1. There is no evidence that Nichiren was ever fully ordained in the Tendai
school. There is also no evidence that he wasn't, but Prof. Nakao pointed out that only well connected monks were fully ordained. Most were just given tokudo, so technically they were just shamis (novices). Based on this answer, it seems to me that when Nichiren said he was a "monk without precepts" what he meant was that even though he had never formally taken up the Bodhisattva precepts or the monastic precepts he was still living in accord with them. It didn't mean that he had rejected them or wanted his disciples to not follow
monastic or bodhisattva precepts. It also means that he did not think it was necessary to take them formally either, as he may not have. This also explains to me why he would have wanted a new precept platform of the essential teaching, because he may have wanted a precept platform anyone could go to instead of just a precept platform for well-connected elite monastics.
2. Nichiren left a fingerprint on one of the Omandalas. Prof. Nakao brought a picture of this. Way cool!
3. Nichiren's kao (signature) below the Odaimoku on the Omandalas may either be a highly stylized form of Myo or it may be the Sanskrit letter that represents "Great Sun." Apparently there are different opinions about this in scholarly circles.
4. In any case, Nichiren's kao changed over time and six different forms of it
have been identified, and these are correlated to different years. This is one way they check the authenticity of an Omandala, by making sure the date on it matches the kao.
5. Just to make sure I asked him if anyone knew for sure why Kuan Yin
Bodhisattva had been left off the Omandala. He confirmed that scholars do not know as Nichiren never said why in any extant writing. Also, he affirmed that all the buddhas and bodhisattvas are included in the Omandala by implication.
6. He explained that in the past, people would write the names of their deceased
relatives on the Omandalas. In the case of picture mandalas, the pictures of the deceased would be put on the Omandalas. This practice was not common and only done by those who could afford to have the portrait Omandalas done.
7. Many of the Omandalas Nichiren made were used as Omamoris (sort of like a
protective paper amulet) and they were folded up and worn by samurai into battle. Apparently several of these have been found (and are probably among those in the Gohonzon Shu collection though I would not know which ones). He also said that new Omandalas were still occasionally found and authenticated to this day.
So those were some of the things that I learned from his talks. He also spoke a
lot about papermaking in medieval Japan and the construction of the Omandalas. Prof. Nako, btw, is regarded in Japan as an expert not in just religious history but also is an expert in Japanese national treasures, many of which he has examined himself in the course of his work. He and his students were also involved in some way with the establishment of the Asian Art Museum in San Francisco though I am not clear about in what capacity.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
This is really interesting, thanks Ryuei for the report!
Posted by: Jeff Wilson at April 11, 2006 01:19 PMRev. Michael -
Thanks very much! I would have liked to attend this presentation, but distances intervened.
Namaste, Engyo Mike Barrett
Posted by: Engyo Mike Barrett at April 11, 2006 01:36 PMHi Ryuei,
I enjoyed reading your article today, especially the part about precepts. Thanks much.
VW
"He also said that new Omandalas were still occasionally found and authenticated to this day."
I would guess there are 25 that are being witheld intentionally. The GS shows none at Tanjo-ji. None at Kyoto Yuseiji. One each at Minobu, Kitayama, & Ikegami.
Tanjo-ji claims 7, Kyoto Yuseiji claims 3.
Posted by: robin at April 12, 2006 09:01 AMThanks for the lowdown on the lecture! It sounds like it was a really, really cool presentation. I hope there were a lot of people present.
"3. Nichiren's kao (signature) below the Odaimoku on the Omandalas may either be a highly stylized form of Myo or it may be the Sanskrit letter that represents "Great Sun." Apparently there are different opinions about this in scholarly circles."
The signature is two Kanji for Nichi & Ren. The Koa
us the seal. On many mandalas, it is on top of the 'sig'. No one knows what the seal is. There is another theory that it represents Dainichi.
I will illustrate next door.
thank you very much Ryuei, for all these informations , helping to keep the dharma alive, and always giving me hope and joy.
Patrick
Hi,
Do you know of any basis for the claim that Nichiren picked '6' because that was a number required for Ordination?
Do you know if Godaigo granted them the power to create a Kaidan?
Posted by: robin at April 14, 2006 02:16 PMHi Robin,
As far as I know, no emperor has ever issued an order for the establishment of a new kaidan. In fact, I believe that was one of the issues that Shoshinkai had with Daisaku Ikeda's insistence that the Sho-Hondo was the Kaidan no Honmon.
As for Nichiren picking 6 because that was the number needed for ordination and/or because that is the traditional number of main offices in a monastery, I wish that I had thought to ask that. I will try to keep that question in mind when I go to Japan in May.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
I have a list of questions and comments:
1. Daniel Montgomery says in his "Fire in the Lotus":
"After that he was too weak to write any more. For nearly a month he lay near death as his disciples gathered about him to hear his last words. He named six of them the "Senior Disciples" and nucleus of his new order. By choosing six, he established the independence of his movement. Six was the traditional number necessary for a proper ordination: Three to perform the ceremony with the candidate and three to act as witnesses. The Nichiren Order was now to select and ordain candidates of its own. Needless to say, the Tendai Sect, which had government authority behind it, bitterly resented this schism from its ranks, and did its utmost to have Nichiren's followers treated as outlaws in the years to come."
This clearly indicates an effort aiming at developing an independant ordination platform. Does the good professor have any information on whether this passage was true or not?
2. We have several versions of what happened between 1282-1332, but I think that it may be more important to focus on the period from 1320-1332. I suspect that there was a temporary return to unity that may have also sowed the seeds for later fights as Nikko became left as the last surviving member of the original five, Nitcho served at his side and died at Fuji, Niko retired to Mobara and died, and both Nichiro and Nissho passed away. I get the impression that one of the campaigns of that period aimed at both Kyoto and Kamakura and culminated when Go-Daigo returned to promise. What promises did Go-Daigo make to the Nichiren school and what rights did he promise to grant them? Was there any basis for the Honmon Shoshu claim that the Emperor did indeed make promises to them? It's obvious that he keep the authority to actually make good his promises. I'm wondering if he ever intended to keep them.
3. This would have sown the seeds for later dissension in several ways. Some of the sponsoring families were allied with the Hojos. Some initially allied with the Emperor but came to support the Shogun, and all involved saw their fortunes rise and fall in the subsequent civil wars and internal turmoil.
Related questions:
How much did Muromachi period religious politics outside of Kyoto reflect "Jito interference" and Clan politics?
What were some of the accomplishments of the Nichiren schools in Kyoto during this same period?
4. It appears that Nichirenism never had a fair debate with the Tendai school about the role of the Lotus versus the role of Mikkyo. Is that true? I think that they would have won that debate hands down simply citing the Ebyo shu (which clearly shows why Jikaku Daishi didn't deserve the title Daishi and was in fact a traitor to his master). How much does modern Nichirenism consider the logic and rationale of the Ebyo Shu in forming Nichiren teachings? (this is a 'powder puff' question)
5. Has Nichirenism developed a rational approach to apocrypha. I would suggest one modeled on Talmudic scholars, they will cite a prefered opinion but also preserve 'counter' opinions in their writings. This might be a good way to break the Macho-"sensei" attitude that has distorted Buddhism (world-wide). All of us have many masters, and regardless of how all of us see Nichiren as the founding Master (and therefore special to this sect) there is no getting around the many questions and debates that have formed around periphrial issues and philosophical subjects. What approach is Nichiren Shu taking to resolving these ancient disputes? I'm not sure a mere "consensus" approach alone will work because consensus only lasts until the factions involved decide to break it.
Thats all for now. I probably can think of more questions, but I'd really appreciate it if you consider asking about these things. I think that the answers will shed light on modern events as well.
Posted by: Chris at April 17, 2006 05:36 AMWas Nitta Yoshisada (1301-1338)related to Nichimoku and Nichido of Taisekiji?
I touched on Honkokuji and its association with the Ashikaga Family in "Mandarin Duck Gohonzon & Honkokuji".
Posted by: robin at April 17, 2006 08:48 AMOne more question. This comment about "fully ordained" has me a bit perplexed. Where in Buddhism do layers of ordainment come in? Who ever "fully ordained" Shakyamuni? And what was involved in becoming "fully ordained" other than renouncing secular life and taking bodhisattva vows?
I have been under the impression, based on my readings about Tendai, that Tendai advanced initiations were also esoteric initiations. Why would any Nichiren monk even want that? But I don't know so could you ask Rev. Nakao to explain this point a bit more?
Thanks again,
Chris
Hi Chris and Robin,
I wouldn't have even had a chance to ask those questions when he was here, but Prof. Nakao has long since returned to Japan. Perhaps I'll bring these with me when I go to Japan in May but I don't know if I'll get a chance to ask them of anyone in a position to know that kind of historical detail.
As for levels of ordination - that goes back to the Vinaya. The first ordination is as a shramanera or novice, and it involves 10 precepts. Then there is the full ordination as a bhikshu (monk) which means taking up the 250 or so precepts. This was actually pretty rare in East Asia according to my research. Most "monks" and "nuns" only received the shramanera ordination. The bodhisattva precepts of the Brahma Net Sutra (an apocryphal Chinese creation) were intended for both monastics and laity, but were not meant to replace the novice and full monastic precepts. In Japan, however, they were used in place of the monastic precepts because Saicho (aka Dengyo Daishi) wanted his Mahayana ordination platform at Mt. Hiei to be independent of the Hinayana ordination platforms of the Nara schools. If I understood Prof. Nakao correctly, only a few well-connected "monks" would have received a full ordination at the Mt. Hiei precept platform and received the 10 major and 48 minor Mahayana precepts of the Brahma Net Sutra. Esoteric intiations and precepts were something else again.
At this time, Nichiren Shu ministers do not receive any formal lists of precepts either during their shramanera ordination or their bhikshu ordination. We receieve the Wonderul Precept of the Essential Teaching which is said to contain all possible precepts in their true spirit as embraced and fulfilled by Odaimoku. In fact, however, the monstic training at Mt. Minobu did conform to the monastic precepts though we never formally took any.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei