Real Life with Ryuei

Response to Mark Rogow's view of differences

Mark Rogow recently responded to a question from Charles about the differences between Kempon Hokke and Nichiren Shu. I would like to respond to this here:

Mark:
One difference is the weight placed on the first half and latter half of the Lotus Sutra and especially the significance of the One Chapter and Two Halves and the Daimoku. The Nichiren Shu, in general, places almost equal emphasis on the first half of the Lotus Sutra (ichi-ha)with the latter half. The Kempon Hokke deemphasizes even the Honmon teachings with respect to the "One Chapter and Two Halves" and demphasize even the One Chapter and Two Halves in respect to the Daimoku, the principle faith and practice of the Lotus Sutra (shoretsu). This is Nichiren's perspective. Nichikan of the Nichiren Shoshu, on the other hand, advocated extreme shoretsu with the smashing of the Hoben-pon, by the Juryo-hon, and the smashing of the Juryo-hon with the Daimoku.

Since we adopt Nichiren's perspective we are the true harmony school.

Let me give you an example. We have a scale that accomodates different weights and we wish to correctly balance the scale. On the right side of the scale we place the Daimoku which is a one kilogram brass weight. On the left side of the scale we place the One Chapter and Two Halves, a 0.5 kg brass weight. We add the rest of the Honmon teachings, a weight of 0.25 kg, the Hoben-pon, a weight of 0.15 kg and the rest of the Shakumon teachings, a 0.1kg brass weight. Thus we have balanced the Buddhism of the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren Daishonin. The Nichiren Shu also places on one side, a one kilogram Daimoku brass weight but they attempt to balance the scale by placing on the other side, a 0.4kg weight of the One Chapter and Two Halves, a 0.3kg weight of the Honmon, a 0.25kg weight of the Hoben-pon, and a 0.25kg weight of the remaining Shakumon teachings.

Ryuei:
This is something for academics at Rissho University to hash out. Maybe it is true that in the past Nichiren Shu balanced things out as Mark suggests. In fact, I know that there are Nichiren Shu ministers who probably do have this view as they put equal emphasis on chanting the sutra as they do on chanting the Odaimoku, and spend as much or more time teaching from the perspective of the Shakumon as the Honmon, or the One Chapter and Two Halves as on the efficacy of the Odaimoku itself. Certainly I could be accused of coming across that way at times. And I certainly cop to putting a lot of emphasis on basic Buddhism as taught in the Pali Canon - and in fact one prominent Japanese Nichiren Shu minister (in Japan) told me that I don't spend enough time on the Pali Canon. LOL.

Anyway, that's not the whole story though. There are plenty of Nichiren Shu ministers (probably many of them are from those Kempon Hokke lineages that are now part of Nichiren Shu) who do take the view that Mark attributes to Kempon Hokke. And what Mark says is correct - that is the perspective Nichiren takes in the gosho. It is very clear: the Odaimoku is the seed for the Buddhism of sowing, the One Chapter and Two Halves are the expression of the ultimate teaching for the time of harvest, which in turn trumps the 8 chapters, which in turn trumps the Honmon as a whole, which in turn trumps the Shakumon, which in turn trumps all the other sutras. At the same time, Nichiren cautioned against throwing any of it away as advocated by extreme shoretsu.

Now I actually don't have a problem with this. And if anyone really paid close attention to my views and how I teach and present Buddhism (offline too) they would see that I have never put other practices on par with Odaimoku, not even the chanting of the Lotus Sutra. They would also notice that I do believe the Single-Moment of Faith and Rejoicing which is the Odaimoku illuminates the One Chapter and Two Halves which in turn illuminates the 8 chapters which in turn illuminates the Honmon which in turn illuminates the Shakumon, which in turn illuminates all the sutras. In other words the final word is Odaimoku and what it expresses and so on down the line. The sutras needs to be interpreted in light of the Shakumon which needs to be interpreted in light of the Honmon and so on. This is my actual view and has been since the late 90's when I put both feet into Nichiren Shu.

Mark:
Another difference is the divergence of our respective views of and feelings for Nichiren. The Nichiren Shu pays lip service to Nichiren as Jogyo Bosatsu while we believe that he is our eternal leader and Sensei in the Latter Day. They treat him as merely a great Bodhisattva, delight in revealing his human frailties, and maintain that he holds no special position in the Buddhist pantheon, likening him to Tientai and Dengyo. This might be their rational for overiding Nichiren's teachings by those of Udana Nichiki's. We on the other hand, assert that, even if Nichiju (the founder of Kempon Hokke)were to conflict with Nichiren, even in the slightest, he should be rejected. We believe that Nichiren, as the Supreme Votary of the Lotus Sutra and the only one who has bodily read the entire Lotus Sutra, can never be overuled in his commentary on the Lotus Sutra and the times in which we live.

Ryuei:

There may be some validity to this. For my part I am fine with this. I don't think Nichiren is infallible. I don't think the historical Buddha was infallible. I don't think the historical Jesus was infallible. I think the papacy is not only not infallible but totally corrupt. I could go on. I also don't think Nichiki Udana was infallible for that matter. One thing I like about Nichiren Shu is that it does regard Nichiren Shonin (or even Daishonin - we use that title also) very highly but we don't make him out to be equal to the Eternal Shakyamuni Buddha or some kind of infallible mouthpiece of truth. He was a man of his times, with all the limitations and frailty and fallibility that implies.

However, I would not say we say he is merely equivalent to T'ien-t'ai or Dengyo. That is not the position of Nichiren Shu. From the point of view of our teachings - T'ien-t'ai and Dengyo were appearances of and did the work of provisional bodhisattvas and they were key people in the external transmission of the Dharma. Nichiren, however, is the appearance of the leader of the Bodhisattvas of the Earth who were given the mission to spread the Odaimoku in the Latter Age by the Eternal Buddha in chapter 21 and therefore he embodies the inner transmission of the Dharma. Nichiren Shu does uphold what Nichiren writes in the gosho - that this inner transmission supercedes the former external transmission of the T'ien-t'ai school, and is the work of the Bodhisattvas of the Earth.

When I read the gosho I see Nichiren writing about himself and by extension all his followers in three perspectives. From one perspective he writes of himself as an ordinary person of the Latter Day at the stage of hearing the Dharma for the first time. On a deeper level he writes of himself and his followers who chant Namu Myoho Renge Kyo as those who are doing the work of the Bodhisattvas of the Earth and who therefore must be those Bodhisattvas. On the deepest level, our true nature is that we are truly buddhas. All three of these perspectives can be found in Shoho Jisso Sho, and the deepest perspective can even be found in Kanjin Honzon Sho where Nichiren says that for those who have faith in the Lotus Sutra the Eternal Shakyamuni Buddha is our flesh, blood, bones and marrow.

This means, btw, that Nichiki Udana was an ordinary person, a Bodhisattva of the Earth, and truly a Buddha.

Mark:
Therefore, shakabuku and the four dictums are our bone and marrow.

Ryuei:
If one reads the Kaimoku Sho, one will see that Nichiren cites Mio-lo and T'ien-t'ai to the effect that when it comes to shakubuku and shoju one should not cling to only one or the other but apply them appropriately. Certainly there are other gosho (I think Kembutsu Mirai Ki and Nyosetsu Shugyo Sho) where Nichiren emphasizes only shakubuku for his day and age. But he does not elevate shakubuku or the four dictums to eternal principles or put them on a par with our true nature. Shakubuku is a teaching method, a mode of practice and propagation - and not always appropriate. I would in fact say that the times and conditions we are facing are now indeed very different from medieval Japan. Certainly you and others (in Kempon Hokke or even within Nichiren Shu) can disagree. But here I agree (but really only in part) with Nichiki Udana. I do, for the record, suspect that Nichiki Udana may have gone too far in being accomodating - but I need to see translations of what he actually wrote.

In addition, if anyone really pays attention to what I write (online and in my other writings) and say offline, it will become clear that I don't hesitate to criticize and rebuke. I'm just not stuck in that mode and most of the time I try to be tactful and respectful about it (as Nichiren himself advised to his disciples in the gosho).

Mark:
We do not allow for the seperate enshrinement of Bodhisattvas or deities, unlike the Nichiren Shu.

Ryuei:
We do indeed allow for this in Nichiren Shu. As for Kempon Hokke, I guess I'll just have to take Mark's word for it that they don't. I wonder if the Kempon Hokke lineage temples that are now within Nichiren Shu allow for seperate enshrinment. It may be that they do not. No one in Nichiren Shu is required to enshrine anything but the Gohonzon.

Mark
We believe in the absolute equality of priests and laity, allowing for the ordination of lay priests not unlike Toki Jonin who was perfectly endowed with all the abilities of his fully ordained counterparts . We may look up to a priest as a nominal Sensei but only as a representative of the Original Buddha Shakyamuni and Nichiren Daishonin, our true and actual Senseis.

Ryuei:
It is true that we do not have an ordination program for lay-priests that I am aware of. However, we are working on having a lay-leader program that will probably be equivalent. As for priests and laity being equal - John Petry the lay president of NONA has addressed that on the Nichiren Shu yahoo group. There certainly is equality in Nichiren Shu, and in fact I think that at least some temples the boards of directors probably have more power than any of the ministers. Anyone who think Nichiren Shu priests lord it over the laity betray their ignorance of and lack of experience with Nichiren Shu.

Mark:
We adopt the practice of neither giving nor receiving from slanderers such as SGI, NST, HBS, Zen, Nembutsu, Ritsu, Shingon, Taoists, Hindus, Christians, and Muslims.

Ryuei:
Well considering that I give talks at Zen centers and accept their honorariums I guess that means I accept donations from slanderers. In fact, I hold my weekly Sunday services at a Zendo offered to me for my use by a community center founded by Christians and have even advocated people sending them donations to support their work (the Faithful Fools that is). So guilty as charged. I don't follow fuju fuse and neither does Nichiren Shu as a whole, though certain ministers might.

I do agree that we should not allow ourselves to be co-opted or compromised because we have become beholden to those who don't respect our teachings and practice. But I do not believe that has ever been the case in my dealings. When I give talks at other Buddhist centers and when I run my services at Faithful Fools I have always been free to teach Nichiren Shu teaching and practice without compromise.

Mark:
These are just some of the differences and I am sure they will be disputed by the Nichiren Shu but careful reading of their official positions and the teachings of their priests, such as Ryuei, will reveal the merit of my assertions.

Ryuei:
Well perhaps contrary to your expectations I have not disputed much of what you said. Nichiren Shu is a big tent - and there are probably Nichiren Shu ministers who are every bit as strict and hardline as you, and there are others who are more liberal than me. I frankly see myself as a moderate and not a liberal - but others interpretations and impressions may differ.

You may, of course, respond on your own blog.

Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei

Posted by Ryuei at September 3, 2008 10:18 AM