Hi everyone,
Among Nichiren Buddhists there is the idea that one is not really practicing correctly or fully until one has a calligraphic mandala called the Gohonzon. This is actually a huge misunderstanding that I, as a Nichiren Shu minister, would like to correct. All one needs to do to practice Nichiren Buddhism is to (1) have a sincere trust and conviction in the teaching of the Lotus Sutra that not only are all beings capable of buddhahood but that buddhahood is right here and now, (2) express that conviction through practicing for oneself and others by chanting the title (Daimoku) of the Lotus Sutra which is both a form of meditation and a way of sharing the Dharma with others, (3) deepen one's understanding of the Wonderful Dharma which is your life's true nature through studying the teachings but even more importantly through studying your own life. Whether or not you have a nifty calligraphic scroll to hang on your wall is, if not totally beside the point, at least not as crucial as people mistakenly believe.
To clarify, the word "gohonzon" is a generic word used by all Japanese Buddhists (not just Nichiren Buddhists) to indicate both the ultimate reality and also whatever a particular school or temple uses to portray or depict or indicate that reality. So the gohonzon of Pure Land Buddhism is Amitabha Buddha. In the Zen temple down the street from me the gohonzon enshrined there is a statue of the historical Shakyamuni Buddha.
In Nichiren Buddhism the Gohonzon is one of the Three Great Hidden Dharmas that Nichiren taught are the basis or standard of practice in Nichiren Buddhism as the direct way of practicing the essential teaching of the Lotus Sutra. They are the Gohonzon (Focus of Devotion), the Odaimoku (Great Title), and the Kaidan (Precept Platform). Nichiren Shu understands the Gohonzon to mean the Eternal Shakyamuni Buddha revealed in chapter 16 of the Lotus Sutra who exemplifies the Oneness of the Person and the Dharma; the Odaimoku is the Wonderful Dharma Lotus Flower Sutra (which is Myoho Renge Kyo in Sino-Japanese); and the Kaidan is understood to be wherever we uphold the Wonderful Dharma of the Lotus Sutra. Actually, all three of these are the One Great Hidden Dharma which is Namu Myoho Renge Kyo (Devotion to the Wonderful Dharma Lotus Flower Sutra). Namu Myoho Renge Kyo is the true nature of the Gohonzon, it is the Dharma that we chant, and it is by upholding it that we become part of the Sangha of the Bodhisattvas of the Earth and their followers. Namu Myoho Renge Kyo for Nichiren Buddhism is the all in all of practice, realization, and actualization when we chant it, awaken to its meaning, and embody its spirit. This means that the Gohonzon is not other than Namu Myoho Renge Kyo itself. And in fact, in Nichiren Shu, a simple inscription of the Odaimoku can be used to depict the Gohonzon, it does not have to be the calligraphic Omandala though that is often enshrined in homes. Even more importantly, the Gohonzon is present whenever the spirit of Namu Myoho Renge Kyo is upheld, whether or not there is a concrete depiction.
Now here are some things Nichiren wrote in a letter that is now called "The Swords of Good and Evil":
"The Lotus Sutra is the staff that helps all the Buddhas of the three existences as they set their minds on enlightenment."
"When one uses a staff, one will not fall on treacherous mountain paths or rough roads, and when led by the hand, one will never stumble. Namu Myoho Renge Kyo will be your staff to take you safely over the mountains of death."
This put me in mind of something a Zen Master named Baqiao once said: "If you have a staff, I will give you one; if you don't have a staff I will take one away. "
Odaimoku, the essence of the Lotus Sutra which in Nichiren Buddhism represents the essence of Buddha Dharma, is the authentic staff of Nichiren Buddhism. Not Odaimoku as a concept, or a paper scroll, or a verbal rabbit's foot, or an object of superstitious clinging, or a method of positive thinking, or a magickal tool for getting something else. Namu Myoho Renge Kyo as an expression of living Dharma is to be our staff. So do you have this staff in hand? Or do you have something else? Is your wealth real wealth? Is your poverty real poverty? What do you really have or not have when you talk about Odaimoku or the Gohonzon?
What is this staff? Who is giving or taking it? What is this giving and taking? Who is gaining or losing? What is having or not having?
Here's a conceptual dead-end sidetrack: This also has to do with the three truths of provisional realities, emptiness of self-nature, and the Middle Way. These three different truths are all different ways of pointing to how things are, including ourselves, others, and our environment. These three truths are also exemplified by the staff of Odaimoku. Is it a provisional reality to take up or put down? Is it empty of giving and taking? Is it just the Middle Way that avoids all extreme views? Yes!
Last night, wondering what my nine year old daughter would make of this I caught her attention, leaned across the table and said, "Julie! If you have a staff I will give you one; if you don't have a staff, I will take it away." Then I leaned back to see what she would say or do.
Julie, went, "Hmmm...well..." Then she looked me right in the eye and said, "If you have a staff, I will give you another one." Then she held up both her hands as though holding two staffs. "If you don't have one, I will go to your house to find out where you left it. Then I will take it and bring it to you."
I don't know what a Zen Master would make of that, but I especially like the second part. It would be a case of not having a staff and still having it taken, of having a staff and still being given it.
But Julie did not stop there. She immediately said, "No wait. If you have a stick I will hit you in the face with it! If you don't have a stick I will kick you in the ass!"
Well she had me there. I laughed out loud in approval. I don't know what a Zen Master would make of that, but she certainly seems like a Dragon Girl to me.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
Being a devils advocate here, why in the world would anyone practice NICHIREN BUDDHISM when Nichiren was not a a Buddha, and he himself worshiped the Lotus Sutra. Seems to be the beginning of a big hairy problem that has festered for over 700 years and caused probably millions of people to fall into the trap of thinking they are following a Buddha, but instead attaching them self to Japan worship, Sumi Ink worship, and people who put on robes and pretend to be Nichiren as an Elvis impersonator would wear a jumpsuit and hand out scarves. I am not picking on you or anyone, just asking for some deeper thought, as you have already led the way here with the mandala entry. Thanks for the post... but Nichiren Buddhism only exists because people want it to exist, it does not exist on its own, however Buddhahood like Gravity will continue to exist with or without Buddhism as a religion.
Bruce
Posted by: Bruce Maltz at December 1, 2006 11:56 AMHi Bruce,
While it is verifiable that "form is emptiness" it is also verifiable that "emptiness is form."
Also, Nichiren Buddhism is not at all dependent on Nichiren having been some kind of "Buddha" except insofar as we are all in truth "buddhas" - a term that simply means "awakened one." When we awake to our life then we are buddhas. Then there are all kinds of technical restricted usages of the word buddha, and then people fall into entanglements and start arguing about who is or is not a buddha and in what sense and which buddha is more important. But if we do not awaken, if we do not realize buddhahood (even the word "become" is way off) then it is all moot.
For that matter, even Shakyamuni's Buddhahood would be meaningless if we do not realize our own awakening. Nichiren Shu's talk about an "Eternal Shakyamuni Buddha" is just an elaborate and symbolic way of pointing this out and the various implications of it. If Buddha is not here and now and closer to us than our very marrow - then Buddha is not Buddha in any meaningful or helpful sense. This is the real essence of Nichiren's teaching - though it is couched in the intricacies of Tendai scholasticism and the concerns and mythic views of his own particular time and culture. We can be inspired by that, perhaps even celebrate it - but we also need to see past it to the real awakening here and now. All the fancy talk and ceremonies and whatnot are just ways of pointing it out for us and motivating us to see for ourselves.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
Posted by: Ryuei at December 1, 2006 07:03 PM
Yeah OK big shot (just kidding).. but if you call your sect Nichiren Buddhism, it means Buddhism of Nichiren, does it not? Shin Buddhism is Shin's, Amida is Amida, or Uncle Amida's of the Lotus, and the list goes on and on. There is no Buddhism, that is my dull point (oxymoron).
How can you practice a no-practice? Sakyamuni was a human, just like Tendai, Nichiren, You and I and Shinran as well. We all have Buddha or Enlightenment in our life according to the Lotus Sutra, other sutras allude but are not complete to this fact. So, if Buddha says he transmitted to you Enlightenment, and never says, awaken to it, or practice to find it, or other catch phrases we Americans have made up, what the heck are we looking for or trying to wake up? Its all ready there!! And the Eternal Buddha left no practice other than to spread this fact to others, there are no meditations, no sittings under streams or hot showers with or without soap, or soap on a rope, there are no sticking pins in our feet, no holding back sex, or not playing the sax, nothing, because we already practiced the way.
Everything seems to be gobbly-goop, stepping outside the juzu-beeds you gotta put things on trial and say, "I just don't see people getting the result that is promised in the Sutra". Is this a fraud or is something very wrong??
OK.. I hit the ball to you, or anyone else, and as always, I agree to disagree and will fight for your right to have your wrong, i mean view.. hahaha
Bruce
Posted by: Bruce Maltz at December 1, 2006 09:07 PMHi Bruce,
There is so much to this issue that to do it justice will perhaps require at least a whole blog entry, and really the most adequate response is probably not one that can be shared in discursive discourse like this.
But for I'll ask this: Where in the Lotus Sutra does it say that we are just enlightened as we are and that therefore there is no reason for teaching, practice, or realization? I just don't see that in the sutra. I see where it says that the merit of a single moment of faith and rejoicing transcends the practice of the perfections of generosity, self-restraint, patience, effort, and concentration. But I also see that it stops short of making it equivalent to the perfection of wisdom. It also says (this is in chapter 17 btw) that the merits of faith and rejoicing along with the first five of the six perfections would be even better.
I would go so far as to say that Nichiren's teachings all boil down to expressing the single-moment of faith and rejoicing by simply chanting the title (daimoku) of the Lotus Sutra and that all other practices or traditions are simply for the support of this one thing.
BTW, Nichiren Buddhism used to be called the Hokke Shu but then people would confuse it with the Tendai schools and so to differentiate it came to be called Nichiren Buddhism, just as in the past some of the Zen schools were called the Bodhidharma school. But this does not mean that any of us consider Nichiren as replacing Shakyamuni Buddha. Really it just means that we follow Nichiren's take on the Buddha-Dharma of Shakyamuni Buddha and perhaps we might go so far as to say that Nichiren uncovered the idea that the true Buddha is found not in some historical figure but in our own true nature. This would make Nichiren an excellent teacher and lineage founder whose name is a convenient label for the lineage(s) that trace back to him. This is not unprecedented. The Zen school is divided into the Soto and Rinzai schools which are the names of their lineage founders.
But of course the Lotus Sutra is itself apocryphal, and even the Pali Canon is the word of the Buddha on the say so of the Theravadin monks (there are no Theravadin nuns) whose vested interests are mostly (but not always) supported by that canon which they themselves compiled and passed down. The Zen folks claim that they have passed down an authentic transmission outside the scriptures that in any case can not be put into words. So who is right?
Frankly, all things are conventional designations. The USA, General Motors, the State Bar of California, the concept of "family", and so on and so forth. Even grass and trees and people and animals are conventional designations. And I am not just talking about the names we use for them - I mean their very existence depends on certain natural conventions that have arisen in terms of how molecules bond together and how cells work and the law of gravity and so on and so forth. These "ways" may have lasted for billions of years but they are literally not written in stone. One scientist has even gone so far as to say that the "laws" of nature would be more properly termed "habits" (I think it was Rupert Sheldrake). So there is no-thing (and even nothing) that is not a convention both linguistically and even ontologically.
So here we are conventionally designated beings in a sea of conventional designation. How do we deal with this? How do we come to terms with it (or not)? On the one hand we can see it all for what it really is - which is no-thing other than conventional designation. On the other hand we can see that there is no-thing apart from conventional designation and so to deal with things as they are without undue clinging or even rejection.
Buddhism is just a tradition that has been conventionally passed down to draw attention to this, remind us of this, and help us see what is there all along. Is it the only way? Perhaps, perhaps not. Is it artificial? Yes. So is everything. It is just another manifestation of how things are - except that in this case it is more self-revealing then most - or at least it aims to be.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
Ryuei:
This was a wonderful piece. I've read the commentary here and find it amusing.
I find your comments quite affirming and the others to be negating. It is true that some principles can best be explained through negation. Reading the Lotus Sutra, it is baffling how someone can conclude that it denies the need for practice or confers Buddhahood that is not won through diligence - afterall, that is how Shakyamuni was able to become a Buddha.
There is no manifest Buddha enlightenment through supposed understanding via some change in perspective. The idea that Buddhism is not a religion is an exercise in semantics. Would Buddhism or any other so-called religion exist outside human consciousness? That seed of appreciation for the universe - which can be termed religion is a potential of consciousness that exists beyond the human beings and is probably a trait of the universe observing itself, transcending the human mind and sentient life.
I believe that the consciousness of self-awareness - whether human or animal, has the Ten Worlds, and the capacity to apprehend something greater then what they are.
In conclusion, Buddhism is a religion that transcends human life and labels. Buddhahood is an aspect of all phenomena yet it does not flourish without practice to bring it forth from latency nor does it remain manifest as a dominant aspect of existence without effort to keep it there.
Charles
Posted by: Charles at December 6, 2006 12:38 PM