Originally catalogued by Craig Bratcher, comments in italic by me(Chris Holte).
Daibyakuho, 9/1/94
My comments on the
History Leading to the Split between the SGI and Nichiren Shoshu.
Part One
Nichijun Fujimoto writes in 1994:
On this occasion of the guidance meeting for the regional representatives (koto) and vice-representatives (fuku-koto) of Hokkeko, who have assembled here from across the country, I have decided to give a general summary of the problems we have faced against the Soka Gakkai. I am certain that all of you are well aware of the situation, but please consider this to be a general review of what has taken place. Moreover, it would give me the utmost pleasure if my speech is even slightly instrumental in deepening your understanding of the circumstances and, furthermore, if it helps you to successfully shakubuku and re-shakubuku True Buddhism.
The Doctrine of Nichiren Shoshu: The Buddhism of the Heritage of the Law As you know, Nichiren Shoshu is a denomination that was founded seven-hundred years ago by Nichiren Daishonin. As the True Buddha of the Latter Day of the Law, the Daishonin inscribed the Gohonzon of the Three Great Secret Laws and, by so doing, he established the foundation for the salvation of all mankind. Thus, he completely devoted his life to propagation. Then, he transferred the entirety of his Buddhist teachings along with the Dai-Gohonzon of the High Sanctuary of True Buddhism to the second High Priest Nikko Shonin.
You will note the references to the "transfered the entirety of his teachings to Nikko Shonin. This is a reference to the notion that the Fuji School has that it has a "lineage" or a body of teachings and understandings that is in addition or even superscedes the written writings of Nichiren Daishonin. According to this interpretatory approach to Buddhism, Nichiren wasn't a mere mortal but a man with teachings so vast and deep that only one man could properly understand them. That man was Nikko, and Nichiren "entrusted" them solely to him. This interpretation also implies that ony Nikko's disciple Nichimoku understood Nikko, and that generally this same transmission has occured some 67 times without any errors or garbled messages. Like a grand game of enlightened post office.
Fujimoto continues:
Succeeding the Daishonin, Nikko Shonin resided in Minobu; however, because of the slanders committed by Hakiri Sanenaga, the steward of the district, and by Mimbu Niko, he decided to take leave of Minobu. With the resolve that Mt. Fuji was to be the site of the High Sanctuary of True Buddhism, Nikko Shonin established Taisekiji with the help and protection of Lord Nanjo Tokimitsu. Then, the transmission of the Heritage of the Law was made to the sole successor, third High Priest Nichimoku Shonin. This firmly established the foundation for future Kosen-rufu. Thereafter, the Heritage of the Law was transferred from Nichimoku Shonin to Nichido Shonin and then to Nichigyo Shonin and the successive High Priests until the present sixty-seventh High Priest Nikken Shonin.
The Daishonin said: "This sutra can only be known through its transmission from master to disciple."(Heisei Shinpen, p. 92,)
The problem with this notion is that these quotes used to support it come from possibly counterfeit sources and were possibly oral teachings that probably were written down much later. A book by Jacqueline Stone details the way that people in Medieval Japan would "borrow authority" for their sect or lineage by attributing teachings to a past master that they themselves heard or authored. These things are called "Kuden" (oral) and "secret" (mitsu) teachings. Nichiren sometimes used the conventions of "secret" transmissions, and the Kanjin No Honzon Sho's cover letter is an example since it says that "Only those with strong faith" should read it. Other works follow the same convention. So it is entirely possible that Nichiren had a body of "kuden work" at one time and that some of the things that Nichiren Shoshu has are inherited from him in this fashion. However, it is even more likely that they have inherited a mishmash of works that have developed over time from his work. My study of Nichiren Shoshu history, limited though it has been indicates that that is the case. What they were teaching in 1282 by evolution and fits of insight evolves into what they were teaching at the time of Nichiu, which in turn evolves and devolves until the time of Nichimoku who systematized much of it into a coherent doctrine that sounds far from the doctrines of the other Nichiren lineages on first inspection. The trouble is that, much of what is being taught contradicts Nichiren's own teachings during his lifetime. You can't just "reinterpret them" as you see fit.
Fujimoto continues:
The second High Priest Nikko Shonin stated the following:
In this Buddhism, the master instructs the disciple and leads him to Buddhahood. If dissension arises in this relationship between the master and disciple, even if the disciple upholds the same Lotus Sutra, he will fall into the hell of incessant suffering. (Rekidai Hossu Zenshu)
If one reads Nichiren's major writings, the Ho'on Sho and "On Flowers and Seeds" Nichiren deals with the same subject differently. One has to make a distinction between "dissension" made on the grounds of political disagreement and dissension on the grounds of "Dharma" or law. Nikko (and his successors) was trying to build a stricter group or "Sangha" of monks after his experience of his fellow senior priests telling him, in effect "who are you." Nichiren enjoined his disciples to work out their differences as in these quote from :"On Flowers and seeds"
"If master and disciple are not of the same mind, they cannot accomplish anything. I will elaborate on this point later. You should always talk with one another and surmount the sufferings of life and death to attain the pure land of Eagle Peak, where you may agree to speak in one mind.
In otherwords Nichiren didn't advocate an authoritarian approach to disagreement. He insisted that his disciples be of "one mind". That doesn't mean impossing or accepting authority on any other basis than the "Dharma" or the truths of Buddhism. Even if Nikko insisted on his disciples being absolutely obedient to him, he is teaching differently from the practice of his own teacher who was much less severe. Dissension is bad for everybody, but when the cause of dissension is not the "rebelliousness of the student" but the unruly mind of an angry or disturbed "teacher" or worse as in the case of Nichiren Shoshu, teachers who are actually teaching things that slander the Dharma itself. Imposing discipline is not the same thing as getting people to naturally be of the "same mind." Nichiren Shoshu seems to not understand this distinction. and so the statement that he makes in his next paragraph is simply not founded on anything that Nichiren actually said so much as their interpretation of his words.
Fujimoto continues:
The Daishonin's Buddhism teaches us to pray to the Dai-Gohonzon-- the essence of the High Sanctuary of True Buddhism -- as the object of worship. Moreover, it instructs us to strive forth in our faith and practice based on the directions from our High Priest who embodies the bond between master and disciple and the Heritage of the Law transmitted to a sole person. Herein lies the cause that will lead us to enlightenment. The Daishonin and the second High Priest Nikko Shonin taught that, if we do not follow these instructions, we will not only be unable to attain enlightenment, but furthermore will fall into the hell of incessant suffering. This has been the tradition of faith and practice in Nichiren Shoshu for the past seven-hundred years. However much the world may change in the future and no matter what may happen at any given point, this is the fundation of our faith and practice that will remain unchanged for eternity.
The Daishonin never taught any such obedience to any person. He taught indeed the opposite. He says in the "Ho'on sho" (Repaying Debts of Gratitude) that we should not follow teachers if they teach incorrectly or don't lead us to the Lotus Sutra and the correct understanding of the Dharma. In the Gosho "Reply to Sairenbo" he teaches that it is a benefit to have a teacher who knows the heart of the Lotus Sutra. He was strict about following the correct teachings, and that meant following him and being "mutually strict" about the teachings. People fall into incessant hell for slandering the Dharma, not for disobeying the order of the High Priest to follow him or else.
Fujimoto continues:
Until recent years, the Soka Gakkai followed this fundamental objective of faith and practice of Nichiren Shoshu. In fact, when the Shoshinkai group violated the principles of our denomination and went as far as to deny the True Heritage of the Law, Daisaku Ikeda said:
The fundamental principle of Nichiren Shoshu is the Heritage of the Law transmitted to a sole person. It is, indeed, the correct objective for both priesthood and laity to follow the High Priest who has received this Heritage of the Law. If we err on this single point, everything will crumble. The Soka Gakkai has followed the successive High Priests. I am confident, therefore, that we will absolutely prosper for eternity.(Jan. 24, 1982, Soka Univ. gymnasium: "Kofu to Jinsei Wo Kataru" Vol.3 p. 32)He further said: "I would like to discuss the golden saying:
'It is useless to embrace the Lotus Sutra without the heritage of faith.' The Minobu faction of the Nichiren sect chants the same Daimoku: Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo. Its followers have the Gosho. They recite the same sutras, the Hoben and Juryo chapters of the Lotus Sutra. Moreover, the members of the Shoshinkai, who were formerly Nichiren Shoshu priests, pray to the Gohonzon sanctioned by our High Priest. They recite the same sutras and chant the same Daimoku as we do. Superficially, their activities seem identical to ours, but in their practice, they do not uphold the principles of the Heritage of the Law transmitted to a sole person or the correct transmission of the pure Law from one receptacle to another [signifying that the person receiving the transmission of the Law is different, but the Law itself remains absolute.] Unless our practice is based on the Heritage of the Law of the correct transmission of the pure Law from one receptacle to another, it would be useless for us to have any kind of Gohonzon, and we would not receive any benefits. In other words, "it is useless to embrace the Lotus Sutra without the heritage of faith." (May 11, 1986, Kanagawa Culture Center: "Kofu to Jinsei Wo Kataru," Vol. 8, p. 228)
Today, the Ikeda Soka Gakkai is doing exactly the same thing for which it formerly criticized the Shoshinkai group.
And this much is true, the shoshinkai and Sokagakkai are both criticizing the High Priest for his authoritarian behavior. Essentially Nichiren Shoshu slanders Nichiren's teachings by equating Nichiren and the "current high Priest" the way they do and by confusing later teachings and "homages" with Nichiren's own words and teachings. By refusing to sort out the mess they compound their error. By insisting that "rebels" will fall into hell, they slander the Buddha nature of people who disagree with them and compound their error even more. The teaching of Buddhism emphasizes fealty to the Dharma over fealty to "person," we are entirely justified to point out that the "lineage" of Buddhism doesn't give "a-priori" authority. These quotes are all countered by Nichiren's own writings. Nichiren taught that the heritage of faith wasn't faith in faithless priests, but faith in the Dharma itself. He pointed out the lies at the basis of deifying any person, and I'm sure he'd be shocked that he himself has been deified by Nichiren Shoshu in their efforts to give authority to the High Priests. For that matter so would Shakyamuni have been shocked by what his disciples did to him. The "Dharma" is eternal and it's votaries acquire the dharma body by their actions to uphold that law.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Back to comment page | Next section