Discourse of a new Kempon Hokke believer part two

[Rogowdoc]

> PART TWO:
>
> Even so, our protagonist might respond, "I must admit I have little defense
> against Nichiren Daishonin's own words or the evidence of Gohonzon. Again,
> however, the Lotus Sutra is difficult to understand and accept and therefore
> also Shakyamuni. If there are people that can be liberated by the belief
that
> Nichiren Daishonin is the true Buddha, then haven't the true intentions of
> Shakyamuni been well served? In other words, isn't it possible that because
> of their past karma, that some people are unable to take faith in Shakyamuni
> and the Lotus Sutra but can take faith in Nichiren Daishonin and the Daimoku?
> "
>
> Your question is searching and has some broad implications that need to be
> considered. As Nichiren Daishonin taught, propagation of the Dharma must be
> in accordance with the time, the teaching, and the country (8). Of course,
> the essential problem of having the Buddha's true Dharma confused with
> inferior doctrines and philosophies is the same throughout the world.
> Nevertheless, because of differences in cultural circumstances, the confusion
> is masked behind a different composition of philosophies, and ideologies in
> each country. Therefore, we must attempt to understand what is best for the
> growth of Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism in this country. With this in mind,
> I would answer your question by asking you to consider the matter in the
> following way. In the 16th chapter of the Lotus Sutra, the Tathagata
employs
> the parable of the excellent physician who attempts to administer medicine to
> his children after they were infected with poison.
>
> "Those among the various children who have not lost their minds see that this
> excellent medicine is good in both color and fragrance and at once swallow
> this, their illness is completely eliminated and they are cured. As to the
> remainder who have lost their minds, although on seeing their father coming
> they also rejoice and make inquiries and request him to heal their illness,
> yet when he gives them the medicine, they are unwilling to swallow it. What
> is the reason? It was because since the influence of poison has penetrated
> deeply and has made them lose their original minds they said to themselves
> about this medicine with good color and fragrance that it is not beautiful."
>
> And later:
>
> "I ever know the masses of beings proceeding on the way and not proceeding >
on the way; according to what will save them, I preach for them all kinds of
> Dharmas. I myself ever form this thought: by what shall I cause the masses
of
> beings to be able to enter the supreme way and rapidly achieve the Buddha
> body?" (12)
>
> In accordance with this, Nichiren Daishonin's ultimate aim was to bring all
> people to direct faith in the pure Buddha Dharma of Lotus Sutra itself. Any
> expedient that does not ultimately lead to this end is not in accordance with
> what he taught. The notion that Nichiren Daishonin is the true Buddha, is a
> heterodoxy that originated in Japan several centuries ago among a small
> faction of his followers long after his passing. (1) This fact should be
> taken into careful consideration. A prevalent theme throughout Nichiren
> Daishonin's writings is that eventual enlightenment can be assured by the
> invocation of Daimoku alone. Undoubtedly, some benefit can be gained by
> accepting Nichiren Daishonin as the true Buddha, provided that this
investment
> in faith leads to the actual chanting of Daimoku. However, what of those
> people who cannot be won to the Daimoku by such a subterfuge? This latter
> kind of people may very well be the majority in this country. Shakyamuni of
> India, the historical Buddha, also called Gautama, is rather commonly known
> throughout the literate world as the original Buddha. This prior
information
> is the original cause that motivates many people to be attracted to and seek
> out the devices of Buddhist practice. So, what of these people, having
> a-priori cultivated respect for Lord Shakyamuni, only to have that respect
> crushed off by the SGI sentiment? Because of this, how many people have
> rejected the Daimoku and Nichiren Daishonin before they hardly begin or
never
> attempted at all? And what of those people who after years of practice
> realize the truth when examining the literal meaning of the Lotus Sutra and
> Nichiren Daishonin's major writings uncorrupted by the agenda laden
> interpretations of the SGI movement? What potential difficulties can ensue
> after having become deeply bonded to the subterfuge by years of community
> affiliation, friendship, and even family? In other words, among those who
> were taught from the beginning that Nichiren Daishonin is the true Buddha,
how
> many of them would have been better off believing from the onset that
> Shakyamuni is the true Buddha? In turn, how many people were driven away
> from the onset because no respect for the Buddha land of Shakyamuni could be
> found?
>
> The protagonist replies, "........ these questions raise difficult issues and
> consequently do not lend themselves to easy answers. It may not be very
> satisfying, but no one ever said it would always be easy, certainly not
> Nichiren Daishonin. Earthly desires and delusions are nirvana and the
> sufferings of life and death are enlightenment. Matters of belief and
> understanding reside there as well. Regardless, your answers have not yet
> adequately satisfied some of my deeper concerns. As we have discussed, the
> Lotus Sutra is difficult to understand and difficult to accept. How can the
> majority of people be expected to directly read and study the Lotus Sutra and
> usefully gain benefit from it? Further, we can both agree that Nichiren
> Daishonin's contribution to doctrine and practice is great indeed. As a
> matter of strategic concern, don't you fear that the benefits of his
> contribution will be lost to posterity and the spread of Namu Myoho Renge Kyo
> blunted if Nichiren Daishonin is not endowed with the status of true
Buddha?"
>
>
> In response to the last part of your question, please consider the following
> things. The latter day of the law (mappo), is defined as the age of decline
> when the true Dharma is confused with inferior teachings and consequently
> lost. For this reason, sowing the seed of the true Buddha Dharma (Myoho
>Renge Kyo) has particular emphasis in the practice of Nichiren Daishonen's
>faith. The term "shakubuku" has been inextricably linked to the propagation
>movement. The term shakubuku has multiple meanings. I understand that in
>one sense it means, 'to crush or subdue', but in another sense it means 'to
>refute heretical views'. It is sometimes hard to see the forest when
standing
> close to the trees. Considering this, I may ask in return, isn't it actually
> possible that the successful propagation of Myoho Renge Kyo has been
> compromised by the lack of universality of the expedient you employ?
> Representing Nichiren Daishonin as the true Buddha can easily cause some
> people to see him as just another radical cult hero, a subversive fad,
rather
> than as a legitimate Buddhist master. If we are going to confuse the status
> of key personages like Shakyamuni and Nichiren Daishonin, then how much
>easier is it to misrepresent the status of others, thus leaving Nichiren
>Daishonin's orthodox Buddhism and the propagation movement open to
>exploitation and corruption? It is difficult to estimate just how much
damage >this kind of phenomena has done to the credibility of both Nichiren
Daishonen >and Namu Myoho Renge Kyo itself. In any event, I think you
must admit that >the stand you take creates very substantial limitations
regarding to who among >the populace that the seed of Daimoku can successfully
be propagated.
>
> As to the issue of the majority of people benefiting from direct
study of the
> Lotus Sutra, I must answer at considerable length. First, I suspect that
most
> of those who claim that the Lotus Sutra is too difficult to study, also carry
> a similar attitude towards Nichiren Daishonin's gosho. These are the kind
of
> people who would rather depend on what their leaders prescribe than bend to
> the effort of studying the source documents themselves. With little
> exception, basic literacy is rather universal condition in this country.
> There is also a clear difference between what is difficult and what is truly
> impossible. The Lotus Sutra admonishes us that in the age of mappo we
>should depend upon the Buddha Dharma (the written sutra) rather than on the
>words of others. And Nichiren Daishonin himself admonished that we should
>"listen to the golden words of the Buddha, not what others have to say". (13)
> Undoubtedly, Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism opens and closes with the
>Daimoku, it is the soul and essence of the practice that he expounded.
>Without assiduous return to Namu Myoho Renge Kyo, the rest of the elements
>of faith, practice, and study are like the different parts of the lotus plant
severed
> from its root. Even so, Nichiren Daishonin wouldn't have stressed the
> assiduous recitation of the Hoben and Juryo chapters had he wanted us to
>chant Daimoku only. That is, he intended that we become well acquainted with
>the heart of the Lotus Sutra, both in sound-rhythm and in literal meaning.
>
> There is very substantial practical justification for being attendant upon
> literal meaning. As most of us first experienced, substantial benefit can be
> achieved just by taking faith in the chanting of Daimoku. However, to
> continue without study, is to base Daimoku on the devices of one's karma
laden
> past experience and insight alone, rather than having that insight mediated
by
> the written guidance of the Buddha Dharma itself. After a certain point,
> progress in faith and understanding is much slower without study into the
> literal meaning of the Buddha Dharma. The lack of such study also makes
> people vulnerable to the misleading views and guidance of others.
>
> Nichiren Daishonin undeniably believed that the Lotus Sutra did fit
the
> capacities of the people of the latter day. The whole theorem of the thing
> was that some two thousand years after the Buddha's passing, the people were
> indeed ready for the Lotus Sutra. Nichiren Daishonin, wouldn't have
advocated
> the sacred title of the Lotus Sutra as the central practice if he hadn't
> believed this. In so doing, he strictly defined what was the essence, what
> was the heart, and what was the body of the text of the Lotus Sutra. Now,
> some three thousand years after the Buddha's passing, the Lotus Sutra fits
> the capacities of the people just as well if not better. To venture an
> analogy, when Albert Einstein first published his theory of relativity,
there
> wasn't anyone else on the planet that could understand what he was talking
> about. Then, after a while, two or three other physicists of his time got
it
> figured out and then after a while a few more caught on. Now, even less
than
> a century after his startling revelations, it would be difficult to earn a
> degree in the physical sciences without having a basic handle on Einstein's
> theory. Although, few people on the street (including myself) could tell
you
> much, there is hardly anyone in the modern world who hasn't at least heard of
> Einstein and his revolutionary theory of relativity. The technological and
> industrial edifice of modern civilization is predominantly based on the older
> Newtonian physics (14). However, the seed of relativity theory has been
> planted and is inexorably working its way into the depths of the collective
> and thus gradually altering our practical understanding of the physical
> universe. It would be safe to predict that civilization of one or two
> thousand years from now will be incalculably different as a consequence. It
> is difficult to significantly change the consciousness of an entire species
of
> living being. As a species, we have resided on the plateau of civilization
> for only five or ten thousand years at best. In the life of the planet and
> our race, a few thousand years can hardly be counted as a period of huge
> extent. The true pure Buddha Dharma shares something in common with
> relativity theory insofar as human kind as a whole has been a long time in
> preparation to receive it. The predicted ten thousand years of the latter
> age of the law marks a time when both the widespread need and the capacity
>for the Buddha Dharma enjoys an extraordinary convergence.
>
> The Daimoku is the seed practice, but knowledge of the heart and eventually
> the body of the Lotus Sutra is necessary in order that the seed develop good
> roots and produce a well formed plant. In the "Opening of the Eyes",
> Nichiren Daishonin quoted Miao-lo as having concluded, 'if one fails to
become
> acquainted with the Buddha of the Juryo chapter, one is no more than a
> talented animal who does not even know what lands his father presides
> over.'(13) Yes, the Lotus Sutra it is difficult to understand, but so are
> many classical works when read for the first time. Those who suggest that
> the Lotus Sutra is too difficult to be worth the reading are seriously in
> error.
>
> I can anticipate your next question, "not all people are bookworms, just how
> much reading and study must be done do to satisfy the practice?" Of course,
> the essential answer is, "just one phrase, 'Namu Myoho Renge Kyo'". However,
> this one phrase is very deep in meaning and the study of it, is consequently
> a life long journey. This journey can be greatly aided if time is taken to
> consult the written Buddha Dharma of the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren Daishonin's
> gosho. Nichiren Daishonin expressed a very focused and economical stand
>on the prescribed scope of study when he wrote:
>
> " 'In all the Buddha's lands of the universe there is but one supreme
> vehicle, not two or three, and it excludes the provisional teachings of the
> Buddha,' and 'Honestly discarding the provisional teachings, I will expound
> the Supreme Law,' and 'Never accept even a single phrase from the other
> sutras.' Thus, ever since that time, the supreme vehicle of the Mystic Law
has
> been the only teaching profound enough to enable all people to attain
> Buddhahood.' " (15)
>
> Judging from this passage, it should be clear that Nichiren Daishonin did not
> expect us to master the entire Buddhist cannon in order to do justice to his
> faith. Study of the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren Daishonin's supporting gosho,
> are the central liturgical articles of faith. Undoubtedly, first readings
> are difficult because there are many unfamiliar terms and unusual styles of
> literary expression. However, with repeated effort, the task of
comprehension
> eventually becomes easier. Although, huge in substance of meaning, the Lotus
> Sutra is not a particularly long book. In turn, the entire collection of
> Nichiren Daishonin's writings is a rather modest holding, and his major
> writings constitute only a fraction of this (16). Therefore, it is not an
> unreasonable expectation that the majority of people gain direct familiarity
> with the contents of both. As familiarity deepens, the Lotus Sutra is
> almost certain to show itself to actually have excellent "color and
> fragrance". The Lotus Sutra is the master plan that Nichiren Daishonin's
> faith rests upon. One would be remiss in claiming to be his follower if he
or
> she didn't endeavor to build studied acquaintance with its content.
> Unquestionably, it is the same imperative with the study of Nichiren
> Daishonin's gosho, which serves as doctrinal guide for interpreting and
> practicing the Lotus Sutra in the latter day. However, this is only part of
> an answer to the complex question that is at the heart of this discussion.
>

Mark