Should there be "only one right way" to practice Nichiren Buddhism? Does the whole tradition come unstuck if one person or sangha practices differently than another does?
Did Nichiren look 700+ years into the future and prescribe exactly how people should arrange their days, how and when they should meet, exactly what they should and should not read, study or recite, how to arrange their altars, and more? Did he prescribe how groups of believers should be organized?
Each one of us must answer these questions for ourselves. I can tell you my answers, but I can't tell you yours.
Nichiren did give us his mantra, and nobody is really arguing about that (questions of contraction aside).
Nichiren gave us his mandala. There are multitudes of arguments surrounding this. How it should be treated; which ones are authorized, or slanderous, or dubious; whether or not it must be eye-opened; whether all will "work" or only certain ones do; and so on and so forth.
Nichiren left us his writings. He was very explicit about things he considered important, writing at great length to make sure his readers understood his meaning. This habit of his is something I use to calibrate my BS radar when someone tells me Nichiren was being "coy" about some certain concept or other. He was also very warm and human when writing to help encourage someone, or thanking them for their gifts, and this side of him tends to be overlooked when we start tossing rhetoric around.
700+ years later, my own understanding is that "One Size does not Fit All". My concept of this Buddhism can accept many different styles of practicing, and many different ways of organizing Sangha. I realize that many people don't want from their Sangha what I want from mine. I believe there is room for debates and disagreements about finer points of doctrine without invalidating someone's claim to be a Nichiren Buddhist. I don't think that the presence or lack of certain things on one's altar makes one heretical.
I want to ask a question here:
What is bad, or negative, or evil, about having different opportunities to practice this Buddhism in different ways? If you believe this is a bad cause, what bad effect can you perceive from this cause?
I also want to repeat a question here from the interview Lisa did with me more than a year ago:
What exactly does your personal vision of Kosen Rufu, or World Peace, or Widely-Propagated-and-Spread Nichiren Buddhism look like?
Namaste, Engyo Mike Barrett
Comments
Greetings.
One size does fit all. That's why it is designated the Great Vehicle. A seeking mind is our boarding pass; the Buddha Wisdom is this ships treasure. Once obtained, the treasure is ours to do with as the circumstances of present moment dictates.
This is the meaning of, ""Shariputra, ever since I attained Buddhahood I have through various causes and various similes widely expounded my teachings and have used countless expedient means to guide living beings and cause them to renounce attachments. Why is this? Because the Thus Come One is fully possessed by both expedient means and the paramita of wisdom.""
The Buddha wisdon is endowed with all manner of expedient means. We are directed not to put the cart before the horse.
Sincerely, Chikushonin
Daikudoshin, myokaku, myojisokukyo/
Namumyohorengemyojisokukyo
Chikushonin -
I don't disagree with your statements above. I am asking what people believe this means IN APPLICATION. Do they mean that there is an organizational blueprint on how a Sangha should be set up? Are there specific instructions as to what is or is not acceptable on one's home altar? How many times per week or month are believers instructed to meet together, and what should they do when they meet? I don't find such in Nichiren's writings or in the Lotus Sutra.
The statements you reference above are broad enough to encompass any number of different ways of application to an individual's life and practice, or to the "theme and tone" of a Sangha, in my opinion. That was the thrust of my questions above, and a more specific definition of "One Size Fits All" as I used it.
Namaste, Engyo Mike Barrett
In sense,Mike, one size does fit all.
While the Daishonin didn't actually prescribe what would be a acceptable sangha after his death, he did say that his followers should be unified. He also said that the Expedient means and Life Span chapter of the Lotus should be recited, if desired; and that the main practice was chanting the Daimoku.
In other words, what helps spread the teachings and create happiness.
More later.
Eddie
Mike -- Good questions. I agree that the Lotus Sutra "fits all." But I say that because it accomodates all diversity. Maybe there are as many "sanghas" as there are individuals. One of the problems with invoking Nichiren's call to unity is that most people see unity as a "rallying around the flag" kind of thing that focuses on order based on some external "unifying" symbol or principle.
I don't think that's what Nichiren means by unity exactly. And I don't have any answers, but I think the unity Nichiren refers to involves the "oneness" of Buddha nature. A Buddha (by definition, I believe) is unified with all living beings. You can't get more "unified" than that.
Perhaps what "destroys unity" is trying to implement any scheme or structure of "unity" other than Buddhahood. That may sound inscrutable -- and no, you can't plan a rally or campaign around it -- but I think that's the point.
best,
Lisa J.
I would have to say that I agree with "one size does not fit all". This has been my issue with organized religion all along. What book is real? What leader is right? When organizing a religion, there are always people that are in charge. They take the teachings and interpret them to suit their needs; and the followers are there because those rules suit their needs. So, given that all teachings are open to debate, and all translations can be changed, who is right?
I decided that if I found something that suited my needs, that I would just not care if the others were right or wrong. Now that I've been practicing for only about a year, I've not convinced myself that this is the right teaching. I still keep asking that same old question. I think that Mike is on the right track though...what exactly is the negative effect of something different to accomplish the same thing? Is everyone here trying to be happy and in turn make others happy as well in order to attain world peace? Is everyone trying to understand the meaning of life and examining their own causes to ensure that they are creating a positive effect on themselves and their environment? I certainly know a TON of religions whose primary function is to dictate to people what to do in order to get money from them. What a noble goal.
Although I'm not a fan of organized religion as a whole, I know that most people need it. They are always going to look up to someone in order to advance their own lives. And those that do it on their own, kudos to you. I personally would prefer not having to answer to anyone, but realized I dont have the discipline to chant twice a day without some encouragement.
In SGI it seems difficult to keep from having that we are all equal whether leaders or not. Its human nature to look up to someone we admire. Branching off from the SGI current structure is understandable. I dont know how wrong it is. Someone somewhere wanted to be in chargebe betterdo things the right way or make money, or whatever the motivation was, there are now followers. Hopefully, they are still examining the question what is the negative effect?
My latest favorite motto You can either be right. Or, you can be happy.
I choose happy myself. I think accepting other peoples differences is a huge step towards unity.
Nam Myoho Renge Kyo
Rea
I dunno, LJ.
The Lotus Sutra is only one way of understanding the universe. If it were universal, then everyone would simply be following it, right? It can lead people to a place of universality, but to say this book or that book is universal is putting the cart B4 the horse. It's not the Lotus Sutra that matters so much as "The Law" that can be gleened from it. Some people would not even see it as "The Law" the way many adherents to Buddhism would.
What matters is how the PEOPLE respond to the teaching, the IMPACT that the teaching has, not so much what is intended by the teacher. By Nichiren's own criteria of actual proof, the Lotus Sutra is by definition not universal.
I think it's one of the major flaws of Nichiren: he seems to confuse the teaching with the attainment of the thing. The teaching serves the person. If a person does not "get it" then the teaching is not doing what it is meant to do.
P.
Dear Mike,
In your reply you have stated the problem. The solution is that in calling forth your Buddha nature a person awakens to the Mystic Precepts. There is no such thing as a Buddha that does not know what to do. Thus, one size DOES fit all.
What form a Buddhas actions and appearances take (all three-thousand realms present and accounted for) is determined by the circumstances of the present moment. The forms are a subordinate concern because they naturally arise from the Buddhas compassion and wisdomthey are the means to awaken Buddhahood, rather, they are the manifestation of Buddhahood itself. If water is our life and heat from the fire boiling it is analogous to the cause and effect of our chanting daimoku with a seeking mind, then the steam that is unavoidably produced as a natural of this relationship is the Mystic Precepts that you are seeking with your question of what your sangha should look like.
This is the meaning of the words I include with my name, Daikudoshin, myokaku, myojisokukyo, A great seeking mind, mystically awakened, Buddhahood as manifest reality. This is also a restatement of the Three Great Secret Laws.
The sangha you seek is the result of enlightened wisdomit is not the vehicle to get there. Both the SGI and Nichiren Shu make the mistake of putting the cart before the horse.
SGI has totally perverted the meaning of jigyo-keta; Nichiren Shu has its community reciting Bodhisattva vows. Both schools have taken the Bodhisattva vehicle of the provisional teachings and renamed it the Buddha vehicle. This is why both schools, all schools for that matter, have failed to manifest the mystic principle of the Land of Eternally Tranquil Light.
Eddie is close when he says, the main practice was chanting the Daimoku. In truth, chanting the daimoku with a seeking mind is the exclusive practice. All other practices are set aside as formal practices. Nichiren explains in The Four Stages of Faith and the Five Stages of Practice:
Question: For practitioners in the Latter Day of the Law, who have just aroused the aspiration for enlightenment, what types of practice are restricted?
Answer: Such persons are restricted from practicing almsgiving, the keeping of the precepts, and the others of the five paramitas, and are directed to chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo exclusively. This practice corresponds to the capacity of persons at the stages of "producing even a single moment's faith and understanding" and "rejoicing on first hearing the Lotus Sutra." It represents the true intention of the Lotus Sutra.
Question: I have never before heard such an assertion. It astonishes my mind and makes me wonder if my ears have not deceived me. Please clearly cite some passages of scriptural proof and kindly explain the matter.
Answer: The sutra says: "[Such persons] need not for my sake raise up stupas or temples, or construct monks' quarters, or make the four kinds of offerings to the assembly of monks." This passage from the sutra makes it quite clear that practitioners who have just aroused the aspiration for enlightenment are restricted from almsgiving, the keeping of the precepts, and the others of the five paramitas.
Question: The passage you have just quoted restricts us only from erecting stupas or temples or providing for the assembly of monks. It says nothing about the keeping of the various precepts.
Answer: The passage mentions only the first of the five paramitas, that of almsgiving, and skips mention of the other four.
Question: How do we know this is so?
Answer: Because a subsequent passage, in describing the fourth stage of practice, goes on to say: "How much more so, then, if there is someone who can embrace this sutra and at the same time practice almsgiving, keeping the precepts, [forbearance, assiduousness, meditation and wisdom]!" This sutra text clearly indicates that persons at the first, second and third stages of practice are restricted from practicing almsgiving, the keeping of the precepts, and the others of the five paramitas. Only when they reach the fourth stage of practice, [that of "practicing the six paramitas while embracing the Lotus Sutra,"] are they permitted to observe them. And because such practices are permitted at this later stage, we may know that, for persons in the initial stages, they are restricted.
Question: The sutra passage you have just quoted seems to support your argument. But can you offer any passages from the treatises or commentaries?
Answer: What commentaries would you like me to cite? Are you referring to the treatises by the four ranks of saints of India? Or are you referring to works written by Buddhist teachers of China and Japan? In either case, it amounts to rejecting the root and searching among the branches, seeking the shadow apart from the form, or forgetting the source and prizing only the stream. You would ignore a sutra passage that is perfectly clear and instead seek an answer in the treatises and commentaries. If there should be some later commentary that contradicts the original sutra passage, would you then cast aside the sutra and follow the commentary?
Nevertheless, I will comply with your wishes and cite some passages. In the ninth volume of the Hokke Mongu we read: "There is a danger that a beginner will be led astray by subordinate concerns, and that this will interfere with the primary practice. The beginner should directly give all his attention to embracing the sutra; that is the highest type of offering. Though one may set aside formal practices, if one maintains [meditation on] the principle, then the benefits will be many and far-reaching."
In this passage of commentary, "subordinate concerns" refers to the five paramitas. If the beginner tries to practice the five paramitas at the same time [that he embraces the Lotus Sutra], that may work to obstruct his primary practice, which is faith. Such a person will be like a small ship that is loaded with wealth and treasure and sets out to cross the sea. Both the ship and the treasure will sink. And the words "should directly give all his attention to embracing the sutra" do not refer to the sutra as a whole. They mean that one should embrace the daimoku, or title, of the sutra exclusively and not mix it with other passages. Even recitation of the entire sutra is not permitted. How much less the five paramitas!
To "set aside formal practices but maintain [meditation on] the principle" means that one should set aside the keeping of the precepts and the other specific practices [of the five paramitas] and embrace the principle of the daimoku exclusively. When the commentary says that "the benefits will be many and far-reaching," it implies that if the beginner should attempt to practice various other practices and the daimoku at the same time, then his benefits will be completely lost.
Chikushonin: The Priests of the SGI and the Priests of the Nichiren Shu, along with Priests of Nichiren Shoshu, and others, all are in agreement that the only time a person can truly enjoy their Buddha nature is when they are reciting the Daimoku. This is true for all of them.
This is because they all take the good medicine of the Juryo chapter and then mix it with the provision vehicles as formal practices for their own enlightenment--just as we have been taught to do.
This is mixing poison with medicine and falling into the trap that Nichiren indicates above. This is the act of praising the Lotus Sutra and destroying its heart. It is the worm in the Lions belly.
Lisa is right on the mark regarding unity. The Hoben Chapter states:
If a person will believe and take refuge in the Buddha, the Thus Come One will never deceive him, nor will he ever show greed or jealousy, for he has rooted out evil from among the phenomena. Therefore throughout the ten directions the Buddha alone is without fear. I adorn my body with the special characteristics and shine my light upon the world. I am honored by numberless multitudes and for them I preach the emblem of the reality of things. Shariputra, you should know that at the start I took a vow, hoping to make all persons equal to me, without any distinction between us, and what I long ago hoped for has now been fulfilled.
Chikushonin: True unity is found in awakening the mind of all Buddhas. This is the sangha of the Lion Kings throne, where shared reality is not confined by time or space, and there is no distinction between self and other. Truly, hidden in the depths of the Juryo chapter is the teaching of self equals others. This is the true kaidan, the place where one is ordained in the Mystic Precepts where self equals others. It is the place all Buddhas emerge from.
Sincerely, Chikushonin
Daikudoshin, myokaku, myojisokukyo/
Namumyohorengemyojisokukyo
Correction:
"What form a Buddhas actions and appearances take (all three-thousand realms present and accounted for) is determined by the circumstances of the present moment. The forms are a subordinate concern because they naturally arise from the Buddhas compassion and wisdomthey are the means to awaken Buddhahood, rather, they are the manifestation of Buddhahood itself."
should read:
The forms are a subordinate concern because they naturally arise from the Buddhas compassion and wisdomthey *NOT* are the means to awaken *ONES OWN* Buddhahood, rather, they are the manifestation of Buddhahood itself."
Chikushonin -
OK, so let me see if I can boil down what you are saying. Your contention is that Nichiren told his followers to chant Daimoku exclusively; to do no other sort of practice, follow no other precept. Did I understand this correctly?
Do you discount other letters where Nichiren tells followers that there is no problem with chanting different passages of the sutra? I am not attacking your conclusions here, I am truly curious. I hadn't looked for a specific reference here, but I can if you like.
I notice that Nichiren was truly appreciative of, and in fact would not have survived without, his followers' gifts of food, clothing, money and supplies. I agree that he rejects almsgiving in the passage above, yet he still survived on dana, or the first paramita. How does this fit into your concepts here? Were those donations to Nichiren somehow not dana or alms?
Again, I intended this topic to be about application of general principle to our daily practice. How do you believe the points you are raising here should be manifested in a believer's daily practice? And to return to the original question, is there only one correct way to do that, especially now, 700+ years after Nichiren?
Namaste, Engyo Mike Barrett