Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

tkp67
Posts: 1385
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by tkp67 » Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:45 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:57 pm
PeterC wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 9:09 am
The view matters.
Yes.

One thing about the Lotus - it does not suggest that the teachings taught in accord with conditions actually themselves lead to bodhi. They may accomplish some beneficial purpose - getting children out of the burning house, letting weary travelers rest, preparing a poor man to receive his legacy, getting children to take their medicine - but those upaya only accord with Dharma when they lead to bodhi, and to lead to bodhi, they have to be abandoned. They only accomplish a limited end and if clung to beyond their utility, lead into an eddy of stagnation, or more often, descent into lower realms, and can no longer be considered Buddhadharma. What is controversial about the Lotus, in ways more controversial than other Mahayana texts, is that it even says the bodhisattva path is incomplete and must be abandoned.

TK, you cited Nichiren, but Nichiren did not in any manner suggest that Confucianism or Brahmanism, or even Hinayana or Provisional Mahayana lead to bodhi and never suggested that dedication to those paths exclusively were beneficial. He echoed the Chinese Buddhist view that Confucianism and Daoism enabled the Chinese to know basic cause and effect and morality, and Brahmanism taught a deeper understanding of cause and effect, but these teachings could only be preparation for the vastly more profound teachings of the Buddha. Once Buddhadharma is heard, then those other teachings are revealed to be incomplete and no longer bring benefit.
Did I cite anything that he said these practices led us to bodhi or that rather site that all practices are relative to capacity cause and culture and like music, rudimentary practices are a relative attempt to evoke humanitarian harmony?

I see this is incredible important in reconciling relative teachings to absolute teachings.

If we look at other teachings from this perspective it becomes apparent that they all try to facilitate this purpose but are limited to the capacity, cause and culture for which those teachings where developed. Yet this is why they thrive, because of RELATIVE BENEFITS.

Did Nichiren teach that all pre lotus teachings are offer no humanitarian benefit through out all of history or where all of his teachings predicated on reconciling relative teachings with absolute teachings?

Does Nichiren demote the enlightenment other's achieved in the past or does he call their path to enlightenment relative in light of the LS as revealed in later times?

The later does not diminish the works of those who came before but rather puts them into context with developing condition over time.

In our minds it is far easier to condemn anything that is in conflict with these teachings but Nichiren went through them all citing wisdom and benefit when he saw it and correcting facets of it as he saw it in comparison to the louts sutra which is ultimately reconciliation of relative to absolute truth. How was he able to do this without bias against the human condition from which they where born?

I think music makes a great example because it can be seen more as an expression than a teaching.

Why did music help in preparing for Buddhism? Because it takes disparate instrument voices and allows them to harmoniously interact for a sum is greater than the whole of the parts phenomenon that we innately appreciate.

Imagine all instruments sound off at the same time? is that music that we innately appreciate? or simply noise?

In my mind bias against humanity in any form is not emptiness of self and does not allow us to see them for what truly are, which is basically provisional means to eliminate suffering.

Do they have to offer the same benefit to the practitioner and humanity as buddhism does in order to be efforts in humanitarianism regardless of efficiency or benefit? If we deny this as reality do we not deny the superiority of the lotus sutra in the same moment? How can there be relative and absolute truth if we deny the former to embrace the later. Is it not the contrast in teachings the basis for teachings the Lotus Sutra and how it was meant to be understood?

Can we accomplish this if we have disdain and not compassion for vehicles that do no offer what the LS does?

Thank you in advance. Hope this finds you well.

narhwal90
Posts: 946
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:10 am

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by narhwal90 » Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:21 pm

I take some instruction from the Nirvana Sutra; fascicle 7 page 206 from the BDK translation;

The Bodhisattva has shown himself entering the shrines of certain
deities and going forth to cultivate the path of other dharmas. He
has made plain his understanding of the observances and ceremonies
practiced [within those faiths], he has grasped the import of their
literature and their art, and he has shown himself entering the writing
schools and performance spaces [of those of other faiths]. The Bodhisattva
has skillfully resolved conflicts among slaves. Among the
great mass of people—whether they are boys, girls, women of the
imperial harem, queens from the imperial household, townsmen or
country people, householders, brahmans, kings, ministers, or the
multitudes of the poor—no one has been more honored than the
Bodhisattva and he is respected uniformly by everyone. He shows
himself doing these things, but although he is indeed there doing
what he is seen to do, he has no affectionate attachment to any of
it. Like a lotus flower, he is unaffected by mud. It is for the purpose
of delivering living beings that he skillfully acts in these expedient
ways, complying with how the world works.

It is a high standard of behavior, and suggests to me that I should be participating and that the time spent on the cushion is not the practice but instead preparation for the actual practice.

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 10090
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by Queequeg » Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:39 pm

tkp67 wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:45 pm
Did I cite anything that he said these practices led us to bodhi or that rather site that all practices are relative to capacity cause and culture and like music, rudimentary practices are a relative attempt to evoke humanitarian harmony?
At best, these teachings lead to the Human Realm, which is within samsara. That's fine, but in the context of Buddhadharma, these are wrong views that just perpetuate suffering.
I see this is incredible important in reconciling relative teachings to absolute teachings.

If we look at other teachings from this perspective it becomes apparent that they all try to facilitate this purpose but are limited to the capacity, cause and culture for which those teachings where developed. Yet this is why they thrive, because of RELATIVE BENEFITS.
They facilitate samsara. This is not compatible with Buddhadharma. Samsara thrives because ignorance prevails. Its fine in a relative sense to try and get along with our fellows, but confusing the benefit of worldly dharmas with Buddhadharma is a profound error.
Did Nichiren teach that all pre lotus teachings are offer no humanitarian benefit through out all of history or where all of his teachings predicated on reconciling relative teachings with absolute teachings?
He taught provisional teachings, Buddhist and non-Buddhist, don't lead to Buddhahood. Only Ekayana, the Buddhayana, leads to bodhi.
Does Nichiren demote the enlightenment other's achieved in the past or does he call their path to enlightenment relative in light of the LS as revealed in later times?

The later does not diminish the works of those who came before but rather puts them into context with developing condition over time.

In our minds it is far easier to condemn anything that is in conflict with these teachings but Nichiren went through them all citing wisdom and benefit when he saw it and correcting facets of it as he saw it in comparison to the louts sutra which is ultimately reconciliation of relative to absolute truth. How was he able to do this without bias against the human condition from which they where born?
No. He did not try to reconcile.

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.
Kaimokusho

Earlier in the text he acknowledged that Confucianism and Brahminism advanced certain levels of wisdom, but also explained their limitations and disconnect from bodhi. Disconnected from bodhi, they don't transcend samsara. If they don't transcend samsara, then they only perpetuate it, and no matter how well they are explained, how well they are practiced, lead to rise and fall, including decent into hell.
Do they have to offer the same benefit to the practitioner and humanity as buddhism does in order to be efforts in humanitarianism regardless of efficiency or benefit? If we deny this as reality do we not deny the superiority of the lotus sutra in the same moment? How can there be relative and absolute truth if we deny the former to embrace the later. Is it not the contrast in teachings the basis for teachings the Lotus Sutra and how it was meant to be understood?

Can we accomplish this if we have disdain and not compassion for vehicles that do no offer what the LS does?

Thank you in advance. Hope this finds you well.
Its not disdain to simply state, these paths do not lead to bodhi but rather perpetuate samsara.
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

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 10090
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by Queequeg » Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:43 pm

narhwal90 wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:21 pm
I take some instruction from the Nirvana Sutra; fascicle 7 page 206 from the BDK translation;

The Bodhisattva has shown himself entering the shrines of certain
deities and going forth to cultivate the path of other dharmas. He
has made plain his understanding of the observances and ceremonies
practiced [within those faiths], he has grasped the import of their
literature and their art, and he has shown himself entering the writing
schools and performance spaces [of those of other faiths]. The Bodhisattva
has skillfully resolved conflicts among slaves. Among the
great mass of people—whether they are boys, girls, women of the
imperial harem, queens from the imperial household, townsmen or
country people, householders, brahmans, kings, ministers, or the
multitudes of the poor—no one has been more honored than the
Bodhisattva and he is respected uniformly by everyone. He shows
himself doing these things, but although he is indeed there doing
what he is seen to do, he has no affectionate attachment to any of
it. Like a lotus flower, he is unaffected by mud. It is for the purpose
of delivering living beings that he skillfully acts in these expedient
ways, complying with how the world works.

It is a high standard of behavior, and suggests to me that I should be participating and that the time spent on the cushion is not the practice but instead preparation for the actual practice.
Why is one the real and not the other? As if sitting on a cushion is somehow distinct from living a stainless life. What's the motivation on drawing such a distinction?
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

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

narhwal90
Posts: 946
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:10 am

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by narhwal90 » Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:48 pm

lol one possible distinction is that I'm sitting on a cushion in one case and in the other walking around.

but more seriously, one possbility is time on the cushion makes the bodhihsattva practice elsewhere possible; accordingly, a distinction between the two is expedient, showing a complementary relation between the actions.

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 10090
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by Queequeg » Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:50 pm

narhwal90 wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:48 pm
lol one possible distinction is that I'm sitting on a cushion in one case and in the other walking around.

but more seriously, one possbility is time on the cushion makes the bodhihsattva practice elsewhere possible; accordingly, a distinction between the two is expedient, showing a complementary relation between the actions.
And what's time on a cushion without the experience of walking around. Your complementary relation, at least as you posed above, is rather one sided.
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

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

tkp67
Posts: 1385
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by tkp67 » Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:04 pm

Thank you for the correction I while I feel I understand I still have contention in my mind based on the opening of the eyes and my interpretations of his writings and his life in general. This is not to diminish what you posted but rather to reveal my intent.

In my mind i reconciled the filial teachings of my ancestors to that of the Buddha. Maybe I am using the wrong words or maybe I am deluded.

Now I could discuss the particulars in my mind and how it worked in my particular situation but I drew this conclusion from the teachings themselves and feel the examples within might be more accurate.

As I understand it both Shakyamuni and Nichiren lived as examples of developmental perfection and it is reflected in the history of their discourse and within is revealed the dharma of the Lotus Sutra.

When I think of this I think of Nichiren in his practices prior to the lotus school and considered how devote and the command he had over them. He seemed to apply the same depth of devotion to erroneous teachings in order to put them into context with the teachings of the lotus sutra.

Could he have put them into relative context with a deluded mind and if he did put them into context out of enlightenment isn't that reconciliation?

Isn't this the treatise of all phenomenon as a product of the mind?

Is the problem in that this wording seems to give life to erroneous teachings instead of meaning that this reconciliation is a personal thing that happens for all of us when we encounter the LS that occurs in our mind?

aren't the bodhisattva of the earth emerging from all paths of life meaning that they are reconciling those paths to the path of the LS?

Either way thank you very much for entertaining my thoughts and the very poignant response for which I found great value and deeply appreciate.

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 10090
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by Queequeg » Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:21 pm

tkp67 wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:04 pm
As I understand it both Shakyamuni and Nichiren lived as examples of developmental perfection and it is reflected in the history of their discourse and within is revealed the dharma of the Lotus Sutra.

When I think of this I think of Nichiren in his practices prior to the lotus school and considered how devote and the command he had over them. He seemed to apply the same depth of devotion to erroneous teachings in order to put them into context with the teachings of the lotus sutra.
Nichiren never claimed mastery over various teachings. I can't find the exact quote, but he said, Zhiyi and Saicho exceeded him in learning, but he exceeded them in terms of practice.

The teaching at the heart of the Lotus is described as Sudden and Perfect. By Sudden it refers to the fact that it actually is not dependent on any other teachings, and contextualizes all other teachings as being preparatory; they are a departure point, but actually have nothing to do with Bodhi. This is also explained as Relative and Absolute Sublime. The Relative Sublime are teachings on incremental refinement of understanding. These are the teachings the Buddha gives from the perspective of the Absolute Sublime in relation to conditions, to prepare beings to hear the Absolute Sublime. Only the Absolute Sublime leads to Bodhi. Only Bodhi relates to Bodhi. This is why the Lotus says, only Buddhas understand. Even the great bodhisattvas don't participate in Bodhi. There is no Gradual path to Bodhi. This is why Faith is the only gate to Bodhi. Bodhi can be entered only by entering it directly - initially a leap of faith into the Bodhi Mandala. Once one enters, one perfects wisdom. NMRK is the teaching on that leap.


Could he have put them into relative context with a deluded mind and if he did put them into context out of enlightenment isn't that reconciliation?

Isn't this the treatise of all phenomenon as a product of the mind?
This is a preparatory teaching.
Is the problem in that this wording seems to give life to erroneous teachings instead of meaning that this reconciliation is a personal thing that happens for all of us when we encounter the LS that occurs in our mind?

aren't the bodhisattva of the earth emerging from all paths of life meaning that they are reconciling those paths to the path of the LS?

Either way thank you very much for entertaining my thoughts and the very poignant response for which I found great value and deeply appreciate.
Look, we can talk about the wonders of beautiful things. Its all in the path. But if we are talking about bodhi, then all of that falls silent and only Bodhi matters.
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

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

tkp67
Posts: 1385
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by tkp67 » Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:42 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:21 pm
tkp67 wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:04 pm
As I understand it both Shakyamuni and Nichiren lived as examples of developmental perfection and it is reflected in the history of their discourse and within is revealed the dharma of the Lotus Sutra.

When I think of this I think of Nichiren in his practices prior to the lotus school and considered how devote and the command he had over them. He seemed to apply the same depth of devotion to erroneous teachings in order to put them into context with the teachings of the lotus sutra.
Nichiren never claimed mastery over various teachings. I can't find the exact quote, but he said, Zhiyi and Saicho exceeded him in learning, but he exceeded them in terms of practice.

The teaching at the heart of the Lotus is described as Sudden and Perfect. By Sudden it refers to the fact that it actually is not dependent on any other teachings, and contextualizes all other teachings as being preparatory; they are a departure point, but actually have nothing to do with Bodhi. This is also explained as Relative and Absolute Sublime. The Relative Sublime are teachings on incremental refinement of understanding. These are the teachings the Buddha gives from the perspective of the Absolute Sublime in relation to conditions, to prepare beings to hear the Absolute Sublime. Only the Absolute Sublime leads to Bodhi. Only Bodhi relates to Bodhi. This is why the Lotus says, only Buddhas understand. Even the great bodhisattvas don't participate in Bodhi. There is no Gradual path to Bodhi. This is why Faith is the only gate to Bodhi. Bodhi can be entered only by entering it directly - initially a leap of faith into the Bodhi Mandala. Once one enters, one perfects wisdom. NMRK is the teaching on that leap.


Could he have put them into relative context with a deluded mind and if he did put them into context out of enlightenment isn't that reconciliation?

Isn't this the treatise of all phenomenon as a product of the mind?
This is a preparatory teaching.
Is the problem in that this wording seems to give life to erroneous teachings instead of meaning that this reconciliation is a personal thing that happens for all of us when we encounter the LS that occurs in our mind?

aren't the bodhisattva of the earth emerging from all paths of life meaning that they are reconciling those paths to the path of the LS?

Either way thank you very much for entertaining my thoughts and the very poignant response for which I found great value and deeply appreciate.
Look, we can talk about the wonders of beautiful things. Its all in the path. But if we are talking about bodhi, then all of that falls silent and only Bodhi matters.
in my mind and in context to a conversation between monks and Muslims Bodhisattva discussion seems appropriate since Muslims don't practice bodhi and I was under the impression that discussions on dharma in terms of Nichiren based on capacity for which I feel the lowest common denominator in open internet discussions should be considered

I don't foresee productivity in continuing the current line of reasoning on this specific topic but I wonder if Nichiren lived in this age and time if he would study the koran and give contrasting commentary regarding it if such a question arose.

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 10090
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by Queequeg » Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:59 pm

tkp67 wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:42 pm
Queequeg wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:21 pm
tkp67 wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:04 pm
As I understand it both Shakyamuni and Nichiren lived as examples of developmental perfection and it is reflected in the history of their discourse and within is revealed the dharma of the Lotus Sutra.

When I think of this I think of Nichiren in his practices prior to the lotus school and considered how devote and the command he had over them. He seemed to apply the same depth of devotion to erroneous teachings in order to put them into context with the teachings of the lotus sutra.
Nichiren never claimed mastery over various teachings. I can't find the exact quote, but he said, Zhiyi and Saicho exceeded him in learning, but he exceeded them in terms of practice.

The teaching at the heart of the Lotus is described as Sudden and Perfect. By Sudden it refers to the fact that it actually is not dependent on any other teachings, and contextualizes all other teachings as being preparatory; they are a departure point, but actually have nothing to do with Bodhi. This is also explained as Relative and Absolute Sublime. The Relative Sublime are teachings on incremental refinement of understanding. These are the teachings the Buddha gives from the perspective of the Absolute Sublime in relation to conditions, to prepare beings to hear the Absolute Sublime. Only the Absolute Sublime leads to Bodhi. Only Bodhi relates to Bodhi. This is why the Lotus says, only Buddhas understand. Even the great bodhisattvas don't participate in Bodhi. There is no Gradual path to Bodhi. This is why Faith is the only gate to Bodhi. Bodhi can be entered only by entering it directly - initially a leap of faith into the Bodhi Mandala. Once one enters, one perfects wisdom. NMRK is the teaching on that leap.


Could he have put them into relative context with a deluded mind and if he did put them into context out of enlightenment isn't that reconciliation?

Isn't this the treatise of all phenomenon as a product of the mind?
This is a preparatory teaching.
Is the problem in that this wording seems to give life to erroneous teachings instead of meaning that this reconciliation is a personal thing that happens for all of us when we encounter the LS that occurs in our mind?

aren't the bodhisattva of the earth emerging from all paths of life meaning that they are reconciling those paths to the path of the LS?

Either way thank you very much for entertaining my thoughts and the very poignant response for which I found great value and deeply appreciate.
Look, we can talk about the wonders of beautiful things. Its all in the path. But if we are talking about bodhi, then all of that falls silent and only Bodhi matters.
in my mind and in context to a conversation between monks and Muslims Bodhisattva discussion seems appropriate since Muslims don't practice bodhi and I was under the impression that discussions on dharma in terms of Nichiren based on capacity for which I feel the lowest common denominator in open internet discussions should be considered

I don't foresee productivity in continuing the current line of reasoning on this specific topic but I wonder if Nichiren lived in this age and time if he would study the koran and give contrasting commentary regarding it if such a question arose.
If you want a good idea of what Nichiren would have to say about the Koran, you might start with Mark Rogow's take. While I disagree with him on whether shoju or shakubuku are appropriate... his analysis of issues seems on point.
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

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

illarraza
Posts: 794
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by illarraza » Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:11 pm

What would Nichiren think of the SGI/Nichiren Shu/Zen interfaith meetings?

Nichiren on the SGI/Nichiren Shu Zen interfaith meetings

Soka Gakkai-Zen interfaith meeting, 14th Nov 2008

"We had an initial meeting last Thursday with a couple of local representatives of Soka Gakkai International, the Nichiren Buddhist community very much engaged with applying spiritual practice in daily life and calling for world peace. We had a fascinating discussion about the value of dialogue in the SGI and the Zen Peacemakers, and are discussing creating a joint dialogue project next year- inviting members of the public to discussion circles where we explore important areas of peacemaking and learn to listen to all the voices involved!..."

Nichiren's view:

"I hope we may set about as quickly as possible taking measures to deal with these slanders against the Law and to bring peace to the world without delay, thus insuring that we may live in safety in this life and enjoy good fortune in the life to come." -- RAR

"Since taking up the study of Buddhism, however, I have frequently given thought to this matter, and it seems to me that restraining those who slander the Law and respecting the followers of the correct way will assure stability within the nation and peace in the world at large." -- RAR

"Thus it is very difficult to establish peace in society. One may be letter-perfect in reciting the Lotus Sutra, but it is far more difficult to act as it teaches." -- Lessening One's Karmic Retributions

"This I will state. Let the gods forsake me. Let all persecutions assail me. Still I will give my life for the sake of the Law. Shariputra practiced the way of the bodhisattva for sixty kalpas, but he abandoned the way because he could not endure the ordeal of the Brahman who begged for his eye. Of those who received the seeds of Buddhahood in the remote past and those who did so from the sons of the Buddha Great Universal Wisdom Excellence, many abandoned the seeds and suffered in hell for the long periods of numberless major world system dust particle kalpas and major world system dust particle kalpas, respectively, because they followed evil companions.

Whether tempted by good or threatened by evil, if one casts aside the Lotus Sutra, one destines oneself for hell. Here I will make a great vow. Though I might be offered the rulership of Japan if I would only abandon the Lotus Sutra, accept the teachings of the Meditation Sutra, and look forward to rebirth in the Pure Land, though I might be told that my father and mother will have their heads cut off if I do not recite the Nembutsu—whatever obstacles I might encounter, so long as persons of wisdom do not prove my teachings to be false, I will never yield! All other troubles are no more to me than dust before the wind." -- Opening of the Eyes

"All the people throughout Japan have been led astray by the wild assertions of Honen, who tells them to “discard, close, ignore, and abandon” [the Lotus Sutra], or of the Zen school, which declares its teaching to be “a separate transmission outside the sutras,” so that there is not a single one who is not destined to fall into the great citadel of the hell of incessant suffering. So believing, over the past more than twenty years I have never ceased to cry out in a loud voice against these errors, fearing neither the ruler of the nation nor the common people. I am in no way inferior to the outspoken ministers Kuan Lung-feng and Pi Kan of old. I am like the thousand-armed Perceiver of the World’s Sounds, the bodhisattva of great compassion, who strives to rescue at once all the beings confined to the hell of incessant suffering."-- Rebuking Slander of the Law

Now the Kamakura government is at the height of power. Therefore, the True Word priests of To-ji, Mount Hiei, Onjo-ji, and the seven major temples of Nara, along with those priests of the Lotus school who have forgotten the teachings of their own school and instead slander the Law, have all made their way east to the Kanto region, where they bow their heads, bend their knees, and seek in various ways to win over the hearts of the warriors. They are in turn assigned positions as superintendents or chief officials of various temples and mountain monasteries, where they proceed to follow the same evil doctrines that earlier brought about the downfall of the imperial forces, using them to pray for the peace and safety of the nation!

The shogun and his family, along with the samurai who are in their service, very likely believe that as a result of such prayers the nation will actually become peaceful and secure. But so long as they employ the services of priests who invite grave disaster by ignoring the Lotus Sutra, the nation will in fact face certain destruction.

When I think how pitiful it would be if the nation were to be destroyed, and how lamentable would be the loss of life involved, I feel that I must risk my own life in order to make the truth of the situation clear. If the ruler desires the security of the nation, he should question the manner in which things are proceeding and try to discern the truth. But instead, all he does is listen to the calumnies of others and in one way or another treat me with animosity. -- The Selection of the Time

"Three times now I have gained distinction by having such knowledge. The first time was the first year of the Bunno era (1260), cyclical sign kanoesaru, on the sixteenth day of the seventh month, when I presented my On Establishing the Correct Teaching for the Peace of the Land to His Lordship, the lay priest of Saimyo-ji, by way of the lay priest Yadoya Mitsunori. At that time, I said to the lay priest Yadoya, “Please advise His Lordship that devotion to the Zen school and the Nembutsu school should be abandoned. If this advice is not heeded, trouble will break out within the ruling clan, and the nation will be attacked by another country." [ibid].

He also writes in the Selection of the Time, referring to the priests of the Lotus school who go out of their way to win the hearts of the Zen sect [warriors]:

"...along with those priests of the Lotus school who have forgotten the teachings of their own school and instead slander the Law..."

Nichiren might as well have been talking about the Soka Gakka and the Nichiren Shu.

Mark

illarraza
Posts: 794
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by illarraza » Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:27 pm

Nichiren's teachings on interfaith

So happy are we who follow Nichiren Daishonin and the Lotus Sutra and not Daisaku Ikeda.

“On the other hand, when I proclaim that the practitioners of the Nembutsu will fall into the hell of incessant suffering or declare that the Zen and True Word schools are likewise in error, people may think I am uttering harsh words, but in fact I am speaking truthful and gentle words. As an example, I may point to the fact that Dozen-bo has embraced the Lotus Sutra and fashioned an image of Shakyamuni Buddha, actions that came about because I spoke harshly to him. And the same thing holds true for all the people of Japan. Ten or more years ago, virtually everyone was reciting the Nembutsu. But now, out of ten persons, you will find that one or two chant only Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, while two or three recite it along with the Nembutsu. And even among those who recite the Nembutsu exclusively, there are those who have begun to have doubts and so in their hearts believe in the Lotus Sutra; some have even begun to paint or carve images of Shakyamuni Buddha. All this, too, has come about because I have spoken harsh words.

This response is like the fragrant sandalwood trees that correct among the groves of foul-smelling eranda trees, or lotus blossoms that rise from the mud. Thus, when I proclaim that the followers of the Nembutsu will fall into the hell of incessant suffering, the “wise men” of our day, who are in fact no wiser than cattle or horses, may venture to attack my doctrines. But in truth they are like scavenger dogs barking at the lion king, or foolish monkeys laughing at the god Shakra.”

We may substitute Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, or Islam for Nembutsu. Can you not see this? If the Daimoku does not penetrate your heart to obtain a correct view it is because your Object of Worship is incorrect.

“If, knowing the best path, one sees one’s parents or sovereign taking an evil path, can one fail to admonish them? If a fool, crazed with wine, is about to drink poison, can one, knowing this, not try to stop him? In the same way, if one understands the truth of the Buddhist teachings and knows the sufferings of fire, blood, and swords,79 can one fail to lament at seeing someone to whom one owes a debt of gratitude about to fall into the evil paths? Rather one should cast away one’s body and lay down one’s life in an effort to save such a person.”

“How reassuring, that those who respect the monks of the correct teaching and admonish those who are evil and in error receive such blessings as these!.”

“You should read again and again the previous letter in which I explained that one should of course obey one’s teacher, sovereign, and parents, but should they commit wrongs, admonishing them is in fact being loyal to them,” (The Three Obstacles and four Devils)

“How could I ever feel distantly toward any of you? Even in the case of the Nembutsu priests, the Zen priests, and the True Word teachers, and the ruler of the nation and other men of authority, all of whom bear me such hatred— I admonish them because I want to help them, and their hatred for me makes me pity them all the more.” (Reply to the lay Priest Takahashi)

“The Classic of Filial Piety states, “[In a case of moral wrong,] a son must admonish his father, and a minister must admonish his lord.” (The Letter of Petition from Yorimoto )

What could be more immoral than Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and Hinduism which trample on the dignity of human life?

“The Great Teacher Dengyo states, “In general, where unrighteousness is concerned, a son must admonish his father, and a minister must admonish his lord.” (ibid.)

“Yet not only do they fail to remonstrate with them, but they criticize one who does confront the Nembutsu school, which is strange indeed! As for Daishin-bo, as I wrote you before, please strongly admonish him by letter.” (The third Doctrine)

The SGI leaders, far from admonishing these heretics, heretical philosophies, and religions, pander to them through their interfaith activities. The only ones they admonish are the True Votaries of the Lotus Sutra. It will be no small occurance if they don’t suffer some great loss for acting contrary to the Lotus Sutra and teachings of Nichiren Daishonin.

“It stipulates that, no matter how learned one may be, if one sees an enemy of the Lotus Sutra but fails to admonish that person out of fear, one will fall into the hell of incessant suffering.” (Letter to Akimoto)

We can only conclude that the SGI fails to speak and act as Nichiren out of fear and cowardice.

“The high minister Pi Kan, seeing that the Yin dynasty was on the path toruin, strongly admonished the ruler, though it cost him his head.” (Opening of the Eyes)

The entire world is based on Chistianity, Islam, Judaism, and Hinduism. They are paths to war and ruin. But SGI seeks support and guidance from these slanderers and give them support and sucor.

“But because Kuan Lung- feng remonstrated with King Chieh of the Hsia dynasty and Pi Kan admonished King Chou of the Yin dynasty, their names have been handed down in history as those of worthies.” (op cit. Letter of Petition to Yorimoto)

This is why Nichiren Daishonin and his true disciples will be remembered for ten thousand years and more and Ikeda and his disciples will be long forgotten.

“Nichiren, who admonishes them for their evil, is father and mother to the ruler, and the teacher of all living beings.” (The Royal Palace)

We too are fathers and mothers to the rulers and the Christian, Islamic Jewish, Hindu, and provisional Buddhist religious leaders. Why? Because we admonish them for failing to embrace the Lotus Sutra and to chant Namu Myoho renge kyo.

Those chanting the Daimoku and who don’t like Nichiren Daishonin and his way are foolish with hollow words.

“Is not a person of wisdom one who admonishes the ruler when the country is endangered or corrects others’ mistaken views? But in your case, no matter what error you may see, you will no doubt refuse to correct it for fear of society’s reaction.” (op. cit. Yorimoto)

“In the Lotus Sutra, it is stipulated that those who bear a grudge against its votary are destined to fall into the Avichi hell. The fourth volume states that the offense of harboring malice toward a votary of the Lotus Sutra in the latter age is graver than that of reviling the Buddha for an entire medium kalpa. The seventh volume teaches that people who disparage the votary will suffer in the Avichi hell for a thousand kalpas. The fifth volume states that after the Buddha’s passing, when the Latter Day of the Law arrives, a votary of the Lotus Sutra will certainly appear, and that at that time, in that country, an immeasurably great multitude of monks who either uphold or violate the precepts will gather and denounce the votary to the ruler of the country causing him to be banished and ruined.”

Do you think persecutions happened to Nichiren for holding interfaith dialogues with the Nembutsu, Zen, Ritsu, and Shingon or for correcting their errors? Do you think Nichiren Daishonin would compromise with the Christians, Jews, Muslims, or Brahmins? I will not compromise the teachings for a pat on the back and an award or two.

“Question: What eye of wisdom allows you to perceive that the Nembutsu, Zen, and other schools of our time are the enemies of the Lotus Sutra and evil companions who are ready to mislead all people?

Answer: I do not state personal opinions, but merely hold up the mirror of the sutras and commentaries so that the slanderers of the Law may see their ugly faces reflected there and perceive their errors. But if they are incurably “blind,” it is beyond my power.

In the “Treasure Tower” chapter in the fourth volume of the Lotus Sutra we read: “At that time Many Treasures Buddha offered half of his seat in the treasure tower to Shakyamuni Buddha . . . At that time the members of the great assembly [saw] the two Thus Come Ones seated cross-legged on the lion seat in the tower of seven treasures . . . And in a loud voice he [Shakyamuni Buddha] addressed all the four kinds of believers, saying: ‘Who is capable of broadly preaching the Lotus Sutra of the Wonderful Law in this saha world? Now is the time to do so, for before long the Thus Come One will enter nirvana. The Buddha wishes to entrust this Lotus Sutra to someone so that it may be preserved.’

This is the first pronouncement of the Buddha. Again the chapter reads: “At that time the World-Honored One, wishing to state his meaning once more, spoke in verse form, saying: ‘This holy lord, this World-Honored One, though he passed into extinction long ago, still seats himself in the treasure tower, coming here for the sake of the Law. You people, why then do you not also strive for the sake of the Law? . . . In addition, these emanations of my body, Buddhas in immeasurable numbers like Ganges sands, have come, desiring to hear the Law . . . Each has abandoned his wonderful land, as well as his host of disciples, the heavenly and human beings, dragons, and spirits, and all the offerings they give him, and has come to this place on purpose to make certain the Law will long endure. . . . as though a great wind were tossing the branches of small trees. Through this expedient means they make certain that the Law will long endure. So I say to the great assembly: After I have passed into extinction, who can guard and uphold, read and recite this sutra? Now in the presence of the Buddha let him come forward and speak his vow!’

This is the second proclamation of the Buddha. The passage continues: “The Thus Come One Many Treasures, I myself, and these emanation Buddhas who have gathered here, surely know this is our aim. . . . All you good men, each of you must consider carefully! This is a difficult matter—it is proper you should make a great vow. The other sutras number as many as Ganges sands, but though you expound those sutras, that is not worth regarding as difficult. If you were to seize Mount Sumeru and fling it far off to the measureless Buddha lands, that too would not be difficult. . . . But if after the Buddha has entered extinction, in the time of evil, you can preach this sutra, that will be difficult indeed! . . . If, when the fires come at the end of the kalpa, one can load dry grass on his back and enter the fire without being burned, that would not be difficult. But after I have passed into extinction if one can embrace this sutra and expound it to even one person, that will be difficult indeed! . . . All you good men, after I have entered extinction, who can accept and uphold, read and recite this sutra? Now in the presence of the Buddha let him come forward and speak his vow!”

This is the third admonition from the Buddha. The fourth and fifth admonitions are found in the “Devadatta” chapter, and I will deal with them later.” (op. cit. Opening of the Eyes)

“Adherents of the various schools may attempt to attack you by citing the passage from The Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom that states, “If one denounces the teachings others follow out of love for one’s own, then even if one is the practitioner who observes the precepts, one will never escape the pains of hell.” Ask them whether they know why Nagarjuna wrote this admonition, and if Nagarjuna could possibly have been ignorant of how serious an offense it is to slander the true teaching by clinging to provisional teachings. He stated, “The various sutras are not secret teachings; only the Lotus Sutra is secret.” He declared that the Lotus Sutra alone is the seed of enlightenment, likening it to a great physician who can change poison into medicine. Is it possible that he later regretted having said these things, and therefore wrote that, if one denounces the teachings others follow out of love for one’s own, one will be destined to fall into the evil paths? If so, he would have been directly contradicting the truthful words of the Lotus Sutra, in which the Buddha states, “Honestly discarding expedient means” and “Not accepting a single verse of the other sutras.” This is hardly conceivable. Nagarjuna was a bodhisattva who appeared in accordance with Shakyamuni Buddha’s prediction, as well as a scholar in the direct lineage of the Buddha’s teaching. He may well have written this admonition in his treatise because he foresaw that such priests as Kobo and T’an-luan would slander the Lotus Sutra, the teaching that befits this age of the Latter Day of the Law. You should scoff at your opponents for not knowing the meaning of the words they cite. Tell them: “Are you yourselves not followers of those destined to fall into the evil paths? How pitiful! Are you not to be counted among those who will suffer for countless kalpas to come?” (Teaching Practice and Proof)

“He agonized over what course to take, but in the end, fearful of violating the Buddha’s admonition, made known his views to Emperor Kammu.” (Selection of Time)

“The Nirvana Sutra states: “If even a good monk sees someone destroying the teaching and disregards him, failing to reproach him, to oust him, or to punish him for his offense, then you should realize that that monk is betraying the Buddha’s teaching. But if he ousts the destroyer of the Law, reproaches him, or punishes him, then he is my disciple and a true voice-hearer.”

This admonition urged me on, and I spoke out against slander in spite of the various persecutions I faced, because I would have become an enemy of the Buddha’s teaching if I had not.Slander can be either minor or serious, however, and sometimes we should overlook it rather than attack it. The True Word and Tendai schools slander the Lotus Sutra and should be severely rebuked. But without great wisdom it is hard to differentiate correctly between their doctrines and the teachings that Nichiren spreads. Therefore, at times we refrain from attacking them, just as I did in On Establishing the Correct Teaching for the Peace of the Land.

Whether or not we speak out, it will be difficult for those who have committed the grave offense of slander to avoid retribution. Our seeing, hearing, and making no attempt to stop slander that, if we spoke out, could be avoided, destroys our gifts of sight and hearing, and is utterly merciless.

Chang-an writes, “If one befriends another person but lacks the mercy to correct him, one is in fact his enemy.” The consequences of a grave offense are extremely difficult to erase. The most important thing is to continually strengthen our wish to benefit others.” (The Embankments of Faith)

“The heart of all these passages is the admonition to embrace and believe in the Lotus Sutra in this Latter Day of the Law.” (The Embankments of Faith)

“Nevertheless, I was concerned that any admonition would be taken by the ignorant as mere jealousy of his wisdom, and so I refrained from speaking out.” (On Persecution Befalling the sage)

“Then the unenlightened man said: “Listening to the teachings and admonitions of a sage like you, I find that the misunderstandings I have labored under in recent days are all suddenly dispelled.” (op. cit. Conversations Sage)

“The third volume of the Nirvana Sutra says: ‘If even a good monk sees someone destroying the teaching and disregards him, failing to reproach him, to oust him, or to punish him for his offense, then you should realize that that monk is betraying the Buddha’s teaching. But if he ousts the destroyer of the Law, reproaches him, or punishes him, then he is my disciple and a true voice-hearer.’

“The meaning of this passage is that, if a person striving to propagate the correct teaching of the Buddha should hear and see others propounding the teachings of the sutras in a mistaken manner and fail to reproach them himself or, lacking the power to do that, fail to appeal to the sovereign and in this way take measures to correct them, then he is betraying the Buddha’s teaching. But if, as the sutras direct, he is not afraid of others but censures these slanderers himself and appeals to the sovereign to take measures against them, then he may be called a disciple of the Buddha and a true priest."

Yet, SGI acts as if Zen and the Zen adherents, Nembutsu and the Nembutsu adherents, Christianity and Christians, Islam and Musselmen, Hindus and Hindu adherents, Judaism and Jews are now somehow different. Nothing is further from the truth. Instead of sharing the dais with them, SGI should be correcting their errant views.

“Being therefore determined to avoid the charge of ‘betraying the Buddha’s teaching,’ although I have incurred the hatred of others, I have dedicated my life to Shakyamuni Buddha and the Lotus Sutra, extending compassion to all living beings and rebuking slanders of the correct teaching. Those who cannot understand my heart have tightened their lips and glared at me with furious eyes. But if you are truly concerned about your future existence, you should think lightly of your own safety and consider the Law above all. Thus the Great Teacher Chang-an states, ‘ “[A royal envoy . . . would rather], even though it costs him his life, in the end conceal none of the words of his ruler” means that one’s body is insignificant while the Law is supreme. One should give one’s life in order to propagate the Law.’

“This passage is saying that, even if one must give up one’s life, one should not conceal the correct teaching; this is because one’s body is insignificant while the Law is supreme. Though one’s body be destroyed, one should strive to propagate the Law.” (ibid.)

Doesn’t the SGI conceal the True Teaching of the exclusive faith and practice of the Lotus Sutra by holding interfaith dialogue. Never once during these inderfaith conferences have they uttered the lion’s roar as did Nichiren.

“And what of these admonitions of mine? Because people regard them with suspicion and refuse to heed them, disasters such as those we now face occur.” (Three Tripitaka Masters Pray For Rain)

“Now this great evil True Word doctrine has spread to Kamakura, deceiving the members of the ruling clan and threatening to bring about the destruction of Japan. This is a matter of the gravest import, and I have not discussed it even with my disciples. Instead I have dissembled, pretending ignorance and filling their ears only with attacks upon Nembutsu and Zen. But since my admonitions continue to go unheeded, without begrudging even my life, I will also tell my disciples what the true situation is.

“When I do so, they will be even more perplexed, saying that, no matter how admirable or worthy of respect Nichiren may be, he can scarcely surpass Jikaku and Kobo. I fear I will never succeed in banishing all their doubts. How can I dispel them?” (op. cit. Takahashi)

“It is a grave offense to go against these admonitions, and though invisible to the eye, the error piles up until it sends one plummeting to hell.” (Fourteen Slanders)

“My admonitions have surpassed even those set forth in the yüeh-fu poems of Po Chüi, and my prophecies are not inferior to those of the Buddha. ” (The Actions of the Votary of the Lotus Sutra)

“In ancient China, King Chou of the Yin dynasty refused to heed the admonitions of his loyal minister Pi Kan and instead cut out Pi Kan’s heart.” (ibid.)

“But just as a high wind creates great waves, or a powerful dragon brings forth torrential rains, so my admonitions called forth increasing animosity.” (ibid.)

“However, he did not heed my admonitions, but rather began to persecute me even more harshly, so there was nothing further I could do. (op. cit. no Safety Threefold World)

“I, Nichiren, fearing these admonitions of the Buddha, accordingly accused all those throughout the nation who were deserving of it, and more than once I was condemned to exile or to death.” (Letter to Akimoto)

“Thus, although Shan-wu-wei, Hsüantsang, Kobo, Jikaku, Chisho, and the others put forth a variety of clever arguments, they could produce no passage of scripture proving the Lotus Sutra to be inferior to the Mahavairochana Sutra. Their whole argument rests solely on the question of whether the sutra includes mudras and mantras. Rather than writing hundreds of volumes of argument, traveling back and forth between China and Japan with their unending schemes, and arranging for the promulgation of imperial edicts in order to intimidate people, they would have been better off producing some clear passage of proof in the sutras themselves. Who then could have doubted their assertions??

Dewdrops accumulate to form a stream, and streams accumulate to form the great ocean. Particles of dust accumulate to form a mountain, and mountains accumulate to form Mount Sumeru. And in the same way, trifling matters accumulate to become grave ones. How much more so in the case of this matter, which is the gravest of all! When these men wrote their commentaries, they should have exerted themselves in examining both the principles and documentary evidence of the two teachings, and when the court issued imperial edicts, it, too, should have delivered its admonitions after thoroughly investigating both sides and citing some clear passage of proof.

Not even the Buddha himself could repudiate his statement that, among all the sutras he has preached, now preaches, and will preach, [the Lotus Sutra stands supreme]. How much less, then, can scholars, teachers, and rulers of states use their authority to do so! This statement [of the Buddha] has been heard by Brahma, Shakra, the gods of the sun and moon, and the four heavenly kings, and duly recorded in their respective palaces.

So long as the people truly did not know of this statement, it seems that the false interpretations of the teachers I mentioned spread without anyone incurring retribution. But once a person of forceful character has come forward to make this sutra passage known in a bold and uncompromising fashion, then grave matters are certain to occur. Because people have looked down on this person and cursed him, struck him, sent him into exile, or attempted to take his life, Brahma, Shakra, the gods of the sun and moon, and the four heavenly kings have risen up in anger and become that votary’s allies. Thus unexpected censures have come down from heaven, and the people are about to be wiped out and the nation destroyed.

Though the votary of the Lotus Sutra may be of humble background, the heavenly deities who protect him are fearsome indeed. If an asura tries to swallow the sun or moon, its head will split into seven pieces.14 If a dog barks at a lion, its bowels will rot. And as I view the situation today, the same sort of retribution is happening here in Japan.

On the other hand, those who give alms and support to the votary will receive the same benefit as though making offerings to the Lotus Sutra itself. As the Great Teacher Dengyo says in his commentary, “Those who praise him will receive blessings that will pile up as high as Mount Calm and Bright, while those who slander him will be committing a fault that will condemn them to the hell of incessant suffering.”

The person who offered a humble meal of millet to a pratyekabuddha became the Thus Come One Treasure Brightness. He who offered a mud pie to the Buddha became the ruler of Jambudvipa. Though one may perform meritorious deeds, if they are directed toward what is untrue, then those deeds may bring great evil, but they will never result in good. On the other hand, though one may be ignorant and make meager offerings, if one presents those offerings to a person who upholds the truth, one’s merit will be great. How much more so in the case of people who in all sincerity make offerings to the correct teaching!” (The Bodies and Minds of Ordinary Beings)

Nichiren's compassion and protection towards the believers in the Lotus Sutra and Shakyamuni Buddha was in no way inferior to that of a lioness for her cubs. Towards those who would harm the Law and his disciples he was fearless and uncompromising.

“… But even bodhisattvas with their great compassion, if they make offerings to the enemies of the Lotus Sutra, are certain to fall into the hell of incessant suffering. On the other hand, even those who commit the five cardinal sins, if they show animosity toward those enemies, will definitely be reborn in the human or heavenly world. King Sen’yo and King Possessor of Virtue, who had destroyed, respectively, five hundred and countless enemies of the Lotus Sutra, became ShakyamuniBuddha in this world. His disciples such as Mahakashyapa, Ananda, Shariputra, Maudgalyayana, and other countless followers were people who, at that time, were in the vanguard, defeating the enemy, or killing them, injuring them, or rejoicing in the fight. The monk Realization of Virtue became Kashyapa Buddha. He was a votary of the Lotus Sutra of great compassion who, at that time, urged King Possessor of Virtue to attack the enemies of the sutra as if they were the ones who had betrayed his father and mother in a previous lifetime.” (On Recommending This Teaching to Your Lord and Avoiding the Offense of Complicity in Slander)

By making offerings to slanderers through interfaith activities SGI destines themselves to hell. To have the same mind as Nichiren takes courage.

We are disciples of the Supreme Votary of the Lotus Sutra. We live his words while others offer lip service to the Daishonin or use him to gain credibility. We will not withhold anything of Nichiren Daishonin’s teachings because he lived the Sutra and those who criticize his way are nothing but barking dogs. The teachings we embrace are The Succession Through the Scrolls of the Sutra. No intermediary like a special priest or Daisaki Ikeda is necessary. The SGI should immediately disband and humbly approach us to receive a True Object of Worship so that they can lessen the karmic retribution they have brought upon themselves. They are not true believers. At best they are parrots of “the Daimoku of SGI”. To chant Namu Myoho renge kyo while abandoning and causing others to abandon the Lotus Sutra and Shakyamuni Buddha and to expect to attain Buddhahood is as futile as entering a treasure mountain without hands. There is no benefit chanting Namu Myoho renge kyo with one’s mouth while chanting Namu Daisaku Ikeda or Namu SGI with one’s heart. If it were possible to attain Buddhahood without confronting evil, the Buddha and Nichiren Daishonin would be great liars. Here is what Nichiren says about those who chant the Daimoku but go against the Sutra:

“They entirely look up to groups of icchantikas and rely on them as leaders and, reverencing blasphemers against the Dharma, make them national teachers. Taking up the Classic Filial Piety of Confucious, they beat their parents’ heads and, while chanting the Lotus Sutra of Lord Shakya with their mouths, they go against the Master of teachings.

As far as converting others, we read in, On Establishing the Peace of the Land through the Correct Law:

“How can we do any good thing without criticizing them?”

“We should rather eliminate (this one sided teaching) than perform ten thousand prayers.”

“You should stop the fountainhead, you should cut out the root.”

“If you wish to realize the peace of our country quickly, you should eliminate them (mistaken doctrines) from our country.”

“If the four kinds of devotees of all the countries of the world stop making offerings to the bad priests and take refuge in the Good Law, no calamity will take place.”

and finally, in conclusion (very last sentences).

“I will not satisfy myself with the pleasure of believing the Right Law.

I will lead others by correcting their mistakes.”

This is not just a call for the leaders of the country but a call for his disciples and believers. That is why so many copies of this treatise was circulated. Thanks to Shakyamuni Buddha and the Lotus Sutra, we will overcome the oppression of the Muslims, Hindus, Jews, Christians and provisional Buddhists in the west, in India and in Southeast Asia.

Now let me say a little bit about defilement and mixing:

“The third is being defiled, which means that the contents can be contaminated. Though the water itself may be pure, if filth is dumped into it, then the water in the vessel ceases to be of any use.’

By exchanging ideas with the heretics in a friendly congenial manner, rather than break and subdue, we ourselves become defiled. Tientai states, “From the indigo, an even deeper blue.” When we dilute the indigo through interfaith we get a pale facsimily.

“Or we may be the kind of practitioners of the Lotus Sutra whose mouths are reciting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo one moment, but Namu Amida Butsu the next. This is like mixing filth with one’s rice, or putting sand or pebbles in it. This is what the Lotus Sutra is warning against when it says, “Desiring only to accept and embrace the sutra of the great vehicle and not accepting a single verse of the other sutras.”

Not accepting a single verse of the other sutras, means not accepting a single verse of the Koran, Bible, Torah or Vedas, let alone the Agamas, the Pure Land, and the Collection Of Wisdom Sutras.

“The learned authorities in the world today suppose that there is no harm in mixing extraneous practices with the practice of the Lotus Sutra, and I, Nichiren, was once of that opinion myself. But the passage from the sutra [that I have just quoted] does not permit such a view. Suppose that a woman who had been the consort of a great king and had become pregnant with his seed should then turn round and marry a man of common stature. In such a case, the seed of the king and the seed of the commoner would become mixed together, and as a result, the aid and assistance of heaven and the protection of the patron deities would be withdrawn, and the kingdom would face ruin. The child born from two such fathers would be neither a king nor a commoner, but someone who belongs not to the human realm.

The doctrine of the sowing of the seed and its maturing and harvesting is the very heart and core of the Lotus Sutra. All the Buddhas of the Three Existences and Ten Directions have invariably attained Buddhahood through the seeds represented by the five characters of Myo ho ren ge kyo."

The words Namu Amida Butsu are not the seeds of Buddhahood nor are the True Word mantras, the five precepts, Shikan or Hindu style meditation, God, the Koran, Torah, or Bible.

"One must be perfectly clear about this point, because this is the fault referred to as being mixed.”

These friendly interfaith meetings are mixing the clean with the unclean. These blasphemers must be remanded to the audience. they may not sit on the platform of Unexcelled Enlightenment with the True Preachers of the Dharma. They are not welcome to preach their heretical Dharma in our homes or temples: “I’m sorry, you will have to sit down and refrain from positing your heretical views, or you will be asked to leave.” They may ask questions and they my praise the Lotus Sutra and their votaries but they will have to do so from the audience. Debate is a whole other story. These interfaith SGI meeting are a meeting of the minds, a consensus. There is no compromise with evil, according to Nichiren Daishonin. We must never defer to the provisional Buddhist schools let alone those of the non-Buddhists lest we be guilty of compicity like the SGI, the Nichiren Shu and the modern Kempon Hokke.

“The scholars of the various schools continue to cling to the mistaken opinions of their respective teachers. Therefore, they declare that Buddhist practices must be accommodated to the people’s capacities, or they defer to the opinions of their founders or try to persuade the worthy rulers of the time to be their allies. The upshot of all this is that in the end they give themselves up wholly to evil intentions, engage in wrangling and doctrinal disputes, and take delight in inflicting injury upon people who are guilty of no fault.” (Letter From Teradomari)

These are the causes and effects, the thoughts, words, and deeds of those who go against the Lotus Sutra. One who has the very same thoughts, words, and deeds of the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren Daishonin can never give themselves up to evil intentions, follow evil teachers, or engage in wrangling and doctrinal disputes since we have the same noble intentions, embrace the very same doctrines, and never delight in injuring people who are guilty of no fault. Those guilty of no fault are those of the same mind as Nichiren Daishonin. Those guilty of great faults are the Soka Gakkai, the Muslims, Hindus, Christians and Jews.

Nichiren also writes:

“Answer: Chang-an writes: “Hence [T’ien-t’ai’s explanation of the title in] the preface conveys the profound meaning of the sutra. The profound meaning indicates the heart of the text, and the heart of the text encompasses the whole of the theoretical and essential teachings.” And Miao-lo writes, “On the basis of the heart of the text of the Lotus Sutra, one can evaluate all the other various teachings of the Buddha.”

We can also evaluate the non-Buddhist teachings and reveal their fallacies. We can evaluate the devotees of these religions and point out their faults. There is no common ground and there is no compromise. Chant Namu Myoho renge kyo or fall into hell.

Nichiren writes:

“The Great Teacher Chia-hsiang wrote the ten-volume Hokke Genron, and that would under ordinary circumstances have condemned him to fall into the hell of incessent suffering. But he set aside his own manner of reading the Lotus Sutra and served the Great Teacher Tientai, and thus was able to escape the pains of hell.” (Akimoto Gosho)

Is interfaith, Nichiren’s manner of reading the Sutra? Can anyone say so and back up their point of vie? In the Opening of the Eyes he takes to task Confucianism, Brahmanism, Taoism, and each and every provisional Buddhist teching. Were he aware of Christianity and Islam would he not take them to task? Would he join them in prayers [or discussions], even for the sake of peace? Never. He never did nor would he ever and neither will we [unlike the SGI who is so steeped in slander that they can neither distinguish black from white].

Today all the sects have a different manner than Nichiren Daishonin in the way they read the Lotus Sutra. Their mistaken doctrines and practices are proof that they have their own manner of reading the Sutra. The SGI is so worried about being liked and accepted that they have abandoned the Lotus Sutra and the Supreme Votary. Ikeda is so preoccupied with receiving awards and honors he will compromise with the devil. It is ten thousand, one hundred thousand, one million times better to be hated as Nichiren Daishonin and speak the truth to slanderers:

"Among all these men, Nichiren alone deserves to be regarded as the foremost. In what sense is he the foremost?? He is foremost in being hated by men and women…”

Why?

“But I, Nichiren, one man alone, declare that the recitation of the name of Amida Buddha is an action that leads to rebirth in the hell of incessant suffering, that the Zen school is the invention of the heavenly devil, that the True Word school is an evil doctrine that will destroy the country, and that the Precepts school and the observers of the precepts are traitors to the nation.”

While the modern “reformers” of the Nichiren sect [who I call blasphemers], Daisaku Ikeda, Arai Nissatsu, and Udai-in Nichiki have changed the Four Dictums of Nichiren to fit in with their limited slanderous worldview, we, the followers of Nichiren, include Islam, Hinduism, Christianity, and Judaism too, as falling under the Four Dictums:

“Because we contemplate the Buddha, ceaselessly devils are quieted; because our words are true, traitors who would destroy the nation are subdued.” –Nissatsu

“The modern significance of the four dictums is not limited to the simple refutation of Japanese Buddhist schools, but in fully developing the positive power of human life. This is the Mystic Law of the simultaneity of cause and effect inherent in human life, and to embrace it is to create boundless value.”– Ikeda

Nichiren’s life and death struggle was a mere “simple refutation” to Daisaku Ikeda. Then he goes on with a non sequitor to change the subject which is offensive to his slanderous ears. This is what all the SGI do when I perform Nichiren Daishonin’s practice of Shakabuku as if it is divorced from Nichiren Daishonin’s Buddhism. It is the very heart of Nichiren Daishonin’s Buddhism and our practice for the sake of others.

We embrace Nichiren Daishonin’s Four Dictums and expand them to make Eight Dictums, Twenty Eight Dictums, One Thousand Dictims such as Christianity is the teaching of heavenly demons, Islam is the teaching of blind heretics, Hinduism is the teaching of parasitic worms, and Judaism is the teachings of misanthropes.

I will conclude with more words from Letter to Akimoto:

"Because I do so, from the sovereign on down to the common people, all people fear me more than they would an enemy of their parents, an enemy from a past existence, a plotter of treason, a night raider, or a bandit. They rage, they curse, they strike at me. Those who slander me are given grants of land, while those who praise me are driven from their areas or fined, and the people who desire to kill me are singled out for rewards. And on top of all this, I have twice incurred the wrath of the authorities.

I am not only the strangest person alive in the world today; in the ninety reigns of human sovereigns, in the more than seven hundred years since the Buddhist teachings were first introduced to Japan, there has never been such a strange person. I, Nichiren, am like the great comet of the Bun’ei era (1264), a disorder of the heavens such as had never happened in Japan before that time. I, Nichiren, am like the great earthquake of the Shoka era (1257), a freak of the earth that had never before occurred in this land.

In Japan since the history of this country began, there have been twenty- six perpetrators of treason. The first was Prince Oyama, the second was Oishi no Yamamaru, and so on down to the twenty-fifth, Yoritomo, and the twenty-sixth, Yoshitoki. The first twenty-four of these men were struck down by the imperial forces and had their heads put on display at the prison gate, or their corpses left to rot in the mountain fields. But the last two succeeded in overthrowing the sovereign and gaining complete control of the nation, and at that time the imperial rule came to an end.

And yet these various perpetrators of treason are less hated by the mass of people than is Nichiren. If you ask why that should be, I will tell you. The Lotus Sutra contains a passage declaring that that sutra is first among all the sutras. However, the Great Teacher Kobo declares that the Lotus Sutra ranks third, while the Great Teacher Jikaku declares that the Lotus Sutra ranks second, and the Great Teacher Chisho agrees with Jikaku. Hence at present, when the priests of Mount Hiei, To-ji, and Onjo-ji look upon the Lotus Sutra, they read the passage that says the Lotus Sutra is first, but what they understand when they read it is that the Lotus Sutra is second or third in standing.

Neither the nobility nor the warrior clans have any detailed information about this matter. But since the eminent priests in whom they place their faith all subscribe to this opinion, the laity share the same view as their teachers."

Mark

illarraza
Posts: 794
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by illarraza » Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:35 pm


illarraza
Posts: 794
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by illarraza » Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:40 pm

MONDAY, JANUARY 14, 2019
Soka Gakkai and George Orwell's Animal Farm
The SGI teachings on interfaith, mentorism, "beauty, goodness, and gain", and the SGI's authoritarian, autocratic, pyramidal structured organization, deprecates and debases the Lotus Sutra and the teachings of Nichiren Daishonin. These teachings are not found in the teachings of Myoho renge kyo, least of all in the "one chapter and two halves". The Soka Gakkai's teachings are even inferior to the non-Buddhist teachings from which they derive. Failing to recognize and revere their true father, teacher, and sovereign, Shakyamuni Buddha, they beseech everyone to honor and revere the apostate heretic Daisaku Ikeda. They are no better than birds, beasts or Nembutsu believers who exort us to revere Amida Buddha. Lastly, they strive to keep their members away from the true disciples and believers of Nichiren by lying about us, lying about the true teachings of the Lotus Sutra, and lying about the actual import of the teachings which is that each one of us is a Bodhisattva of the Earth or Buddha in his or her own right, not one sole individual. They are greedy pigs. Nichiren says of such men:

"The hearts of the people are like those of birds and beasts; they recognize neither sovereign, teacher, nor parent. Even less do they distinguish between correct and incorrect in Buddhism, or good and evil in their teachers. But I will say no more of these things."

"All the teachings other than the “one chapter and two halves” are Hinayana in nature and erroneous. Not only do they fail to lead to enlightenment, but also they lack the truth. Those who believe in them are meager in virtue, heavy with defilement, ignorant, poor, solitary, and like birds and beasts [that do not know their own parents].

Most of all, Ikeda teaches them to abandon the Master of Teachings Lord Shakya for his beast-like animal self. Nichiren teaches:

"Nevertheless, the schools of Buddhism other than Tendai have gone astray concerning the true object of devotion. The Dharma Analysis Treasury, Establishment of Truth, and Precepts schools take as their object of devotion the Shakyamuni Buddha who eliminated illusions and attained the way by practicing thirty-four kinds of spiritual purification. This is comparable to a situation in which the heir apparent of the supreme ruler of a state mistakenly believes himself to be the son of a commoner. The four schools of Flower Garland, True Word, Three Treatises, and Dharma Characteristics are all Mahayana schools of Buddhism. Among them the Dharma Characteristics and Three Treatises schools honor a Buddha who is comparable to the Buddha of the superior manifested body. This is like the heir of the supreme ruler supposing that his father was a member of the warrior class. The Flower Garland and True Word schools look down upon Shakyamuni Buddha and declare the Buddha Vairochana and the Buddha Mahavairochana to be their respective objects of devotion. This is like the heir looking down upon his own father, the supreme ruler, and paying honor to one who is of obscure origin simply because that person pretends to be the sovereign who abides by the principles of righteousness. The Pure Land school considers itself to be most closely related to the Buddha Amida, who is an emanation of Shakyamuni, and abandons Shakyamuni himself who is the lord of teachings. The Zen school behaves like a person of low birth who makes much of his small achievements and despises his father and mother. Thus the Zen school looks down upon both the Buddha and the sutras. All of these schools are misled concerning the true object of devotion. They are like the people who lived in the age before the Three Sovereigns of ancient China and did not know who their own fathers were. In that respect, the people of that time were no different from birds and beasts."

The pig is an appropriate animal to liken such men. Daisaku Ikeda and his leaders, like pigs, devour their physically, spiritually, or psychologically, wounded members, including their skin and bones. Their spiritual corruption through profligate wealth and power too, is not unlike a tame pig who is released into the wild and which becomes a vicious dangerous feral pig, growing tusks and attacking both man and beast. Pigs, though naturally clean animals, have the karma to live and thrive in filth and they will eat almost anything. SGI's interfaith is not unlike the pig's indiscriminate eating of filth. The SGI has thrived through their associations with filth: An example is SGI's association with the Mitsubitshi corporation which builds and manufactures weapons of mass destruction. Pigs will literally eat themselves to death if given unrestricted access to food. The SGI mentor and senior leaders have given themselves unrestricted access to money and power through SGI's "planned giving", their hard sell contribution campaigns, and inserting their most loyal members into all facets of the Japanese government through stealth and the New Komeito political party. This, along with their lack of financial transparency, reveal the true nature of the mentor and the Soka Gakkai, that of greedy pigs.

No greater arrogance than for SGI to offer no scriptural proof of interfaith and Mentor-Disciple

Could there be any greater arrogance than SGI having no scriptural proof for their doctrines of interfaith and living mentor in the seat of the Law?

"In the more than 2,220 years since the Buddha’s passing, neither the Buddha of the “Life Span” chapter nor the five characters that are its essence have been propagated. When I consider my present rewards, I wonder whether they do not perhaps exceed even those of Dengyō and T’ien-t’ai, and surpass even those of Nāgārjuna and Vasubandhu. If I had no scriptural or doctrinal proof for this, how could there possibly be any greater arrogance?"

Mark

tkp67
Posts: 1385
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by tkp67 » Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:04 pm

personally I would be impressed if anyone would simply remark on his comment instead of attacking his character

Nichiren commented on inability to comment due to lack of wisdom but I am sure every participant in the Nichiren forum has far superior doctrinal recall.

Thank you very much for the deep and thoughtful responses they always have great value for me, from all participants, regardless of point of view.

It is a wealth of perspective to digest for which I most certainly will devote the time.

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 10090
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by Queequeg » Sun Jul 14, 2019 10:08 pm

Well I suppose I did invite that...

I should probably say - I no longer consider myself Nichiren Buddhist.

I offer my comments only to the extent that this is stuff I know from a long period of study.
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

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

markatex
Posts: 384
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 1:33 am

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by markatex » Mon Jul 15, 2019 1:47 am

Queequeg wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 10:08 pm
I should probably say - I no longer consider myself Nichiren Buddhist.
:shock:

tkp67
Posts: 1385
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by tkp67 » Mon Jul 15, 2019 12:04 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 10:08 pm
Well I suppose I did invite that...

I should probably say - I no longer consider myself Nichiren Buddhist.

I offer my comments only to the extent that this is stuff I know from a long period of study.
Well I must say while this might conjure many thoughts and emotions in others I am very grateful for your support in my endeavors. I had though based on your signature that you might have a practice that differs and yet you have supported mine as if it was yours. I can't express my gratitude for this behavior or how impressed I am with the compassion it takes to keep such a commitment.

Thank you

User avatar
Queequeg
Global Moderator
Posts: 10090
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by Queequeg » Mon Jul 15, 2019 4:10 pm

markatex wrote:
Mon Jul 15, 2019 1:47 am
Queequeg wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 10:08 pm
I should probably say - I no longer consider myself Nichiren Buddhist.
:shock:
:shrug:

:smile:

:anjali:
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

There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.
-Ayacana Sutta

markatex
Posts: 384
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 1:33 am

Re: Split from When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by markatex » Mon Jul 15, 2019 4:26 pm

It’s just surprising and seemingly out of the blue. And off-topic for a thread created because another thread went off topic.

Post Reply

Return to “Nichiren”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Minobu and 27 guests