Walt Whitman (1819–1892). Leaves of Grass. 1900.

O Captain! My Captain!

O CAPTAIN! my Captain! our fearful trip is done;
The ship has weather’d every rack, the prize we sought is won;
The port is near, the bells I hear, the people all exulting,
While follow eyes the steady keel, the vessel grim and daring:
But O heart! heart! heart!
O the bleeding drops of red,
Where on the deck my Captain lies,
Fallen cold and dead.

O Captain! my Captain! rise up and hear the bells;
Rise up—for you the flag is flung—for you the bugle trills;
For you bouquets and ribbon’d wreaths—for you the shores a-crowding;
For you they call, the swaying mass, their eager faces turning;
Here Captain! dear father!
This arm beneath your head;
It is some dream that on the deck,
You’ve fallen cold and dead.

My Captain does not answer, his lips are pale and still;
My father does not feel my arm, he has no pulse nor will;
The ship is anchor’d safe and sound, its voyage closed and done;
From fearful trip, the victor ship, comes in with object won;
Exult, O shores, and ring, O bells!
But I, with mournful tread,
Walk the deck my Captain lies,
Fallen cold and dead.

Who’s being mourned?
I’ll give you a hint. It’s not “your” captain and it’s not “our” captain. But a choice is made available.

There are only about four or five words, which are strictly untranslatable, and are autonomous unto their self from the Lotus Sutra and need be used (and explained in context) to make a point in addressing Buddhism. In every other case, in the US, if you can’t use an English word in describing or explaining, you probably don’t understand what you’re talking about in the first place.

“Sensei!”

Its usage between some practitioners in the SGI is cavalier at best and unsettling. It’s used in speeches and can be seen on twenty-five foot long banners in SGI community centers wishing “sensei” a happy birthday. And everyone assumes that this Japanese word, “sensei”, means “mentor” or “teacher”, which is in turn construed to be Daisaku Ikeda when used by a Soka Gakkai member. And because there is no questioning of the meaning of “sensei” specifically when referring to Daisaku Ikeda, I could easily take a page from the Soka Spirit web site play book and pass my own spurious title past the true believers by making this statement:

“I’d like to read something from Sensei in a moving address which I believe accurately reflects the Soka Spirit movement; ‘So we have come together on this day to prove symbolically that we are more than a collection of individuals, that none of us is too proud, none of us too high, none is too rich, and none too poor, to stand together. Everything that we have created up to the present we owe solely to goodness of heart, its capacity, its loyalty, its decency, its industry, its sense of order. So this, I believe, can be our message: we are proud enough to confess that we ourselves are a treasure. I could, as leader, think of no more glorious, no prouder task in this world than to serve this people.’ ”

But in this case, my “sensei” is Adolph Hitler. It makes as much sense to use this word “sensei” as “insegnante”, “professeur”, or “leraar”, all equal in meaning but likewise have no place in Buddhism in the USA.

I got into a discussion with someone who works at a SGI publication, who believes that this Japanese word “sensei” has been incorporated into the American lexicon. And they sent me examples of other words they too believe to be akin to this: crikey (which spell check automatically challenges), sushi, igloo, Creole, and fiesta. I happened to be in Salt Lake City at the time, which, so far as I know, is still part of the United States. So I made up a sentence using all these words, which are supposedly recognizable by Americans across this nation:

“Crikey, sensei is eating sushi in an igloo during Creole fiesta!”

I canvassed about twenty locals over two weeks when the opportunity presented itself by repeating this sentence and asking if they understood what I was saying. Everybody knew what sushi and fiesta meant; no brainer. Most knew that an igloo was either where Eskimos live or it was what kept their beer cold. Creole, which I thought most people would know, was about 25% understood to be an American Indian tribe or jambalaya. Two people knew crikey, which was the least recognized word. “Sensei” was recognized as a “karate” teacher by about half. The rest had no idea what it meant. It never had a religious connotation nor ever as a mentor. It definitely didn’t mean Daisaku Ikeda. Not in Utah.

I'm basically writing in an effort to clarify issues surrounding Nichiren Buddhism as presented by the organization I belong to, SGI; a religion and a practice which professes that it's goals can only be achieved through a faith in which it has no deity. I ask questions that challenge the laity (that's me) with the burden of proof. I know that's what the infrastructure of the organization is supposed to do. And they do encourage people to deepen their faith by actual proof. But, and I guess I just discovered what I'm writing about next, we really need to re-define faith. That word is also bandied about a lot because Nichiren uses it, or we define whatever word he used 800 years ago as “faith”. But we in our Western/Christian society equate “faith” with a suspension of disbelief. So we have a tendency to not prove, but accept. And I think that’s why the usage of the word “sensei” or the phrase "our mentor” is endemic of a larger problem. Or, to put it another way, in an effort to encourage people, the organization has relied upon what has become intrinsic to the culture of origin but contains no external validity with regards to Buddhism. Anyone in a position of organizational responsibility that refers to Daisaku Ikeda collectively as "our mentor" in public, in print or on video, removes the burden of proof from the individual, which inhibits what is commonly referred to as “human revolution” and postpones the misnomer “kosen-rufu” that much longer. Stating, or worse assuming, that everyone thinks alike is not leading anyone anywhere except to a cul-de-sac where conformity is also mistaken for unity.

That being said, in researching this topic I was directed to a CD of archival articles from both the World Tribune and Living Buddhism. Although I completely disagree with his usage of “our mentor”, the author of this article, a man for whom I have great respect, petitions for common sense and the shedding off of the cloak of Japanese culture so intrinsically married to this Buddhism. I am resurrecting it to share. For in it he addresses several of the issues that so many of us currently wrestle with. And ironically this is from 2000, the year I re-engaged myself to SGI.

PERSPECTIVE
ADVOCATING THE UNIVERSALITY OF BUDDHISM
BY DAVE BALDSCHUN
LA TUNA CANYON, CALIF.
I believe we have been given a specific mandate by our mentor, SGI President Ikeda, to create an organization unlike any in the world—including the Soka Gakkai in Japan. Just a few weeks ago, in his message to the women’s conference at the Florida Nature and Culture Center, he said, “Please have an enjoyable, bright and cheerful time, in a manner befitting America” (Feb. 25 World Tribune, p. 3). During his visit here in 1990, he said, “I would like the SGI-USA to be a model for the rest of the world” (March 1990 Seikyo Times, p. 7).
During that visit he also said: “From the outset America has been a country to which people from around the world have flocked, leaving their homelands for one reason or another. They came to this country searching for a new home. It is the task of the kosen- rufu movement to breathe life into America’s purpose of building a new home for these people” (March 1990 Seikyo Times, p. 72). The next year he returned to this country and said: “The United States above all serves as an all-important stage for the whole world. It is an exciting and dynamic stage of vast dimensions” (November 1991 Seikyo Times, p. 21).
In 1993 he talked about a “new American Renaissance” and asked that we “march forward, carrying high the Stars and Stripes and the tri-colored SGI flag” (March 1993 Seikyo Times, p. 50).
Building an organization that is particularly American in character is an ongoing process. One of the ways our progress has become evident is in the language we use. We define who we are by the way we speak. Twenty or thirty years ago, we were strongly influenced in our speech and behavior by the immigrant Japanese who pioneered the organization. Our debt to them is immeasurable and a large part of that debt lies in our responsibility to further develop the SGI-USA. They didn’t intend for the organization to be an isolated Japanese colony. And so we have continued to change as our diversity and numbers grew.
The use of organizational jargon has been one of the most obvious changes. We realized that to prove the universality of Nichiren Daishonin’s Buddhism, we must be able to convey it in plain English. I believe that this is a key component of our mentor’s desire that “the United States become the central stage for the SGI’s worldwide activities” (November 1991 Seikyo Times, p. 51). Therefore, we should continue our “language revolution.” The longer we continue to use foreign words to talk about Buddhism, the more difficult it is to propagate it to a wider audience. Chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo and reciting passages of the Lotus Sutra to our object of devotion are difficult enough for new members to get used to. Why make it even more confusing by peppering our speech with foreign words? Nichiren Daishonin’s Buddhism may have originated in Japan, but I don’t believe it is a Japanese religion. The teachings of the Daishonin transcend national and ethnic boundaries.
There are still a few words that we have not gotten out of the habit of using such as shakubuku, gosho and sensei. And there are some words that are formal titles of groups that we should translate such as byakuren and gajokai. The word shakubuku is a specific method of propagation that the Daishonin talks about in his writings. Although the term is not translated in the most recent compilation of his works, we misuse it to refer to any type of propagation or even people as in “He is my shakubuku.” There is no book in English called the gosho. It was translated to The Writings of Nichiren Daishonin, which contain his letters and theses.
A curious thing happened during SGI President Ikeda’s visit in the early ’90’s. The women’s chorus had finished singing a Japanese song and after thanking them and praising their singing, he said that in the future it would be more appropriate for them to sing American songs. In an unusually direct manner, I believe he was imploring us not to mimic Japanese culture. That is why I don’t believe we should refer to him as sensei. In this country, the most likely place one would encounter the word sensei would be at a karate or kung fu school. The connotation in that setting is one of unquestioning obedience to the master of the school, a connotation that in no way applies to our mentor. Besides demonstrating the universality of Nichiren Daishonin’s Buddhism, I believe we must prove the universality of our mentor as well. When signing in at the 1975 gathering in Guam for the founding of the SGI, President Ikeda put “the world” as his country of origin. He is truly a global citizen, and we do him a disservice when we treat him otherwise.
Speech habits are hard to change but I believe we must continue to be responsible for the way we portray our organization and mentor to prospective members, the media and general public. President Ikeda is planning to attend the opening of Soka University in Aliso Viejo, Calif., next year. It is an event that will be covered by national and possibly world press. The image of him entering to shouts of “sensei!” from hundreds of American members does not strike me as responding to his vision for our organization. Another quote during President Ikeda’s 1990 visit concerns change: “Change, unceasing change, is one of the distinguishing characteristics of America. Change occurs more rapidly here than it does elsewhere. This could be said to be an indication of the vitality that this country possesses. Similarly, Buddhism holds that everything is in a constant state of flux. Thus, the question is whether we are to accept change passively and be swept away by it, or whether we are to take the lead and create positive changes on our own initiative. While conservatism and self-protection might be likened to winter, night and death, the spirit of pioneering and attempting to realize ideals evokes images of spring, morning and birth” (March 1990 Seikyo Times, p. 52).
These suggestions may seem radical to some, but I believe they are inevitable. The more we are perceived as an American organization, the wider the entrance we provide to new membership. Our mentor made an even more radical suggestion in 1996 when he said: “I propose that we come up with an alternate name for the SGI to make it more accessible and familiar to a large number of people both inside and outside the organization. For example, we might use the organization’s initials to create a catch phrase like ‘Social Good Institution’” (July 12, 1996 World Tribune, p. 12). As his disciple, I am compelled to ponder what he is saying to us by such statements and take action accordingly.
END

“Stop this day and night with me, and you shall possess the origin of all poems;
You shall possess the good of the earth and sun—(there are millions of suns left;)
You shall no longer take things at second or third hand, nor look through the eyes of the dead, nor feed on the spectres in books;
You shall not look through my eyes either, nor take things from me:
You shall listen to all sides, and filter them from yourself.”
Walt Whitman

Sometimes in life an immediate action is required because there is no time for explanation. Like when I was stepping off a curb and some stranger grabbed my shirt and pulled me back from being hit by a cab in New York City. It was my first time to a big city and those buildings were all so tall. All I could do was look up. I also stepped in dog poop. But nobody saved me from that. Lesson learned. Sometimes an explanation wouldn’t help even if there were time. Like a parent screaming at a toddler “don’t you ever do that again” all in an effort to keep them safe from a harm they can’t comprehend. And sometimes all you can do is be actively patient.

The Patient Giant

In 2000, my niece who was 11 at that time was diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor. Except for being blind in one eye, she's fine now and attending USC. I watched her parents go through the daily torment of facing the possibility of losing their only child. It wasn’t until the surgeon came through a pair of automatic doors, which made a “swish” sound like in the old Star Trek TV show, to tell them “We got most of it,” did they allow their resolute stoic demeanor to crack. It was more than a time to finally let go and cry. It was a crumbling. But there wasn’t much of an interval between that initial first deep inhale of release and what was to come. She needed radiation to get the rest. That was the steely truth contained within the doctor’s words, “most of it.”

I was visiting my niece and waiting in the lobby one day while she got radiation. I saw a man dressed in hospital blue, no hair, pulling an IV. He looked exactly like a patient. This is a children's hospital and this man was grown. Really grown! He was at least six and a half feet tall, a giant of a man. All chest and arms, like the front lineman of a major league football team. But he looked and dressed like a patient. Finally I notice, low and close to the floor, almost completely hidden behind the giant’s leg, a small child maybe four years old. No hair, dressed in hospital blue, and the tube from the IV that the giant was pulling was inserted into its arm. It was the giant’s son. The giant had dressed like his son and shaved his head like his son while his son had to go through the ordeal of chemotherapy. They were heading towards the chemo room. The chemo room had two large automatic doors, just like the doors the doctor came through after my nieces operation. But before they got close enough to open the doors themselves, someone came out and the doors made their distinctive sound. The little boy stopped to ponder this for a second while his dad, the giant, held his hand in fingers which where so long and large that they enveloped not just the boys hand, but his arm up to the elbow. Another person went through the doors with a “swish”, and the little boy suddenly realized that this was the portal to the place that made him lose his hair and feel so sick for so long. The little boy started to cry. His father, the giant, could have easily gathered his son up in one of his enormous hands and carried him into the therapy room. After all, that's why they were there; to get therapy to save the boys life. But the giant didn't pick up the boy. Instead, he got down on one knee and talked to the boy. He talked and talked. Ten minutes. Fifteen. Twenty. The giant sat on the floor. He kept talking. An hour went by. Finally, together, they got up and walked into the room. The little boy walked into the room, the room that makes him sick, the room where he lost his hair, the room he hates, holding the hand of the giant, his father. His father, the giant, had the patience to explain to this little boy, his son, in whom the giant could see himself, that not only was this something he couldn't avoid, but something he had to do for himself. The time for simply doing something because he was told to had past for this little son of a giant. It had past at the age of four. And the giant knew this. But they would do it together no matter what the consequences.

There have been and continue to be many giants in my life whose hands have held mine, past my elbow and into my heart. One of my giants told me the story of Buddhamitra, which they remembered reading in the older volumes of the letters of Nichiren from Repaying Debts Of Gratitude. They took the time to go and find this passage, which is actually only a footnote. They said that I reminded them of the person who waited patiently under a red flag for years and years. I’d never thought of myself as particularly patient, rather just the opposite, volatile and reactionary. But in a conscious effort, I have to some small degree, changed my nature. And it happens as a matter of recourse through the diligence of elevating my life condition through chanting Nam Myoho Renge Kyo with Nichiren’s Gohonzon. This giant, one of my giants, made me realize that I have been working on one particular issue in my life for eight years. Eight years under my own red flag. Now if this were a case of life or death, like an addiction to some substance or cancer, most people would understand my diligence because the impact is so immediately important. If it were about a career, which I spent twenty years under a red flag, people would understand. But this is one of those things that people seem to lose patience about and it seems reasonable to quit. To move on. To move away. And it has been as difficult to explain why I continue, as it has been to continue. But I appreciate those who ask “why” because it forces me to reflect on whether I’m being diligent or delusional and if I can see positive results from the journey itself. And because of this I have come to think of the journey as the reason to set the goal.

The first fourteen pages of this book, and page 190, could be the best leadership manual I've seen to date. In fact one could build an entire practice on those pages. I want to share what has been sitting on my altar for two years from Daisaku Ikeda:

"We are now in the process of creating an unshakable foundation meant to last for 10,000 years. For that reason, we must not be impatient, nor is there any need to try to look impressive. It is important that, person by person, we increase the size and scope of our movement by developing friendships based on humanism. Making true, genuine friends and creating a core of capable individuals is crucial. No great development can be accomplished without painstaking effort."

I am, of course, lampooning the organization which brought this amazing Buddhism into my life. That being said, and thanks to Byrd who coined the phrase, I bring you...

This is the harrowing story of Aeon Klutz. A young girl, played by Oscar winner Charlize Theron, practicing Buddhism under an unscrupulous and abusive leader, played by Oscar nominee Gary Busey, who is not so much acting but just being himself. Aeon escapes but must wander in the North Country until she meets her mentor played by Oscar winner Sally Field: “Norma Rae…that’s a name I haven’t heard in a long, long time.” Norma instructs Aeon in the ways of her previous mentors, Makiguchi, Toda, Ikeda, and the master of them all Nichiren. All portrayed brilliantly by Oscar winner Linda Hunt: “I find the challenge of playing four different men challengingly different. Instead of one Filipino man, these are four men, Japanese, you see? You see ‘Filipino’ begins with an ‘F’ and not a ‘Ph’ as in ‘The Philippines’. You see?” Aeon and Norma, together with their band of disciples, Sofia Gakkai, Inagaddadavidadevadatta, Don the Medicine King, Byakuren the Flight Attendant, and Evil “Friend” Knievel (in his last appearance jumping the drunken elephants), these Magnificent Seven help each other and the Village People they vowed to protect, regain what they thought was lost forever: conformity! And when they kick ass it’s by the book! After the smoke clears, and the dust settles, and the earth turns, and the sun comes up, and the cock crows, and the cows come home, and Tupac’s last album is released, and Elvis has left the building, sameness is restored in a miraculous transformation; everyone becomes Linda Hunt (as portrayed by Oscar winner Linda Hunt.)

What the critics are saying:

“Rapturous! Leaves everything else behind.”
Kirk Cameron

“Free Thinkers? Not for me. From now on, I’m charging for it!”
Susan Jacoby

“I found it’s ‘in your face’ approach refreshing.”
Richard Dawkins

“I read the book. I couldn’t put it down. Of course, I couldn’t pick it up either.”
Steven Hawking

“Finally something I can believe in!”
Sam Harris

“Let it be a warning for gays, lesbians, those bad people with aids, those bad people from Louisiana, feminists…oh wait, I already said lesbians… Hugo Chavez and anyone else trying to destroy the fabric of God’s America. And by God’s America, I mean My America.”
Pat Robertson

LETTER 1

Regarding the SGI-USA Leadership Manual and the SGI-USA Code of Conduct for Leaders Signature Form

First let me also say that the Leadership Manual is much needed and overdue. The criteria for being a leader in the past may at times have been not so much about life experience, but rather availability. I learned for myself, usually by trial and error, some of the issues that have been addressed for the sake of the harmony of the SGI membership. The three that seem to garner the most attention are money, business dealings, and interpersonal relationships. I learned all too soon in life that if you really don’t want to see an individual ever again, loan them money. You’ll never see that person again unless it wasn’t enough money. Or if you’re in an interpersonal relationship that isn’t complicated enough, sleep with them. That will do it nicely. And it’s human nature to take the path of least resistance. Having an all too convenient gathering of individuals can be too tempting for some not to sell their snake oil. But we gather to attain our absolute happiness through Buddhism, not Amway. Kudos to those who diligently struggled to put this manual together in what must have seemed at times as futile as Sisyphus pushing his stone for eternity. Regardless of the flaws it may contain, I am ready to roll up my sleeves, or pant legs depending on how you regard it, and tackle this manual and implement it’s suggestions to the best of my ability.

Unlike the United States and it’s constitution in which the elected president takes their oath to preserve, protect and defend it to the best of their ability, this is an organization based on faith, which exists to propagate faith, and it seems ineffectual if not futile to try and create a duality between leadership or organizational matters and the faith it fosters.

As well intended as it may be, I have serious reservations about the mandatory signature form. I don’t need to tell you what it is as you wrote it. But it helps me to walk down a path and talk. I realize that formalizing a code was much needed due to the irresponsible and detrimental behavior of some. In conjunction with the signature form, it will certainly put parameters around any behavior. The signature form is a vow or an oath, written in the form of a closed ended contract, and has been required to be signed by all who wish to remain or qualify for positions of responsibility in the SGI-USA. It states that, “I agree…” that’s the contract part; “to dedicate myself…” that’s the vow part. On the bottom is a reiteration of the introduction which states, “Not signing, therefore not accepting the Code of Conduct for Leaders, disqualifies one from leadership in the SGI-USA,” that’s the closed ended part. This implies that one doesn’t accept the code of conduct if one doesn’t sign the form. The question that immediately poses itself is in what way does not signing imply this? Simply stated; says who? The only justification for assuming that individuals not signing the form equals not accepting the code is the sentence that states so. I understand that you want some formal acknowledgement of the code. But the signature form and code of conduct combined together constitutes so much more that it becomes detrimental to this purpose. I’ll stick my neck out for you to chop my head off and make my own assumption to say that the individuals who already have the qualities this document is trying to insure will be the ones most reticent to signing.

The signature form is not an avenue for leadership to transcend differences and unite to a common goal. Rather it’s a mandate that dictates that they relinquish them. It’s demands them to obey. It allows for no recourse other than compliance. It requires them to think as directed, as stated in the code. I understand that the code is not an attempt to find reasons to remove people from leadership, but a statement of commitment to very fundamental standards for exercising that responsibility. “Independent thinking or action” that contradicts those essentials would, by definition, disqualify one from leadership. But with the signature form there is no latitude for those seeking more effective ways of supporting kosen-rufu. It turns the abidements into commandments, all ten of them.

A year or so ago Mr. Greg Martin presented a video which at the end had a clip from the movie Spartacus. In it the captured men all rose and declared that they were Spartacus. It was a good metaphor on many levels. There is a metaphor in a more recent movie, No Country For Old Men, which directly correlates to the signature form. A killer flips a coin and tells his victim, a woman, to call it heads or tales. If she gets it right she lives. If wrong, she dies. The victim says that isn’t a choice. It was the illusion of choice. She refused to choose even if she died because she refused to give that power over to her killer. She was murdered and was a victim in that sense. But she wasn’t a victim of a meaningless choice that she was coerced to make. The leadership in the SGI-USA is being given an illusion of choice in this signature form. The illusion that this choice they are being forced to make is putting their fate in their own hands. This isn’t a choice either. The ironical situation I find myself in is that I am arguing over a position of responsibility that I was cajoled into volunteering for. The metaphor for this would have to be Tom Sawyer; what’s it going to cost me before you let me paint your fence?

It occurred to me that as an educator Mr. Makiguchi fought most of his adult life against the bureaucratic hobbling of the individual that funnels them into a position of calculated obedience. I am but one person trying to make a difference. Likewise, I find it difficult to drink water from this well.

Respectfully,
Me

WHAT I LEFT OUT AND/OR ABRIDGED

The Code of Conduct, on the other hand, is open ended. It contains many good and commonsensical ideas. These ideas should be considered guidelines of wisdom. With the signature form, however, they have turned into The Ten Commandments. Some activities that I must sign and agreed to dedicate myself to have qualities attached to them like being proud and resolute. The Code of Conduct also contains ambiguities. For example:

“Abide by the guidance and activity guidelines of the SGI and participate in and promote the kosen-rufu activities of the SGI, including, but not limited to, propagation, publications and contributions.” Because of the ambiguous way this is worded, I may already be in violation of this contract as written, breaking the vow, because there is no room for independent thinking or action. Also “not limited to,” implies there are things not listed that I could be in violation or of not fulfilling.

The last four commandments have asterisks and an additional six pages of explanation that also contain the nebulous phrasing “Abide by …but not limited to,” The listed behavior for disrupting “the harmonious unity of the SGI,” the one that “disturbs the faith and practice of its members” reads like a drunken collage frat party. The “not limited to,” could be this question, which arises from what I must abide by: define faith and how I can be the judge of someone’s so as to enable me to not disturb it.

“Assigned organizational responsibility…organizational matters…organizational units…organizational leaders.” How Orwellian!
[I got a response from someone I had shown my original draft. They said of course that language is this way because this is about about organizational issues and not faith. I queried back with 'In an organization based on faith, who's leadership is to foster that same faith, how is it possible to separate that faith from the organizational issues?"]

LETTER 2

Letter to the Leadership Manual Committee

I notice that the leadership manual doesn’t state specifically that the leaders must refer to Mr. Ikeda as the mentor of the SGI-USA membership as in “our mentor”. At a recent Soka Spirit/Study Meeting, “Name Deleted” demonstrated exactly how we are suppose to think and act, just as it is written in the Code Of Conduct for Leaders. “Name Deleted” announced resolutely, with pride, and unequivocally that Daisaku Ikeda is everyone’s mentor for this time period. I assume this means everyone in the SGI. But since I’m not a sage who can judge time like Nichiren and “Name Deleted”, it very well could mean everyone everywhere. This certainly saves a lot of people from having to make that discovery for themselves with a lot of time consuming thinking. This should to be in writing! There should be no question as to who our mentor is! The leadership, if they wish to continue to be so, must be made to sign off on this and that they are to refer to him as such! The new members coming in should also sign an acknowledgement/agreement of this before they are allowed to receive a Gohonzon. Otherwise people who don’t think like us could get one.

Please take this into consideration.
Thank you for your time, of which I am no judge.
Steven Colbert

Luke Skywalker to his friend/mentor Obi-Wan Kenobi (posthumously). After battling his sworn enemy and having his hand chopped off in a light saber fight by the second evilest dude in the galaxy, Darth Vader, the man Luke believes killed his father, Luke finds out from Vader himself that “Obi-Wan did not tell you everything. No. *I* am your father!” Not only that, Vader is cajoling Luke to join him in his evilness and Luke can feel his presence because of the special connection they both have as father and son through the “force”. Talk about internal personal conflict! And you thought you were having a bad day!

PART 2 OF BETWEEN A ROCK AND A MANDALA;

THE FUNCTION OF BETRAYAL

“And yet the people doubt me, and I too have doubts about myself. Why do the gods not assist me? Heavenly gods and other guardian deities made their vow before the Buddha. Even if the votary of the Lotus Sutra were an ape rather than a man, they should address him as the votary of the Lotus Sutra and rush forward to fulfill the vow they made before the Buddha. Does their failure to do so mean that I am in fact not a votary of the Lotus Sutra? This doubt lies at the heart of this piece I am writing. And because it is the most important concern of my entire life, I will raise it again and again here, and emphasize it more than ever, before I attempt to answer it.” WND, Vol.1, page 243. And he devotes the rest of this letter doing just that. He examines and argues the causes and effects of his actions, which are based on his interpretation of the Lotus Sutra: “Startled by these passages and it’s commentaries, I examined the entire body of sutras and the expositions and commentaries of the various teachers, and found that my doubts and suspicions melted away.” WND, Vol.1, page 264. This is the diligence I referred to earlier.

Nichiren points to a rite of passage that happens in the Lotus Sutra: “With one remark, in one moment, the Buddha wiped away his earlier pronouncements, saying, ‘I have not yet revealed the truth.’” WND, Vol.1, page 247. Shakyamuni taught for 40 years before he revealed this truth contained within the Lotus Sutra. Imagine being a disciple of his and for the last couple of decades you’ve been doing what he told you to do. And for arguments sake let’s say that he told you that in order to be happy, you’d need to stand on one foot. Imagine that you have become very good at this and the other disciples refer to you as the “go to guy” when it comes to understanding all the deeper nuances and insights of standing on one foot. There’s another disciple who does something else. He’s really good at skipping rope. There’s another one, a woman, a nun named Dorothy, who’s working on being reborn as a man, because women can’t become absolutely happy, attain enlightenment, only men. She’s the “go to gal” at this. So here you all are, diligently practicing what the Buddha told you to do for years and years and suddenly he says that that’s not the point. He also says that if people admire you for doing what he told you to do, they will go to avichi hell and it will be your fault. (Occasionally I get mail addressed to “Avichi Hell or Current Resident”. Which is the universe’s way of letting me know that changing my address isn’t changing my life. According to Buddhism, you can take it with you. But I digress and I happen to be the “go to guy” for that.) He says that you always had the potential for becoming absolutely happy and standing on one foot or skipping rope was just a way to help you realize it. As for becoming a man, well Dorothy, you can become absolutely happy just the way you are. You always could. So now how do you feel about the Buddha and what he’s telling you? A little confused? Doubtful? How about betrayed? Let’s face it you’ve really invested yourself into doing something for a long time. And why did you? Because of the trust you bequeathed to the Buddha. But this trust is also a trap because it is an attachment to what you think the Buddha is, not what the Buddha is in actuality.

To help you over come this doubt and feeling of betrayal, he throws a party, which really takes off and invites a bunch of other Buddhas from all over time and space, who all vouch for what the Buddha is now telling you. He also invites a gazillion other disciples, which shows you he’s been doing this a lot longer than you thought. He’s trying to tell you that it’s not about the teachings per say, but their intention. It’s not about him, the Buddha, but his intention as a Buddha, which is to help you become like him as quickly as possible. So don’t worship him, but appreciate his intention. Standing on one foot guy and Dorothy overcame their sense of betrayal and the doubt that they held about their own worth and became enlightened. Skipping rope guy was so good at skipping rope that he left the party early, and is teaching other people how to do it.

Addressing doubt is an act of courage and is an absolute necessity in any arena of human development. But overcoming doubt in the form of betrayal is much more difficult because some of the qualities contained within it are faith, trust and belief. These can only be offered from the betrayed, not the betrayer. It’s the quintessential element of the disciple picking the mentor. Endeavoring to understand this relationship and it’s dynamic is important to each individual’s happiness with regards to how they view life; one is a victim of it; another is an autonomous individual who takes responsibility for it and at the same time sees the symbiotic relationship that life depends upon.

I’m going to try a couple of examples which I hope can express this idea of overcoming doubt which comes in the form of betrayal. This is not an idea exclusive to Buddhism, but rather what has been referred to down through the ages as a coming of age, or a rite of passage. The first is from Robert Bly in his book Iron John. He addresses what must happen to each individual human in order to become a healthy productive person. He has been criticized by some for being too exclusive because he wrote this for men. I can appreciate, however, his elucidation on this topic, which has helped me personally come to see that this event is not gender specific, and very necessary.

I recommend to everyone who can, read the actual story as it will be much better than my
quick synopsis of the Iron John tale:

In a kingdom there is a forest and in it a place where no hunter has ever returned. The king declares it off limits. But eventually someone returns who tells of a large hairy wild man living at the bottom of a lake. He’s captured and put into a cage from which no one may let him out under penalty of death. The king’s son is playing with a golden ball when it rolls into the cage. (Yeah, the same golden ball the frog saved from the well for the petulant princess in that other story.) The prince asks the wild man if he can have his ball back. The wild man says he can if the prince lets him out. The prince says he can’t. But he comes back and asks for his ball twice more, and the third time (that’s three) he agrees to let him out. The wild man tells the prince he can find the key under his mother’s pillow. (Paging Dr. Freud.) He releases the wild man, who reveals his name to be Iron John (or Iron Hans, depending on the translation). The prince fears he will be killed for setting Iron John free, so Iron John agrees to take the prince with him into the forest.

As it turns out, Iron John is a powerful being and has many treasures he guards. He sets a task for the prince to watch over his well, but warns him not to let anything touch it or fall in. The prince obeys at first, but begins to gaze at his own reflection in the water becoming distracted, and as his hair drops into it, it all turns to gold. Disappointed in the boy’s failure, Iron John sends him away to experience poverty and struggle, but also tells the prince that if he ever needs anything, simply to call the name of Iron John three times. (That’s three.)

The prince travels to a distant land and lands a job at a castle. Not a bad place to start. Since he is ashamed of his golden hair, he refuses to remove his cap before the king. As this is mistaken for arrogance, he is sent to assist the gardener. By accident, the king’s daughter has seen the prince’s golden hair when he finally took off his hat on a hot day. She is intrigued. Hey, who wouldn’t be? He has golden hair.

War comes to the kingdom and the prince calls upon Iron John who changes his lame horse who has only three good legs (that’s three) into an armored, fire-breathing steed, and gives him a legion of iron warriors to fight alongside him. The prince successfully defends his new homeland, but returns all that he borrowed to Iron John before returning to his former position.

In celebration, the king announces a banquet and offers his daughter’s hand in marriage to any one of the knights who can catch a golden apple that will be thrown into their midst. The king hopes that the mysterious knight who saved the kingdom will show himself for such a prize. So does the princess who secretly believes it to be the seemingly arrogant boy with the golden hair.

Again the prince asks Iron John for help, and again Iron John disguises the prince as the mysterious knight. Though the prince catches the golden apple and escapes, and does so again on two more occasions (that’s three), he is eventually found out. All ends well. The prince is returned to his former station, marries the princess, and is happily reunited with his parents. Iron John too, comes to the wedding, but now without the hair and wildness that made him frightening. He reveals he was under enchantment until he found someone worthy and pure of heart to set him free. As an act of gratitude Iron John bequeaths to the prince and his bride all his wealth. The End.

The reason I keep pointing to the number three is that it seems to be a special number in fairy tales, Buddhism, and everything else that is part of the human condition. After WWI and WWII there were unknown soldiers who had died in battle. Whoever got first pick for their tomb of the unknown always picked the third in line. Check yourself out when picking straws or anything else.

There is an even more blatant tale of betrayal from those grim Grimm Brothers: Hansel and Gretel. Because there isn’t enough to eat, their father, a woodcutter, is convinced by a mean stepmother (is there any other kind?) to dump the children out in the woods. They handle themselves pretty well and overcome, abandonment, a witch who wants to eat them, and the betrayal of their father. The resolution is swift as they and their father are joyous in the reconciliation, now rich with the defeated witch’s booty, and the evil stepmother has conveniently died. (Check for ax marks.)

Both stories contain all of the essential elements that Joseph Campbell illuminates in his book The Hero With A Thousand Faces, which is the template for the archetype hero and the bases for the Star Wars movies. The hero is called to an adventure by some incident in which he must cross a threshold of no return. Along the way he meets enablers who teach him and give him tools or knowledge of powers he has yet to develop. And there is always a moment of betrayal he must overcome about his own worth in which he has the choice to bring what he has learned back for the benefit the society or not.

Luke Skywalker overcame his dark side, which was manifested by his discovered betrayal; his doubts about where he came from, what he was supposed to accomplish, and what he was to become. He had mentors and a tool to help develop his powers. In the process he not only saved the galactic community from external evil, but his father as well, from his own internal fundamental darkness. (Extra points for waiting this long to put that phrase in.) Here we see in the hero story what Mr. Ikeda previously referred to as an active life; developing the self-awareness of choice and having the external circumstances respond in kind.

As we sit in front of Nichiren’s Gohonzon, opening it’s eyes and our own, we go through a re-enactment of the hero’s journey on a daily bases. Everyday we must face ourselves and prove our own necessary worth by overcoming our doubts about who we really are. And to return to Carl Sagan’s original comment, the results must not only be able to cross the barriers of culture, but validity must apply to all and be held to an empirical scrutiny too tangible to ignore. The search for truth is an act of courage on a cosmic scale. Thus we become the heroes of the story of our own life.

Recently I had a conversation with someone whose opinion I greatly respect. We spoke about the essence of the Nichiren Gohonzon, the one all of us in the Soka Gakkai International practice with. This person expressed the their understanding of this mandala as an expedient. That is, something that wouldn’t be needed if only we could tap into our Buddha nature on our own, without relying on an external object. This made perfect sense to me. Since we seem to be at the whim of external influences that consistently affect our momentary states of being, having an object whose sole purpose is to help us provoke the most positive effect possible is something to be desired. And for economy’s sake, let’s just say this effect is that we see things as they are from an enlightened perspective.

Nichiren himself reasons us to this point in The Openings Of The Eyes II: “It is also laid down that one should ‘rely on sutras that are complete and final and not on those that are not complete and final.’(Nirvana Sutra) We must therefore look carefully among the sutras to determine which are complete and final and which are not, and put our faith in the former. Bodhisattva Nagarjuna in his Commentary on the Ten Stages Sutra states, ‘Do not rely on treatises that distort the sutras; rely on those that are faithful to the sutras.’ The Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai says, ‘That which accords with the sutras is to be written down and made available. But put no faith in anything that in word or meaning fails to do so.’ The Great Teacher Dengyo says, ‘Depend upon the preachings of the Buddha, and do not put faith in traditions handed down orally.’ Enchin, also known as the Great Teacher Chisho, says, ‘In transmitting the teachings, rely on the written words [of scriptures].’” WND, Vol.1, pages 263-264. Just to add a little irony to all this, the last quote used by Nichiren is ascribed to “A Collection Of Orally Transmitted Teachings”.

What is commonly referred to as the Dai-Gohonzon is a wooden Gohonzon, which is a copy of a paper Gohonzon that was supposedly inscribed by Nichiren for all mankind. In other words, a template Gohonzon that would be used for “everyman” so all who practice to it could reap the benefits of what the nature and purpose of a Nichiren Gohonzon is for. That puts whoever is in possession of this Dai-Gohonzon in a position of power over those who actually believe the Dai-Gohonzon possesses this power over other Gohonzon to “open eyes”. This very medieval thinking is the foundation of Christianity’s success throughout Europe. It is interesting to note that throughout history, no religion was exclusive in erecting temples to worship relics: it just makes good business sense. It works especially well when working in conjunction with whatever happens to be the current governing authority. Instead of “power to the people,” it’s “power over the people,” because the premise consists of subjugating individuals who relinquish control of their lives to an external source.

The Soka Gakkai International organization has refuted this claim of the Nichiren Shoshu Priesthood, and has asserted that each individual “opens” the Gohonzon’s “eyes,” activates its properties, every time it’s practiced to. That makes sense, because in reading Nichiren’s letter The Opening Of The Eyes, he consistently battles against any idea, person or bureaucracy that comes between an individual and his or her potential enlightenment. What doesn’t make sense is for the Soka Gakkai membership to be cajoled into believing that each person needs to continue to repay a debt of gratitude to “it,” the Dai-Gohonzon, as stated in their liturgy books. That’s medieval thinking too, and seems to me to be self-defeating in purpose. It’s a conflicting message about the nature of a Gohonzon, which very well may be residue from what the Soka Gakkai considers its lineage. Here is an example of a perpetuation of existing conflicting dogma:

If...

"Never seek this Gohonzon outside yourself. The Gohonzon exists only within the mortal flesh of us ordinary people who embrace the Lotus Sutra and chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo" (MW-1, 213). http://www.sgi-usa.org/buddhism/library/Nichiren/Gohonzon/

And.

"Thus Nikken's destruction of the Grand Main Temple, has encouraged SGI members to internalize the meaning of the high sanctuary. And to fully realize the inner implications and significance of any event or phenomena is the proper spirit of Buddhism." The Untold History Of The Fuji School. Pg. 196

Therefore...

"To those who fail to grasp its message, however, the map's (Gohonzon) worth will be reduced to that of a mere scroll." http://www.sgi-usa.org/buddhism/library/Nichiren/Gohonzon/

Then why...

"Photographs should never be taken of the Gohonzon and should be destroyed if accidentally taken." http://www.sgiusa.org/buddhism/library/Nichiren/Gohonzon/offering.htm

Is the Soka Gakkai still practicing surplus Nichiren Shoshu precepts? Or are they just stuck in transition? I can understand the confusion since also contained in the condemnation of the priesthood in The Untold History Of The Fuji School is "We should look upon the Gohonzon enshrined in each of our homes as the life of the Daishonin, the entity of the original Buddha. When chanting daimoku with that conviction, it is the same as worshipping the Dai-Gohonzon itself, right where we are." pg. 11. Is that the same Uber-Gohonzon that the priesthood told us that we needed to open each Gohonzon's eyes? Or is this the one we should not seek outside of ourselves? I took a picture of my stepdaughter’s bulldog Egor. I tried to play fetch with the picture but that didn’t work out so well. I put the picture next to a bowl of delicious dog food. Unlike with the actual Egor, the food didn’t disappear instantly. Then again, I’m also not sitting in front of the likeness of Egor as the entity of the original bulldog attempting to manifest my bulldog nature.

The idea of “opening eyes” is wondrous in its inclusiveness. As it happens to an individual it also is what happens to the mandala itself. It becomes more than paper and ink. Or more than wood and etchings. Or more than pixels on a screen. This process has been expressed in ways not relating to enlightenment, but never the less aptly portraying the effects of contemplating a thing or idea with some degree of diligence. Nietzsche warns of the negative affects of such efforts in his “Beyond Good And Evil” when he writes, “Those who would fight monsters be wary not to become one. For when you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss gazes long into you.” His warning was for those combating evil. But it can apply to any endeavor a person may immerse their self into. There is a tendency to become alike. At first glance it might seem that if an individual has found a quintessential positive to be devoted too, then ignorance is bliss. But since every relationship is symbiotic — everything flows both ways — it would behoove the devotee to understand as fully as possible all aspects of the relationship so as not to, as the saying goes, ruin a good thing. Daisaku Ikeda addresses this same idea in a positive way: “An active life retains the ability of selection, in that it decides what circumstance should be confronted and what substances to assimilate. In response to this life, the outer circumstances or object is certain to undergo a delicate and relative change in significance.” Dialogue On Life, Vol.1, page 40.

I had a similar but separate conversation with another person about the nature of a Gohonzon a couple of years ago. In this particular conversation I posed the question that if insentient phenomena such as a Gohonzon or a rock, have the same potential for enlightenment as sentient phenomena, then why can’t we chant to a rock as an expedient means and attain the same result as chanting to a Gohonzon? The answer I got was, “the nature of a rock is to be a rock, and the nature of a Gohonzon is to be a Gohonzon.” I do believe this person gave me more credit for understanding what they said than was due me. As simplistic as this statement reads, it has rattled around in my brain for a couple of years looking for a place to lodge itself. I have eventually translated it into meaning that a Gohonzon has a deliberate intention and a rock doesn’t. A rock has many potentials: to become soil, a foundation for organic growth: to be strapped to a piece of wood to be used as a tool or a weapon: to be marketed as a pet in a box. Can I see the potential in a rock? Sitting on the shoulders of human evolution and Madison Avenue, I certainly can. And as part of the environment that I co-exist in, I can appreciate it for what it is, a rock with many potentials. It has an intention, which is to fulfill it’s potential as a rock. Those potentials are imbued upon the rock from an external source, me. The rock has undergone as Daisaku Ikeda has said, “a relative change in significance.” Can I see the potential in a Gohonzon? When I look at it, can I, metaphorically speaking, make it look back at me, open its eyes, and fulfill its necessary intention? Can I then see the potential in all phenomena, sentient and insentient alike? Can I appreciate this potential? Sitting on the shoulders of my own human revolution, yes I can.

But in my conversation, what really got my attention, what interested me most was this persons’ reluctance to speak openly about what the Gohonzon actually is. “Don’t tell anyone I said the Gohonzon is an expedient.” Like it’s a big secret. Nichiren said himself that it is not to be found outside of one’s life. It isn’t actual enlightenment, but the representation of the potential of enlightenment for human life. Yes it contains its own potential for enlightenment, but it still needs human life interaction to activate it. If the Gohonzon is an expedient, why whisper the fact to a select few in secret? And why refer to it as something it isn’t? Is it for power, as in medieval times when the only people who could read were the priests and the nobility so they have a “power” over others? I really don’t believe this particular individual is into power of that nature. Doubt, is more likely, but doubt about what? This attitude of not speaking about what something is, but rather, what it is not, reminded me of the early Deists. Fearful of being labeled persona-non-grata, which could lead to social banishment and financial ruin, they hedged their way around what they really were: atheists. There was also a fear of tearing apart the fabric of society, which they mistakenly believed was held together by the common people’s belief in an omnipotent being. Fear that the common man couldn’t comprehend a godless world without falling into hedonism. The first fear — personal, social, and financial ruin — was, and still is, well founded. The second fear was proven completely false. This happened with profound resonance in the publishing of Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense,” when the world did not fall backwards into time, but instead leapt forward with a gusto never before seen in the history of mankind. Isn’t that what we are trying to do in the Soka Gakkai, lead mankind into a new paradigm of common sense?

TO BE CONTINUED...THE IMPORTANCE OF DOUBT AS BETRAYAL

GROUCHO: All right, fine. Now here are the contracts. You just put his name at the top and you sign at the bottom. There's no need of you reading that because these are duplicates.
CHICO: Yeah, they's a duplicates.
GROUCHO: I say they're duplicates.
CHICO: Why sure they's a duplicates...
GROUCHO: Don't you know what duplicates are?
CHICO: Sure. There's five kids up in Canada.
GROUCHO: Well, I wouldn't know about that. I haven't been to Canada in years. Well go ahead and read it.
CHICO: What does it say?
GROUCHO: Well, go on and read it!
CHICO: You read it.
GROUCHO: All right, I'll read it to ya. Can you hear?
CHICO: I haven't heard anything yet. Did you say anything?
GROUCHO: Well, I haven't said anything worth hearing.
CHICO: Well, that's why I didn't hear anything.
GROUCHO: Well, that's why I didn't say anything.
CHICO: Can you read?
GROUCHO (struggling to read the fine print): I can read but I can't see it. I don't seem to have it in focus here. If my arms were a little longer, I could read it. You haven't got a baboon in your pocket, have ya? Here, here, here we are. Now I've got it. Now pay particular attention to this first clause because it's most important. It says the, uh, "The party of the first part shall be known in this contract as the party of the first part." How do you like that? That's pretty neat, eh?
CHICO: No, it's no good.
GROUCHO: What's the matter with it?
CHICO: I don't know. Let's hear it again.
GROUCHO: It says the, uh, "The party of the first part shall be known in this contract as the party of the first part."
CHICO: (pausing) That sounds a little better this time.
GROUCHO: Well, it grows on ya. Would you like to hear it once more?
CHICO: Uh, just the first part.
GROUCHO: What do you mean? The party of the first part?
CHICO: No, the first part of the party of the first part.
GROUCHO: All right. It says the, uh, "The first part of the party of the first part shall be known in this contract as the first part of the party of the first part shall be known in this contract" - look, why should we quarrel about a thing like this? We'll take it right out, eh?
CHICO: Yeah, it's a too long, anyhow. (They both tear off the tops of their contracts.) Now, what do we got left?
GROUCHO: Well, I got about a foot and a half. Now, it says, uh, "The party of the second part shall be known in this contract as the party of the second part."
CHICO: Well, I don't know about that...
GROUCHO: Now what's the matter?
CHICO: I no like-a the second party, either.
GROUCHO: Well, you should've come to the first party. We didn't get home 'til around four in the morning... I was blind for three days!
CHICO: Hey, look, why can'ta the first part of the second party be the second part of the first party? Then a you gotta something.
GROUCHO: Well, look, uh, rather than go through all that again, what do you say?
CHICO: Fine. (They rip out a portion of the contract.)
GROUCHO: Now, uh, now I've got something you're bound to like. You'll be crazy about it.
CHICO: No, I don't like it.
GROUCHO: You don't like what?
CHICO: Whatever it is. I don't like it.
GROUCHO: Well, don't let's break up an old friendship over a thing like that. Ready?...
CHICO: OK! (Another part is torn off.) Now the next part, I don't think you're gonna like.
GROUCHO: Well, your word's good enough for me. (They rip out another part.) Now then, is my word good enough for you?
CHICO: I should say not.
GROUCHO: Well, that takes out two more clauses. (They rip out two more parts.) Now, "The party of the eighth part..."
CHICO: No, that'sa no good. (more ripping.) No.
GROUCHO: "The party of the ninth part..."
CHICO: No, that'sa no good, too. (they rip the contracts again until there's practically nothing left.) Hey, how is it my contract is skinnier than yours?
GROUCHO: Well, I don't know. You must've been out on a tear last night. But anyhow we're all set now, aren't we?
CHICO: Oh sure.
GROUCHO (offering his pen to sign the contract): Now just, uh, just you put your name right down there and then the deal is, uh, legal.
CHICO: I forgot to tell you. I can't write.
GROUCHO: Well, that's all right, there's no ink in the pen anyhow. But listen, it's a contract, isn't it?
CHICO: Oh sure.
GROUCHO: We got a contract...
CHICO: You bet.
GROUCHO: No matter how small it is...
CHICO: Hey, wait, wait. What does this say here? This thing here.
GROUCHO: Oh, that? Oh, that's the usual clause. That's in every contract. That just says uh, it says uh, "If any of the parties participating in this contract is shown not to be in their right mind, the entire agreement is automatically nullified."
CHICO: Well, I don't know...
GROUCHO: It's all right, that's, that's in every contract. That's, that's what they call a 'sanity clause'.
CHICO: Ha ha ha ha ha! You can't fool me! There ain't no Sanity Clause!

We usually refer to Myo as “mystic” as in The Mystic Law. One explanation of the word “mystic” from an English dictionary describes it as this: a person who seeks by contemplation and self surrender to obtain unity with or absorption into the Deity or the absolute, or who believes in the spiritual apprehension of truths that are beyond the intellect. And the explanation of “mystical” is: transcending human understanding. Therefore, “mystic”, by this definition, is the personification of that which is “mystical”. So it would seem that when we Nichiren Buddhists refer to the “mystic law” we are referring to the personification of that which is transcendental to our understanding but is becoming integrated into our very person. But is that actually what we believe? When we refer to the “mystic” law we really think in terms of the “mystical” law, something that is apart from ourselves. And we don’t think of ourselves as “mystics”. Why is that? Is it because this law can only be understood between Buddhas and we don’t think of ourselves as one? Perhaps.

But it takes a while for this type of thinking to actually become common sense. Common sense is an ever evolving condition, and as such, subject to change. But not always without some cost. In ancient Greece and through the Middle Ages, Ptolemy’s geocentric model for the universe seemed to make perfect sense. It was the prevailing common sense based on the best empirical facts and observation for that time. So much so that the Roman Catholic Church incorporated it into its doctrine, imbuing it with a moral “a priori”. This agenda made it very difficult to change common sense when new and improved set of observations presented a heliocentric model for how things worked. Even though a version of this model had existed in Vedic Sanskrit since the 7th century BCE, Copernicus published what were to become the quintessential bases of thought on the subject in 1543. But almost a hundred years later, the Church of Rome found Galileo guilty of heresy for following the position of Copernicus. And people of less stature than Galileo taking the same stance could easily find themselves burned to death as a heretic. So common sense doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s commonly used.

We who sit upon so many broad shoulders who came before us may at times forget how difficult it can be to work within a framework of time and try to advance new ideas for the benefit of our fellow humanity. I have often wondered why Daisaku Ikeda continually points to the works of Goethe, Kant, Spinosa, and Pascal, to name just a few pivotal personages of Judeo Christian thinking. What they have in common to some extent was the desire to clarify: to distill a thought so as to be better used by mankind. They all did what they could within the confines of society and government ruled by the Church. They all approached the process with a combination of scientific questioning and a religious imperative. They all asked the same three questions that are difficult to ponder; where did I come from, why am I here, and what happens after I die? They all reflected the same seeking mind as did Nichiren, revealing to Medieval Japan that it’s subjects could free themselves from the bonds of birth, old age, sickness, and death. This is the same action that we who practice Nichiren’s Buddhism take when we sit in front of our Gohonzon and contemplate our life. It’s an act of courage.

So why do we think of the “mystical” law as such, and so separate from ourselves? It could be as simple as the words we use. Sam Harris, author of “The End Of Faith” states “To know what a given belief is about, I must know what my words mean; to know what my words mean, my beliefs must be generally consistent. There is no escaping from the fact that there is a tight relationship between the words we use, the type of thoughts we think, and what we can believe to be true about the world.”

Myo in Chinese

"While I was thinking thus, a golden Buddha suddenly appeared in the hell of incessant suffering ... As my agony subsided a little, I joined my hands together in prayer and asked him what kind of Buddha he was. The Buddha replied, I am the character myo..."
— Major Writings of Nichiren Daishonin, Vol. 4, p. 309

The word that is pronounced Myo by Nichiren Buddhists is composed of two Chinese root characters. The character to the right is Shao. The character to the left is Nu.

Nu by itself means "young girl," "thou," or "you." Shao is something small that has been cut in half — something fine, something difficult to perceive.

Kumarajiva used these symbols to express "wonderful," "excellent," "subtle," "fine," and "mysterious." It corresponds to the Sanskrit word Sad, meaning, "perfectly endowed" or "complete" round (Hokke) teaching (kyo).
Why is "mysterious" (mystic) a "young girl"? The answer lies in the nu character. The brush strokes that compose nu outline the image of the new moon. Look inside the brush strokes to see it.
The moon is at first a slender crescent that grows into full roundness, expressing the maturity of a young girl growing into a full (pregnant) woman.

The new moon is like a young girl. The full moon is a mature woman. The moon is by extension an expression of the cycle of birth and death, therefore "universal." The new moon only partially illuminates the full moon meaning "all has not been revealed" and is therefore "mysterious."

The moon illuminates the darkness as does hope (myo). Hope opens the doors that are "difficult to enter" in the Hoben Pon of the Lotus Sutra. The path illuminated by myo is medicine for all living things.

"Just as the moon is reflected in the water the moment it appears from behind the eastern mountains" (from the Major Writings, Vol. 3, p. 306), our world is illuminated by introducing all to Myo, the First Buddha of the Lotus Sutra.


 http://www.gakkaionline.net/Imagery/Myo.html

Nichiren is constantly explaining Myo in terms of its relationship to Ho, as in that they are mutually co-dependent. Myo can be death, and Ho life. Myo contains the potential for life. Myo can be the potential for Buddhahood and Ho the manifestation of the other nine worlds which themselves contain Buddhahood, or Myo. Sad means perfectly endowed, wonderful, etc. So it is very hard to put into words something that is transcending of consciousness. So it would seem that there is a world of meaning in “myo” beyond our conception, or misconception, of the word “mystic”. The deepening of our own self realization that we are indeed “myo” the Buddha, the more we take the “mystic” out of the Mystic Law and the easier it is for us to think of Buddhahood as common sense.

There are many simple examples of this kind of wording redundancy. The most famous might be from The Firesign Theater “The Department Of Redundancy Department”. Others are armed gunmen, fall down, plan ahead, free gift, ATM machine (automatic teller machine machine) or juzu beads (prayer beads beads). My personal new favorite is “Prince, the artist formerly known as, ‘The Artist Formerly Known As Prince’”. The list is an endless list.

Here’s one that pops into my head when I do morning gongyo:
“I suppose you know what your doing, but I wonder if you realize what this means?”
(Claude Rains as Monsieur Renault the Prefect of Police to Humphrey Bogart as Rick Blaine in the movie classic “Casablanca”.)

Why do we do it twice? I’m glad you asked. We didn’t use to. We used to face east. That’s where those protective forces used to live and the rising sun represented their manifested form. Hey they have names too; Bonten, Taishaku, Nitten, Gatten, Myojoten and, like the first season of Gilligan’s Island, the rest. But this viewpoint could have a propensity to lead one to think of those forces as separate from us. Especially if we took the written words in a literal way. From the page, to our brain, to our way of thinking, those forces could possibly be visualized as anything from the god of the sun, to the god of the moon, to a Power Ranger. Separating them into specific functions, also, can force us to mentally isolate us from their actual source of origination, which is one’s own self and one’s own environment. Has this answered why we do it twice? Nope! And it certainly got me thinking. But after all, it’s just a guideline, right?

Which brings me back to “I suppose you know what you’re doing, but I wonder if you realize what this means.”

The prose part of the Life Span (Juryo) chapter of the Lotus Sutra says the same thing as the verse part, which is the part we do now. It was longer and more difficult to recite. At least it was for me. We also used to do all that reciting five times in the morning and three times in the evening. Apparently that was considered redundant and was changed into what we do now. But chanting Nam Myoho Renge Kyo over and over is also redundant isn’t it? So why is one thing expendable and the other necessary?

Here’s an example of one possible explanation. In Nichiren’s letter to Toki Jonin entitled “On The Four Stages Of Faith And The Five Stages Of Practice” he states, ”The five characters of Myoho-renge-kyo do not represent the sutra text, nor are they its meaning. They are nothing other than the intent of the entire sutra. So, even though the beginners in Buddhist practice may not understand their significance, by practicing these five characters, they will naturally conform to the sutra’s intent.” Pg. 788, WND.

Monsieur Renault may well have asked, “What’s your intention?” That gets directly to the point, but it’s not very lyrical from a dramatic point of view. If your intention is to be a body builder, then you will have to lift weights over and over again. Is that redundant or is that diligent? Here’s the definition of both and you decided.

REDUNDANT
No longer needed or useful. Superfluous.

DILIGENT
Having or showing care and conscientiousness in ones work or duties.

So, if there are parts of a sentence that are superfluous, it follows that those words are no longer useful or needed to make the intended meaning of that sentence clear. The Department Of Redundancy Department becomes either The Department Of Redundancy or The Redundancy Department. And Prince can just be Prince.

But according to what Nichiren wrote, Nam Myoho Renge Kyo itself isn’t redundant. It’s incredibly economic. And I don’t believe, based on my personal experience with its effect upon my life, that repeating it over and over is being redundant but, rather, diligent.

But wait a second. If the Lotus Sutra’s true intention is contained within Myoho-renge-kyo, why then do we recite excerpts from the Expedient Means and Life Span chapters? Is that being diligent or redundant?

Before you attempt to answer that question read this. It’s from “On Establishing The Four Bodhisattvas As The Object Of Devotion” by Nichiren written to our same pal Toki Jonin. Nichiren writes, ”In the present period the essential teaching is primary, while the theoretical teaching is subordinate. But those who would therefore discard the later, saying it is not the way to enlightenment, and believe only in the former, have not yet understood the doctrine of Nichiren’s true intention. Theirs is a completely distorted view.” Pg. 978 WND.

Clearly Nichiren felt that there was value in the teachings leading to Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. What that may be is what we as his disciples must be diligent in discovering. And I got stuck here for a while and started chanting about it. Then I remembered a book I read by Joanna Macy called "Mutual Causality In Buddhism and General Systems Theory," (you guys read that, right?) and put that together with an article by Shin Yatomi. It was in the Jul-Aug 2006 issue of the Living Buddhism on Dependent Origination. In a nutshell states that nothing exists independently of other things or arises (comes into existence) in isolation. If that’s the case, then you can’t have life without an environment for it to exist in. Likewise you can’t have an essential teaching without the theoretical. (I'm going to write a separate article on what Dependent Origination, Creationism, and the Anthropic Bias Principle all have in common. But I digress.)

Let’s extrapolate Dependant Origination further. If you can’t have life without an environment of which life is a part of, then you can’t have an environment, which supports life, without a cause for it to arise (come into existence). Life and its environment are the simultaneous cause and effect for each to exist. Life isn’t just an effect. It causes an environment to support it to come into existence. Within life is the cause and effect for it to arise without the need for an anthropomorphic, metaphysical deity either.

Reciting the passages from the Lotus Sutra during Gongyo is an act of appreciation. Nichiren encourages us to appreciate everything because we are a part of everything and in turn everything, the whole cosmos, is a reflection of ourselves. The first prayer in he morning is for this. So in reciting the Hoben and Juryo sections of the Lotus Sutra we are expressing our appreciation for them leading us to Nam Myoho Renge Kyo.

By now it should be apparent that I have way too much time on my hands. But I hope this encourages you to read the Writings Of Nichiren and chant about what you read. There are a lot of answers in his writings to a lot of questions about this practice and about life and how it all works.

Here is a letter I wrote objecting to the profuse amount of redundant language used in what was supposedly a profound explanation in an SGI-USA publication.

Letter to Living Buddhism May-June Living Buddhism 2006

"Lost In Translation"

The lecture in The Living Buddhism "On Attaining Buddhahood In This Lifetime" by Mr. Katsuji Saito, a very learned man and much respected co-contributor of the series "The Wisdom Of The Lotus Sutra", is a perfect example of the importance of "zuiho bini", the difficulty in bridging cultures, and the importance of addressing the needs and capacities of a specific audience. The concepts attempting to be clarified appeared to have been filtered through the Department of Redundancy Department. For example;

"What gives rise to all those laws is the Mystic Law. It is the essential Law that supports all things. Again, because it is difficult to comprehend, it is called "mystic" or "wondrous". At the center of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo is myoho-the Mystic Law. Because the Mystic Law underlies all things, naturally, it supports all living things. In other words, the Mystic Law exists in and supports our own lives. This is why Nichiren calls it the "mystic truth"..." and on and on and on. In fact the terms "Mystic Law" and "Mystic Truth" are offered as an explanation of Myoho-renge-kyo around 56 times in this 12 page lecture.

Also; "For this reason, he teaches each of us must develop the conviction that "my life is Myoho-renge-kyo," that "Myoho-renge-kyo is my life itself" and that "the name of my life is Myoho-renge-kyo." What was that first thing again?

Now these last three sentences are in quotes as if that is what Nichiren said, but it is paraphrasing what he said. The actual Gosho translation is much clearer than the explanation.

Speaking of which, on page 16 Mr. Saito is addressing the Pure Land School’s interpretation of Buddhism and draws a conclusion, which makes no sense at all in relationship to his premise;

"Any religion that seeks salvation in the absolute tends to focus on things far removed from ordinary people." Scooby Doo says "Rhut?"

The manner in which this lecture is transmitted challenges one to find the blossom in the mire. There are some. But one really needs to wade in chest deep to find them. For example;

"In this letter, Nichiren expounds on the meaning of chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, the foundation and practice of Nichiren Buddhism. Because he repeatedly admonishes us not to seek the Law outside ourselves, we can transcend the destiny of other religions that fall into formality and authoritarianism."

My initial reaction was to this statement was, "Is it hot in here, or is it just me!" I seem to remember boys on one side, girls on the other and a whole lot of uniforms. But after re-reading and reflecting on what is actually being said, Mr. Saito is referring (perhaps) to the issue that SGI, in transcending what the other religions can only experience as "destiny", must also be subject to it in order to overcome it. In fact, how else can SGI lead they way for corporate revolution without overcoming the same pitfalls they all face? If one gives Mr. Saito the benefit of doubt, it was a very adroit way of alluding to past culpability without admitting complicity. Once again this may be a cultural difference.

Mr. Saito was very upfront in stating, "Additionally, I intend to confirm here that it is only the SGI that has been propagating this great Law of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo exactly as intended by Nichiren." He spends a good third of his lecture in refuting the Nichiren Shoshu organization and priesthood. I imagine that in Japan one can pick up a newspaper or ride on a train and read an advertisement or listen to a news program and hear disparaging remarks and editorials from those who either want to destroy the Soka Gakkai's movement for the globalization of peace or who simply do not understand what the truth actually is. However, we here in America who practice this amazing Buddhism, do not see that conflagration in same social and cultural way as the Japanese. In fact I doubt if any information, positive or negative, would reach us except through the auspices of the SGI information network. It's really not a part of our daily life. We are more inculcated with religious fundamental extremism, which this issue of the temple and its priesthood occasionally bleeds into, and gives us pause to reflect.

Respectfully,