Robin Beck

On Refuting Other Schools

The segment on Zen can be found here: On Refuting Other Schools, Zen

"Nowhere in the entire Lotus Sutra do we find a passage suggesting that we should discard the first fourteen chapters [which comprise the theoretical teaching]. When one distinguishes between the theoretical and essential teachings of the Lotus Sutra on the basis of the threefold classification of the entirety of the Buddha s teachings, the pre-Lotus Sutra teachings are to spread in the Former Day, the theoretical teaching in the Middle Day, and the Latter Day is the time to propagate the essential teaching. In this time the essential teaching is primary, while the theoretical teaching is subordinate. However, those who therefore discard the latter, saying it is not the way to enlightenment, and believe only in the former, have not yet learned the teaching of Nichiren's true intention. Theirs is a completely distorted view. " -- Attributed to Nichiren May 17, 1279

This is always a controversial topic in Nichiren circles. My own thought is is that there is no sense in publicly refuting other Buddhist schools, or other religions in general, since they currently lack secular authority. The exception might be any who are engaged in clearly criminal acts. To mindlessly attack others, calling them heretical, or blaming them for all manner of social ills and natural disasters, only makes us look foolish, and degrades the Dharma.

Perhaps we should, as I suppose SGI does to an extent, clarify the distinctions between various models of religious practice, and maybe refute models that are counter-productive; but even that should not be an emphasis, and should not transparently point fingers at specific schools.

Nor should such critiques be too simplistic, and thereby conducive of cultivating or encouraging bigotry, self righteousness, fundamentalism, etc. For example, a nuanced critique of esotericism can be illuminating. And, IMO, statist theocracy is close to an absolute evil. When religion is established as part of the state, it tends to be subsumed, as a tool of the state. On the other hand, I am not sure I want leaders who are a-spiritual or anti-spiritual. And esoteric teachings about mudras, mandalas, and mantras certainly have practical value.

If Nichiren would disagree with that, about which I am not 100% clear, then I would disagree with him. I tend to think that Nichiren, in his critiques, was most concerned with those Priests and Schools who were competing with one another for secular power, as opposed to working for universal salvation. Here are some random Gosho quotes that support this view:

"At that time the ruler of the nation, allying himself with those monks who slander the Law ..."

"When an evil ruler in consort with heretical priests tries to destroy ... Buddhism ... " [I hate that word "heretical."]

"Shakyamuni Buddha states: 'After my death, during the beginning of the Latter Day of the Law ... a person will appear who will propagate the heart of the Lotus Sutra, ... At that time an evil king will be in power and evil priests, more numerous than particles of dust, will contend with one another over the various Mahayana and Hinayana sutras."

"The Buddha stated that, in the latter age, monks and nuns with the hearts of dogs would be ... numerous. By this he meant that the monks and nuns of that day would be attached to fame and fortune."

"Thus they strive to keep their patrons to themselves and prevent other monks or nuns from coming near them, like a dog who goes to a house to be fed, but growls and springs to attack the moment another dog approaches."

I think if we see other schools doing those things; conspiring with evil rulers, and thereby persecuting rival schools or teachers, or using their followers like ropes, in cynical games of tug of war, and mounting various smear campaigns, then maybe we should say something.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
"Anyone who attempts to propagate the teachings of Buddhism must understand the capacity and basic nature of the persons he is addressing. The Venerable Shariputra attempted to instruct a blacksmith by teaching him to meditate on the vileness of the body, and to instruct a washerman by teaching him to count his breaths in meditation. Even though he spent over ninety days with them, these pupils of his did not gain the slightest understanding of the Buddha's Law. On the contrary, they took on erroneous views and ended by becoming icchantika or persons of incorrigible disbelief."

"The Buddha, on the other hand, instructed the blacksmith in the counting-of-breath meditation, and the washer of clothes in the meditation on the vileness of the body, and as a result both were able to obtain understanding in no time at all. If even Shariputra, who was counted foremost in wisdom among the major disciples of the Buddha, failed in understanding the capacity of the persons he was instructing, then how much more difficult must it be for ordinary teachers in this, the Latter Day of the Law, to have such an understanding! Ordinary teachers who lack an understanding of capacity should teach only the Lotus Sutra to those who are under their instruction. " -- during the Izu exile

````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
"Similarly, since the introduction of Buddhism to China in the Later Han dynasty, non-Buddhist views and writings have become even more wrong and cunning than the pre-Buddhist writings of Confucianism that deal with the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors of antiquity. Also the teachers of the Kegon, Hosso, Shingon and other schools, jealous of the correct doctrines of the T ien-t ai school, brazenly interpret the word of the true sutra in such a way that they will accord with the provisional teachings. Those who seek the way, however, should reject such one-sided views, transcending disputes between one s own sect and others, and should not treat others with contempt. " -- Kaimoku Sho ````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
I see no point in re-fighting long resolved 13th century conflicts. My interest in Kamakura Era Japanese religious politics is purely academic. There are lessons to be learned, but only if our understanding is objective and as accurate as possible.

I am evidently not the only one thinking this way. According to Dr. Jacqueline Stone, "[SGI President Daisaku] Ikeda is alleged to have said [in 1990], for example, that "[statements such as] 'Shingon will destroy the nation' and 'Zen is a devil' merely degrade the Dharma," and that in today's society Sõka Gakkai's peace movement and cultural activities represent the most viable means of propagation. On a later occasion Ikeda reportedly made remarks that unfavorably compared Nichiren's harsh public image with the gentler image of Shinran, and urged that Nichiren's compassionate side be emphasized as "a requirement of shakubuku from now on." " from Rebuking the Enemies of the Lotus, Nichirenist Exclusivism in Historical Perspective by Jacqueline STONE

Someone elsewhere posted this, from the Late Nikkyo Niwano (1906–1999):

"One may well wonder whether Nichiren did not go contrary to Buddha's intention when he criticized the other sects of Buddhism in the Kamamkura period (1185-1333), saying "The Jodo sect will got to hell; the Zen sect is made by devils; the Shingon sect will ruin the state; the Ritsu sect is traitorous," But there was a good reason for such criticism of the other sects at that time."

"Japan was then already in the period of the mappo (last Law) and the various sects of Buddhism were mutually antagonistic. They were apt to lose sight of the true intention of the Buddha. Therefore Nichiren urged that all Buddhist give up the consciousness of their particular sect and practice according to the true intention of the Buddha. He used harsh language in criticizing the other sects because the people of that time could not be brought to their senses in any other way. This was a tactful means in the true sense. It was nothing other than an indication of the "affairs of others" in the Buddha's salvation."

"Since Buddhist priests and the general public today are more sophisticated in their thinking, we need not use the same kind of tactful means as Nichiren. As has already been explained, "Tactful Means" signifies a suitable enlightening method, in accord with the capacity of the people to understand the teachings of the Buddha. It is stupid to repeat the same tactful means when the people's capacity has changed for the better. To do so is to practice wrongly the teachings of the Buddha. This is an important point to keep in mind." -- from Buddhism For Today by Nikkyo Niwano; Chapter 16, page 230
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Also, someone brought this Gosho, Teaching, Practice, and Proof, to my attention. It was written in May from from Minobu, but the year is unclear. Likely between 1275 & 1277. The recipient is Sammi Ajari, but likely not the Sammi-bo connected with Atsuhara.

It clearly explains Nichiren's the basics of Nichiren's critiques of the Four Schools -- Shingon, Zen, Jodo, & Ritsu. Of course, it is helpful if one knows a little about both Buddhism & Kamakura Era Japan. The proponents of those schools, those who Nichiren criticized, all disparaged, in some cases denounced, the value of the Lotus Sutra. They also taught the higher teachings were only accessible to an 'Elect' of sorts. Nichiren was dealing with a power structure that used these 4 schools for their own socio-political ends.

Nichiren also addresses the common counter complaint: "Your opponents may attempt to attack you by citing the passage from the Daichido Ron which states: 'If one denounces the teachings others follow, out of love for his own, then even if he observes the precepts, he will be destined to fall into the path of evil.' ... He may well have written this admonition in his treatise because he foresaw that such priests as Kobo and T'an-luan would slander the Lotus Sutra, the teaching which befits this age of the Latter Day of the Law.""

On the superiority of the Lotus Sutra {ichinen sanzen, gohyaku-jintengo, sanze- jintengo}, Nichiren writes:

"repeatedly cite the passage, "I have not yet revealed the truth," to refute their arguments. However, do not carelessly cite such passages [of the Lotus Sutra] as "Honestly discarding the provisional teachings, [I will expound only the supreme Way]" or "The World-Honored One has long expounded his doctrines [and now must reveal the truth]." Rather, keep these teachings deep in your heart."

And:

"From this perspective, you should assert the supremacy of the Lotus Sutra among all the Buddha's teachings. Such a profound teaching may be brought forth in an official debate, but not during personal discussions. Should you indiscriminately mention it to whomever you meet, on any occasion or at any time, you will certainly incur punishment from all the Buddhas of the three existences. This is the principle that I have always referred to as my own inner realization. "

Then the closing passage:

"When in public debate, although the teachings that you advocate are perfectly consistent with the truth, you should never on that account be impolite or abusive, or display a conceited attitude. Such conduct would be disgraceful. Order your thoughts, words and actions carefully and be prudent when you meet with others in debate."

Finally, I get irritated when people read into the Gosho, and tell us Nichiren "really meant" this or that, which supports a narrow agenda. On the other hand, I do not think we should be excessively literal or fundamentalist. Nichiren wrote:

"The lotus plant resembles the principle of Myoho-renge in that it simultaneously contains both cause [blossom] and effect [seed]. Hence the plant came to bear the same name as the principle. Then lotus that grows in water is the lotus that is a plant, such as the pink variety or the white variety. When we speak of the figurative lotus or the lotus that is a metaphor, it is this lotus plant we mean. This lotus plant is used to help clarify the difficult concept of Myoho-renge. That is what the Great Teacher T'ien-t'ai means when he says that through the use of this metaphor, the difficult-to-understand Mystic Law is rendered more comprehensible."

It seems Nichiren wanted us to think, and not take everything too literally? I can not speak for Nichiren. I do not know what he "really meant." I can only speak for myself, to my own limited understanding, and of what makes sense to me.

Something to ponder:

" ... the extremity of greed, anger and stupidity in people's minds in the impure world of the latter age is beyond the power of any sage or worthy man to control. ... This is because, although the Buddha cured greed with the medicine of the meditation on the vileness of the body, healed anger with the meditation on compassion for all, and treated stupidity with the meditation on the twelve-linked chain of dependent origination, to teach these doctrines now merely makes people worse and compounds their greed, anger and stupidity. " -- Nichiren

At any rate, we, both in the Nichiren community, and the broader Buddhist Sangha, can agree to disagree on interpretations. Gosh, my own views continue to evolve! And I think one reason Nichiren named multiple successors, and Shakyamuni declined to name any, was to ensure a diversity of approaches. The error is when the various achools attack & smear one another, competing for patrons and secular authority.

"I, Nichiren, am not the founder of any sect, nor am I a latter-day follower of any older sect. I am a priest without precepts, neither keeping the precepts nor breaking them. I am an ordinary creature like an ox or a sheep, divorced from both the possession of wisdom and the absence of it. " fromLetter to Myomitsu Shonin written the third month of 1276.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Comments
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.fraughtwithperil.com/blogs/holte/archives/000705.html

Posted by: Chris at November 9, 2005 08:26 AM
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
I shall move that link up, so it works.

http://www.fraughtwithperil.com/blogs/holte/archives/000705.html
Holte's corner
Fundamentalism and Buddhism

Posted by: robin at November 9, 2005 09:29 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Posted by rbeck at May 13, 2006 06:27 AM