorin, “Nichiren
kyogaku no kenkyu”, pp. 275-277, 303); this conclusion, far from being
overturned in recent years has been adopted by standard reference
works: (See“Nichiren Shonin Ibun jiten”, 503c) Moreover, even the
editors of the “Showa Teihon” in the Nichiren Sect, who were not very
strict in separating out forgeries decided to put this “Junyoze no
koto” in the Continuation Section (zokuhen) which is reserved for
questionalbe texts. (v. 3, 2030-2033; no.3)

[Note, even if one were to concede that this work is by Nichiren, it
is supposedly from the year (Shoga 2 = 1258) and thus would have less
significance than Sado and post-Sado writings.]

Let us now turn to the assertion that Honda Nissho was fervent believer
in this hongaku monism, so beloved of Maltz and other “ex” Gakkai “New Agers”.

From the Kanjin Honzon-Sho, Nichiren Dai Shonin (trans. Kyotsu Hori),
Chapter 4 (Upholding the Lotus Sutra and Attaining Buddhahood),

Pages 88-96


Question (20): You have not responded to the serious question raise earlier regarding the Buddha residing in our minds, have you?
Answer: It is said in the Sutra of Infinite Meaning (Muryogi-kyo), an introductory teaching to the Lotus Sutra: "though unable to perform the six kinds of practice leading to Buddhahood: charity, observing precepts, perseverance, effort, meditation and wisdom, upholders of this sutra will inevitably receive merits from practicing them." The second chapter of the Lotus Sutra states: "We wish to hear the way to perfection;" and in the Nirvana Sutra it is said: "'Sad' in the Saddharmapundarika (Lotus Sutra) means 'perfection'." Bodhisattva Nagarjuna says in his great Wisdom Discourse (Daichido-ron) that "sad" means "six" while the Annotations on the Four Mahayana Treatises (Wu-i wu-te ta-cheng ssu-lun hsuan-i chi) by Hui-chun of T'ang China means "perfection" in India. The Annotations on the Meaning of the Lotus Sutra (Fa-hua i-su) by Chi-tsang states that "sad" is translated as "perfection"; whileGrand Master T'ien-t'ai states in his Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra (Fa-hua hsuan-i) that "sad" is a Sanskrit term which is translated as "miao" (wonderful) in China.

I fear that I may debase these passages if I try to interpret them, but I dare do so in order to answer your question. The gist of these passages is that Sakyamuni Buddha's merit of practicing the bodhisattva way leading to Buddhahood, as well as that of preaching and saving all living beings since His attainment of Buddhahood are altogether contained in the five words of myo, ho, ren, ge, and kyo (Lotus Sutra of the Wonderful Dharma) and that consequently, when we uphold the five words, the merits which He accumulated before and after His attainment of Buddhahood are naturally transferred to us. Thus, it is stated in the Lotus Sutra (chapter four, "Understanding by Faith) that four great sravaka such as Kasyapa rejoiced in their understanding of the teaching of the Lotus Sutra enabling sravaka to attain Buddhahood, and reported to the Buddha that they had been given invaluable jewels without asking for them. This represents the attainment of Buddhahood by the sravaka realm contained in our minds.

Not only the sravaka but also Sakyamuni Buddha is within us. For we encounter such a statement like this in the second chapter of the Lotus Sutra: "It was My (Sakyamuni's) original vow to let all beings become like Myself. My vow has now been fulfilled. I have helped them all enter the way of the Buddha." Does this not mean, that Sakyamuni Buddha, who has attained Perfect Enlightenment, is our flesh and blood, and all the merits He has accumulated before and after attaining Buddhahood are our bones?

Moreover, the eleventh chapter of the Lotus Sutra "Appearance of the Stupa of Treasures", states: "Those who uphold the teaching of this sutra are deemed to serve Me, Sakyamuni, and Taho Buddha. They also serve Buddhas in manifestation here who adorn and glorify their respective worlds." This means that Sakyamuni Buddha, Taho Buddha, and all the Buddhas in manifestation are in our minds, and that we, upholders of the Lotus Sutra, will follow their steps and inherit all the merits of those Buddhas.

This is the meaning of the passage in the tenth chapter of the Lotus Sutra,"The Teacher of the Dharma", which reads: "Those who hear of this Lotus Sutra even for a moment, will instantly attain Perfect Enlightenment." A passage in the sixteenth chapter of the Lotus Sutra, "Duration of the Life of the Buddha", contends: "It has been many hundreds of thousands of billions of nayuta of kalpa (an incalculably long period of time) since I have attained Buddhahood." It means that Sakyamuni buddha, within our minds, is an ancient Buddha without beginning, manifesting Himself in three bodies, and attained buddhahood in the eternal past described as 500 dust-particle kalpa ago.

In the same chapter, another passage reads: "The duration of My life, which I obtained through the practice of the way of bodhisattvas, has not yet expired. It is twice as long as the length of time stated above: 500 dust-particle kalpa." This reveals the bodhisattva-realm within out minds. The bodhisattvas described in the fifteenth chapter, "Appearance of Bodhisattvas from Underground", who have sprung out of the great earth, as numerous as the number of dust-particles of 1,000 worlds, are followers of the Original Buddha Sakyamuni who resides within our minds.

They are like T'ai-kung-wang and Duke of Chou, retainers of King Wu of the Chou dynasty in ancient China, who at the same time served the King's young son, King Ch'eng; or Takeuchi-no Sukune of ancient Japan, a leading minister to Empress Jingu, who concurrently served her son, Prince Nintoku. Just like them Bodhisattvas Jogyo, Muhengyo, Jogyo and Anryugyo, the four leaders of those bodhisattvas sprung up from the earth, are simultaneously followers of the Original Buddha and Bodhisattvas who reside in the minds of us, ordinary people.

Therefore, Grand Master Miao-le has declared in his Annotation on the Mo-ho chih-kuan (Mo-ho chih-kuan fu-hsing-chuan hung-chueh): "You should know that both our bodies and the land on which we live are a part of the 3,000 modes of existence which exist in our minds. Consequently, upon our attainment of Buddhahood, we are in complete agreement with the truth of '3,000 existences contained in one thought', and our single body and single thought permeate through all the worlds in the universe."

------------------------------------------------------------

Let us take a look at Honda’s “Hokekyo kogi”
(“Lectures on the Lotus Sutra”); commenting on the “Chapter of the
Measure of Life of the Tathagata”: in volume 2, p. 215, he
specifically states in commenting the first line of the central “Jiga
ge”:

“The saintly patriarch relying on the vast numbers preaches the
innumerable, and therewith judges it to reveal the Beginningless
Really-existing Original Buddha of Concrete (or Tangible) Character
of the Enjoyment and Response [Bodies], when as he says it ‘is the
Beginningless Ancient Buddha of kalpas as many as the dust of
countries touched or not by the dust of five hundred of tens of
trillions of nayutas of asamkheyas of great trichiliocosms (gohyaku
jinden gô) and so on to the Three Bodies that are revealed’, it is
this. Although in discussing this Original Buddha there are those who
cull out the Buddha Who practiced and manifested the Effect and point
to the Ideality (Abstraction) of Unmanifest Original Enlightenment
(hongaku no ritai) and take this Abstract Buddha (ributsu) that is the
unenlightened worldling (bombu) to be the Original Buddha (hombutsu)
and take the Actual Buddha (jibutsu) as the Manifestation Buddha
(shakubutsu);"

"This is by no means (kesshite) the conclusion of the
faith and practice of [the Bodhisattva] Converted by the Original
Buddha (honge). However, among the Saint’s latter lineages they
frequently assert this doctrine and advocate that it is the sublime
doctrine revealed by the ‘[Chapter] of the Measure of Life’ alone and
the Ultimate Theory exceeding the {Bodhisattva] Converted by the
Original Buddha (honge); the ignorant heedlessly would follow suit.
Alas! This child is to be pitied !”

The passage is reasonably clear: in interpreting this central part of
the “Lotus Sutra” Honda makes it clear that the Buddha spoken of in
Chapter Sixteen is of a concrete or tangible character (gutaikaku)
relating to the Enjoyment and Response Bodies (hojin and ojin) and he
utilizes a phrase from the “Kanjin honzon sho” to describe this
Buddha; although there are some who have tried to twist the phrase to
mean something else Honda is fairly clear: he believes in the “Actual
Buddha” (ji butsu) and dismisses the theory of the Abstract or Ideal
(ritai) Original Enlightenment, which, as every scholar should know,
is oriented towards the Dharma Body (hosshin) of the Buddh

(See the comparison between the two views, the “Beginningless
Ancient Buddha” and the “Hongaku Uncreate Three Bodies” in Asai Yorin,
“Nichiren kyogaku no kenkyu”, pp. 287-315, especially the summary on
p. 295)

It should be noted that Honda’s description tallies with the idea
found in the “Kaimoku sho” (STN, v. 1, 5536-8) where Nichiren says the
feature that separates the “Hokekyo” from all other Mahayana Sutras is
the concept of the “revelation of the original” (kempon) of the
Enjoyment Body (hojin) and of the Response Body (ojin). (Shigyo
Kaishu, “Nichiren no ‘Kanjin honzon sho’ no busshin ron ni tsuite” p.
181, cites this “Kaimoku sho” passage to show Nichiren was NOT
oriented towards the Hosshin based hongaku view of the Buddha

Significantly Honda then goes on to criticize in no uncertain terms
those ignorant people who willy-nilly follow those who take ri hongaku
to be the Original or Fundamental Buddha and take the Actual Buddha to
be a a mere Manifestation Buddha. (This hongaku doctrine is clearly
expressed in “On the Reality of the Dharmas” (Shoho jisso sho) (STN,
v. 1, 724 l. 11)), a work much praised by Taisekiji and the Soka
Gakkai. Surely this fact is significant: the position vehemently
proclaimed by the Fuji Branch is the very position which Honda
condemns as being by no means the final doctrine of Nichiren Shonin;
he then continues by noting the prevalence of this view among the
latter-day religious groups of the Nichiren movement he pities the
children who blindly take this view point. Could there be a better
description of Maltz and his Soka Gakkai followers? Truly they are to
be pitied !

As for Yasuhara’s claim that Honda cited the “Junyoze no koto” in the
“Daizokyo yogi” (“Essential Doctrine of the Great Sutra Store”), I do
not doubt it; but in what context did he use it?

Moreover, as the title implies this appears to be an over-all view of the
Buddhist canon, not the quintessential Truth of all Truths, the “Lotus Sutra”.

Nor again can Yasuhara wriggle out of the charge of promoting
Medieval Tendai by saying that the Medieval Tendai (Chuko Tendai) idea
required no practice; of course, the people who introduced this sort
of thought into the Nichiren canon tack on chanting the Daimoku and so
on in order to make their fundamental alteration of Nichiren’s world
view more acceptable and plausible.

Moreover, even some Chuko Tendai works included some kind of nod in the
direction “practice”. The sin here is to twist Nichiren’s doctrine of an
actually-existing Buddha into this abstract Hongaku in which the worldling is
the Original Buddha.

In fact, those people who passed off such works as these as genuine
writings of Nichiren fundamentally changed the metaphysics behind his
religion from the concept of an objective, actual Eternal Buddha Who
is omnipresent and even in our minds and Who out of Great Compassion
grants us His merit through the Daimoku into that of a highly
subjective monistic view in which the Buddha Body is reduced to a mere
projection of ourselves. (Again: see the writings by Shigyo and Asai
cited above.)

Despite attempts by various groups (such as the forerunners of the
modern so-called Nichiren Shu) to reconcile the two concepts of the Buddha Body,
they are fundamentally different and the people who combined them always gave
the Hongaku view precedence.

Because of the relative complexity of some of the issues I will defer
this. (Again: see the writings by Shigyo and Asai cited above.)
I have to say Maltz’s recent statements seem to bear out my belief
that he and his followers really do not understand the difference
between hongaku thought and the historical Nichiren’s hommon thought.

The terms “hombutsu” (original Buddha) or “hondo” (original land)
do not of themselves imply the hongaku monistic world view. Likewise the
concept of the Buddha in our minds does not imply the Tathagata of
Original Enlightenment. [Likewise on rare occasions “hongaku” can be
synonym for the actual Original Buddha but this appears to be a
relatively rare usage and that is clearly not what is meant in these
forgeries attributed to Nichiren.] Denying “Hongaku” is not equivalent
to denying the Original Buddha (hombutsu). Quite the contrary it is
defending and giving honor to the Original Buddha Shakyamuni!

There is much more I could say and possibly will say on this subject but I
want to make the following observations: First: Maltz has declared on the basis of
one passage in Stone’s book that every one who dares to oppose his Soka Gakkai
Hongaku philosophy is “out of bounds” and “in the penalty box”. Who gave him
authority to cut off rational discussion in this preemptive and dictatorial
way?

Cannot anyone see what is happening here? Not only is he chiming in
with the Gakkai/Taisekiji metaphysical view (he only differs from them
where he needs a hook to pull in their members or ex-members to build
his own organization) but he is acting like an absolute ruler in
cutting off discussion!

Well, let us see who is in the “penalty box” with me:
Most of the Old Jumonryu (followers of Nichiju) before the lineage
began to decline. (Unless, of course, Kubota and Yasuhara want to
show me that these men were gung-ho for “Ri hongaku”.)

The above cited scholars, Asai Yorin and Shigyo Kaishu, two of
the best historical and textual scholars of the mid-twentieth century
Tamura Yoshiro, author of the monumental work, “Kamakura Shin Bukkyo
no kenkyu” (“A Study of the New Buddhism of Kamakura”)
Miyazaki Eishu (I believe he is an acquaintance of Rev. Kubota) who
says in his excellent little reference work “Nichiren jiten” p. 261,
where he labels the “Ongi kuden” and “Onko kikigaki” forgeries and
notes that if Nichiren used these concepts it was as a warning and was
exceptional, for Hongaku was not really part of the original Tendai
doctrinal system."

illarraza
Posts: 579
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by illarraza » Mon Jan 22, 2018 12:25 am

Minobu wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 11:23 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 11:14 pm
Doc,
Instead of posting walls of copy pasta, in your own words, define Hongaku.
Let's start there.
All i want is to know where this whole Myoho Renge Kyo is an entity concept sprung from.

if it isn't an entity as far as Nichiren Shonin is concerned ... i don't want to go where i am being drawn into...

but i need an authentic source outta Nichiren Shonin's writings to confirm it.

so for the umpteeeeth time...please for the sake of my faith answer me ...someone ..anyone....


This is exactly how i feel right about now ...watch for a few secounds at least
you can see me at around time stamp 1:46 ...the whole thing is Minobuesque so have a heart and help me out ...

That part of that scripture, I have no problem with. I have a problem with the following:

"Therefore, the two Buddhas, Shakyamuni and Many Treasures, are Buddhas who are functions [of Myoho-renge-kyo]. It is Myoho-renge-kyo that is the true Buddha. This is what is described in the sutra as “the Thus Come One’s secret and his transcendental powers.” The “Thus Come One’s secret” refers to the entity of the Buddha’s three bodies, and it refers to the true Buddha. “His transcendental powers” refers to the functions of the three bodies, and it refers to provisional Buddhas. A common mortal is an entity of the three bodies, and a true Buddha. A Buddha is a function of the three bodies, and a provisional Buddha. In that case, though it is thought that Shakyamuni Buddha possesses the three virtues of sovereign, teacher, and parent for the sake of all of us living beings, that is not so. On the contrary, it is common mortals who endow him with the three virtues."

User avatar
Minobu
Posts: 2111
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by Minobu » Mon Jan 22, 2018 12:28 am

illarraza wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 12:25 am
Minobu wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 11:23 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 11:14 pm
Doc,
Instead of posting walls of copy pasta, in your own words, define Hongaku.
Let's start there.
All i want is to know where this whole Myoho Renge Kyo is an entity concept sprung from.

if it isn't an entity as far as Nichiren Shonin is concerned ... i don't want to go where i am being drawn into...

but i need an authentic source outta Nichiren Shonin's writings to confirm it.

so for the umpteeeeth time...please for the sake of my faith answer me ...someone ..anyone....


This is exactly how i feel right about now ...watch for a few secounds at least
you can see me at around time stamp 1:46 ...the whole thing is Minobuesque so have a heart and help me out ...

That part of that scripture, I have no problem with. I have a problem with the following:

"Therefore, the two Buddhas, Shakyamuni and Many Treasures, are Buddhas who are functions [of Myoho-renge-kyo]. It is Myoho-renge-kyo that is the true Buddha. This is what is described in the sutra as “the Thus Come One’s secret and his transcendental powers.” The “Thus Come One’s secret” refers to the entity of the Buddha’s three bodies, and it refers to the true Buddha. “His transcendental powers” refers to the functions of the three bodies, and it refers to provisional Buddhas. A common mortal is an entity of the three bodies, and a true Buddha. A Buddha is a function of the three bodies, and a provisional Buddha. In that case, though it is thought that Shakyamuni Buddha possesses the three virtues of sovereign, teacher, and parent for the sake of all of us living beings, that is not so. On the contrary, it is common mortals who endow him with the three virtues."
That part of that scripture, I have no problem with.
what part of what scripture...
and the next piece where is it from...

are you sure you are posting in the same forum as we are or did you mean some of this stuff for another forum , maybe in another window?

illarraza
Posts: 579
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by illarraza » Mon Jan 22, 2018 1:04 am

Everyone has Buddha-nature. Everyone is not a-priori a Buddha. Medieval Tendai* Original Enlightenment doctrine is not Nichiren's teaching and is another reason they are an enemy of the Lotus Sutra. We receive the Five Characters from the Eternal Buddha.

*Not to be confused with Tientai the Great of India.

narhwal90
Posts: 603
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:10 am

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by narhwal90 » Mon Jan 22, 2018 1:31 am

As per Stone, plenty of Tendai lineages well before Nichiren, and after, came down on various sides of the hongaku question. Tendai is way, way bigger, older and more complicated than Nichiren, probably most anything good, bad or ugly you can say about Tendai was true somewhere or somewhen.

User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1552
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by Coëmgenu » Mon Jan 22, 2018 1:33 am

illarraza wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 1:04 am
*Not to be confused with Tientai the Great of India.
China. Tiantai is Chinese. Tendai is Tiantai's Japanese son.
世尊在靈山會上拈華示眾眾皆默然唯迦葉破顏微笑世尊云
The Lord dwelt at the Vulture Peak with the assembly and plucked a flower as a teaching. The myriad totality were silent, save for Kāśyapa, whose face cracked in a faint smile. The Lord spoke.

吾有正法眼藏涅槃妙心實相無相微妙法門不立文字教外別傳付囑摩訶迦葉。
I have the treasure of the true dharma eye, I have nirvāṇa as wondrous citta, I know signless dharmatā, the subtle dharma-gate, which is not standing on written word, which is external to scriptures, which is a special dispensation, which is entrusted to Mahākāśyapa.

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 5465
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by Queequeg » Mon Jan 22, 2018 2:34 am

Coëmgenu wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 1:33 am
illarraza wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 1:04 am
*Not to be confused with Tientai the Great of India.
China. Tiantai is Chinese. Tendai is Tiantai's Japanese son.
Image
Those who, even with distracted minds,
Entered a stupa compound
And chanted but once, “Namo Buddhaya!”
Have certainly attained the path of the buddhas.

-Lotus Sutra, Expedient Means Chapter

illarraza
Posts: 579
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by illarraza » Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:32 am

Minobu wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 12:28 am
illarraza wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 12:25 am
Minobu wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 11:23 pm

All i want is to know where this whole Myoho Renge Kyo is an entity concept sprung from.

if it isn't an entity as far as Nichiren Shonin is concerned ... i don't want to go where i am being drawn into...

but i need an authentic source outta Nichiren Shonin's writings to confirm it.

so for the umpteeeeth time...please for the sake of my faith answer me ...someone ..anyone....


This is exactly how i feel right about now ...watch for a few secounds at least
you can see me at around time stamp 1:46 ...the whole thing is Minobuesque so have a heart and help me out ...

That part of that scripture, I have no problem with. I have a problem with the following:

"Therefore, the two Buddhas, Shakyamuni and Many Treasures, are Buddhas who are functions [of Myoho-renge-kyo]. It is Myoho-renge-kyo that is the true Buddha. This is what is described in the sutra as “the Thus Come One’s secret and his transcendental powers.” The “Thus Come One’s secret” refers to the entity of the Buddha’s three bodies, and it refers to the true Buddha. “His transcendental powers” refers to the functions of the three bodies, and it refers to provisional Buddhas. A common mortal is an entity of the three bodies, and a true Buddha. A Buddha is a function of the three bodies, and a provisional Buddha. In that case, though it is thought that Shakyamuni Buddha possesses the three virtues of sovereign, teacher, and parent for the sake of all of us living beings, that is not so. On the contrary, it is common mortals who endow him with the three virtues."
That part of that scripture, I have no problem with.
what part of what scripture...
and the next piece where is it from...

are you sure you are posting in the same forum as we are or did you mean some of this stuff for another forum , maybe in another window?
I have no problem with the part of the Shoho Jisso sho that teaches, "The entities of all phenomena are entities of Myoho-renge-kyo. That is the meaning of ''the true aspect of all phenomena.'" It is the mixing of the clean with the unclean that is so dangerous about this writing and most forged texts. Other writings that only posit false doctrines such as The True Cause and 106 Comparisons are less dangerous because they are easily seen to be forgeries.

illarraza
Posts: 579
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Shoho Jisso Sho (All Phenomena as Ultimate Reality)

Post by illarraza » Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:36 am

illarraza wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:32 am
Minobu wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 12:28 am
illarraza wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 12:25 am


That part of that scripture, I have no problem with. I have a problem with the following:

"Therefore, the two Buddhas, Shakyamuni and Many Treasures, are Buddhas who are functions [of Myoho-renge-kyo]. It is Myoho-renge-kyo that is the true Buddha. This is what is described in the sutra as “the Thus Come One’s secret and his transcendental powers.” The “Thus Come One’s secret” refers to the entity of the Buddha’s three bodies, and it refers to the true Buddha. “His transcendental powers” refers to the functions of the three bodies, and it refers to provisional Buddhas. A common mortal is an entity of the three bodies, and a true Buddha. A Buddha is a function of the three bodies, and a provisional Buddha. In that case, though it is thought that Shakyamuni Buddha possesses the three virtues of sovereign, teacher, and parent for the sake of all of us living beings, that is not so. On the contrary, it is common mortals who endow him with the three virtues."
That part of that scripture, I have no problem with.
what part of what scripture...
and the next piece where is it from...

are you sure you are posting in the same forum as we are or did you mean some of this stuff for another forum , maybe in another window?
I have no problem with the part of the Shoho Jisso sho that teaches, "The entities of all phenomena are entities of Myoho-renge-kyo. That is the meaning of ''the true aspect of all phenomena.'" It is the mixing of the clean with the unclean that is so dangerous about this writing and most forged texts. Other writings that only posit false doctrines such as The True Cause and 106 Comparisons are less dangerous because they are easily seen to be forgeries.
“…Then, as laymen, they work to destroy the teachings of Buddhism. Men of this kind steal and usurp the correct teachings of Buddhism and use them to supplement and bolster the erroneous writings…” — Opening of the Eyes

The Soka Gakkai steals and usurps the Daimoku of the Lotus Sutra to destroy the Secret Law of the Object of Worship, the concept of Eternal Buddha, the doctrine of the exclusive faith and practice of the Lotus Sutra, the doctrine of the transmission, and the meaning and significance of attaining Buddhahood in this very body. They utilize the writings in a selective and arbitrary manner and highlight the disputed texts such as the forged and insignificant Ongi Kuden to supplement and bolster the erroneous teachings of Human Revolution, Lotus Sutra interfaith, SGI Oneness of Mentor and Disciple, and seeking guidance [control]. They [Daisaku Ikeda and his high paid lieutenants] also steal and usurp Namu Myoho renge kyo to enrich themselves.

Post Reply

Return to “Nichiren”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Queequeg and 17 guests