Robin Beck

-Would love to hear your opinion on this.-

See the thread on the Daihonzon of 1274, which I moved up. That has pictures so readers can see what we are talking about.

+++ It occurred to me that the absence of samsaric beings might be why Nichiren wrote Dai Honzon rather than Dai Man Da Ra in the Ichien Budai Inscription. +++

It seems the absence of samsaric beings at the ceremony is simultaneous with the revelation of a universal Tathagata, whose body is the totality of Shakyamuni, Great Sun Tathagata (Taho Nyorai), and buddhas from all directions of the universe. Could this be a way of making known to us that the body of this universal Buddha is devoid of defilements?

+++ The Daihonzon, in fact also the Daimandara up to sometime in 1278, all had a representative of "the emanation Buddhas of the ten directions" in Zentoku Nyorai {Buddha from the east. There is also Jippo Bunshin on the other side. Anyway, the emanation Buddhas are summoned in Chapter 11? I do not see where the space was completely cleared of Samsara Dwellers. though that still rings a bell. Shakyamuni does purify many Saha Worlds to make room for all of the Buddhas who are showing up. +++

Probably the Daimandaras up to 1278 represent those stages where the emanation buddhas have yet to fully assemble. Chapter eleven of the Lotus sutra says the emanation Buddhas kept arriving. So, in order to accommodate them, there were three stages of purification. Each time the ceremonial environment expanded. (Is this a way of saying there is no room for defilement in the Pure Land of the Eternal Shakyamuni?) When all the emanations have arrived fully, only then it is called Daihonzon? Is this what they call the complete body of the Tathagata? 016 represents this complete body?

Would love to hear your opinion on this.

*Do you think there is a possibility of a connection between 016 having no samsara dwellers and that event in the Lotus Sutra?*

I sort of recall something about Shakyamuni purifying the open space before summoning his emanations. But I do not recall anyone discussing this in detail.

It occurred to me that the absence of samsaric beings might be why Nichiren wrote Dai Honzon rather than Dai Man Da Ra in the Ichien Budai Inscription.

The Daihonzon, in fact also the Daimandara up to sometime in 1278, all had a representative of "the emanation Buddhas of the ten directions" in Zentoku Nyorai {Buddha from the east. There is also Jippo Bunshin on the other side. Anyway, the emanation Buddhas are summoned in Chapter 11?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
At that time the Buddhas of the ten directions each spoke to his multitude of bodhisattvas, saying, "Good men, now I must go to the saha world, to the place where Shakyamuni Buddha is, and also offer alms to the treasure tower of Many Treasures Thus Come One."

The saha world thereupon immediately changed into a place of cleanness and purity.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I do not see where the space was cpmpletely cleared of Samsara Dwellers. though that still rings a bell. Shakyamuni does purify many Saha Worlds to make room for all of the Buddhas who are showing up.

*** The best case for a special Daihonzon among those extant would be the mandala with that name. The case that 016 is special is overwhelming. The date, the inscription, Namu before all the names, no samsara dwellers present.***

I recall there is one chapter in the Lotus Sutra where Shakyamuni Buddha cleansed the ceremonial space three times, despatching the lower worlds to elsewhere, while also summoning his emanations from every directions to the ceremony.

The reason was to present his unified (or universal?) buddha body at that ceremony?

Do you think there is a possibility of a connection between 016 having no samsara dwellers and that event in the Lotus Sutra?

**If based on those remarks by Nikko that Kitayama and Nishiyama called their mandaras "Mannen Kugo Gohonzon", and their temples "Honmonji", then the other four temples who also own mandaras with those same remarks Nikko made, should calls their's the "Mannen Kugo Gohonzon" too. Then we would have six "Mannen Kugo Gohonzons" in the world.**

Maybe 8 0r 9. The Tsisekiji Mandala has the words Honmon Kaidan in the conferral.

The best case for a special Daihonzon among those extant would be the mandala with that name. The case that 016 is special is overwhelming. The date, the inscription, Namu before all the names, no samsara dwellers present.

But I see no reason why there can not be more than one special mandala. There is an ichinen sanzen honzon, one or 2 women's nirvana honzons, 2 healing honzons, 1 or 2 ease of child birth honzons. I do not see the Lotus Sutra Gohonzon as
being a Tribal or Jealous Gohonzon.

gassho

robin

I figured that out after I posted. I recall reading that Nikko wrote "Hanging it up in Honmonji" on some 1280 Mandalas.
Myokakuji in Kyoto, Honnoji in Kyoto, Honmonji in Kyoto, and Hokkeji in Kagawa Prefecture were mentioned as Temples that own these.

===================================

The Nichizen mandara (Kitayama copy) does have the same remarks as the Nishiyama mandara # 32B.
I got an earful from a senior for not knowing this. Haha. Anyway, it is confirmed.

The remarks in kanji: 懸本門寺可為万年重宝也.

懸 hanging 本門寺 Honmonji 可為 regarded 万年 10,000 years 重宝 precious treasure 也 is.

There's another correction I need state, and that was pointed out by my senior too.
The above remark should be understood as: "Hanging it up in the Honmonji that is regarded as the precious treasure of ten thousand years."

The meaning is that it isn't those four to six mandaras on which Nikko wrote those remarks that was to be considered the treasure of ten thousand years. Rather, it is Honmonji that is regarded as the treasure.

The four or six mandaras distributed by Nikko to his various lineage temples were a reminder to those temples that they are subject to the precious Honmonji of the future. It should be noted that although Nikko mentioned Honmonji, there was no built-up Honmonji during his lifetime. Honmonji was the name designated for the future Honmon Kaidan.

If based on those remarks by Nikko that Kitayama and Nishiyama called their mandaras "Mannen Kugo Gohonzon", and their temples "Honmonji", then the other four temples who also own mandaras with those same remarks Nikko made, should calls their's the "Mannen Kugo Gohonzon" too. Then we would have six "Mannen Kugo Gohonzons" in the world.

Ciao.

I figured that out after I posted. I recall reading
that Nikko wrote "Hanging it up in Honmonji" on some 1280 Mandalas.

Myokakuji in Kyoto, Honnoji in Kyoto, Honmonji in Kyoto, and Hokkeji in Kagawa Prefecture were mentioned as Temples that own these.

None below are Nikko's remarks. They are all the usual inscriptions by Nichiren.

13:大覚世尊入滅後二千二百二十余年之間雖有経文一閻浮提之内未有大曼陀羅也得意人察之

26:大覚世尊御入滅後二千二百廿余年間一閻浮提之内未有大漫荼羅也

20: 仏滅後二千二百卅余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大曼陀羅也
21: 仏滅後二千二百三十余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大曼陀羅也
22: 仏滅後二千二百三十余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大曼陀羅也
23: 仏滅後二千二百三十余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大曼陀羅也
24: 仏滅後二千二百卅余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大曼陀羅也
27: 仏滅後二千二百二十余年間一閻浮提之内未有大漫荼羅也
30: 仏滅後二千二百二十余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大漫荼羅也
31: 仏滅後二千二百二十余年之間一閻浮之内未曽図画大漫荼羅也
32: 仏滅後二千二百二十余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大漫荼羅也
32b: 仏滅後二千二百二十余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大漫荼羅也

However, there is a possibility I may have missed out something on the Nichizen. There could be a remark by Nikko after all. I will do a thorough check first. Bye.

13:大覚世尊入滅後二千二百二十余年之間雖有経文一閻浮提之内未有大曼陀羅也得意人察之

26:大覚世尊御入滅後二千二百廿余年間一閻浮提之内未有大漫荼羅也

20: 仏滅後二千二百卅余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大曼陀羅也
21: 仏滅後二千二百三十余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大曼陀羅也
22: 仏滅後二千二百三十余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大曼陀羅也
23: 仏滅後二千二百三十余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大曼陀羅也
24: 仏滅後二千二百卅余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大曼陀羅也
27: 仏滅後二千二百二十余年間一閻浮提之内未有大漫荼羅也
30: 仏滅後二千二百二十余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大漫荼羅也
31: 仏滅後二千二百二十余年之間一閻浮之内未曽図画大漫荼羅也
32: 仏滅後二千二百二十余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大漫荼羅也
32b: 仏滅後二千二百二十余年之間一閻浮提之内未有大漫荼羅也

Corrected:

懸 hanging 本門寺 Honmonji 可 to do 為 regard as 万 ten thousand 年 years 重 important 宝 treasure 也 it is.

This remark was added by Nikko to the bottom centre (facing) of Nichiren's Mandara No.32B (Nishiyama). Note: Remark by Nikko, not Nichiren. Nikko added the almost equivalent remark to at least 3 or maybe 4 others. Let me find out first.

懸 hanging 本門寺 Honmonji 可 to do 為 regard as 万年 ten thousand 重 important 宝 treasure 也 it is.

Hi all!
How are you?

Hi Robin,

You probably were surprised that Kitayama has a Mannen Kugo? And all these years you’ve never heard such a thing. Well, that’s because Kitayama called it the Mannen Kugo, not too long ago. Beyond Kitayama, it has always been known as the "Nichizen Juyo Mandara" (日禅授与漫荼羅). On what basis Kitayama calls it the Mannen Kugo? There is none really, other than the need to impress that they lack not a Mandara that saves and protects for the 10,000 years of Mappo.

The website http://kamakura.cool.ne.jp/gomoyama/new_page_35.htm calls it the “Nichizen Juyo Mandara" but state in brackets (Kitayama Honmonji Mannen Kugo Honzon) in order that people would know this is the one which Kitayama calls their Mannen Kugo.

Nishiyama also have their very own Mannen Kugo. It is No.32B of the Gohonzonshu. This one contains a remark by Nikko [懸本門寺可為万年重宝也]. It means, “Hanging it up in Honmonji as its esteemed treasure for ten thousand years.” By virtue of this remark, Nishiyama call theirs the Mannen Kugo too, though it contain this inscription common to more than a hundred mandaras “.....the never before revealed Great Mandara in the 2220 year..... blah blah blah." Like the Nichizen, No.32B is a Great Mandara.

I noticed that, I think the dates are very close? The calligraphy looks like what I see in pictures of Taisekiji's DG, but not exactly the same.

Hi Robin,

The Nichizen reminds me of the Nichiren autograph that Nichiren Shu confers on believers-the Shutei Mandala Gohonzon; not so much the calligraphy, as it is quite different, but the spacing.

Hi Robin,

Mandara conferred on Nichizen (日禅授与漫荼羅) height 111 cm x width 58.3 cm.

Fuji Taisekiji Ita-mandara (富士大石寺板大漫茶羅) height 143.92 cm x width 65.15 cm.

Hota Myohonji Mannen Kugo Honzon (保田妙本寺万年救護本尊) height 106 cm x width 56.7 cm.

woops. just saw your other post. never mind my comments.

Hey Robby, when I was talking with my mother about these two objects that go by the name "Manen Kugo" we looked at the page in the Gohonzonshu about the Hota Gohonzons (I believe it was there - this fact didn't mean much to me at the time). (I believe) the notes say that the Hota ManenKugo is the only object that is identified on its face as a "Gohonzon". You also pointed out that its not a 10 world mandala, while the Kitayama one is...

I understand that most temples use a printing company. Which one they use varies depending on the school. I think most use an electronic reproduction of a Nichiren Original.

Robin,
How are the Gohonzon made now? Are they copies that the Priest make and then photo copy them? Is this a silly question?
Thank You,
With Metta.........Annette

"How do you come by this information?"

Teaching myself to read Kanji. E-discussions at E-Sangha.

"Are you saying the "Mannen Kugo" Daihonzon is NOT no. 16 of the Gohonzon Shu?"

No. There are simply two Gohonzons with the same name.

Is this NOT kept at hota myohonji temple?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
# 016 is kept at Hota.

The Nichizen is kept at Kitayama AND Taisekiji. See my updates.

"Someone separated {it} into 2 copies. The surface copy is kept at Kitayama, while the background copy is kept at Taisekiji."

Hello Robin;

now I'm really confused...are you saying the "Mannen Kugo" Daihonzon is NOT no. 16 of the Gohonzon Shu? Is this NOT kept at hota myohonji temple? What about the wooden copy held by Honmon Shoshu?

This is all very confusing...to say the least.

How do you come by this information?

David