Chapter 6 from Nam-myoho-renge-kyo: A Personal Exploration of the Wonderful Buddhist Mantra by Cris Roman.
I feel that Nichiren must have been continually working in his subconscious on the what and when of the Gohonzon. There is evidence to support the notion that the Gohonzon was a work in progress.
Each year, the Head Temple of Nichiren Shoshu holds an "airing" ceremony in which many of the Gohonzon inscribed by Nichiren are placed on display for believers. Looking at this collection, it is clear that Nichiren's notion of what the Gohonzon should include evolved as the years passed.
The Gohonzon is usually either in the form of a wooden tablet or a paper scroll, which we in the West generically refer to as a mandala. The Gohonzon is rectangular with a great deal of writing on it. The writing is almost all in kanji -- Chinese-rooted pictograms -- which, for the most part, depict Japanese terms and concepts. However, there is some pure Chinese, as well as Sanskrit, on the mandala.
As I mentioned before, Nichiren wanted to include in his teachings all the languages that were known to him in order to impart a sense of universality and global applicability. It's important that when we look at the Gohonzon, we see more than just a scroll full of foreign writing.
Written vertically going down the center of the Gohonzon are several kanji that say Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, Nichiren. Around this central phrase are a variety of other pictograms representing characters and events from the Lotus Sutra, including mythological Buddhist characters ranging from Sakyamuni himself and his various disciples to a variety of demons and protective deities.
In Japanese, there is a word which literally translates as "protective gods," but which is understood by both scholars and practicing Buddhists to mean protective forces. When I reference such concepts as gods, devils and demons, I am not proposing the existence of a pantheon of separate entities that somehow holds sway over our lives. Rather, these are metaphors that are used by Nichiren to communicate emotion as well as context.
It is said that Nichiren intended the Gohonzon to be seen, at least on a superficial level, as a symbolic representation of the pivotal event of the Lotus Sutra known as the Ceremony in the Air, also referred to as the Treasure Tower ceremony.
Earlier I mentioned that the two great revelations of the Lotus Sutra were the accessibility of enlightenment to every person, and the reality of Buddhahood as being an eternally existing condition within our lives rather than some destination which we may or may not reach -- a concept known as orginal enlightenment.
The first revelation is contained in the second chapter. In general, the first 14 (of 28) chapters of the Lotus Sutra are considered to deal with this. In the latter half of the sutra, Sakyamuni reveals the concept of original enlightenment and talks about the mechanism whereby this teaching may spread.
Sakyamuni tells the story of the Ceremony in the Air to convey the magnitude of what he foresees happening. In this ceremony, several of his disciples and believers ask Sakyamuni how this wondrous teaching can be communicated into the future. They are most concerned that Buddhism be transmitted correctly and effectively for later generations.
Recognizing their concern, Sakyamuni tells them not to worry, it's all been taken care of. As he says this, the entire assemblage of Sakyamuni and his disciples rises into the sky. Sakyamuni declares that the essence of his teaching actually predates him and his enlightenment -- it stems from the Buddha or "original enlightenment," which has existed since time without beginning.
In response to his teaching, a wondrous jewel-encrusted treasure tower rises from the earth. Sakyamuni takes his seat at the top of the tower. Another Buddha, by the name of Taho, who is seated on the opposite side. Taho is considered to be the Buddha whose function is to verify the truth of what Sakyamuni is teaching, which he does.
In response to the disciples' questions about who among them will be entrusted with this great teaching, the earth opens up. Out spill millions upon millions of Bodhisattvas of the Earth, said to number more than the sands of the Ganges River. They are led by a figure known as Jogyo.
These bodhisattvas promise to take the teaching into the Latter Day of the Law, which Sakyamuni prophesied would be about two millennia after his death, and bring the teaching to all humankind. Taho verifies this promise and mission of the Bodhisattvas of the Earth. The entire assembly celebrates and is in awe of what they have just heard.
In his writings, Nichiren often refers to this Ceremony in the Sky and expresses his opinion that he may be fulfilling the function of Jogyo in the Latter Day of the Law. Additionally, he refers to his believers and followers as Bodhisattvas of the Earth.
In the Buddhist view of things, the bodhisattva is the highest operational function of life we can strive for.
I know -- earlier, I said that we all will become Buddhas. So am I contradicting myself?
In the sutras there is no explanation of Buddhahood. There are descriptions of what Buddha looks like and wonderful tales of the miracles he performs, but there's no real talk about what it feels like to be a Buddha.
I believe there are two ways we can look at the existence of the Buddha. One is that he is an historical personage, a great teacher who brings the lessons of enlightenment to all human beings. Sakyamuni was the first, and most familiar Buddha. T'ien-t'ai of China is also considered by many to have been a Buddha. Nichiren is thought by many of his disciples, myself included, to have been a Buddha as well.
But if we view the Buddha primarily as "a being who functions as a great teacher," then it is absurd to suggest that we all become teachers. Who would be the students?
Also, what would be the point of functioning as a Buddha like Sakyamuni? The teachings have already been given (at least on this planet) and, by definition, should prove adequate to benefit all humankind from now into the infinite future.
I suppose if you really wanted to be a teacher like Sakyamuni, you could always chant to be reborn on another planet where the teachings haven't been revealed yet.
Although we may not function as historical Buddhas in this life, we can still have the same awareness as they. This is a second way to look at what it means to be a Buddha. Buddhahood is a level of awareness and capacity that we, too, can attain.
Nichiren and other Buddhist teachers admonish us to strive to function as bodhisattvas. Bodhisattva is the state of life that flowers from Buddha awareness. It is no easy state to achieve.
In the Buddhist texts there are many stories of bodhisattvas and their accomplishments. Nichiren references the story of Fukyo, which is told in the 21st chapter of the Lotus Sutra. According to Nichiren, Bodhisttava Fukyo's spirit is the spirit that all Buddhists should try to achieve. Fukyo's attitude is the most effective attitude we can have in life.
Bodhisattva Fukyo is portrayed in the Lotus Sutra as constantly manifesting, in both word and action, the awareness that all around him possess the Buddha nature. He wanders around, hands clasped in front of him, extolling the virtues of all who surround him, repeating, "I worship the Buddha within you."
For his troubles, he is continually abused and reviled. Nonetheless, his unwavering commitment to the potential divinity of all human beings is what makes Fukyo the prime example of the spirit all Buddhists should try to enhance within themselves.
Stuck in the everyday world with all kinds of jerks, from our bosses to our spouses, to the person driving the car in front of us -- many of us can at least partially relate to how difficult this kind of awareness may be to achieve.
At this point, I might do well do draw the obvious comparison between the bodhisattva and the Western concept of good Samaritan. In terms of function and attitude they are very similar. However, I might make one distinction.
It seems to me that the Samaritan acts out of faith in God, and that is all well and very good. Nonetheless, I perceive the Samaritan as having a possible pitfall. In the service of others and seeking redemption from without, he or she may turn a blind eye to the God that exists within. Therefore, I can conceive of a situation in which a Samaritan might, despite a life of good works, have a less-than-perfect sense of his or her wondrous value and thereby not attain fulfillment.
In contrast, the bodhisattva must undertake his or her good works with a real and growing belief in "human divinity," also known as Buddhahood, or "original enlightenment."
By definition, a bodhisattva must respect the perfection of all human life, including his or her own.
My experience in the practice of Buddhism has led me to the conclusion that this (the concept of one's own original enlightenment) is a fundamental issue that needs to be addressed as Westerners pursue the goals of both Buddhahood and the bodhisattva ethic. This is especially true for those raised in the Judeo-Christian culture.
Even as one sincerely tries to be of service and good will to others, he or she must remember Nichiren's warning: "If you think the Law is outside yourself, you are embracing not the Mystic Law but some inferior teaching."
In other words, if you want to make others happy, you'd better get happy yourself.
This is what I love about Buddhism. It truly is predicated on a win-win scenario. Rather than exemplifying some selfless, austere form of altruism, the bodhisattva must become convinced that what will truly lead others to happiness is the confidence and joy that he or she manifests from within.
The bodhisattva, unlike the Buddha, is described more from the aspect of true spirit than actual function. In this way, Buddhism leaves the door open for each of us to become totally unique individuals. The bodhisattva may be a teacher, a doctor, a mechanic, a farmer, a stripper, or even a used-car salesman.
There are no proscriptions regarding the function of the bodhisattva...although it would seem obvious that taking or degrading human life would lessen one's opportunity for enlightenment.
Nonetheless, in the second chapter of the Lotus Sutra, Sakyamuni predicted the enlightenment of even Devadatta, the man who tried several times to assassinate him. Obviously, Sakyamuni's point is that no one lacks the Buddha potential.
*
Chapter 1: Looking for a Bridge
Chapter 2: Nichiren and the Lotus Sutra
Chapter 3: Defining Nam-myoho-renge-kyo
Chapter 4: The Benefits of Buddhist Practice
Chapter 5: A Focal Point for One's Faith
Chapter 6: The Gohonzon and Bodhisattva Practice
Chapter 7: A Personal Relationship with the Gohonzon
Chapter 8: Theoretical Underpinnings of the Gohonzon
Chapter 9: Theoretical Underpinnings of the Gohonzon, Part Two
Chapter 10: Gongyo, An Intensely Personal Symphony
8 comments
Taisekiji is not in possession of any authenticated Gohonzon{s} by Nichiren himself. They may have the backing of the Nichizen Mandala, but that one can not be authenticated. A look at the Gohonzon Shu, and the Gosho, shows that Nichiren's concept of the Gohonzon did not evolve. It was always a depiction of Chapter 16, orn in general, the Ceremony in the Sky. Some are abbreviated, some are formal. Some of his later ones are abbreviated. All of the Mandala Gohonzon{s} are considered Dharma Honzon because they center on Namu Myoho Renge Kyo. The amount of detail shown varies. The earlier formal style ones include 2 of emanation Buddhas in the top row, the later ones omit them. Nichiren also taught use of the Nin-Honzon; composed with statues. These center on the Eternal Shakyamuni Buddha; sometimes flanked by statues of the 4 leaders of the BfG. These mostly date to later in Nichiren's life, probably because they are less portable and more expensive, than a mandala. After his passing, Dharma Honzon made of statues appear, centered on the Daimoku Stupa. Daimoku Stupas may also have been carved while he was alive. Pictorial Mandalas also appeared after Nichiren's passing. Whether the Buddhas, Bodhissatvas, and other beings are shown as their names in kanji, as statues, or as paintings, the meaning is the same. They can be viewed as archetypesof spiritual states; states of mind. I take the Nin-Honzon as depicting the 5 skandhas purified; while the Dharma-Gohonzon illustrates Ichinen Sanzen. That is my theory. gasshorobin
"Written vertically going down the center of the Gohonzon are several kanji that say Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, Nichiren." Nope. This is tey another misconception inherited from Nichikan. I must admit it looks that way on some of Nichiren's Gohonzon[s]. However, it is is simply his name, written with two kanji, and his stylized seal, called a kao. The location of these varies on Nichiren's mandalas. They are always at the bottom; sometimes centered, sometimes not. When Nikko made mandalas, he signed them, "Nichiren Zaigohon, Nikko." Zaigohan means something like "by authority of." Adding that after a name indicates a person is acting as sort of a proxy or agent. Taisekiji, Kitayama, and Nishiyama apparently all follow that tradition. The other successors generally simply wrote their own name and kao at the bottom. Sometimes, we will see, Namu Nichiren Shonin, Namu Nichiren Daishonin, or Namu Nichiren Daibosatsu, below the Daimoku, followed by the signature of the person who drew it. Nikko may have done it this way on occasion. most like this are more recent. I picture Nichiren at the Ceremony. seated in front of the Daimoku, facing it, looking up at it. I think that is closer to Nichiren's and Nikko's intention, if they had one, if they even envisioned him at the ceremony. Others see him facing us, sort of emanating or descending from the Daimoku. I think that is from a Nichikan interpolation. There is not even any real evidence that Nichiren's name on there is anything other than a signature; no evidence it was originally intended to make him part of the Gohonzon. However, it appears that latter view became common later on. He is now often viewed as a literal appearance of Bodhisattva Superior Practices. The notion that he is the Nin-honzon or True Buddha is an aberration unique to Taisekiji, first mentioned publicly by Nichikan. There is no hard evidence that even Nikko believed that; plenty that he did not. I doubt it even occurred to him. The Nichiren as True Buddha teaching came from highly complex form of "Hokke Shinto Honji Suijaku." Nikko probably did believe in a very rudimentary form of Hokke Shinto. However the identification of Nichiren with Amaterasu Omikami {Tensho Daijin} and Shakyamuni, as a sort of trinity, happened at Taisekiji well after Nikko's time. iirc, in medieval Hokke Shinto, Tensho Daijin is seen as an reward body of Shakyamuni, and Hachiman as as a response body. This has loose roots in Nichiren and Nikko's writings. Noter that Tensho Daijin and Hachiman flank Kyo, on either side, on many mandalas; or are on either side, juat below kyo.Later, Tensho Daijin is identified by some nationalists as the Dharma Body, with Shakyamuni demoted to an emanation or even a response body. Then, Nichiren is identified as the original identity of Tensho Diajin {Sun Goddess}, and from there, the Buddha of Musa Sanjin. That is convoluted, but I am not making it up. BTW; Tensho Daijin and Amaterasu Omikami are alternate readings of the Kanji for the sun goddesss Heaven Illuminating Big Kami.http://tinyurl.com/656kf6gasshorobinIn Secret Transmissions in the Hokke Shu, from Original Enlightenment and the Transformation of Medieval Japanese Buddhism, Dr. Jacquie Stone wrote: "Equations of specific Buddhist and Shinto deities often involve claims about the legitimacy and authority of particular institutions. Here the authority of the Sun Goddess and the throne are assimilated to the Hokkeshu via the person of Nichiren, carrying an implicit challenge to the authority of other religious traditions, such as Sanno Shinto of Mt. Hiei, which also identifies Sakyamuni with the Sun Goddess enshrined at Ise, or the esoteric traditions of both Tendai and Shingon that equated Dainichi with the Sun Goddess. The identification of Nichiren with the Sun Goddess is especially pronounced in transmissions of the Fuji school, which exalt the status of Nichiren to that of the original Buddha."
I suppose at this juncture it would be prudent of me to remind people that I mentioned at the beginning of these writings that I am not an academic nor do I lay claim to being one. These are simply understandings and beliefs I have come to after 40 years of practice, which included, I am sure, incorrect mentoring from less than perfect mentors.I do not care about Nam or Namu, nor do I care about the dogma handed down by the variety of Nichiren sects. Dogma, I believe, which is for the most part, irrelevant for Western practitioners. What I am going to say here is perhaps going to stop many people from continuing to read my writings, but I feel the need to clarify where I am coming fromGiven the concept of entity and function (Shoho Jisso)as I understand it, I believe that the lives and enlightenments of Shakyamuni, T'ien-t'ai (Chih-I) and Nichiren were all the same... they simply functioned differently in accordance with time and space. I readily admit to believing that Nichiren's is the fundamental, and original (as opposed to "true") practice of the Lotus Sutra. And I also admit to being mentored (as opposed to "mastered"), however imperfectly, by Nichiren Shoshu priests, Soka Gakkai leaders and even university professor or two. Therefore, I apologize for any technical, academic errors in my writing. However, I do not apologize for my beliefs, predicated on both my own lengthy experience of practice and abiding sense that what I feel inside is absolutely valid.That said, I simply want to state that as beliefs, these are all statements of faith... by definition, they cannot be proven or disproven. Above all, I believe the teachings of Shakyamuni and Nichiren to be religious, not philosophical, though they have profound philosophical underpinnings which others may argue about as much as they wish. I simply don't have the time or inclination anymore. I hope my writings will be read as simple statements of my own unique, individual approach (as is all of ours) to my practice and faith... if they support or enlighten, that's great, if they seem heretical, or wrong, that's great too. I simply hope that those who chant Nam(u)-myoho-renge-kyo to the Gohonzon could simply "transcend their differences and meet together on Eagle Peak" and unite in bringing this Rolls Royce of religious practice into a world that is on the verge of driving itself off a cliff. So far, we've been marketing it like a Yugo and the paucity of our results are self-evident.
Please do not take offense. We were spoon a lot of Taisekiji dogma in the past, that simply does not hold hold up. I would have said the same things 10 years ago. In the last 6 years, I have relearned everything. The first step for me was to let go of attachment to fixed views. So far, I have time to scan parts of your book. It is obviously well written. It is also appears to clearly explain what those of raised in Nichiren Shoshu / Soka Gakkai were taught, and goes beyond that. So far, I have only commented on the points I presently disagree with and consider important. This is a tad long winded, I hope you can bear with me. :} Now, Nam is just a technically bad transliteration of Namu. It can certainly be pronounced Nam, with an unvoiced, un-aspirated u, but it is still two kanji. Writing it Nam gives the mis-impression there is one kanji. In all other instances, Watson, SGI, and NST transliterate the same two kanji as Namu. People will tell me that Nichiren wrote Nam in the Gosho, and Nam on the Gohonzon; they cite the SGI Gosho translation as proof. =:0 Next, the idea that Nichiren's name and kao are part of the central inscription is one of the more misleading bits of Taisekiji Dogma out there. As is the notion that Nichiren's conception of the Gohonzon evolved over time. Those are not simply misconceptions, they were self serving distortions that supported a sectarian agenda. Anyway, he signed the mandalas at the bottom. His earliest formal mandalas are just as conceptually evolved as his last ones. Those are not just opinions or beliefs; it is based on evidence. I had to struggle with this several years before changing my mind. On the main point you made, Chris, I agree, Enlightenment is indeed Enlightenment. The quality of Enlightenment of the Nun Dhammadina is or was exactly the same as Shakyamuni's. He said so. However, Buddhism does not simply dismiss and ignore conventional distinctions. Otherwise, why single out three male humans as having some special Enlightenment? To say T'ien T'ai is the Buddha of the Middle Day, and Nichiren is the Buddha of the Latter Day, is making conventional distinctions that are simply incorrect. There are not separate Samyaksambuddhas for the three stages of one Dharma Dispensation. That was just a clever invention of Taisekiji, to support the notion that the Gosho supersedes the Maka Shikan; which supersedes the Lotus Sutra. That is exactly the opposite of what Nichiren Shonin taught -- to trust Sutra over commentaries, and public commentaries over confidential commentaries. Taisekiji reversed all that; ranking their kuden transmissions over authentic Gosho, and the Gosho over the Lotus Sutra. Again, from the viewpoint of nonduality, there is no distinction between the Awakening of Shakyamuni, T'ien T'ai, and Nichiren. However, we can not accurately mix non-dual concepts with conventional concepts. Nichiren called that confusing the general and specific; and considered it an important matter. If we are going to accept an idea that all Buddhas are the same, then, to be consistent, we have to accept that Amida, Dainichi, Vairochana, Medicine Buddha, and all the Emanation Buddhas are all equal to Shakyamuni. There are reasons why Nichiren Shonin rejected that -- I outlined three in another thread -- see below. Someone asked if it makes any difference if we envision the Eternal Buddha as Shakyamuni or Nichiren? My answer is yea. To expand, why not include the above in that? Or, include some female Buddhas? After all, the Awakening of all Buddhas is the same. 1. The Source Buddha is not just an impersonal Dharma that emanates a Reward Body and and a Response / transformational body. The Source Buddha, as Nichiren taught, is the unity of all Three Bodies as one Eternally Existent Uncreated Tripled Bodied Tathagata.2. From the viewpoint of conventional truth, Shakyamuni is the Samyaksambuddha of the present Dharma Dispensation. Therefore, he is taken as the appearance of the Source Buddha in our world. 3. All the symbolism of the Lotus Sutra is structured on the axiomatic assumption that Shakyamuni is or represents the Original Buddha. It is like a jigsaw puzzle; if we move the pieces around, the picture gets distorted. This is not just my take. It is my understanding of what Nichiren Shonin taught in Kaimoku Sho and other major writings. That understanding is supported by my still evolving general knowledge of the Buddhism that Nichiren would have taken as assumptions. If anyone stayed with me this long, thank you. Also, please do not take my word for anything, see for yourself. Reverend Ryuei's commentaries have been of tremendous assistance. gassho with mettarobin
Robin, I am getting a lot out of Cris' book as well as your comments. Several of the points you made are news to me. I tend to dismiss sectarian differences as rooted in impenetrable Japanese grudges -- I gather from your comments that there's more going on here, and I'm a tad overwhelmed. I really want to understand and practice what Nichiren taught. Is there an agreed upon set of teachings and assumptions we can universally call Nichiren Buddhism?also, would you provide a link to the Ryuei writings you mentioned?
I can not think of, off hand, if Ryuei has a talk on the "Nichiren as True Buddha" issue. We discussed this at length at Soka Gakkai Unofficial. I grasped the concepts first; then filled in the terminology via discussions with Reverend Eijo {Shingon} and some Theravdins at E-Sangha. I had also read all the positions of Lamont, the Honmon Shoshu people, and others. Another thing I did was to study the Kaimoku Sho without the Taisekiji / Soka Gakkai spin. This veers away from the thread topic, so I shall start a diary. Meanwhile, here is a link to Reverend Ryuei's formal on line articles: http://nichirenscoffeehouse.ne...
First of all, I want to assure there is no offense taken. As one who was, over twenty years ago, placed on official "enemies" lists of both the Gakkai and the Nichiren Shoshu temples in America, I have developed a pretty thick skin and would like to believe I have pretty much developed lovingkindness for all (though I'm still having problems with Mr. Bush).That said, I appreciate all your commentary very much, Robin. It shows great scholarship and a broad depth of understanding I am sure I can never approach. I only take exception to the first sentence of your last couple postings on this thread: "Taisekiji is not in possession of any authenticated Gohonzon{s} by Nichiren himself."I lived at Taisekiji for many weeks in the early seventies. I have had the opportunity to attend the Omushibarai (scroll-airing ceremony) held there on an annual basis. At the time of the airing, I was told, by both priests and scholars alike who were in attendance, that many, many of the scrolls were inscribed by Nichiren himself. Not only Nichiren Shoshu priests, but academics, assured me (both at that time and now--I asked after I saw your comment) that, as best they could tell, the Nichiren calligraphy on these scrolls was authentic (and please understand I am not referring here to the "Dai-Gohonzon," which is certainly suspect to the many issues you have raised).Granted, they have not been carbon-dated and outside documentation is difficult, due to the Fuji school's tradition of not allowing photographic copies of their Gohonzon. However, I would suggest that your statement may be more one of your's or others' opinions rather than one of fact. I know what I have seen and I trust those whose opinions I seek -- by the way, the correct spelling is "Jackie."Look, as I tried to make clear earlier... we all come to this point in time via our own biased apperception. I admit my formative Buddhist years were spent in the Gakkai and Nichiren Shoshu, however those years ended in 1983 and I spent 10-15 years in deprogramming myself (from the "True" point of view) before I wrote the first word of my book in the Black Hills. Nonetheless, I still consider Nichiren, the Daishonin, and my Gohonzon (admittedly I should have said "my" instead of "the"), inscribed by Nittatsu, does have Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, Nichiren inscribed down the dead center, both in appearance and function. It is my only treasure, other than those few that may be carried within my heart.I know it is fashionable, especially on the Internet and in Gakkai buildings around the world, to excoriate Taisekiji and Nichiren Shoshu, and for very good reason -- though I still believe the major villain of the piece to be an aging meglomaniac in Shinanomachi. Nonetheless, as one who has witnessed scroll-airing, visited the Gohozo(the treasure house) at Taisekiji and counts many Nichiren Shoshu priests as friends, not mentors, I would beg you not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. As Scotty from Star Trek might say, "There be treasures there."
Key word there is authenticated. Kitayama {Omosu}, the Nikko Temple close to Taisekiji, has several they regard as authentic. In fact, both Kitayama & Taisekiji claim to have the same Nichizen Mandala. One or both of those is a good forgery. An impartial "Gohonzon Shu" scholar that Liugi just recently spoke with has seen them, suspects Taisekiji has the original. On Kitayama, only one of their Nichiren Gohonzon{s} the Teppo Honzon, has been authenticated. The others might be real McCoy's, but there are problems. Of the 7 or so at Tanjoji; Nichiren's Birth Temple, none are authenticated. A common issue is the dates do not make sense. There are maybe hundreds or more Mandalas that various temples think are in Nichiren's hand. Only 128 to 132 are authenticated at present. There are a couple, the Sosei amulet of 1264, and the Sado Siken-no-Daimandara of July 08 1273, that no longer exist. They were lost in a fire a Minobu. Copies and diagrams to exist; made by the 33rd abbot of Kuon-ji. The July 08 1273 Daimandara was a full formal Ten World's Great Mandala done on a piece of silk almost six feet tall, and about 2 feet wide. It was done at Kondo Kiyohisa's residence at Ichinosawa, near Mano Bay, on the Sea of Japan. iirc, There is a Nichiren Shu Temple at the site. One more thing, a lot of the Mandalas & amulets Nichiren made for followers are highly abbreviated. This is true of early ones as well as later ones. There are wood block prints of some with dates as early as 1253. Obviously, there is no way to authenticate those, since there is no known extant original. Some of these would be like the "B" Gosho, impossible to prove either way. Luigi is in Japan now. He hopes to have an English translation of the latest Gohonzon Catalog ready by next spring. I was working on an amateur translation of an older Gohonzon Shu, but decided to wait. I have to examine and look up each kanji and then try to make sense of it in context; Luigi can actually read it. gasshorobin