This question has been raised time and again, but I don't feel that it has been resolved.
I chant daimoku and recite daily portions of the Lotus Sutra, as Nichiren prescribed. I also sit -- meaning that I practice seated meditation in which my breath is my object of focus. Since this is my practice, and since I enjoy studying the work of teachers from other Buddhist traditions, can I really call myself a Nichiren Buddhist?
There are self-proclaimed Nichiren Buddhists who will tell you that I am not -- and cannot be -- a Nichiren Buddhist if I practice silent sitting along with chanting, and "mix the profane with the pure."
Some denigrate me as a "cafeteria Buddhist" or a "Burger King Buddhist" (Have It Your Way) -- and maybe I am. So what?
Why should anyone have a problem with how I practice? Well, if you want to know the truth, I have a problem with the way other people practice. So I don't mind having my choices scrutinized and criticized -- because I scrutinize and criticize the way others approach Buddhism.
Who do I scrutinize and criticize? The self-proclaimed Nichiren Buddhists, guardians of Nichiren purity. They are likely to be fervent members of either Kempon Hokke or Soka Gakkai, although every organized Nichiren group has a wing of fanatics.
Members of these two groups are the most vocal and visible practitioners of Nichiren Buddhism. These groups espouse a kind of extremism or fundamentalism that's seemingly rare in other traditions of Buddhism but is the norm in Nichiren Buddhism.
I don't want to be associated with religious extremism. So when I tell people I'm a Nichiren Buddhist, I have to add quickly: "But not the crazy kind of Nichiren Buddhist." (I stole this from brooke, actually.)
I have had a number of online (and e-mail) debates on this issue with other Nichiren Buddhists. Invariably, someone will trot out passages from Nichiren's writings suggesting that he himself was an extremist. The implication is that if one is to practice "correctly," as Nichiren intended, one must be extremist and exclusive and incessantly vocal about Nichiren's righteousness.
And yet, Nichiren also stated that those who chant daimoku have "the same mind" as Nichiren; if one chants daimoku, one is a votary of the Lotus Sutra.
This would suggest that it is not one's beliefs -- extremist or otherwise -- that make one a disciple of Nichiren. Simply intoning Namu-myoho-renge-kyo is an embrace of the Lotus Sutra.
For example, the people who have discovered, thanks to Charles Atkins, the benefits of meditative visualization based on daimoku. Or the people who have chanted daimoku because they heard Tina Turner chant it. Many of these people would never dream of joining a Nichiren Buddhist sect, and many profess other faiths. But they have chanted daimoku so they are votaries of the Lotus Sutra.
On one hand, Nichiren's own words seem to suggest that only the most extreme and ideological few can rightly call themselves votaries of the Lotus Sutra.
On the other hand, Nichiren's own words seem to suggest that anyone who forms any kind of relationship with the daimoku (negative or positive, a.k.a. the "poison drum") is a votary of the Lotus Sutra.
The more inclusive approach to the Lotus Sutra -- the idea that it "belongs" to those who embrace it, regardless of religious labels or group memberships -- seems to be losing out to the loud, extremist crowd who feel that they "own" daimoku and they alone have the right to call themselves Nichiren Buddhists.
So this is my issue:
Nichiren extremism is repugnant to me. Does this make me less of a Nichiren Buddhist, or more of one?
What are your thoughts?
16 comments
Let me once again clarify Nichiren Daishonin's and the Kempon Hokke's position on the practice of the householder [layman]. Nichiren Daishonin writes:"But for your person as a householder the essence is for you to chant 'Namu Myoho renge kyo' with no other thought and also make offerings to the monks. And also, if it is in accord with the sutra text, one should also 'expound it according to their strength,' shouldn't one?" [Reply to Lord Matsuno]Nothing else is required of us. If our strength is such, we may do street conversions, as did Nichiren Daishonin. If we are only able to share Namu Myoho renge kyo with our family and friends, that too is in accord with the teachings. If we have lots of money and wish to open up a Kempon Hokke temple and hire a Kempon Hokke priest, that too is a viable practice of the Lotus Sutra. If one has the money and the strength to rent a stadium every week and fill it with 10,000 people chanting the Daimoku, then you too are a Bodhisattva of the Earth. If you don't have the strength to do assertive or aggressive practice then you may do the gentle practices towards those who are receptive. If you just have the strength, for one reason or another, to talk to the cat or bird, then tell the cat or bird. If you are blind, deaf and unable to speak, then believe in Namu Myoho renge kyo.When you are old and ill, just chant the Daimoku from your hospital bed and if you are not married and have the strength, tell the nurse caring for you that, thanks to the Daimoku of the Lotus Sutra, I can still recognize a beautiful woman. There are no rules except as found in the Lotus Sutra and Gosho which is no rules save one, chant Namu Myoho renge kyo throughout your life.Question: The SGI fills stadiums with people who chant Nam[u] Myoho renge kyo. How can you say they are not practicing as the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren Daishonin teach.Answer: Another passage from reply to Lord Matsuno [also known as The Fourteen Slanders] reads, "Those who have obtained a human body. which is difficult to receive, and who happen to have left the household life, who have studied the Buddha Dharma and do not attack those who blaspheme against the Dharma but vainly spend their nights and days in disporting and idle talk are beasts who have put on the skin of Dharma Teachers. Though they borrow the name of 'Dharma Teachers' to make their way through the world and nourish themselves, there is not one instance of their turning out to be Dharma teachers. They are Thieves who steal the name of 'Dharma teachers'. They should be ashamed."The good monks to whom Nichiren Daishonin is referring are those monks who "attack" those people and religions who slander the Dharma. The monks who do not cherish bodily life but only follow the Supreme Way, "not sparing bodily life".The Soka Gakkai leaders [priests], on the other hand, fail to follow these injunctions, slandering the monks of the Kempon Hokke and failing to attack those who slander the Dharma while "making their way through the world, nourishing themselves." Interfaith is not the practice of the Lotus Sutra nor is enriching oneself from the Dharma.Question: How do you know that the Kempon Hokke faith and practice is correct?Answer: It is is an impossibility that everyone having such divergent views are all correct. There is only One Vehicle, not two or three. We follow The Succession Through the Scrolls of the Lotus Sutra and the writings of Nichiren Daishonin. We turn to the Lotus Sutra and the writings of Nichiren Daishonin for guidance, not persons of the first, second, third, and fourth ranks, those SGI leader and Nichiren priests who fail to preach with Sutra in hand.
Thanks for posting this, Nine.Yes, you have the tiresome joyeternals of the Nichiren community who exclaim that their sect is the most correct and damn the others.But the other extreme is Nichiren Whateverism in which everyone is already a Buddha and therefore there's no need to practice or study Buddhism.IMO, the best position to take is an unsettled position. Be uneasy about where you are in the continuum between these two extremes.Seriously, I think contradictory and paradoxical teachings are for our benefit because they keep us from feeling too comfortable, smug, righteous, correct, etc. about our views.Feeling that you have it all figured out is also a kind of extremism. I'm leery of people who claim to have mastered Nichiren Buddhism, or that their sect has mastered it somehow. As if.
All the rhetoric around sect vs. sect and who can call themselves Nichiren Buddhists sounds weirdly legalistic. Like thousands of lawyers are arguing their cases using the Lotus Sutra and the gosho. As if "Mystic Law" is something like contract law.This cannot be what Nichiren or Shakyamuni or any of the great dharma teachers intended.I blame SGI for this state of affairs. When the priests excommunicated them, they twisted themselves into pretzels to justify why excommunication was a good thing, and how their beliefs were so much different than the priests. Really, there was no difference, except SGI wanted to replace the high priest with Ikeda. In truth, both espoused a fairly idiosyncratic, arcane "fuji" style set of beliefs that were intended to make them seem different than other Nichiren sects.Then the split. What ensued was some of the most painstaking, hairsplitting, absolutely absurd rhetorical gymnastics. Both sides took on a tone of legalistic authority, and it went on for years, polluting every discussion of Nichiren Buddhism at all levels. (It still goes on. Didn't mean to suggest that the Fuji wars have ended.)That's where a lot of this is coming from. People seem to forget that we're talking about dharma and the human heart and mind.Reading the Lotus Sutra or Nichiren's writings as if they're statutes or court rulings is really ridiculous.
"Question: How can we discern the error of distorted views? Although I am not wise enough, I am nevertheless anxious about my next life and have resolved to seek the Buddhist teachings to the best of my ability. Therefore, I wish to know this standard of evaluation by all means. Should it be that I am adhering to distorted views, I will reflect on them and turn to the correct view.Answer: It can be neither discerned with our physical eyes nor perceived with our shallow wisdom. We should use the sutras as our eyes and give precedence to the wisdom of the Buddha. Surely, however, if this standard is made clear, people will become enraged and be filled with resentment."He goes on to say, the standard for judging the absolute worth of a teaching is if it enables all people whether good or evil, to become Buddhas. By means of this standard, he asserts we can compare the various sutras and teachings and ascertain which is superior, which is inferior.In like manner we can evaluate the teachings of the various Nichiren sects to see which is superior and which is inferior.
Joyeternal, if you want to reply to a specific comment, click "reply" below the comment.Also, if you want to reply, you should maybe say something, uh, you know, that's a reply.What is this stuff you're cutting and pasting? Gosho quotes? If so, put it in a quote box. Nine Lives just said this. Select the text that's a quote and click the "quote" button. And always cite the exact source so people can see the context.Context is important here. You're taking something Nichiren said about why he believes the Lotus Sutra is the best sutra, and you're completely twisting it to make it sound as if he said that some people will attain Buddhahood by practicing the Lotus Sutra and some people won't, if they happen to be members of the wrong Nichiren sect. That's not what he's saying.Who has attained Buddhahood by practicing with a particular Nichiren sect? I would bet that there are many people, but we've never heard of them. Because they're not charismatic narcissists so they don't go around bragging about their Buddhahood. And I would bet that there are people of sincere, lifelong faith and practice in every Nichiren sect and independent practitioners, along with lots of unserious lookyloos and fakers and get-rich-quickers everywhere.So your criteria of judging inferior and superior is suspect because whether individuals have attained Buddhahood is:1. Unknowable2. Unverifiable3. Totally subjectiveHow about we all just give up the whole game of saying that correctness/Buddhahood is a function of group affiliation?Nichiren never. said. it. He never said that "correct group" affiliation was a prerequisite for Buddhahood.
Mroaks, you're the one with the bugaboo about using the quote box. I would prefer if everyone cited their sources when posting quotes. It helps the general conversation to know what's a quote and what's not, and where the quote comes from.I called out Kempon Hokke in my post, so it's only fair to let the representatives of Kempon Hokke (joyeternal in this case) respond however they see fit.I did get an email asserting that instead of saying "extremist" I should say "cult." There are Nichiren groups or sects, and there are Nichiren cults -- that's how some people see the dichotomy. (a.k.a. Nichiren Buddhists versus crazy Nichiren Buddhists.)
"Reading the Lotus Sutra or Nichiren's writings as if they're statutes or court rulings is really ridiculous."The Buddha was a stickler for correctness: thought; livelihood; effort; etc. Nichiren, no less so and he taught us how to correctly practice the Lotus Sutra through his actions as the Supreme Votary of the Lotus Sutra. Everyone seems to want to adopt their own manner of reading the Sutra. We strive to adopt Nichiren's manner. Why? Because neither Brooke, I, nor Ikeda are worthy to set ourselves up as paradigms of the faith and practice of the Lotus Sutra. Nichiren who, if we delve into the history of his life, was indeed the Master of the faith and practice of the Lotus Sutra. He is the paradigm of faith and practice. If we want to be a world class artist, who should we emulate, Bob Montana of Archie and Veronica comic fame, or Renoir? If every Nichiren Buddhist strove to have the same faith and practice as Nichiren and the same mind, we would have ironclad unity. There would be nothing to criticize. Those who strive to develop and spread the same faith and practice as Nichiren, when they encounter: 1. the nonsense taught by those, for example, who follow Daisaku Ikeda, their Nissatsu or Nichikan inspired priest, or their own self satisfied view of what the faith and practice of the Lotus Sutra entails in Mappo; 2). and have criticisms leveled against them by these same "shirkers and idlers"*, their determination only solidifies.*Opening of the Eyes
Just an aside: If I am not mistaken, the word that is often translated into english as "Right" in the Eightfold path could also be translated as "Complete". To me, this puts a very different light on interpreting the Buddha as being a stickler for correctness. I personally gave up my attachment to always being "Right" a while back.YMMV. Namaste, Engyo
Joyeternal, maybe your practice involves trying to emulate Nichiren, but mine doesn't. Some people think they need to emulate Ikeda. Many Christians value the emulation of Jesus.Personally, I think this is a totally stupid approach to religion -- trying to emulate people you've never met and don't really know. You're emulating projections and dogmas. You're essentially emulating a fiction.Again, maybe that's the cornerstone of your practice, but it's not part of mine. In fact, I think it's an unhealthy and destructive approach to religion. IMO, the point of religion is to re-link you to the God, Buddhamind, stillpoint, center, or whatever you want to call it, within yourself and within all.You seem to think that Buddhism and Nichiren have proposed a set of rules by which people must abide if they wish to awaken to their true nature.In general, rules-based religions are intolerant of ambiguity and complexity, making them fundamentalist or extremist. Thing is, even if there are general religious rules that most people agree with (Thou Shalt Not Kill, for example) it does absolutely no good. People still kill regardless of the rule. Some even kill in the name of the religion that teaches Thou shalt Not Kill.So what are you going to do? Make more religious rules? Enforce them more zealously? Good luck with that.Buddhism isn't about following rules to win some sort of prize. It's about awakening to Buddhahood. There may be one vehicle (meaning, awakened mind itself, a.k.a. buddhahood, the center, God consciousness, etc.) but there are infinite valid paths for this one vehicle. I think the truest and best path for me or you to follow is the one we blaze for ourselves using tools such as meditation and daimoku.As the saying goes, "Use the law as a lamp." Not as a crutch or a cudgel.
I like how you see this, deardenver. The One True Vehicle can go anywhere, on any path -- and ultimately the path is unique to the individual -- all-wheel drive. In the Nichiren tradition, the vehicle is the Lotus Sutra. In other traditions, the vehicle may be known by another name.I can dig it.
Excellent point, Engyo. I was not aware of this translation. "Complete" makes more sense to me than "correct."
To me, the biggest problem with emulating someone else is the subconscious bias that comes with it. Or maybe it's conscious bias. Either way, it's bias.For example, consider this. The historical Buddha was a man. The Lotus Sutra refers to the Buddha as male. But if you study the dharma, you learn that Buddha is not a gendered thing. It is neither he nor she. But the bias -- which you can see throughout the historic and present manifestations of the Buddhist sangha -- men are thought to be "closer" to being Buddha than women. There's enormous inequality in the roles of male/female practitioners.In Nichiren Buddhism, I know of only one female priest -- thousands and thousands of men, but only one woman that I have ever heard of. and in the SGI, they go so far as to proclaim literal divisions in their organization -- Men's Division and Women's Division. Separate ain't equal.There are cultural biases, too, that you internalize if you're trying to emulate someone else. Nichiren was Japanese. He lived in the Middle Ages. How his attitudes and specific actions and precise words were influenced by these factors, we may never fully know. It's ridiculous to assume that the behavior that worked for Nichiren in his time and place is appropriate for your time and place.In SGI, you can see the Japanese bias so clearly. Anyone who is Japanese or speaks Japanese or is a "fortune baby" of semi-Japanese parentage is considered to be somehow closer to Buddhahood. They somehow understand Nichiren Buddhism better than anyone else.Emulating Ikeda, you internalize a lot of really damaging bias. Grandiose pronunciations, declarations of victory, paranoid ramblings about persecution -- these things have nothing to do with dharma practice, but this is what Ikeda does, and this is what his self-proclaimed disciples do.Don't emulate. Don't copy anyone. Be yourself. Awakening to Buddhahood is not a mask or a pose.
Many ignorant fools assert that Karma and cause and effect is so complex that it falls into the realm of the unfathomable. Nichiren taught if you want to know the causes in the past look at the effect in the present and if you want to know the effect in the future look at the causes at present. A Votary of the Lotus Sutra, a Bodhisattva of the Earth, and a Buddha, can see causes and effects clearly. Chant Namu Myoho renge kyo with a correct faith and the same mind as Nichiren Daishonin and you too will see clearly the causes and effects. Then, you will know karma as clearly as a basketball fan knows the outcome of a series of games between the Miami Heat and the Cleveland Cavaliers. Many times it is quite easy to see the karma of others but not of one self. For example, even the lowly Nichiren Shoshu can perceive the working of Karma in the lives of SGI members:sgi13.htmlOthers teach that karma is fathomable but in order to do so you have to accomplish a myriad of esoteric practices, read all the Sutras and the commentaries by this or that man, and "follow me". They have no idea of the power of Namu Myoho renge kyo and can not believe that a practice this easy to accomplish changes flesh and blood eyes into the eyes of the Buddha.Then there are others who are in denial. They refuse to take responsibility for their own sufferings and misfortunes. How could they possibly affirm that the sufferings and misfortunes of others are due to the others' causes made in the past?Many are too politically correct to publicly acknowledge what is before their eyes, maintaining that it someone else's fault for being deformed, never correctly stating the Buddhist view that one is born or develops into bad circumstances because one tortured others into deformity, killed and maimed others on the battlefield, or was a negligent physician in a previous existence, for example. It is not the lack of oxygen in the womb's fault. It is not chance, according to Buddhism. A person's bad causes of suffocating others, as another example, results in the effect of being born into a womb lacking of oxygen. The Secondary Cause [one of the Ten Factors of life] is not the root cause of our suffering and misfortune. It is the Primary Cause of the person's impure thoughts, slanderous or hurtful words, and misdeeds carried out in the past that results in the effect of suffering and misfortune.Still others are unable to raise the lion's roar, too cowardly to take responsibility for rheir own misfortunes or to criticize others for their erroneous views about karma. They place blame on everyone and everything else for theirs or others misfortune rather than placing the blame squarely on themselves or the person who is suffering. When a little girl for example, demonstrates a mastery over several instruments without a lesson, it is thanks to the little girls noble causes she has made in the past. The ignorant pseudo-Buddhists are unable to perceive that this little girl has been assisting the deaf for many lifetimes, risked or lost her life saving a deaf person, she herself has suffered through myriad lifetimes unable to hear but finally broke through with some life changing kind act or a correct practice of Buddhism.What is difficult to understand is the enmity and stupidity of many so-called Nichiren believers like Clown, Mroaks, Joe Isuzu, Cultmember, dmr, and Dear Denver, for example, who mocked and slandered MarkP for sincerely expounding the Buddhist view of karma. I too have been mercilessly attacked and slandered for propounding a correct view of karma by such men as Engyo, Shoryo Tarabini, Brian Kearnes and others. These men and women, far from being enlightened, are steeped in the Three Poisons. How fortunate are we who believe in the golden words of the Sutra and Nichiren Daishonin! The armies of Mara both internally and externally attacked Shakyamuni Buddha and Nichiren Daishonin. Without them, they could never have revealed their Buddhahood. I only hope that those who slandered Mark P. and the correct teachings of Buddhism are eventually engaged in a life and death struggle to either reveal their Buddhahood or to sink into the great citadel of hell. Perhaps these men and women will awaken at the very moment of death? Either way they serve as a lesson. The Gosho, On Practicing the Buddha's teachings concludes with the type of faith to muster at the crucial moment:"Life flashes by in but a moment. No matter how many terrible enemies you may encounter, banish all fears and never think of backsliding. Even if someone were to cut off our heads with a saw, impale our bodies with lances, or shackle our feet and bore them through with a gimlet, as long as we are alive, we must keep chanting Namu-myoho-renge-kyo, Namu-myoho-renge-kyo. Then, if we chant until the very moment of death, Shakyamuni, Many Treasures, and the Buddhas of the ten directions will come to us instantly, exactly as they promised during the ceremony at Eagle Peak. Taking our hands and bearing us on their shoulders, they will carry us to Eagle Peak. The two sages, the two heavenly kings, and the ten demon daughters will guard us, while all the heavenly gods and benevolent deities will raise a canopy over our heads and unfurl banners on high. They will escort us under their protection to the treasure land of Tranquil Light. How can such joy possibly be described!"
joyeternal, i am tempted to let you have the last word here because your response is a perfect example of the doctrinaire, self-righteous, wounded, defensive, simplistic, cookie-cutter crazy talk that gives nichiren buddhism a bad reputation.i am responding to you because you have once again misrepresented nichiren, who did in fact write: it is impossible to fathom one's karma. Impossible.Pointless, too, i would add.
Question: How can you be certain that the exiles and sentences of death imposed on you are the result of karma created in the past?Answer: A bronze mirror will reflect color and form. The First Emperor of the Ch'in dynasty had a lie-detecting mirror that would reveal offenses committed in this present life. The mirror of the Buddha's Law makes clear the causal actions committed in the past. The Parinirvana Sutra states: "Good man, because people committed countless offenses and accumulated much evil karma in the past, they must expect to suffer retribution for everything they have done. They may be despised, cursed with an ugly appearance, be poorly clad and poorly fed, seek wealth in vain, be born to an impoverished and lowly family or one with erroneous views, or be persecuted by their sovereign. They may be subjected to various other sufferings and retributions. It is due to the blessings obtained by protecting the Law that they can diminish in this lifetime their suffering and retribution."Of course if one doesn't have a mirror, has a cloudy mirror, or has no eyes, one can not see.
Mroaks, we see eye to eye on this issue. Whenever I read a superstitious pseudo-analysis of karma, it makes me want to run screaming from buddhism.The whole "you're ugly because you made bad karma in the past" argument is a favorite of buddhist fundamentalists, not just nichiren buddhist fundamentalists.Karma means action. The only karma we should be concerned about is the karma we're creating right now with our words and actions.Fundamentalists are mostly concerned about past karma and future karma -- they can't focus on the now and the real. They are off in the magical realm of theory and superstition. That's why it never occurs to them to wonder what kind of karma they are creating right now by judging superficial appearances and speculating about what other people have done in the past.Nine Lives is right on this whole issue. Fundamentalists can and do use quotes from buddhist scriptures and revered teachers to bolster their case that buddhism is essentially a rules-based, superstition-laden, punitive set of teachings that must be practiced zealously and taken literally.I like to think that the people who reject this fundamentalism are more "buddhist." But when you start ranking who's more buddhist or less buddhist, you're starting to draw your own little fundamentalist lines in the sand.