Kanji of the Kaimoku Sho-repeated
dc
>>>>>>>>>Nicihren own words in the Kai Moku Sho are very clear. No
inferences need to
be made at all or re-interpretations. All one needs to do is read it
without
bias.<<<<<
Again, only a bias such as you have can fail to see the difference between
the Daishonin's historical and theoretical elements in his writings and his
personal convictions.
When he clearly names Shakyamuni as the Buddha who is the Mother Father,
Teacher and Sovereign, in histporical terms and then declares himself to be
the same in his own time, or the even more obvious, "Sovereign of the
Three-Fold World," where he first explains that this referred to Shakyamuni
and then in the present day that the title belongs to he himself, then one
must think, WHY would the Daishonin do this? The only possible reasonis his
own inner awakening and persoanl conviction.
Nothing you say can change this. The Daishonin doesn't write this out of
arrogance. He had already established these terms as appellations for
Shakayamuni Buddha? Why would he then suddenly change and then applies
these terms to himself?
Furthermore the Gosho quotations offered from the goshos from sects, omit
these appelations or mistranslate. This is easily proven if you would take
the time to listen and stop yapping your mental jaws.
dc
MarcInMD
what you want them (need them) to. Anasaki is a great example of a learnd and
highly respected person, who studied the Kaimoku Sho and does not draw Nichiren
Sho Shu conclusions. He wrote out a
translation that Dave likes but did not see anything at all like what he does
in its meaning.
That is because NSS doctrines all depend on inferences that you must be cluded
into before you read. Without "help", any reasonable person..like Anasaki,
would take Nicihren at his word and not have any need to work backwards,
starting with a
conclusion first and then look for snippets that could, if you try hard
enough, that you could use to pretend points to those foregone conclusions
Nichiren was all too clear in the Kaimoku Sho that he thought of himself as the
True Buddhist as Anasaki has put it. The Hokekyo No Goyja, the Votary. In that
role he saves the people of Japan by bringing the Buddha-Dharma into Mappo.
Nowhere does Nichiren mention anything at all about beiging a True "Buddha".
That is a label that Nichiren Sho Shu came up with several centuries after
Nichirens death to appeal to popular Japanese predudices (reversing Honge
Suijaki) that prefered a Home Grown Buddha rather than one from India.
But the Kai Moku Sho is Nichiren central Gosho, written when he thought he may
die and he called it his last will. Nichiren Sho Shu followers are embarassed
that none of their pet doctrines are mentioned in it..
...so they have to pretend.
I am writing out my own essay on tehKaimoku sho and inculding long passages.
Its taking a while mostly becasue of all the typing. I think I will post it in
three parts wo that I can get a big chunk posted up before I am all done .
MarcInMD
own inner awakening and persoanl conviction.
Its simply ..' not' the only possible reason ...as is obvious from century
after century going by and only Nicihren Sho Shu reads this into it.
One big reason no one sees it is that Nichiren clearly explains his role as
Votary of the Sutra in Mappo, which gives him the role of Parent and leader of
those of us who take faith in the Lotus Sutra during this age.
Dave's argument is based on his and Nichiren Sho Shu's ability to understand
what he "really" meant, what Dave refers to as his "inner" enlightenment, which
he says he understands. The problem is that Dave's understanding of Nichren's
secret inner feelings contradict what is in the text outright, when Nichiren
identifies Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha (no hints needed..he says it
several times directly), urges faith in the Lotus Sutra and calls himself its
Votary in Mappo. Clear as bell.. There is no need to muddy any of this up.
Nichiren Sho Shu has real problems. They claim to be the 'One True Sect' of
Nichren Dai-Shonin yet when anyone reads what Nichiren actually wrote, their
unique doctrines are not to be found and in fact are refuted. They have a tough
row to hoe. My sympathy to them.
dc
You are in a state of denial. The Translations posted from the NOPPA are
doctored. The "votary of the Lotus Sutra has a general and specific
meaning. The Votary of the Lotus Sutra means the true Buddha himself. To
explain how Shakyamuni deserves the titles of Mother, Father, Teacher and
Sovereign for all mankind aqnd then to applie this to himself in the next
breath at the very core or climax of the writing have much more meaning then
you are willing to acknowledge. Furthermore, to call oneself "Sovereign of
the Three-Fold World," is an early non-Chinese appellation that also only
applies to a Buddha.
The "mud" is in your head. The Daishonin had admitted experiencing the
vision of the Treasure Tower. To push this aside and get hung up in shallow
interpretations is ridiculous.
dc
Bruce Maltz
> You are in a state of denial. The Translations posted from the NOPPA are
>
> dc
Actually, DC, he is in the state of Maryland.
Bruce
--
"SHUMON NO ISHIN"
THE RESTORATION OF THE NICHIREN SECT
Kempon Hokke Kai
fax:1(603) 372-1298
email: kemponh...@japan.co.jp
http://www.nichirenbuddhism.org
AOL Messenger: KHShu
http://wwp.mirabilis.com/27355077
Cody
Bruce Maltz <> escribió en el mensaje de noticias >
> Actually, DC, he is in the state of Maryland.
> Bruce
Then THAT explains it. Maybe that explains Kathy and Terry too. Maryland.
Horrible place.
Cody in Spain
MarcInMD
How do you know that Dave?
John Petry
> >>>>>>>>>Its simply ..' not' the only possible reason ...as is obvious
> from century
> after century going by and only Nicihren Sho Shu reads this into it.
>
> One big reason no one sees it is that Nichiren clearly explains his role as
> Votary of the Sutra in Mappo, which gives him the role of Parent and leader
> of
> those of us who take faith in the Lotus Sutra during this age.
> Dave's argument is based on his and Nichiren Sho Shu's ability to understand
> what he "really" meant, what Dave refers to as his "inner" enlightenment,
> which
> he says he understands. The problem is that Dave's understanding of
> Nichren's
> secret inner feelings contradict what is in the text outright, when Nichiren
> identifies Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha (no hints needed..he says it
> several times directly), urges faith in the Lotus Sutra and calls himself
> its
> Votary in Mappo. Clear as bell.. There is no need to muddy any of this up.
>
> Nichiren Sho Shu has real problems. They claim to be the 'One True Sect' of
> Nichren Dai-Shonin yet when anyone reads what Nichiren actually wrote, their
> unique doctrines are not to be found and in fact are refuted. They have a
> tough
> row to hoe. My sympathy to them. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> You are in a state of denial. The Translations posted from the NOPPA are
> doctored.
Sorry Dave but you have it backwards. If you look at the original treatise you
would see that it makes reference to mother and father not to teacher or
sovereign. Those are additions by your sect. Of course you would have to go to
Minobu to see the original but you can look at the Showa Teihon to see the same
kanji.
dc
>>>>>>Sorry Dave but you have it backwards. If you look at the original
treatise you
would see that it makes reference to mother and father not to teacher or
sovereign. Those are additions by your sect. Of course you would have to
go to
Minobu to see the original but you can look at the Showa Teihon to see the
same
kanji.<<<<<<<<<<<<
Are you trying to say that the original does not contain the Kana
characters? I have some photographs of the original passages and there is
kana all over the place.
What you would be claiming, then, is that the Gosho Zenshu is the culprit
and not the NSIC english translations. Is this what you are saying?
dc
dc
>>>>The Votary of the Lotus Sutra means the true Buddha himself.<<
How do you know that Dave?<<<<<
I read it with my life.
dc
MarcInMD
and not the NSIC english translations. Is this what you are saying?<<
Dave..The Original was written in Classical Chinese. You have been looking at
translations into modern Japanese. I told you that before. And if you did ever
run across something written in the common Japanese of the 13th Century , you
would not be able to read that either. Ever heard any 13th century English ?
The Gosho Zenshu has no standing. It is an in-house knock off. The Showa
Teihon, while produced by Rissho U. which is a Nichiren Shu University, is the
standard by which every single scholar goes by.
dc
Sorry Marc. I am looking at photographs of the original Goshos in the
Daihonin's own hand. Kana, kana and more kana.
You should realize that a few hundred years in Japan makes little
difference. They don't mutate as quickly as we do in this part of the
world.
dc
John Timothy Hall
"dc" (rial...@ojai.net) writes:
> What you would be claiming, then, is that the Gosho Zenshu is the culprit
> and not the NSIC english translations. Is this what you are saying?<<
>
> Dave..The Original was written in Classical Chinese. You have been looking
> at
> translations into modern Japanese. I told you that before. And if you did
> ever
> run across something written in the common Japanese of the 13th Century ,
> you
> would not be able to read that either. Ever heard any 13th century English ?
>
> The Gosho Zenshu has no standing. It is an in-house knock off. The Showa
> Teihon, while produced by Rissho U. which is a Nichiren Shu University, is
> the
> standard by which every single scholar goes by.<<<<<<<<<
>
> Sorry Marc. I am looking at photographs of the original Goshos in the
> Daihonin's own hand. Kana, kana and more kana.
Daimoku Daibolical Dianetics Diatribe...
You're so full of shit you squeak. Kana are only for japanese to pronounce
chinese characters of sanskrit words.
dharma-samadhi Ch'an Zen meditation hard on
>
> You should realize <who are you to tell anyone else what to realize>
that a few hundred years in Japan makes little
> difference. They don't mutate as quickly as we do in this part of the
> world.
>
> dc
>
>
>
>
The japanese have been practicing infanticide since the seventeen hundrerds.
--
Ecology: the last fad.
Derek N.P.F. Juhl
ed...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (John Timothy Hall) wrote:
> The japanese have been practicing infanticide since the seventeen
hundrerds.
Are you going to tell us next that Bodhidharma had to leave India
because of invading Muslims?
--
Derek N.P.F. Juhl
http://members.aol.com/djuhl82848/page/index.htm
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
John Petry
> John Writes:
>
> >>>>>>Sorry Dave but you have it backwards. If you look at the original
> treatise you
> would see that it makes reference to mother and father not to teacher or
> sovereign. Those are additions by your sect. Of course you would have to
> go to
> Minobu to see the original but you can look at the Showa Teihon to see the
> same
> kanji.<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> Are you trying to say that the original does not contain the Kana
> characters? I have some photographs of the original passages and there is
> kana all over the place.
>
> What you would be claiming, then, is that the Gosho Zenshu is the culprit
> and not the NSIC english translations. Is this what you are saying?
>
> dc
What I am saying is that the original treatise for the relevant portion says :
"I, Nichiren, am like a compassionate parent to everyone in Japan,
whereas everyone in the Tendai School is their worst enemy. " Kaimoku-Sho, pp
328 and 330, NOPPA.
The additions found in the NSIC translations include the concept of lord and
teacher but these are not in the original text. They are however in the Gosho
Zenshu. Watson in his discussion of the NSIC translations admits that no
attempt was made to compare the NSIC translations to the original documents.
They were translations of the Gosho Zenshu without any attempt to cross
reference to the originals. If you look at the Showa Teihon, there is a
character for character correlation between the originals and the Showa
Teihon.
John Petry
> What you would be claiming, then, is that the Gosho Zenshu is the culprit
> and not the NSIC english translations. Is this what you are saying?<<
>
> Dave..The Original was written in Classical Chinese. You have been looking
> at
> translations into modern Japanese. I told you that before. And if you did
> ever
> run across something written in the common Japanese of the 13th Century ,
> you
> would not be able to read that either. Ever heard any 13th century English ?
>
> The Gosho Zenshu has no standing. It is an in-house knock off. The Showa
> Teihon, while produced by Rissho U. which is a Nichiren Shu University, is
> the
> standard by which every single scholar goes by.<<<<<<<<<
>
> Sorry Marc. I am looking at photographs of the original Goshos in the
> Daihonin's own hand. Kana, kana and more kana.
>
> You should realize that a few hundred years in Japan makes little
> difference. They don't mutate as quickly as we do in this part of the
> world.
>
> dc
Sorry Dave but every person I have ever spoken to on this issue has said that
the opposite is true, that it is virtually impossible for the regular Japanese
to read 13th century writings. A good example of this problem is the gongyo
books. If you will recall the old NSA ones, they had the romanji and the Kanji
characters but also little tiny Japanese characters as well. The reason was
that to the average Japanese, the stuff we chanted was completely
incomprehensible.
dc
>>>The additions found in the NSIC translations include the concept of lord
and
teacher but these are not in the original text. They are however in the
Gosho
Zenshu. Watson in his discussion of the NSIC translations admits that no
attempt was made to compare the NSIC translations to the original documents.
They were translations of the Gosho Zenshu without any attempt to cross
reference to the originals. If you look at the Showa Teihon, there is a
character for character correlation between the originals and the Showa
Teihon.<<<<<<<<<<<<
Do you have a copy of the Showa Teihon? and photographs of the Kaimoku Sho
original? Does Kana script appear in the Showa Teihon? Would you be able
to scan them and post them on the appropriate paragraphs?Where do I buy a
Showa Teihon? I would like to see it.
dc
dc
John Reposts and Writes:
> Sorry Marc. I am looking at photographs of the original Goshos in the
> Daihonin's own hand. Kana, kana and more kana.
>
> You should realize that a few hundred years in Japan makes little
> difference. They don't mutate as quickly as we do in this part of the
> world.
>
> dc
Sorry Dave but every person I have ever spoken to on this issue has said
that
the opposite is true, that it is virtually impossible for the regular
Japanese
to read 13th century writings. <<<<<<<<<<<<<
But John, I have a number of photographs of major gosho originals and the
Kanji is little different from the Chinese Buddhist terms in Kanji. There
was little change in that department. The Kana is also there. One of the
major issues that Nikko Shonin admonished some of the five elder priests
about, concerned their removal of Kana script from the Daishonin's
writings. If I am able to dicipher it, with my little ability in that area
then I am sure others who read Kanji and is familiar with Buddhist terms is
able to read it too. It was the spoken language where the real problems
lie and that has little to do with the Daishonin's writings in Kanji and
Kana. In order to understand it one need to understand the context and the
history and the buddhist terms themselves. The Gosho is very succint, but
the terms it uses are profound. There is a literary quality to the Gosho as
well and the Daishonin expressed deep ideas in prose or histories. In
reading the Gosho Zenshu version of the Kaimoku Sho portions, it is obvious
what it means. It takes me a long time to find each Kanji and check the
variations but it is not hard work and buddhist kanji is nearly all related
to sanskrit or pali terms. Diciphering Sanskrit for me is also a slow
process, but my library is extensive and Dictionaries are the same in any
language.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>A good example of this problem is the gongyo
books. If you will recall the old NSA ones, they had the romanji and the
Kanji
characters but also little tiny Japanese characters as well. The reason was
that to the average Japanese, the stuff we chanted was completely
incomprehensible.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I don't think you understand what you are saying. I am no expert, but I am
quite aware of the Kana script and how it is used to distinguish sounds or
import foreign words. The Daishonin, after his death was criticized for
writing in Kanji. The founder of a particular sect of Nichiren Buddhism,
burned gosho with kana and rewrote goshos removing the kana, because they
thought it wasn't literary enough and scolarly enough to be acceptable.
I think you are mistaking the old kana characters for modern marks the
Japanese have added while they lessensed the use of kanji.
Chinese Buddhist characters are clear as a bell and sometimes the Chinese
terms of a Confucian origin, such as "Teacher and Master," in the sense the
Daishonin was using, are spelled out in Kana. Even the ancient kanji in
China was difficult. The reason was, because these were Buddhist terms.
Technical words, taken from Sanskrit, they would also import more modern
chinese terms, such a "Teacher and Master" from the Confucious terminology
and use kana to spell out the sounds.! In more modern days Roman
characters were incorporated into the spoken language using new types of
scripts to identify the sounds and they are not the same thing as the old
kana used in the Daishonin's goshos.
dc
dc
>>>Dave the 5 Major treatises of Nichiren were written in Classic Chinese
not in
Japanese. This includes Kaimoku Sho. The copy you have is not from the
original. If you wish to see the original text in the classic Chinese, then
go
look at the Showa Teihon. It is reproduced for you there. All of your
deductions are based upon this tranlslation you have done. Your problem is
that
what you have translated is not the original text but the Nichiren Shoshu
'annotated' version.<<<
I think you don't understand, that the "classic chinese" Buddhist terms are
virtually the same as in any Chinese dictionary on Buddhist Kanji.
Certaintly it is much harder to read the handwriting, but even I can do it,
using dictionaries. In the case of the Yoritomo Gosho, the issue is not
about kana. it is the sentence itself, in Kanji it is clearly stating
"Nichiren is the Sovereign of the Three-Fold World." All the key words of
this sentence happes to be all in Kanji.
You are suggesting that the Gosho Zenshu was purposefully altering the
sentences itself and moving the kanji itself around.
The Gosho Zenshu has "annotations," in the margins between sentences, but
"annotated" does not mean changing the sentences of the Gosho itself. If
you can read on your computer that scan you I posted, you will see the kanji
just to the right of the kana script for sovereign, and teacher and Parent
(as oppossed to father/mother) The orignal says "father and mother and
teacher and Sovereign." using the kana to sound out the Confucian terms for
Sovereign and Teacher."
Again I have a number of photographs of Gosho orignals that have been
published and including pieces of the major Treatises and they all contain
some kana along with the Kanji.
dc
dc
>>There is a copy of the Showa Teihon in the temple library at San Jose.
There
are a number of universities which also have sets but I do not recall where
you
are so I can't suggest any. The original of the Kaimokusho was in classic
Chinese so no Japanese interlineations.<<<<
I cannot find any photos of orignal Gosho in the Daishonin's hand, that do
not contain some kana script. The majority of it is used for sounds but
some of it is used to import Chinese terms, that did not specifically relate
to Buddhist Sanskrit terms
Perhaps the copy at Minobu is an example of the kind of things, Nikko Shonin
remonstrated about. You are familiar with Nikko Shonin's charges that they
removed kana and altered gosho arent you?
dc
Reginald Carpenter
8:13pm (CDT+5). As in the first series of postings on the thread,
"Kanji of the Kaimoku Sho," the discussion has gone off-topic, which is
par for the course on arbn! LOL.
Regarding your posting, you wrote that you are writing out your own
essay on the Kaimoku Sho. I can hardly wait! I hope it's going to be
good. I will try to respond to it from the view of the Nichiren Shosho
teachings which you are trying to disprove in that Gosho. Please take
your time, and be ready to post it on your own thread next month. Maybe
then, we can stay on-topic! LOL. Peace! } : < { 0
<<< Stone Eagle >>>
Airborne in Cyberspace*
John Petry
Dave the 5 Major treatises of Nichiren were written in Classic Chinese not in
John Petry
There is a copy of the Showa Teihon in the temple library at San Jose. There
moo...@webtv.net
~Nichiren is Lord/Master, Teacher/Master, Father and mother to all the
people (each person) in Japan.~
Lord, Master, Teacher, Parents, are all someone to look up to.
Someone who guide you.
To dc,
If you meant me, I'm moon28, not 98! LOL
dc
Thank you Moon for verifying my translation. I was pretty correct Neh?
I had said:
"Nichiren ha nippon koku no shonin (or shojin--not sure) ni shi-u shi chichi
haha na ri"
Sorry about the "98" I don't know where that came from Moon 28.
dc
moo...@webtv.net
"Nichiren wa Nihon koku no shonin ni Shu, Shi, Chichi Haha nari"
You wrote "ha" instead of "wa". In Hiragana, we write "ha" but we
pronounce it "wa". Thatis why I typed "wa".
About Nippon and Nihon. There are 2 ways to pronounce Japan.. I prefer
Nihon because Nippon sounds like, during WW2, the crazed Japanese
military forced civilians to call "Nippon". Some people refuse to say
Nippon. I think Nihon is older.
Shonin NI <~ This "ni" means "~ni taishite" like "to" or "for". This
is an old saying, now we say "shonin 'no'".
Reginald Carpenter
(CDT+5). You wrote & I quote, that "I was pretty correct Neh?" Answer
is - No! So, don't pat yourself on the back for that INcorrect
translation!!
There is no such thing as being "pretty correct" when it comes to
translating this NS Buddhism. You are either dead on the mark or you
ain't!
Even "Soul Brother #1", James Brown sez: "In the world of exactitude,
half-steppin' is totally out!" LOL. Don't give up, but you will NEVER
be as good as a native born Japanese translator who is a Hokkeko member,
like Moon 28! Your "translation" of 28 to 98 was wrong, too! LOL. So,
you are just going to have to eat your razz-berries, with "Equal" or
"Sweet & Low", from me, DC! LOL. Peace! } : < { 0
dc
Thanks for the explanation I wondered about he Ha/Wa
So Nippon has a derogatory ring to it? I will try to remember that and use
Nihon.
dc
dc
(CDT+5). You wrote & I quote, that "I was pretty correct Neh?" Answer
is - No! So, don't pat yourself on the back for that INcorrect
translation!!
There is no such thing as being "pretty correct" when it comes to
translating this NS Buddhism. You are either dead on the mark or you
ain't! <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hey, give me a break, the written words and translation were exactly right.
It was the pronounciation I am bad in when I wrote the syllables into roman
and I admitted there were probably some errors in that aspect. The
translation itself into English, was 100% correct---dead on the mark. It's
the japanese scripts and stuff that changes pronounciation that is the
tough part, sometimes the sounds change.
dc
Reginald Carpenter
You got your "break" when Moon28 was kind enough to respond to you after
you referred to her as Moon98, Doofus DC. But, you were forgiven. Now
what you should do is chant and eat your razz-berries in humility!
LOL.
Also, you can "come correct" [slang] to Moon28 properly by saying, "Domo
arregato" to her, DC. Duh?; or is that "Neh" to you? Hai! LOL. That
"translates" into having good manners. Peace! } : < { 0
dc
As the old expression goes, and of course it isn't meant to be taken
literally,
Kiss my ass.
LOL
dc
MarcInMD
Daihonin's own hand. Kana, kana and more kana.
<<
No youre not
( Is Bruce gone ?..Are we getting back to serious discussion ?)
I believe the original of the Kai Moku sho does not exist anymore.. I will
check on that for you.
dc
No youre not
I think you will find that there are original pieces of the Kaimoku Sho.
All the photographs of original Gosho I have, ALL have kana along with
Kanji. Some have lots of Kanji and some have just a little. I am sure that
I have seen photos of parts of the Kaimoku Sho and I am trying to remember
where I saw it. My book situation is awkward because I have too many and
they are in boxes. I have located 6 photos of Gosho pieces in various books
so far and all of them have kana along with kanji. I know it will come to
me which book the Kaimoku Sho excerpt is in.
I should mention that in the recent issue of Nichiren Shoshu monthly there
are two excellent lectures by the High Priest Nikken Shonin, one of them
deals with the Daishonin's vision as a young boy and other discusses the
Kaimoku Sho and the appellations of the three virtures. Reading it, makes
it very clear that what I have written regarding the three virtues is
correct. The Kaimoku Sho takes great pains to show how the confucian ethic
of respect for parents, teacher and sovereign, was applied to Shakyamuni and
then to the Daishonin himself.
dc
John Petry
> John writes:
>
> >>There is a copy of the Showa Teihon in the temple library at San Jose.
> There
> are a number of universities which also have sets but I do not recall where
> you
> are so I can't suggest any. The original of the Kaimokusho was in classic
> Chinese so no Japanese interlineations.<<<<
>
> I cannot find any photos of orignal Gosho in the Daishonin's hand, that do
> not contain some kana script. The majority of it is used for sounds but
> some of it is used to import Chinese terms, that did not specifically relate
> to Buddhist Sanskrit terms
>
> Perhaps the copy at Minobu is an example of the kind of things, Nikko Shonin
> remonstrated about. You are familiar with Nikko Shonin's charges that they
> removed kana and altered gosho arent you?
>
> dc
I am aware that you are dragging in a non issue as well as ignoring what Watson
had to say. The Nichiren Shoshu has no originals of the authenticated Nichiren
Gosho. They certainly do not have the originals for the 5 major writings. The
original of the kaimoku Sho was in the possession of the Nichiren Shu until a
temple burned down in around 1875. There are three copies known to exist in the
handwriting of his disciples, again in the hands of the Nichiren Shu.
John Petry
> "Nichiren wa Nihonkoku no shonin ni shu shi chichi haha nari"
>
> ~Nichiren is Lord/Master, Teacher/Master, Father and mother to all the
> people (each person) in Japan.~
>
> Lord, Master, Teacher, Parents, are all someone to look up to.
> Someone who guide you.
>
> To dc,
> If you meant me, I'm moon28, not 98! LOL
Sorry but this is not the correct translation of the original. It may be
a correct translation of what is written in the Gosho Zenshu but it is not
what Nichiren wrote. We would have to sit down with a copy of the Showa
Teihon and the Gosho Zenshu and go over this character by character to
show you but it is a simple fact that the translation is "Nichiren is like
a compassionate mother and father to all the people of Japan.
dc
John writes:
>>>>>>>>>The Nichiren Shoshu has no originals of the authenticated Nichiren
Gosho. <<<<<
"Authenticated," by those who make demands of Nichiren Shoshu. Whether
these demands were from the view of secular scholars, from the opposing
sects or those who left the source of their orignal vow, Nichiren Shoshu has
no obligation to prove anything, instead Nichiren Shoshu treaches faith.
dc
dc
> If you meant me, I'm moon28, not 98! LOL
Sorry but this is not the correct translation of the original. It may be
a correct translation of what is written in the Gosho Zenshu but it is not
what Nichiren wrote. We would have to sit down with a copy of the Showa
Teihon and the Gosho Zenshu and go over this character by character to
show you but it is a simple fact that the translation is "Nichiren is like
a compassionate mother and father to all the people of
Japan.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
We already established that this is your view and what Nichiren Shoshu
teaches in regards to this.
I am totally sure that there are some pieces of the original Kaimoku Sho.
If you have any photos of rorigijnal gosho look at them They all have some
kana. The reason that that is written in Kana in that section is because
they areimported Chinese terms, not strictly previous Buddhist terms:
Sovereign and teacher, were in Kana.
dc
dc
> John writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>The Nichiren Shoshu has no originals of the authenticated
Nichiren
> Gosho. <<<<<
>
> "Authenticated," by those who make demands of Nichiren Shoshu.
No Dave, authenticated as meaning that the gosho has been verified as being
in
the actual handwriting of Nichiren.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Verified by experts? What experts?
Nichiren Shoshu is not the domain of experts, politicians, scholars etc.
they have the whole rest of the world to destroy let them leave Nichiren
Shoshu alone.
dc
John Petry
MarcInMD
Nichiren this is out of my range and up his alley, though I think Petry has in
fact given the complete explaination at this point but Lamonts answer can fill
in a few details.
Btw.. he answered me relutctantly and does not think sparring with NSS members
is a good use of anyones time.
> Was the Kai Moku Sho originally written in kana or Clasical Chinese?
>
> Does Nicihren call himself "Soveriegn of the Three-fold World " somewhere in
> it or in any text ?
>
> Thanks for your patience..
>
> Marc
>
His reply:
"The autograph was lost in the Minobu fire of 1876 but a fascimile copy
by the sixteenth century abbot Nikken exists at Hommanji in Kyoto and
indicates the original was in mixed kana and kanji style.
I know of no passage which, read normally and honestly, could have
Nichiren calling himself sovreign of the Three Worlds. However, I'd
have to study the work in detail. Besides even if he did so, the later
works show him as messenger of the Lord of the Three Worlds.
Are you arguing with that pig....{snip name of well known arbn contributor...
}... again?"
and
"There is no doubt that Nichiren regarded Shakyamuni as Lord, Teacher,
and Parent; his reference to himself as Compassionate Parent derives
from the commentaries on the Great Nirvana Sutra; the Three Virtues of
Shakyamuni are from the Hokekyo."
dc
"The autograph was lost in the Minobu fire of 1876 but a fascimile copy
by the sixteenth century abbot Nikken exists at Hommanji in Kyoto and
indicates the original was in mixed kana and kanji style.
I know of no passage which, read normally and honestly, could have
Nichiren calling himself sovreign of the Three Worlds. However, I'd
have to study the work in detail. Besides even if he did so, the later
works show him as messenger of the Lord of the Three Worlds.
Are you arguing with that pig....{snip name of well known arbn
contributor...
}... again?"
and
"There is no doubt that Nichiren regarded Shakyamuni as Lord, Teacher,
and Parent; his reference to himself as Compassionate Parent derives
from the commentaries on the Great Nirvana Sutra; the Three Virtues of
Shakyamuni are from the Hokekyo." <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I have already shown that the old pre-Gosho Zenshu gosho used by the
Nichiren Shu also had the kana characters for Sovereign and Teacher. and the
case of the the Yoritomo Gosho you better tell Lamont to look it up, because
this is not a case of Kana...This is in Kanji "Nichiren is the
Sovereign/Hero of the Three-Fold World.
dc
John Petry
No sorry Dave but you have NOT shown that the pre-Gosho Zenshu Nichiren Shu
version had any such thing. You have simply shown us that the Nichiren Shoshu
version has had additions made to it that are not in the original.
MarcInMD
> case of the the Yoritomo Gosho you better tell Lamont to look it up, because
> this is not a case of Kana...This is in Kanji "Nichiren is the
> Sovereign/Hero of the Three-Fold World.
Ok. I will try to ask him about it but as he said and I have mentioned several
taimes now..even if Nichiren refers to himself as Sovereign /Hero of the Three
Worlds it still has nothing at all to do with the entenuated Nichiren Sho Shu
doctrine of Nichiren as Hombutsu. Nichiren clearly and aggressively and
repeatedly explains his role as messenger sent by the Buddha , having gotten
his entrustement from him as depicted in Chapter 21 and 22 of the Sutra.
The part that trips us Nichiren Sho Shu is that the texts must be read
honestly, which they are unable to do since theie idea's emerged at a time far
removed from Nichiren's and Nikko's and they now must go back and re-interpret
the Gosho to find passages that they can pound into the shape the need for use.
Nichiren expalins his role clearly. Doubt him and add new doctrines at your own
peril.
John Petry
> >
> > "There is no doubt that Nichiren regarded Shakyamuni as Lord, Teacher,
> > and Parent; his reference to himself as Compassionate Parent derives
> > from the commentaries on the Great Nirvana Sutra; the Three Virtues of
> > Shakyamuni are from the Hokekyo." <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> >
> > I have already shown that the old pre-Gosho Zenshu gosho used by the
> > Nichiren Shu also had the kana characters for Sovereign and Teacher. and
> the
> > case of the the Yoritomo Gosho you better tell Lamont to look it up,
> because
> > this is not a case of Kana...This is in Kanji "Nichiren is the
> > Sovereign/Hero of the Three-Fold World.
> >
> > dc
>
> No sorry Dave but you have NOT shown that the pre-Gosho Zenshu Nichiren Shu
> version had any such thing. You have simply shown us that the Nichiren
> Shoshu
> version has had additions made to it that are not in the
> original.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> I suppose you did not get to see the post of the pre-Gosho Zenshu gosho
> photo of Makiguchi's copy of exactly that page in the Gosho, with the same
> kana : "Sovereign and Teacher," The Gosho Zenshu was published in 1952.
> This Gosho was the Gosho in Makiguchi's cell with him, years before, and was
> his Gosho for many years before that.
>
> I know I have heard some bragging from non-Nichiren Shoshu sects, that
> "Nichiren Shoshu didn't have their own Gosho."
>
> So I guess I should repost the photo of that gosho. Please compare it to
> the Gosho Zenshu. Now There is also some bragging that Nichiren Shoshu had
> to go to other sects to use their copies to compile the Gosho Zenshu. The
> accusation is that Nichiren Shoshu altered it, but here in living color is
> proof that the Gosho from the other sects ALSO had the same KANA. So what
> possible argument can you have for this?
>
> I have also posted a photo of a page of the original Rissho Ankoku Ron, in
> the Daishonin's hand, showing Kanji along with kana. demonstrating that
> contrary to what has been said here, Five major writings do contain some
> kana. If you need proof of these photos I would be happy to show you these
> references in more detail.
>
> I recommend you also read the segment of the High Priest Nikken Shonin's
> lecture on the Kaimoku Sho which I also posted. He discusses the Sovereign
> Teacher and Parent. It might be an Eye-Opener for you.
>
> dc
>
> [Image]
Dave:
You seem very unclear on the concept. Let me repeat myself. The copy you are
posting, regardless of where you say it came from, IS NOT THE ORIGINAL. The
original does not say parent, teacher and sovereign. It does say compassionate
father and mother. End of story.
dc
> case of the the Yoritomo Gosho you better tell Lamont to look it up,
because
> this is not a case of Kana...This is in Kanji "Nichiren is the
> Sovereign/Hero of the Three-Fold World.
Ok. I will try to ask him about it but as he said and I have mentioned
several
taimes now..even if Nichiren refers to himself as Sovereign /Hero of the
Three
Worlds it still has nothing at all to do with the entenuated Nichiren Sho
Shu
doctrine of Nichiren as Hombutsu.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Ding Dong. Schools out.
There is only one meaning of the Sovereign of the Three Fold World.
In very ancient India, Varuna and Mitra gave birth to Vaisithtacarita, the
first Sage of the World. This was not in fact a person, it was a Star. The
Star Zeta Ursa Major. The stories of all the gods between the north and
south poles of the sky, is the stories of all the sages, gods and beings.
later these stories of the constellations became attached to Buddhism as
expedients. The story is that it was Visisthacaritra that began the
expounding of the principles of the Vedas. more then 20,000 years ago. The
vedas contain astronomical information that can no longer be refuted, now
that astronomical positions of the paths of astronomical objects, can easily
be determined with computers. In the most ancient traditions of India and
Sumeria, the Lord of the Universe manifested himself as the Original human,
born of the union of the gods. This Lord is the original human who comes
from the "depths," meaning the bottom of the sky, associated in ancient
mythology in the constellations of Canopus. The Daishonin had quoted
Tien-t'ai, saying "the deepest principle comes from below."
The Story of the Birth of Vaisisthacaritra is the birth of our Sun in the
center of a Lotus Flower, arising from down below the earth.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Nichiren clearly and aggressively and
repeatedly explains his role as messenger sent by the Buddha , having gotten
his entrustement from him as depicted in Chapter 21 and 22 of the
Sutra.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
These are expressions of the Lotus Sutra, Sovereign of the Three Fold World,
Orignal Buddha, Buddha, Votary of the Lotus Sutra, messanger, practitioner.
The Daishonin realized the nature of all these things come from within human
life.
>>>>>>>>>>The part that trips us Nichiren Sho Shu is that the texts must be
read
honestly, which they are unable to do since theie idea's emerged at a time
far
removed from Nichiren's and Nikko's and they now must go back and
re-interpret
the Gosho to find passages that they can pound into the shape the need for
use.<<<<<<<<<<<
"Read honestly," does not mean reading the goshos as though they as composed
of separate sentences of equal power. Just like all writings there is a
point and outline and general informations. There are times when the chief
points come out in the form of revelations. The Daishonin did not just
write a bunch of disconnected paragraphs, reading them honesty is to follow
the point he leads up to in each writing. In the case of the Kaimoku Sho,
there is the themes of the Sovereign, Teacher and Parent or Confucianism,
meaning the secular teachigns, were actually part of Buddhism and that
Nichiren himself is now, the Sovereign, Teacher and Parent of the Three fold
World. Ignoring this final revelation as some sort of anomaly, and
relying on the supporting material is what you are doing in your attempts to
read the meaning of the Kaimoku Sho.
>>>>>>>>>Nichiren expalins his role clearly. Doubt him and add new doctrines
at your own
peril.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
You better check your own additions, if you have been paying attention you
should now realize that the older gosho of the other Nichiren Sect, AlSO,
contained these same characters of Sovereign Teacher and Parent and that
there are examples of photographs of the originals Five Major writings which
also contain kana characters. This proves that it is the most recent
translations, such as the 1987 version which was originally posted by John
P., and other versions of the non-Nichiren Shoshu sects, have altered their
own previous versions.
dc
dc
Dave:
John you are skirting these issues and you are just plain mistaken.
I has shown that the Gosho Zenshu contains the characters Sovereign and
Teacher as well as mother and father, ands I have also shown that the
previous version of the Nichiren Shu Gosho, also contains the characters for
Sovereign and Teacher. That means that the later Nichiren Shu versions you
have posted, have been altered, from even the pre-war, Nichiren Shu
version.
Futhermore, although I have yet to find that photograph of a piece of the
original Kaimoku Sho I have seen, I have posted a photo of the Rissho Ankoku
Ron original which demonstrates that there was in fact some kana, even in
the most formal writings.
Even the Pre-war version of the Nichiren Shu gosho contains the kana for
Sovereign and Teacher. As I said, there has been a mistranslation involved.
Your claim that Nichiren Shoshu read the other sects versions and then
altered them when they created the Gosho Zenshu, is now proven wrong.
No matter how you refuse to acknowledge this, it is fact. I have posted
proof. If you doubrt the proof and wish further details or reposting of
these photos and specific tranlations of each character again then let me
know.
Both the Gosho Zenshu and the Pre-War Nichiren Shu Gosho both state "I
Nichiren am the Sovereign, Teacher father and mother of all the people..."
Do I need to repost these things again? Are are you just choosing to stand
firm, even though I have shown you proof?
dc
Rogowdoc
I'm sorry Dave but Nichiren never ever used the Hindu faith to affirm the
Buddhist faith. You are way off base here. That is like using Lord Jesus to
affirm Lord Buddha Shakyamuni. You have everything reversed.
Mark
dc
Mark<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
And I never suggested that he did, I am just telling you the origins of
these things.. The Daishonin does begins the Kaimoku Sho saying "there are
three doctrines to be studied....."
You are just very naive of the true meaning of these things. It is all myth
used as expedients and guided imagery, The Daishonin of course was well
aware of Hinduism and the histories and stories.
Ignorant people imagine just more mythology. All other religions cloth
Buddhism in the clothing of mythology ands superstition, childrens stories
and even many Buddhists hang on tight to these myths. In reality myth came
from the ancients looking at the sky and taking various substances to become
one wi5th the cosmos. There are even very convincing theories that
pre-human apes, ate psychedelic foods and that it altered their
consciousness leading to human mind.
The stories of the Gods eating Soma are the central hymns of the Rig Veda,
including the exploits of Taishaku. These Soma experiences, combined with
astronomical observation, of the ancients produced all these original
dieties, used later by Buddhism in the stories and expedients.
When people pray to things long enough they actually become constucts in
consciousness and can be seen in visions.
dc
dc
You seem very unclear on the concept. Let me repeat myself. The copy you
are
posting, regardless of where you say it came from, IS NOT THE ORIGINAL. The
original does not say parent, teacher and sovereign. It does say
compassionate
father and mother. End of story.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
But John, you say the original doesn't exist!
dc
dc
There are three copies which still exist in the handwriting of the original
disciples. Those were not destroyed in the fire.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Yes John and "experts" just happened to know the "handwriting" of the
disciples because they were so famous.
Please get real.
Even the Nichiren Shu Pre-War Gosho contains the kana characters for
Sovereign, Teacher, Mother and Father.
I think there is some serious confusion going on here.
dc
dc
> Teacher as well as mother and father, ands I have also shown that the
> previous version of the Nichiren Shu Gosho, also contains the characters
for
> Sovereign and Teacher. That means that the later Nichiren Shu versions
you
> have posted, have been altered, from even the pre-war, Nichiren Shu
> version.
>
Dave: Stop lying. You have posted copies of Nichiren Shoshu versions of
the
Kaimoku Sho. This does not prove anything concerning the Nichiren Shu
version
nor is it the original version.<<<<<<<<<
Why are you accusing me of "lying."
Are you able to see binary posts?
I have posted a color photograph of the exact page of the pre-war Nichiren
Shu Gosho. Do you need further proof of this? You accuse me of lying?
What do you think this picture is? Rather then accuse me of lying perhaps
you should concentrate on the content itself. If you believe I have posted
a bogus picture then ask for more proof.
The Nichiren Shu Pre-war Gosho states: "I Nichiren am the sovereign,
teacher, mother and father......"
Now if you believe I am posting a bogus picture or are unclear of the kanjij
and kana then ask for more details. Calling me a "liar" is a cop out. This
post of the pre-war Nichiren Shu Gosho is actual proof that the 1987
translation you have quoted differs from the earlier Nichiren Shu Japanese
version.
Calling me a "liar," when I have posted proof is really silly. If you need
further proof then ask.
dc
Stephen C. Schwichow
> Yes John and "experts" just happened to know the "handwriting" of the
> disciples because they were so famous.
> Please get real.
>
> Even the Nichiren Shu Pre-War Gosho contains the kana characters for
> Sovereign, Teacher, Mother and Father.
>
> I think there is some serious confusion going on here.
>
> dc
John, John....I love you dearly, but WHY do you continue to interact with "Davy
One Note?"
dc has NEVER, EVER allowed verifiable facts to get in the way of how he sees the
world.
If you could go back in time and get a tape recording of Nichiren Shonin himself
chanting Namu Myoho Renge Kyo, offering his prayers to the Eternal Buddha
Shakyamuni and reading the Kaimoku Sho Dave would STILL find what he wants be
reading "between the lines." After all, no matter what Nichiren Shonin said,
what he REALLY MEANT will be what dc attaches himself to.
Stephen
John Petry
> Dave:
>
> You seem very unclear on the concept. Let me repeat myself. The copy you
> are
> posting, regardless of where you say it came from, IS NOT THE ORIGINAL. The
> original does not say parent, teacher and sovereign. It does say
> compassionate
> father and mother. End of story.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> John you are skirting these issues and you are just plain mistaken.
>
John Petry
> Dave:
>
> You seem very unclear on the concept. Let me repeat myself. The copy you
> are
> posting, regardless of where you say it came from, IS NOT THE ORIGINAL. The
> original does not say parent, teacher and sovereign. It does say
> compassionate
> father and mother. End of story.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
John Petry
> > I has shown that the Gosho Zenshu contains the characters Sovereign and
> > Teacher as well as mother and father, ands I have also shown that the
> > previous version of the Nichiren Shu Gosho, also contains the characters
> for
> > Sovereign and Teacher. That means that the later Nichiren Shu versions
> you
> > have posted, have been altered, from even the pre-war, Nichiren Shu
> > version.
> >
>
> Dave: Stop lying. You have posted copies of Nichiren Shoshu versions of
> the
> Kaimoku Sho. This does not prove anything concerning the Nichiren Shu
> version
> nor is it the original version.<<<<<<<<<
>
> Why are you accusing me of "lying."
> Are you able to see binary posts?
>
> I have posted a color photograph of the exact page of the pre-war Nichiren
> Shu Gosho. Do you need further proof of this? You accuse me of lying?
>
> What do you think this picture is? Rather then accuse me of lying perhaps
> you should concentrate on the content itself. If you believe I have posted
> a bogus picture then ask for more proof.
>
> The Nichiren Shu Pre-war Gosho states: "I Nichiren am the sovereign,
> teacher, mother and father......"
>
> Now if you believe I am posting a bogus picture or are unclear of the kanjij
> and kana then ask for more details. Calling me a "liar" is a cop out. This
> post of the pre-war Nichiren Shu Gosho is actual proof that the 1987
> translation you have quoted differs from the earlier Nichiren Shu Japanese
> version.
>
> Calling me a "liar," when I have posted proof is really silly. If you need
> further proof then ask.
>
Dave:
What you have posted is NOT a Nichiren Shu copy of anything. It is a Nichiren
Shoshu copy. That is the lie.
John Petry
> Yes John and "experts" just happened to know the "handwriting" of the
> disciples because they were so famous.
> Please get real.
>
> Even the Nichiren Shu Pre-War Gosho contains the kana characters for
> Sovereign, Teacher, Mother and Father.
>
> I think there is some serious confusion going on here.
>
> dc
Dave there are authenticated Gosho in Nichiren's own hand as well as writings of
the original disciples out there. Get real. That is the gold standard from
authentication. That is also why Nichiren Shoshu won't let anyone get too close
to their so called originals. They won't pass muster.
dc
Not true John. The photo I posted is not the Gosho Zenshu. It was the same
copy of the Gosho used by all the branches within Nichiren Shu. it was the
only Gosho around.
Are we talking about the same photo? To clarify, I originally posted the
Gosho Zenshu, and then I showed the meaning of the Kanji and Kana. You
stated that it was an altered Gosho. No wI have posted a photo of the
pre-war Nichiren Shu Gosho, that was NOT published by Nichiren Shohsu. It
still has the same Kanji and Kana.
If you are going to deny this then please explain why you are denying this,
rather then just a flat denial with no substance. You are calling it a
Nichiren Shoshu Gosho, but we know that Nichiren Shoshu, did not have their
own Gosho book in those years. It is also explained in the Gakkai books
that the gosho used, was the gosho of the other sects and this has been
pointed out many times by people of the non-Nichiren Shoshu sects. This
particular Gosho volume was used for many years by all the sects and was
apparently the only version of the complete Works of the Daishonin.
If you wish further proof then ask, but a flat denial, without some
supporting evidence is rather silly.
dc
dc
> Sovereign, Teacher, Mother and Father.
>
> I think there is some serious confusion going on here.
>
> dc
Dave there are authenticated Gosho in Nichiren's own hand as well as
writings of
the original disciples out there. Get real. That is the gold standard from
authentication. That is also why Nichiren Shoshu won't let anyone get too
close
to their so called originals. They won't pass muster.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
This is all just your unsupported belief, No proof, just many years of
accumulated hearsay. The Gosho segment in the color photo I posted is NOT
the Nichiren Shoshu Gosho, yet it still says, Sovereign, Teacher and Parent.
It was the standard Gosho pre-war in Japan.
The Gold Standard is Nikko Shonin, not what people who hated Nikko say, that
Nikko Shonin said or did. All those things are such transparent lies that
I cannot understand how you can hold onto them so carelessly.
dc
John Petry
> dc wrote:
>
> > Yes John and "experts" just happened to know the "handwriting" of the
> > disciples because they were so famous.
> > Please get real.
> >
> > Even the Nichiren Shu Pre-War Gosho contains the kana characters for
> > Sovereign, Teacher, Mother and Father.
> >
> > I think there is some serious confusion going on here.
> >
> > dc
>
> John, John....I love you dearly, but WHY do you continue to interact with "Davy
> One Note?"
>
> dc has NEVER, EVER allowed verifiable facts to get in the way of how he sees the
> world.
>
> If you could go back in time and get a tape recording of Nichiren Shonin himself
> chanting Namu Myoho Renge Kyo, offering his prayers to the Eternal Buddha
> Shakyamuni and reading the Kaimoku Sho Dave would STILL find what he wants be
> reading "between the lines." After all, no matter what Nichiren Shonin said,
> what he REALLY MEANT will be what dc attaches himself to.
>
> Stephen
True but his constant lying, claiming that a Nichiren Shu copy of the Gosho supports
his position is most annoying. The fact is that he is deliberately lying about
that.
dc
> John, John....I love you dearly, but WHY do you continue to interact with
"Davy
> One Note?"
>
> dc has NEVER, EVER allowed verifiable facts to get in the way of how he
sees the
> world.
>
> If you could go back in time and get a tape recording of Nichiren Shonin
himself
> chanting Namu Myoho Renge Kyo, offering his prayers to the Eternal Buddha
> Shakyamuni and reading the Kaimoku Sho Dave would STILL find what he wants
be
> reading "between the lines." After all, no matter what Nichiren Shonin
said,
> what he REALLY MEANT will be what dc attaches himself to.
>
> Stephen
True but his constant lying, claiming that a Nichiren Shu copy of the Gosho
supports
his position is most annoying. The fact is that he is deliberately lying
about
that.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Well so you still think I am lying. Can I ask one more time.....? Do you
read binary files? Are we talking about the same picture? The color photo
I posted was the Gosho in possession of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi during his
entire practice. It was in the jail cell with him. Nichiren Shoshu did not
publish Gosho Zenshu until 1952.
It is well known that Nichiren Shoshu did not have their own Complete Works
of the Daishonin. This particular version of the Gosho was put together
much earlier and was used by every Nichiren Sect at that time.
So perhaps this is troubling to you, but I expect more then just a flat
denial, which anyone can do.
As far as verifiable facts are concerned I think a photograph in this case,
is very good "verifiable," evidence Now if either Stephen or you can show
me that this is in fact a Gosho that was mysteriously created by Nichiren
Shoshu by some magical exercise of time travel or something along those
lines then I will have to assume that you have no evidence to counter what I
have said. Stephen.......burying your head in the sand will not make it go
away. The pre-war Nichiren Sect Gosho contains the words "Sovereign,
Teacher and Parent." And the Yoritomo Gosho in KANJI states, "Nichiren is
the Sovereign of the Three-Fold World.--Jogyo." Furthermore I have
explained the actual meaning and origin of "Jogyo" and it does not in any
way preclude the Daishonin from using both appellations, nor would it
preclude him from using "messenger," or "practitioner."
If you need further proof then just ask. If you insist on saying that I am
"lying." and even "purposefully," lying, then neither of you are serious
enough to show me specifically how this is not the pre-war Nichiren Sect
Gosho.
If on the other hands you are not even bothering with viewing the photos in
the first place then what can I do, other then repeat this over and over?
The original accusation was that Nichiren Shoshu/NSIC altered the english
Major Writings. I disproved this by showing the Gosho Zenshu and the exact
translation. Then the next accusation made by John, was that the Gosho
Zenshu itself is altered, so I am at the stage of disproving with verifiable
evidence, that your own sect's old pre-war Gosho also contains those words,
Sovereign, Teacher as well as Father and Mother. The only "proof," you have
offered, is copies of the 1987 Nichiren Shu, english translation.
It is non-Nichirne Shoshu sects who have often bragged "Nichiren Shohsu
didn't even have their own Gosho they had to use ours!"
Now are you contradicting yourselves on that?
Do you think the photo is bogus?
Did you even see the photo?
dc
John Petry
> > Even the Nichiren Shu Pre-War Gosho contains the kana characters for
> > Sovereign, Teacher, Mother and Father.
> >
> > I think there is some serious confusion going on here.
> >
> > dc
>
> Dave there are authenticated Gosho in Nichiren's own hand as well as
> writings of
> the original disciples out there. Get real. That is the gold standard from
> authentication. That is also why Nichiren Shoshu won't let anyone get too
> close
> to their so called originals. They won't pass muster.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> This is all just your unsupported belief, No proof, just many years of
> accumulated hearsay. The Gosho segment in the color photo I posted is NOT
> the Nichiren Shoshu Gosho, yet it still says, Sovereign, Teacher and Parent.
> It was the standard Gosho pre-war in Japan.
>
As I said before Dave. Horsepucky. You lie like a rug and then eat with that
mouth?!
John Petry
> > Calling me a "liar," when I have posted proof is really silly. If you
> need
> > further proof then ask.
> >
>
> Dave:
> What you have posted is NOT a Nichiren Shu copy of anything. It is a
> Nichiren
> Shoshu copy. That is the lie.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> Not true John. The photo I posted is not the Gosho Zenshu. It was the same
> copy of the Gosho used by all the branches within Nichiren Shu. it was the
> only Gosho around.
>
This is a crock. Prove it. You cannot and you know it.
John Petry
Horsepucky Dave. You can lie all you want but it will not make it any more
true.
dc
> Well so you still think I am lying. Can I ask one more time.....? Do you
> read binary files? Are we talking about the same picture? The color
photo
> I posted was the Gosho in possession of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi during his
> entire practice. It was in the jail cell with him. Nichiren Shoshu did
not
> publish Gosho Zenshu until 1952.
>
Horsepucky Dave. You can lie all you want but it will not make it any more
true.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Okay, then what picture did I post?
Was it not a real picture of a different Gosho then the Gosho Zenshu.?
Now over and over we read that Nichiren Shoshu didn't have a Gosho. It is
even specified where the Gosho the early Gakkai used came from. And it is
named in the Human revolution and in other places. It is well known. So
either you doubt that that is the Gosho of Makiguchi or you are not even
studying these photos.
Would it help if I post many views of this Gosho and the captions? and the
source of these pictures?
It is simple John. The Pre-war Gosho of the Nichiren Sect, states,
"I Nichiren am the Sovereign, Teacher and Father and Mother of all the
people of Japan."
Toss out your mistranlations from 1987, they are heretical and altered.
Bruce probably wrote them or maybe some people that were just earlier
versions of people like Bruce or things written by people who follow Daisku
Ikeda.
You've lost this case John, you just don't realize it.yet. there is no
settlement offers and there can only be one eventual outcome.
The price for the proof you seek from Taisekiji, is Kosen Rufu. So pay
the Ransom.
dc
dc
> Not true John. The photo I posted is not the Gosho Zenshu. It was the
same
> copy of the Gosho used by all the branches within Nichiren Shu. it was
the
> only Gosho around.
>
This is a crock. Prove it. You cannot and you know it.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Okay. But first, tell me exacxtly what it will take for you to believe
this? I don't want to leave you in doubt.
dc
dc
> Dave there are authenticated Gosho in Nichiren's own hand as well as
> writings of
> the original disciples out there. Get real. That is the gold standard
from
> authentication. That is also why Nichiren Shoshu won't let anyone get too
> close
> to their so called originals. They won't pass muster.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> This is all just your unsupported belief, No proof, just many years of
> accumulated hearsay. The Gosho segment in the color photo I posted is NOT
> the Nichiren Shoshu Gosho, yet it still says, Sovereign, Teacher and
Parent.
> It was the standard Gosho pre-war in Japan.
>
As I said before Dave. Horsepucky. You lie like a rug and then eat with
that
mouth?!<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Okay you are really asking for it....Tomorrow night you will see more proof
then you ever wanted. Better dust off that Browser and clean your monitor.
Do you have photoshop? If not, I suggest getting it. Install more Ram or
something. Better get a new hard drive for all this stuff.
Now I absolutely know that I am correct I would be to your benefit to
concede to this. Are you sure you don't want to concede on this?
One last time. What will it take to prove this to you?
Are you really so callused that you think I am "lying?" I have a Very Large
Book with full color large high quality photos documenting everything in
Makiguchi's life. It is full of his Gosho, including the very same page I
have posted, of Kaimoku Sho, including his red pencil marks along the
borders. The book is very extensive. There are many photos of the
Makiguchi Gosho. Clearly it was not Gosho Zenshu. And even more clearly
can be seen the character the Kanji and Kana that we are discusing. It is
documented that the Gosho was that of Nichiren Sect. It is different in
pagination and order of Writings. There is no mistake.
dc
Christopher H. Holte
It may be that they are referring to some of the purposely doctored
Gosho that came out during the militarist period. That is also talked
about in the Human Revolution. They purposefully altered the Gosho to
caste Nichiren as an Emperor Worhshiping Nationalist. That passage
would have been altered in that version of the Gosho. It, for example
omitted or changed the passage where Nichiren refers to the Emperor as
an "Island Chieftain" and it altered passages to build up the idea of
him worshipping the Gods of Japan such as Hachiman or the Sun Goddess.
In article <aMAl3.7$Zn1...@newshog.newsread.com>,
--
<a href="http://dragon.lizardtech.com/>Gosho</a><BR>
<a href="http://www.geocities.com/athens/ithaca/9011/">
More Information </a>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
John Petry
> >
> > Well so you still think I am lying. Can I ask one more time.....? Do you
> > read binary files? Are we talking about the same picture? The color
> photo
> > I posted was the Gosho in possession of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi during his
> > entire practice. It was in the jail cell with him. Nichiren Shoshu did
> not
> > publish Gosho Zenshu until 1952.
> >
>
> Horsepucky Dave. You can lie all you want but it will not make it any more
> true.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> Okay, then what picture did I post?
>
What you posted was a Nichiren Shoshu version of the Gosho. It is really that
simple.
>
> Was it not a real picture of a different Gosho then the Gosho Zenshu.?
>
> Now over and over we read that Nichiren Shoshu didn't have a Gosho. It is
> even specified where the Gosho the early Gakkai used came from. And it is
> named in the Human revolution and in other places. It is well known. So
> either you doubt that that is the Gosho of Makiguchi or you are not even
> studying these photos.
>
What we read is that the Nichiren Shoshu did not a have a compilation of the
Gosho that people could purchase. This is very different from what you are
claiming.
John Petry
Dave you can post a videotape of Makaguchi reading the Gosho and it would not
matter to me. He is reading the Nichiren Shoshu version and not the Showa
Teihon. The Showa Teihon is the accepted version for the simple reason it has
been compared to the originals and is a faithful copy of them. The Nichiren
Shoshu version is not.
So post away all you wish. I could care less. I do not and will not accept the
validity of anything that Makaguchi said or had. You amy as well post something
from Ikeda! Same difference to me.
John Petry
Show me that in the Showa Teihon it says what you claim it says.
dc
> This is a crock. Prove it. You cannot and you know it.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> Okay. But first, tell me exacxtly what it will take for you to believe
> this? I don't want to leave you in doubt.
>
> dc
Show me that in the Showa Teihon it says what you claim it
says.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Would you happen to know when the Showa Teihon was published...what years?
Can you find out if you don't know? Find out about the pre-war Gosho. Ask
your Priests and try to get a documented answer otherwise, it will just be
hearsay.
I have been very busy and have not had time to tranlate other pages from the
photographs of the pre-war Gosho perhaps i can prove that that IS the Showa
Teihon or at least a precursor. I will as soon as I have time. IF you can
get a copy of the current Showa Teihon and scan it and post it that would
help as well.
dc
dc
> Was it not a real picture of a different Gosho then the Gosho Zenshu.?
>
> Now over and over we read that Nichiren Shoshu didn't have a Gosho. It is
> even specified where the Gosho the early Gakkai used came from. And it is
> named in the Human revolution and in other places. It is well known. So
> either you doubt that that is the Gosho of Makiguchi or you are not even
> studying these photos.
>
What we read is that the Nichiren Shoshu did not a have a compilation of the
Gosho that people could purchase. This is very different from what you are
claiming.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
John, this Gosho is no home made job. It is clearly a real published Gosho.
Although I haven't had time to search for the references to this gosho in
various gakkai books, I remember clearly that it was the Nichiren Sect
Gosho. It is mentioned by name in a number of places. I am sure that if I
check these pictures carefully I will find exactly what it is. As a matter
of fact I believe I have a photo of the Book Spine itself with the title on
it. But it would be interesting for you to find out the various dates of
the publications of Nichiren Shu Goshos.
dc
dc
>>>>>>Dave you can post a videotape of Makaguchi reading the Gosho and it
would not
matter to me. He is reading the Nichiren Shoshu version and not the Showa
Teihon. The Showa Teihon is the accepted version for the simple reason it
has
been compared to the originals and is a faithful copy of them. The Nichiren
Shoshu version is not.
So post away all you wish. I could care less. I do not and will not accept
the
validity of anything that Makaguchi said or had. You amy as well post
something
from Ikeda! Same difference to me.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
You shall see. I am confident that I will find absolute proof that you will
be unable to argue with. But for the sake of clarity, why don't you check
the original publication dates yourself.
dc
dc
It may be that they are referring to some of the purposely doctored
Gosho that came out during the militarist period. That is also talked
about in the Human Revolution. They purposefully altered the Gosho to
caste Nichiren as an Emperor Worhshiping Nationalist. That passage
would have been altered in that version of the Gosho. It, for example
omitted or changed the passage where Nichiren refers to the Emperor as
an "Island Chieftain" and it altered passages to build up the idea of
him worshipping the Gods of Japan such as Hachiman or the Sun
Goddess.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
No, Chris, this Gosho was printed before the militarists had taken power.
dc
John Petry
> >
> > This is a crock. Prove it. You cannot and you know it.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> >
> > Okay. But first, tell me exacxtly what it will take for you to believe
> > this? I don't want to leave you in doubt.
> >
> > dc
>
> Show me that in the Showa Teihon it says what you claim it
> says.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> Would you happen to know when the Showa Teihon was published...what years?
> Can you find out if you don't know? Find out about the pre-war Gosho. Ask
> your Priests and try to get a documented answer otherwise, it will just be
> hearsay.
>
Dave you are just flapping in the wind. No if, ands, or buts about it. I have
checked into this. I did so several years ago when another person bought it up
here on arbn. Reality has not changed despite your desperate attempts to make
it seem as though it has done so.
Christopher H. Holte
support the view that Nichiren saw himself as a sage.
In article <bmfm3.495$__1.2...@newshog.newsread.com>,
--
dc
Sorry John the "flap" is whats covering your eyes.
The Nichiren Shu pre-war Gosho are contains those same teachings. Again, I
ask you, what year was the Showa Teihon published? I know, do you?
dc
Reginald Carpenter
(CDT+5). Re. when the Showa Teihon was first published, I don't exactly
know that date, but it can be estimated from what information is
available about it at this time.
1) The Showa Teihon is the name of the collective writings (Gosho) of
Nichiren Daishonin published by the Nichiren Shu sect. It is the first
known Gosho to have been compiled and published by any Nichiren Buddhist
sect.
2) After its' publication, is was used by Nichiren Shu and other
Nichiren buddhist sects, including the Nichiren Shoshu, as the Gosho of
Nichiren Daishonin since there was no other compiled Gosho at that time.
3) It was published during the Showa Period of Japan's history which
are the years from 1926 to 1989. The Showa Period is divided into two
segments; before and after World War II; 1926-1945, and 1945-1989.
4) If DC has obtained copies of pages of the "Gosho" used by Mr. T.
Makiguchi, 1st president of the Soka (Kyoiku) Gakkai, it was published
within the 1st segment of the Showa Period, 1926-1945. Since he died in
prison in 1944, that was the last year he could have obtained a copy of
the Showa Teihon Gosho.
5) Therefore, the Showa Teihon Gosho was first published between 1926
and 1944, which gives an average of it being in existence in the year
1935.
IMHO - it doesn't make a d-a-m-n bit of difference when the Showa Teihon
Gosho was first published or it's exact date, because it is irrelevant
to the subject/thread of this discussion - Kanji of the Kaimoku Sho -
repeated. It was apparently accepted and used by all sects of Nichiren
Buddhism. What it says is what's important relevant to the
subject/thread, but this discussion has gone off/topic in a meaningless
squabble over a date. Hopefully, it can get back on/topic to benefit all
arbn. readers instead of continuing to be just a pointless personal
argument between two people involved in it. Peace! } : < { 0
<<< Stone Eagle >>>
Airborne in Cyberspace*
John Petry
Dave you are flapping in the wind.
John Petry
Dave claims that this image he has printed is from a copy of the Showa
Teihon which Makaguchi possessed prior to WWII [obviously since he died
during the war]. The proof of Dave's lie is that the Showa Teihon NIchiren
Shonin Ibun was first published in 1952. It comes in 4 volumes with a
topical index. Finally anyone who has ever seen it would know instantly
upon looking at the scanned page that it was not from the ST.
Oh BTW it does not say what Dave claims it says. Dave is showing a Nichiren
Shoshu collection of Gosho and claiming it is something it is not.
Richard Thieme
clearly says Nihon Koku no Shonin ni _Shitashi_ fubo. . . (Where the
editors of the edition you are showing have put in the character for
Shitashii (same as parent, but in this case meaning kind or benevolent).
This contrasts with the Gosho Zenshu edition which has Shushi (sovereign
and parent).
Regards,
Richard Thiemedc wrote:
>
> I, Nichiren am the Sovereign, Teacher, Father and Mother of all the people
> in Japan!
>
> Check it out.
I did
dc
Dave claims that this image he has printed is from a copy of the Showa
Teihon which Makaguchi possessed prior to WWII [obviously since he died
during the war]. The proof of Dave's lie is that the Showa Teihon NIchiren
Shonin Ibun was first published in 1952. It comes in 4 volumes with a
topical index. Finally anyone who has ever seen it would know instantly
upon looking at the scanned page that it was not from the ST.
Oh BTW it does not say what Dave claims it says. Dave is showing a Nichiren
Shoshu collection of Gosho and claiming it is something it is
not.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Finally you checked the date of publication. The same year as the Goshu
Zenshu.
So what was there before? It was the Standard Edition Gosho printed by the
Nichiren sect and in existence since 1915.
So now you know that the 1952 Showa Teihon also was altered. I already had
researched the dates. The 1952 edition of this Gosho altered the original
Gosho and likewise your 1987 english tranlations.
The image I posted was NOT a Nichiren Shoshu book. It was called Gosho or
"complete Works of Nichiren Shonin" It is the exact same Gosho used by
Anesaki when he did his english translations and was used by the all the
sects, since it was the only volume available.
Sorry but you were very slow in checking.
dc
dc
> Sorry John the "flap" is whats covering your eyes.
>
> The Nichiren Shu pre-war Gosho are contains those same teachings. Again,
I
> ask you, what year was the Showa Teihon published? I know, do you?
>
> dc
Dave you are flapping in the wind.<<<<<<<<<<
and you are in a rather precarious state of denial. As an attorney this
kind of denial may be necessary if you were to defend a guilty client, but
in this case it is totally inappropriate.
Surely the worst offender you have ever defended is Nichiren Shu.
dc
John Petry
Seems as though others disagree with you as well Dave.
Richard Thieme wrote:
Regards,
I did
BTW I spoke ot the wife of a friend of mine. She is Japanese with a doctorate
in Japanese Literature. I told her about your claim that you could translate
13th Century Japanese using a Kanji dictionary. She thought that was the
funniest thing she had heard in years. She told me it was the equivalent of a
Japanese who knew only very basic modern English using a modern English
dictionary to translate Beowulf into Japanese. It cannot be done. So she
suggested that what you are using is a modern version of the 13th century work.
John Petry
Well Dave here is someone who disagrees with you:
dc
>
> dc
Seems as though others disagree with you as well Dave.
Richard Thieme wrote:
Sorry Mr. Cole, but you just proved John Petry correct. What you posted
clearly says Nihon Koku no Shonin ni _Shitashi_ fubo. . . (Where the
editors of the edition you are showing have put in the character for
Shitashii (same as parent, but in this case meaning kind or benevolent).
This contrasts with the Gosho Zenshu edition which has Shushi (sovereign
and parent).
Regards,
Richard Thieme<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
So now, you suddenly believe that what I posted IS the Nichiren Shu
Gosho!!! How clever of me!
The sad point is that the Nichiren Shu not only put in a later kana form
"TA" as a kana to change the meaning, they also added the kanji for parent
in parentheses so it makes some sort of sense and on top of that make it
sound like there are three kinds of parents, yet when the Daishonin uses
the phrase Compassionate father and mother two paragraphs above, he
doesn't use it, nor does he use it in other instances of that phrase, and
when mentioning Shakyamuni as terms of being Sovereign Teacher and Parent
in the same gosho guess what he uses?
dc
dc
> dc
Well Dave here is someone who disagrees with you:
Sorry Mr. Cole, but you just proved John Petry correct. What you posted
clearly says Nihon Koku no Shonin ni _Shitashi_ fubo. . . (Where the
editors of the edition you are showing have put in the character for
Shitashii (same as parent, but in this case meaning kind or benevolent).
This contrasts with the Gosho Zenshu edition which has Shushi (sovereign
and parent).
Regards,
Richard Thieme <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I think that Richard T knows perfectly well that Shitashi is NOT what the
kana really means. The Ta is a falsified ending sound.
Just above the quote the Daishonin uses the phrase compassionate father and
mother and does not use Shitashi why would he say the same thing and use a
different kana. No it is a deliberate scam ending added to the kana
imported Sovereign and Teacher.
Furthermore since you have been insisting that the Gosho was NOT the Showa
Teihon, as though you actually knew, now suddenly you are taking it as the
Showa Teihon.
I guess it is the Showa Teihon afterall isn't it.
Richard T may be reading it as it appears but he has also admitted his
doubts as to which is correct. I think it is common sense. All the sounds
for Shu shi and shin are there and in the context, especially since the
entire Gosho context is ABOUT the THREE VIRTUES, does it evcen make sense
that he would only say parent? He was just talking about ALL THREE VIRTUES
dc
John Petry
> > Sorry but you were very slow in checking.
> >
> > dc
>
> Seems as though others disagree with you as well Dave.
>
> Richard Thieme wrote:
>
> Sorry Mr. Cole, but you just proved John Petry correct. What you posted
> clearly says Nihon Koku no Shonin ni _Shitashi_ fubo. . . (Where the
> editors of the edition you are showing have put in the character for
> Shitashii (same as parent, but in this case meaning kind or benevolent).
>
> This contrasts with the Gosho Zenshu edition which has Shushi (sovereign
> and parent).
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard Thieme<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> So now, you suddenly believe that what I posted IS the Nichiren Shu
> Gosho!!! How clever of me!
>
> The sad point is that
The sad point is that you have been busted but continue to flair around like a
moron insisting on things that you have been called upon. The Nichiren Shu
didn't change a thing. In fact you would have no way in which to know this
unless you had seen the original and were competent to read it. You have not
and you are not. End of story.
John Petry
> >
> > dc
>
> Well Dave here is someone who disagrees with you:
>
> Sorry Mr. Cole, but you just proved John Petry correct. What you posted
> clearly says Nihon Koku no Shonin ni _Shitashi_ fubo. . . (Where the
> editors of the edition you are showing have put in the character for
> Shitashii (same as parent, but in this case meaning kind or benevolent).
>
> This contrasts with the Gosho Zenshu edition which has Shushi (sovereign
> and parent).
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard Thieme <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> I think that Richard T knows perfectly well that Shitashi is NOT what the
> kana really means. The Ta is a falsified ending sound.
>
> Just above the quote the Daishonin uses the phrase compassionate father and
> mother and does not use Shitashi why would he say the same thing and use a
> different kana. No it is a deliberate scam ending added to the kana
> imported Sovereign and Teacher.
>
> Furthermore since you have been insisting that the Gosho was NOT the Showa
> Teihon, as though you actually knew, now suddenly you are taking it as the
> Showa Teihon.
>
> I guess it is the Showa Teihon afterall isn't it.
>
> Richard T may be reading it as it appears but he has also admitted his
> doubts as to which is correct. I think it is common sense. All the sounds
> for Shu shi and shin are there and in the context, especially since the
> entire Gosho context is ABOUT the THREE VIRTUES, does it evcen make sense
> that he would only say parent? He was just talking about ALL THREE VIRTUES
>
> dc
> The sad point is that