I was just reminded again today why having detractors can help give you perspective. I am thinking of the Rubys specifically but I want to get to them later. Thinking of all my detractors over the years I have had quite a few: Bruce Maltz, Marc Strumpf, Graham Lamont, and others. I am not even going to dignify the Nichiren Shoshu members on arbn who still regularly attack me as though I still posted there. To be honest I have learned nothing from them except the vital art of avoiding insipidness.

I do, however, want to talk about Bruce. Bruce probably thinks that I hate him and that I have it in for him. I actually have many good reasons for hating him. But the fact is that I don't. A lot of that has become water under the bridge. When I think of Bruce now I think of this: Bruce is the person who originally broadcast over the internet the truth about the transfer documents, the Ita-mandala, the doctrine of Nichiren as Buddha, and other things about Taisekiji teachings. He learned most of these things from his mentor Senchu Murano. Bruce's relationship with the Nichiren Shu has always been rocky at best, but he and Senchu Murano were friends until Murano died. Bruce also made the Prayer Gohonzon available and thereby paved the way for the Independence Movement (I really should not capitalize that as it is not any kind of organization). Bruce's rhetoric and tactics, in my opinion, certainly left a lot to be desired. But in many ways he provided a valuable service to Nichiren Buddhism outside of Japan. He opened up the larger context of Nichiren Buddhism beyond SGI and NST for large amounts of people.

Now would be a good time to mention someone who was not a detractor of mine but who provided me with a more exacting definition of the Gohonzon. For a long time I was saying the Gohonzon is the "Eternal Shakyamuni Buddha" but Karmagrrl of Kempon Hokke Shu (which Bruce used to represent in the USA) pointed out that really it is the "Eternal Shakyamuni Buddha transferring the Wonderful Dharma to the Bodhisattvas of the Earth and all other beings." Kempon Hokke Shu also teaches that we inherit the Wonderful Dharma directly from the scrolls of the Lotus Sutra, and I have found nothing in Nichiren Shu teaching to contradict that, and in fact I find that to be truly in the spirit of the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren Shonin.

I don't really have anything good to say about Graham Lamont. I don't know him. Never met him. I have never seen him. I have never been in a flame war or otherwise exchanged emails with him. All I know is that he was a member of the L.A. temple, that he opposed Rev. Fujiwara (who first introduced me to Nichiren Shu) and to my late friends Ken Patterson and Elexion. I do not know what happened so I can't comment on it. But he apparently did what he could to hurt friends of mine, friends who introduced me to Nichiren Shu and who were as sincere and faithful as any Nichiren Buddhists I have ever met. And despite never having met or talked to me online of off, Graham certainly seems to say alot of things directed against me on the current Kempon Hokke Shu site. If I had time for grudges and wished to ignore the teachings of the Buddha in the Dhammapada, Graham Lamont would be on the top of my grudge list. But in fact, I hardly ever think about him. I only think of him now because I am talking about Bruce and am now going to talk about another former Kempon Hokke Shu rep.

When Kempon Hokke Shu was first present on the net, and I think they called themselves Kempon Hokke Kai or something like that, Marc Strumpf was the other rep. Now Marc and I have flamed each other, and spoken on the phone (one of the few unpleasant phone converstations I have ever had - I have had more cordial discussions with top SGI leaders) and then flamed each other some more. Marc eventually broke with Bruce and KHK to rep Honmon Butsuryu Shu. More often than not, Marc relied on Graham Lamont's version of Nichiren's teachings. At least that is my strong impression. Graham and therefore Marc (and Bruce to a certain extent) all had a thing about Original Enlightenment. They all blamed Chuko Tendai Hongaku Shiso (Medieval Tendai Orignal Enlightenment Teachings) for everything that went wrong with Nichiren Shoshu, Soka Gakkai, and Nichiren Buddhism as a whole. Or at least that is my impression of their arguments. I take the more moderate view of Jackie Stone. I also think there are a lot of other factors to explain what went wrong at Taisekiji. Anyway, I find to my amazement that I actually don't bear a grude for Marc either, even though he tried to pin ideas on me which I do not hold. Instead, I have to acknowledge a certain debt of gratitude for Marc even though I know he wasn't trying to do me any favors. Rather, he was trying to build himself up by tearing me down - that is my impression. In any case, because of his (and Graham's but they always came through Marc) critiques I found myself rethinking, rereading, rechecking, and again rethinking Nichiren Buddhism. In the end, I gutted my manuscipt Dharma Flower and rewrote it because the first version was full of Buddha-nature rhetoric held over from SGI which Nichiren Shonin hardly ever used in his authenticated writings. The new version of Dharma Flower (and therefore my own thoughts about Nichiren Buddism) are much more in line with what Nichiren teaches in the five major writings and those elements which appear in apocryphal writings or oral transmissions have been downplayed or even taken out altogether. So I find that instead of resentful I am actually grateful that Marc made me take the issues seriously enough to do that.

And now we come to Terry and Kathy Ruby. Every now and then I talk with an SGI leader like Richard Yoshimachi at the San Francisco Community Center, or William Aiken whom I was on a panel with at the American Academy of Religions and I come away thinking: "Wow. These guys seem so decent and reasonable. Why is that we can't all just get along despite our doctrinal differences - differences which in most cases the majority of members could care less about." But then I run into people like the Rubys who twist facts, play semantic games, put forward claims with no basis in fact, and in general do anything they can to score points and put down those who don't follow whatever they believe is the paty line - SGI member or otherwise. Thanks to the Rubys I am able to keep in perspective that the SGI top leaders and public representatives have a wholesome image which they want to portray. And I don't necessarily think they are faking it or being insincere - but I think that the public reps and some of the leaders were chosen because they do come across as reasonable and mature human beings. But behind them is an organization where people like the Rubys are found and even encouraged, and I am reminded why it is that you can't judge SGI by people like William Aiken, or Chris Holte, or Brian Holley. Too bad though, because I wish we could all just get along and have real "death defying dialogue" without having to be nasty and defensive. Thanks for helping me maintain perspective Terry and Kathy!

Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei