About Nichiren Sho Shu, pt. 4
MarcInMD
"…..The Hon in-myo sho simply identifies Nichiren as "the
practitioner of the subtlety of original cause" (hon in-myo no gyoja). However,
the Hyaku rokka sojo is more explicit:
"The subtlety of original effect corresponds to Sakyamuni Buddha, and the
subtlety of original cause, to Bodhisattva Superior Conduct." It also says:
"What Nichiren now practices does not differ from the
conduct of [the Buddha] in the most distant past when he
achieved the stage of verbal identity, not by so much as a
single mustard seed… The "Fathoming the Lifespan"
chapter of my [Nichiren's] inner enlightenment is the
subtlety of original cause hidden in the depths of the
"Fathoming the Lifespan" [chapter] of the harvest, and
its teacher is myself…From the standpoint of
beginingless time (kuon ganjo), "in heaven and earth, I
alone am worthy of respect" refers to
Nichiren…Nichiren, constantly abiding throughout the
three time periods [ of past, present, and future],
[confers] the benefits of [the stage of ] verbal
[identity]… The Buddha of sowing is [like] the moon in
the sky, while the Buddha of the harvest is [like] the
moon reflected in a pond"
"By the latter part of the Muromachi period, such ideas would be
systematized in the Fuji school's idiosyncratic doctrinal position, elaborated
particularly within the Taisekiji line, the equates Nichiren with the original
Buddha ('Nichiren Hombutsu ron'). A few passages form the Muromachi period
writings of this school will suggest some of the various ways in which this
doctrine was developed. For example, Nichiu (1409-1482), ninth abbot of the
Taisekiji, argues that for people of the Final Dharma age who are at the
beginning stage of practice, Nichiren as the teacher of the original cause is a
more appropriate focus of devotion than Sakyamuni:
"In our school, we do not enshrine as the object of
worship the Sakyamuni who, during his lifetime, taught
people able to extricate delusion and thus reach the
ultimate principle…Because this Sakyamuni, who taught
for the sake of those at advanced stages of practice, is
beyond the deluded perception of [being like ourselves],
who are at the stage of verbal identity and have but newly
produced the aspiration for enlightenment, we take as our
object of worship that which Sakyamuni practiced as the
cause for his enlightenment. This is why we rely on the
eminent founder, Nichiren Shonin."
"Nichiyo, a contemporary of Nichiu and of the same Fuji lineage, interprets
Nichiren as manifesting in his behavior a reality that Sakyamuni only
theoretically expressed: "[Nichiren] Daishonin is the essence of the Lotus
Sutra. Sakyamuni's Lotus Sutra is the Lotus Sutra in words alone…When
[Nichiren] practiced the Lotus Sutra in actuality, then it became the true
Lotus Sutra." Similarly, Sakyo Ajari Nikkyo (b.1428), a disciple of Nichiu,
developed the argument for Nichiren as the original buddha in his 'Musaka sho'.
He argues that Bodhisattva Superior Conduct, who represents the stage of
practice, is the teacher of all buddhas and surpasses Sakyamuni, who represents
only the stage of attainment. Thus Nichiren, who is the embodiment of Superior
Conduct in the time of mappo, is all-inclusive: "Simply believing in Nichiren
Shonin encompasses the virtues of faith in Sakyamuni, Many Jewels, Superior
Conduct, and all Buddhas."
"The equation of Nichiren with the original Buddha represents a bold if
convoluted attempt to free Nichiren from the context of the preceding
historical tradition of Sakyamuni's Buddhism and to relocate Sakyamuni within
the context of Nichiren's teaching. Structurally, it resembles medieval Tendai
claims that Chih-I's inner enlightenment is prior to and surpasses the
testimony of the Lotus Sutra preached by Sakyamuni. It also suggests the
nonlinearity and reversals of time and hierarchy characteristic of medieval
Tendai kanjin-style interpretations: The seed surpasses the harvest; the stage
of practice surpasses that of attainment; Superior Conduct, a bodhisattva, is
superior to Sakyamuni, a Buddha; and Nichiren, who lived after Sakyamuni in
historical time, becomes his teacher in Beginingless time. In the reading of
the three jewels of Buddhism adopted by most schools within the Nichiren
tradition, the Buddha is defined as the original Sakyamuni of the "Fathoming
the Lifespan" chapter of the Lotus Sutra, the Dharma is Namu-myoho-renge-kyo,
and the Sangha is represented by Nichiren. In the Fuji school, however, the
Buddha is Nichiren, the Dharma is Namu-myoho-renge-kyo, and the Sangha is
represented by Nikko. Founder worship is hardly uncommon in Japanese Buddhism,
but nowhere has it been provided with a more elaborate doctrinal rationale than
in the Fuji lineage of the Nichiren tradition.
{"Original Enlightenment and the Transformation of Japanese Buddhism".
pp.340,341,342 by Jacqueline Stone, }
To be continued
mark
Sounds good to me. What Dr Stone doesn't realize is that these concepts
are debated and would not be adopted unless they hold water. Only the
High Priest can ultimately make this decision, and they don't do things
lightly.
In essence, Nichiren Daishonin passed on a religion that the priests
had to formalize into doctrine. The difference between the fuji school
and the others is that it was based on the true lineage. Cause and
Effect!
>
> "The equation of Nichiren with the original Buddha represents a bold if
> convoluted attempt to free Nichiren from the context of the preceding
> historical tradition of Sakyamuni's Buddhism and to relocate Sakyamuni within
> the context of Nichiren's teaching. Structurally, it resembles medieval Tendai
> claims that Chih-I's inner enlightenment is prior to and surpasses the
> testimony of the Lotus Sutra preached by Sakyamuni. It also suggests the
> nonlinearity and reversals of time and hierarchy characteristic of medieval
> Tendai kanjin-style interpretations: The seed surpasses the harvest; the stage
> of practice surpasses that of attainment; Superior Conduct, a bodhisattva, is
> superior to Sakyamuni, a Buddha; and Nichiren, who lived after Sakyamuni in
> historical time, becomes his teacher in Beginingless time. In the reading of
> the three jewels of Buddhism adopted by most schools within the Nichiren
> tradition, the Buddha is defined as the original Sakyamuni of the "Fathoming
> the Lifespan" chapter of the Lotus Sutra, the Dharma is Namu-myoho-renge-kyo,
> and the Sangha is represented by Nichiren. In the Fuji school, however, the
> Buddha is Nichiren, the Dharma is Namu-myoho-renge-kyo, and the Sangha is
> represented by Nikko. Founder worship is hardly uncommon in Japanese Buddhism,
> but nowhere has it been provided with a more elaborate doctrinal rationale than
> in the Fuji lineage of the Nichiren tradition.
Dr. Stone and all the other scholars have no idea of the concept of
time. Other religions, most notable christianity have touched somewhat
on it, even though they don't have a clue how they know it, by referring
to a cycle of hell whereby a person repeats a certain thing throughout
time, hell of incessant sufferring to us.
Most people think of time as a one way event, always going forward, and
this is true, however, from the perspective of causality, since the
moment is written by the past and the future is written by the moment,
and because of the consistency from beginning to end, time therefore
becomes irrelavent to the person and their karma. It is possible to be
born again into the past as well as the future, thus repeating the cycle
of the hell of incessant suffering, or to live in the Buddha's land.
Dr. Stone seems to think that all this comes from founder worship which
is ludicrous. Her interpretations are based on reading without faith,
and are a clear attempt to justify the existence of heretical sects. Why
else would she have even written this except to try to denigrate
Nichiren Shoshu and justify her own religion?
She starts from the perspective of the whining priest of Nichiren Shu
and HBS, because they are frustrated at not being able to sway our
priesthood into justifying their sect. From there it's easy to assert
that what the heretical sects are saying is true by inserting founder
worship into the mix.
Miao-lo states, "Both life (shoho) and its environment (eho) always
manifest Myoho-renge-kyo." He also states, "The true entity is
invariably revealed in all phenomena, and all phenomena invariably
possess the Ten Factors. The Ten Factors invariably function within the
Ten Worlds, and the Ten Worlds invariably entail both life and its
environment" And, "Both the life and environment of Hell exist within
the life of Buddha. On the other hand, the life and environment of
Buddha do not transcend the lives of common mortals." Such precise
explanations leave no room for doubt. Thus, all life in the universe is
clearly Myoho-renge-kyo. Even the two Buddhas, Shakyamuni and Taho, are
the functions of Myoho-renge-kyo who appeared to bestow its blessings
upon mankind. They manifested themselves as the two Buddhas and, seated
together in the Treasure Tower, nodded in mutual agreement.
No one but Nichiren has ever revealed these teachings. T'ien-t'ai,
Miao-lo and Dengyo knew in their hearts but did not declare them aloud.
There was reason for their silence: The Buddha had not entrusted them
with this mission, the time had not yet come, and they had not been the
Buddha's disciples from ages past. No one but Jogyo, Muhengyo and the
other leaders of the Bodhisattvas of the Earth can appear during the
first five hundred years of the Latter Day to spread the Law of
Myoho-renge-kyo. Only they are qualified to inscribe the object of
worship which physically manifests the ceremony of the two Buddhas
seated together in the Treasure Tower. This is because both the Law and
the object of worship are the reality of ichinen sanzen revealed in the
Juryo chapter of the essential teaching.
The two Buddhas, Shakyamuni and Taho, are merely functions of the true
Buddha, while Myoho-renge-kyo actually is the true Buddha. The sutra
explains this as "the Tathagata's secret and his mystic power." The
"secret" refers to the entity of the Buddha's three properties and the
"mystic power" to their functions. The entity is the true Buddha and the
function, a provisional Buddha. The common mortal is the entity of the
three properties, or the true Buddha. The Buddha is the function of the
three properties, or a provisional Buddha. Shakyamuni is thought to have
possessed the three virtues of sovereign, teacher and parent for the
sake of us common mortals, but on the contrary, it is the common mortal
who endowed him with the three virtues."
True Entity of Life - Shoho Jisso Sho - ;
>
> {"Original Enlightenment and the Transformation of Japanese Buddhism".
> pp.340,341,342 by Jacqueline Stone, }
>
> To be continued
--
Mark Porter
"Take these teachings to heart, and always remember that believers in
the Lotus Sutra should absolutely be the last to abuse each other. All
those who keep faith in the Lotus Sutra are most certainly Buddhas, and
one who slanders a Buddha commits a grave offense." Gosho; 14 Slanders
for(reverse(1..100)){$s=($_!=1)? 's':'';print"$_ bottle$s of beer on the
wall,\n";print"$_ bottle$s of beer,\nTake one down, pass it around,\n";
$_--;$s=($_==1)?'':'s';print"$_ bottle$s of beer on the
wall\n\n";}print'*burp*';
MarcInMD
Once again we see Mark caught in the evil web Nichiren Sho Shu has laid out
for him.. They depend on Hongaku oriented forgeries to justify their changes to
Nichiren's Buddhism. The Sho ho Jisso Sho is considered a fake by modern
Buddhist scholarship, with three separate authors. Nichiren likely wrote the
first part and then a later forger got this fragment and added all the Hongaku
crap
(every one is already a Buddha) . This was very common.
Mark Porter cannot use anything but the most fringe Gosho to make his case.
Where are Nichiren's central Treatises in his arguments? They are never
included because he has been led away from the very things Nichiren held most
dear and preached most viorously and has replaced them with extreme
interpretations that are dependent on the most dubious Gosho you can use.
Cody
"MarcInMD" <marc...@aol.com> wrote
Notice how Mr Strump's "proof" for what he is saying is "Modern Buddhist
scholarship". In other words, nothing but the words of people (read Stoned
and Lamentable) who have an obvious agenda to discredit Nichiren Shoshu
(because, if they don't, they discredit themselves). Ikeda would be proud of
you, Marc, for getting up every morning at 8AM and posting your blasphemy
towards Nichiren Shoshu almost every live long day but the Daishonin would
not.
Cody
mark
MarcInMD wrote:
>
> True Entity of Life - Shoho Jisso Sho - ;
>
> Once again we see Mark caught in the evil web Nichiren Sho Shu has laid out
> for him.. They depend on Hongaku oriented forgeries to justify their changes to
> Nichiren's Buddhism. The Sho ho Jisso Sho is considered a fake by modern
> Buddhist scholarship, with three separate authors. Nichiren likely wrote the
> first part and then a later forger got this fragment and added all the Hongaku
> crap
> (every one is already a Buddha) . This was very common.
>
So you don't believe you posses the Buddha Nature? How pitiful. What is
your faith based on?
The portions I added still stand.
"She starts from the perspective of the whining priests of Nichiren Shu
and HBS, because they are frustrated at not being able to sway our
priesthood into justifying their sect. From there it's easy to assert
that what the heretical sects are saying is true by inserting founder
worship into the mix."
And whining they are indeed. Just take a look at the Lay Priest of
HBS!! Everything is a forgery unless it isn't specific.
MarcInMD
your faith based on?
The portions I added still stand.<
You obviously do no t understand the very doctrines you are trying to use.
Hongaku thought means "enlightenment is inherent". People are Buddha's
"Originally". It denies the spritual realm and is an absolute affirmation of
the World ( in the Medieval Tendai Shu philosophy imported by Taisekiji). It
has nothing at all to do with possenion of Buddha Nature.
Once again..your comments exceed your training. Why dont you try slowing down a
bit and stop coughing up boiler plate answers that you only vaguely understand.
And whining they are indeed. Just take a look at the Lay Priest of
HBS!! Everything is a forgery unless it isn't specific.
Let me say this again slowly so you dont miss it. I never declare a Gosho
authentic or a fake based either on my own scholarship (I am not qualified in
the least to make that sort of judgment) and I certainly dont say a Gosho is a
fake just because I dont like it. I like all authentic Gosho. They are all very
consistent with my beliefs and if I find one that is not, I will change my
beliefs. I have only tried to inform you about Gosho's that are commonly
considered dubious by the length and breadth of Modern scholarship.
Normally, that should be a caution light if you were really interested in
finding the truth instead of just defending turf.
Once again, I can show page after page of Orthodox teachings from Nichiren's
authentic treatises, the ones he himself declared his central doctrinal
statements. But you cannot. All we see are snippets that are from highly
dubious sources and the constant search for vague phrases that could be
declared hints at your foregone conclusions. Real study means reading the Gosho
straight and if you can find no mention of your idea's in the main doctrinal
Gosho and.indeed..hate most all of what is in them without tortured
reinterpretation,, you should pause and reconsider your position.... I would..
mark
MarcInMD wrote:
>
> You obviously do no t understand the very doctrines you are trying to use.
> Hongaku thought means "enlightenment is inherent". People are Buddha's
> "Originally". It denies the spritual realm and is an absolute affirmation of
> the World ( in the Medieval Tendai Shu philosophy imported by Taisekiji). It
> has nothing at all to do with possenion of Buddha Nature.
This is what is stated over and over in the Gosho. That everything
posseses the buddha nature. Inherent, originally, whatever. you can pick
at any point and find a weakness if you just keep trying. Just because a
scholar of dubious capabilities says something doesn't make it true
either.
Whether or not I understand the minute differences you try to highlight
doesn't make any difference to the whole. You are bound and determined
to undermine NST and you will pay for it in your life. You go out of
your way to denigrate Nichiren Shoshu on a daily basis. What are you
doing to advance the cause of Kosen Rufu? Because no matter what you say
about what you clearly don't understand to begin with, you have clearly
decided that slandering the Lotus Sutra doesn't worry you. And I don't
say that because you slander NST that you slander the Law. You've been
warned several times by me in references that had nothing to do with
NST.
>
> Once again..your comments exceed your training. Why dont you try slowing down a
> bit and stop coughing up boiler plate answers that you only vaguely understand.
And your training has been to undermine NST no matter what. All you
have to do is look through the Nichiren Shu site to find slander. I bet
there's slander on the HBS site, but haven't bothered looking to deeply.
All these amatuerish web sites with their illogical navigation pisses me
off too much anyway.
> Let me say this again slowly so you dont miss it. I never declare a Gosho
> authentic or a fake based either on my own scholarship (I am not qualified in
> the least to make that sort of judgment)
Believing in scholars when it comes to the Lotus Sutra is like asking a
kindergartner to explain the law of relativity!
Lotusguy
the Nichiren Shoshu, doesn't really vary from any other religions
theology. The HBS is a eight Chapters school and that is a varation
of Nichiren Theology. Nichiren stressed the Honmon but he definatly
didn't throw out the first 16 chapters, as a matter of fact I thought
Nichiren forbid that. Actually as an outsider soem of the Shoshu
theology you mentioned in part 4 make sense. My only question and
maybe you could tell me is when did the Dia-Gohonzon come into the
pic. Thank you.
Daniel
mark <m...@imchat.com> wrote in message news:<3C17B863...@imchat.com>...
Derek N.P.F. Juhl
> Once again we see Mark caught in the evil web Nichiren Sho Shu has laid out
> for him.. They depend on Hongaku oriented forgeries to justify their changes to
> Nichiren's Buddhism. The Sho ho Jisso Sho is considered a fake by modern
> Buddhist scholarship, with three separate authors. Nichiren likely wrote the
> first part and then a later forger got this fragment and added all the Hongaku
> crap
And the Lotus Sutra was written down by _______ in the year _______ ?
(For reference, you may use the introduction to Hurvitz' translation
of Miao Fa Lien Hua Ching.)
Derek N.P.F. Juhl
Derek N.P.F. Juhl
> Scuse me but from what I'm reading the development of the theology of
> the Nichiren Shoshu, doesn't really vary from any other religions
> theology. The HBS is a eight Chapters school and that is a varation
> of Nichiren Theology. Nichiren stressed the Honmon but he definatly
> didn't throw out the first 16 chapters, as a matter of fact I thought
> Nichiren forbid that. Actually as an outsider soem of the Shoshu
> theology you mentioned in part 4 make sense. My only question and
> maybe you could tell me is when did the Dia-Gohonzon come into the
> pic. Thank you.
Hi, Daniel,
Nichiren Daishonin inscribed the Dai-Gohonzon over 700 years ago, in 1279 C.E.
Derek N.P.F. Juhl
MarcInMD
Daniel wrote:
The HBS is a eight Chapters school and that is a varation
> of Nichiren Theology. Nichiren stressed the Honmon but he definatly
> didn't throw out the first 16 chapters, as a matter of fact I thought
> Nichiren forbid that. <
This is exactly so. HBS does not throw out any part of the Lotus Sutra. We
simply agree with Nichiren that the Essential Teaching portion of the Sutra is
the "Original Gate " to enlightenment which is found in the core Eight Chapter
of the Honmon. This in no way indcates some sort of rejection of the Shakumon
Teachings( firrst 14 chapters) . It just places them in the same priority as
Nichiren's view of them. They complete the provisional teachings and are
superior to any of them because the first half strongly hints at the revelation
of the Life Span of the Buddha found in the second half
( Honmon) and sets the stage for the Honmon.. I can provide Gosho passages for
you if you like to read where this is all found.
>> Actually as an outsider soem of the Shoshu
> theology you mentioned in part 4 make sense. My only question and
> maybe you could tell me is when did the Dia-Gohonzon come into the
> pic. Thank you.
<
The So Called "Dai-Gohonzon" was compeltely unheard of until about two hundred
years after Nichiren's death. Nichiren never teaches about it nor does Nikko (
founder of Taisekiji) nor does anyone else in the early communities. That is
because it did not actually exist yet. It is a manifestaion of a slide
backwards into Tendai Shu Esoteric ideas when Taisekiji began to switch from
Nichiren Buddhism into a rather extreme brand of Japanese Foudner Worship.
Founder Worship cults have a problem when the Foudner is no longer around.
Taisekiji solves this by saying that he transferred his living "essence" into
this one particular Mandala and that provides them access to the Founder. They
have a practice of trying to "merge" with the Founders soul etc. It's all
unrealted to anything Nichiren ever taught and this Dai-mandala is most likely
something they purchased from a local lay sangha who were known for using large
wooden Mandalas at that same time.
MarcInMD
> for him.. They depend on Hongaku oriented forgeries to justify their changes
to
> Nichiren's Buddhism. The Sho ho Jisso Sho is considered a fake by modern
> Buddhist scholarship, with three separate authors. Nichiren likely wrote the
> first part and then a later forger got this fragment and added all the
Hongaku
> crap
And the Lotus Sutra was written down by _______ in the year _______ ?
(For reference, you may use the introduction to Hurvitz' translation
of Miao Fa Lien Hua Ching.)<
Nichiren Daishonin believed the Lotus Sutra wa a manifestation of the Eternal
Buddha. He believed it was "all true" and said so many many times. Who wrote it
down is not at all important. The only important thing is that it is true. I
side with Nichiren.
Using fake Gosho that were written by people other than Nichiren which teach a
philosophy very much different than what Nichiren taught, is not a good thing.
Why is none of this clear to you?
Derek N.P.F. Juhl
> And the Lotus Sutra was written down by _______ in the year _______ ?
> (For reference, you may use the introduction to Hurvitz' translation
> of Miao Fa Lien Hua Ching.)<
>
> Nichiren Daishonin believed the Lotus Sutra wa a manifestation of the Eternal
> Buddha. He believed it was "all true" and said so many many times. Who wrote it
> down is not at all important. The only important thing is that it is true. I
> side with Nichiren.
>
> Using fake Gosho that were written by people other than Nichiren which teach a
> philosophy very much different than what Nichiren taught, is not a good thing.
>
> Why is none of this clear to you?
Your arguments are hypocritical at best.
Derek N.P.F. Juhl