Back to Main Page | The Fuji School Lineage | The Six Priests | Mentor/Disciple Relationships | lineage.html | Nichiren
The Teacher Nichiren Daishonin founded a religion in 13th century Japan that deserves to have a strong impact on the modern world. Nichiren Daishonin taught a simplified and yet sophisticated Buddhism based on the Lotus Sutra and chanting its title. He wrote major treatises and these are worth reading. But he also wrote letters of appreciation and guidance to his followers, which have been preserved as "Gosho" in the subsequent centuries, which together with the treatises elucidates a simple and yet sophisticated kind of Buddhism often called "true Buddhism" by its devotees. This religion is represented both in "new religions," in established groups that have been around for centuries, and in offshoots of each of the established groups.
- For more on him and his Buddhism visit these pages:
- nichiren.html
- Nichiren Biography.
- The six priests and conditions immediately after his death
- The narrative below takes up from there.
- Nikko and Fuji School and offshoots:
- Nichiren Shoshu
- Shoshinkai
- Sokagakkai
- Kenshokai
- "New Religions (Sokagakkai is also considered by some a new religion):
- Sokagakkai
- NSA past and present
- Nichiren Shu and others:
- reiyukai, Koseikei
- outside webpages:
- Gakkai and Independent:
- Buddhajones (Independent)
- Camp Ross
- Nichiren Shu and its offshoots:
- Nichiren Shu
- Another page
- Kempon Hokke Shu and some of its offshoots:
- http://www.kemponhokke.com/
- Mirror site:http://www.geocities.com/bukkokukai/
- http://www.butsuryushu.org/
There are at present two primary streams of Nichiren Buddhism reflecting an ancient split within Nichiren Buddhism that occured when Nikko Shonin split with the other five priests, and there are hundreds of schools, with many of the temples either independent or in loose association with one another. The main representative of the disciples of Nikko in this day and age is the "Fuji School" which is represented by Nichiren Shoshu, Soka Gakkai, and other groups more or less offshoots of them. Most of the lineages of the other schools, and some of the Fuji-School banded together to form a group known as Nichiren Shu.
As a measure of the depth of complexity of the issues since the time of Nichiren, one of the Nichiren Shu schools is also a Fuji School. Nichiren Shu is an alliance of lineages with only the loosest of defined doctrines. It's origins date back to the time of Chigaku Tanaka and his attempt to revamp Nichirenism as a modern religion. His efforts came to be at the service of Pre World War II Nationalism (see http://www.iop.or.jp/0010s/sato.pdf) and so were not innocent.
And then there are other groups which represent variations in understanding of the teachings(known as 'Gosho') of nichiren based on arguments over various arcane seeming issues. On some issues these groups sound similar to Nichiren Shoshu or the Gakkai, but you would never hear them admit it. To read more follow the links or continue. All of them have had similar struggles between layfolks and priests, and how to view Nichiren in a modern context.
For more detail please visit Six priests and links to each of the direct disciples who succeeded Nichiren founded his own lineage (see sixpriests.html) . These first group of lineages were represented by these founders plus representative successors:
- Nissho (1221-1323):
- Hama School, or "Monryu",
Nissho led the community in Kamakura until his death, and seems to have genuinely believed that the role of Nichirenism was as a reform movement within Tendai. The "overt split" between Nikko and the other five priests would be Nikko's treatment by Lord Hakiri, but it was Nissho's leadership in Kamakura that probably was his main issue. Nissho thought he was honoring Nichiren by revising the Rissho Ankoku Ron to include Nichiren's longstanding criticisms of Tendai and Shingon, yet by revising that text to explicitly criticize those two "established religions" he brought himself into conflict with the official establishment of religion in Japan. Nichiren had reserved criticism of these schools for a great debate. He had even warned in one Gosho at least, and in person, that the differences between Tendai and Shingon were so slight that only a person of wisdom should tackle them. Because Nichiren hadn't made any secret of his criticisms, Nissho felt it was appropriate for him to include them in his revised sending of the Gosho to the Kamakura authorities. However, he also wasn't prepared for the results. After bravely challenging the authorities, when they came to debate him or burn down his temple he fearfully demurred that he was a "mere" Tendai Priest. Thus he at the same time exposed all of the very legitimate critiques that would make a debate winnable and undermined the chances of Nichirenism to ever engage in a debate under Hojo sponsorship. This, I believe, is what led Nikko to criticize Nissho's behavior. Expecially as it became more and more apparant what the consequences of this cowardice would be. If he wasn't prepared for the response he should have refrained from provoking it.
He thus precipitated hostilities towards Nichirenism in Kamakura that made it impossible for Nichirenism to be integrated into the Kenmitsu Taisei system of the established schools of the time. and even with the sometimes hostile climate Nichiren Hokkeshu monks sometimes were able to cooperate, study with, or even convert monks from the Tendai school with which they shared a lot. This is dealt with at length in the webpages on the founders.
- Nichiro (1245-1320):
- Ikegami Honmonji
- Hikigayatsu in Kamakura
- also Hondoji (Jisso-ji?) in Shimosa.
One of Nichiro's disciples, Higo Ajari Nichizo, was one of the first disciples of the Nichiren school to successfully preach Buddhism in Kyoto. Sanmi-bo, Shofu-bo, and the legendary Sairen-bo, all had travelled to Kyoto, but it was Nichizo who succeeded in opening the door to the Imperial court. See section called "Forever Kansai"
- Nikko (1246-1333):
- Taiseki-ji Fuji School led by Nichimoku after Nichiren's death.
The Fuji School is important enough to get its own webpage. It developed doctrines and teachings that were distinct from the other schools, and spawned the modern religious movements Nichiren Shoshu and Sokagakkai. Nikko had legitimate reasons for feeling that he should have been Nichiren's true successor.
- Nikko also had disciples at Omosu Seminary later to be called "Kitayama Honmonji" a turf issue between one of these monks led him to travel to Nishiyama to form Nishiyama Honmonji. Another disciple of Nikko travelled to Kyoto to form the temple known as "Yobo-ji", which was important during the subsequent "Muromachi" period. Apparantly this rivalry led to the destruction of transfer documents claimed by both sides of the rivalry. (See transfer.html page
- Niko (1253-1314)
- Founded the Minobu School, which was taken over by Nisshin(1271-1346) on his death.
- And also the Mobara Monryu (in present day Chiba prefacture), which was taken over by Nisshu (1271-1334) on his death.
- Nitcho (1252-1317),
- Founded no school of his own, but was also instrumental in establishing the Fuji School. As Toki Jonin's disciple, he was lumped with the "evil five elder priests" by later Fuji scholars, but when he broke with Toki Jonin they gave him a new life. He didn't found his own school, but he did help Nikko teach at Omosu Seminary.
- and Nichiji (1250-1305?).
- Nichiji, was based at Matsuno in Suruga prefacture, founded two temples, but then headed on a journey of propagation that eventually took him to the Mongolian Border in China. He left no independent lineage.
- And Later Nitcho was deposed by Toki Jonin: Nakayama School
The Nakayama school generated excellent scholarships. Nichijo was succeeded by Nichiko (1257-1314), Nichiko by Nichiyu(1298-1374), and the Nakayama school developed some training regimens, based loosely on the esoteric ideas that Toki had used to ordain himself, that others -- both priest and lay -- sought to take part in later.1
Toki and Nitcho's story, like that of Nikko and Niko, set the pattern for Nichiren school interactions. For more on those stories see the page on the six priests and their pages. The upshot is that each of these schools also spawned other schools, as second and even third generation priests, many of them direct disciples of Nichiren himself, sought to propagate their perception of Nichiren's understandings of the Dharma into new areas. And while they all had a sense of being part of the same movement they disagreed on key points.
Jacqueline Stone writes:2
- "The Monk Kuonjo in Nisshin (1407-1488), who traveled extensively and compiled the first history of the Nichiren tradition, summed up these conflicts as follows:"
- 'Whether the origin or the Trace Teachings represent a unity or a hierarchy;'
- 'Whether or not to mount the ordination platform of Mt. Hiei;'
- 'Whether or not to accept the alms of nonbelievers;'
- 'Whether or not to go pay respects at shrines and temples'
- '--such arguments are entangled like so many strands of hair.'"
And these arguments didn't go away with time. You still see similar arguments going on today, often defining subgroups within subgroups. Some of these issues would be standins for "turf issues" between monks competing for attention, followers, donations, or fame, but some of these were concrete disputes turning on differing interpretations of the message of the Lotus Sutra. We will seek to examine them in a historical context
'Whether the origin or the Trace Teachings represent a unity or a hierarchy;'
refers to the "Itchi"/"Shoretsu" controversy. During the early middle (Muromachi -- from 1333- period of Nichiren's disciples, according to Jacqueline Stone, this was the most hotly contested issue.
The "Shoretsu" approach emphasizing the "Origional Gate" teachings over the "Imprinted Gate" or the importance of the 16th chapter of the Lotus Sutra over the rest of the Lotus Sutra and pre-lotus teachings. Nichiro's disciples at Hikigayatsu and later at Ikegami Honmonji, were early exponents of the Shoretsu teachings. And Shoretsu style teachings were also an influence on the Fuji School. As usually the case, two schools with otherwise opposed views see certain things the same. And these issues in various ways became tied up with other ones.
And the Itchi approach, which emphasized that the Imprinted gate was indispensible to understanding the "original Gate" and also tended to emphasize the unity of Nichiren's teachings with Buddhism in general. Eventually this view became predominant in the Minobu School.
Naturally there were refinements, cross overs, and much of the differences were not as much as they first seemed. But this was a hotly contested early issue between the Nichiren Groups.
'Whether or not to mount the ordination platform of Mt. Hiei;'
This issue had two aspects. One was whether or not to literally study with Tendai Monks, and the other was how much to associate with them. Early on Nichiren monks felt a need to interact with Tendai Monks and those interractions were so extensive, interlocking and two way, that they influenced Nichiren doctrines, with the result that ideas such as "Original enlightenment" were adopted by some schools and rejected by others. For more on this issue see my page senba.html which details some of the interactions.
And this attitude, in more recent times, even has been applied to Nichiren schools themselves. To this day some schools consider all schools that disagree with them on this or that fine doctrinal point to be "heretical." The Fuji School even took this to the point that some of them will not chant to a "heretical Gohonzon" or other object of worship unless it is somehow authorized or tied in with the orthodox doctrines or "kechimyaku" of their school.
One central issue of the early years was summarized in one word "fuje-fuse." Which means "don't take, don't give." Nichiren himself had refused to compromise with the Hojo Regime and accept a Temple donation in return for his complicity with the regime. The more 'fundamentalist' Nichiren groups tended to emphasize "fujefuse" Which literally means "don't accept don't give," and refers to how one should deal with "slanderers of the Law or people outside of the basic group." Again there were refinements and -- when necessary -- convenient refinements to this, but basically the groups that emphasized "Shoretsu" tended to also emphasize FujeFuse, and also tended to be outside the mainstream or at least take a "revolutionary" posture.
The primary groups famous for this would be the Honmon Butsuryu Shu and the Kempon Hokke Shu, both of whom took the teacher Nichiryu as inspirations. Nichiren's later disciples. Nichiryu (1384-1464) was an early exponant of Fuje-Fuse, and someone who found both the Fuji School and the other existing schools not "fujefuse" enough for his liking. For more read further.
Some of the practitioners of this attitude include in their proscriptions associating with Nichiren believers who don't hold to the Shoretsu or other doctrinal groups they hold dear. In this century the Nichiren Shoshu has tended to promote the legend of the "evilness" of the "five elder priests" as an excuse to use "fujefuse" against the other schools. Similarly Honmon Butsuryu Shu and Kempon Hokke have tended to come out with rather strident criticisms of their rivals. This seems to be both a product of convenience -- you don't have to answer questions if people are told the other is evil -- and reaction, as the other schools have also appeared to exaggerate their "errors" in in return. It actually seems to me to *be* slander of the dharma to avoid other believers who chant the daimoku.
Conversely, the Japanese Nichiren Buddhists often weren't even aware of how much they "swam" in Japanese culture. Even the most ardently Fuje-Fuse schools have often been very Japanese. Most Japanese unconsciously merged (and many still do) the Shinto religion of their country with Buddhism, to such an extent that they often had trouble telling where one religion left off and another one began. This played an important role in Japans Abyssmally bad record in World War II, when thinkers like Chigaku Tanaka subjected Nichiren Buddhism to being an adjunct to the Imperial Religion. You can see this in the emphasis on ancestor veneration in the present day Reiyukai and to a lesser extent in the Rissho Koseikei. It may make no sense to outsiders, but it is perfectly in keeping with Japanese culture.
These doctrines defined Nichirenism during the Muromachi period. But what else was going on? Well, Nichiren monks were active everywhere, and in competition with the Kenmitsu Taisei efforts of the Established Buddhism, and the syncretist activities of Shinto priests. Often Shinto and Buddhism went side by side. Enryaku-ji was increasingly also a center of the "Sanno" Cult, and this syncretism touched Nichirenism in direct and indirect ways. It even plays a role in the rise of Nichiren Shoshu. The Monk Nippo isn't said to have prayed to the Buddha in his questing for a better practice, he prayed to Shichimen. It was Shichimen who answered his prayers and sent the Log down the Fuji River. It was Shichimen who he carved an image of in his Kamakura Temple, and who guarded Mt. Minobu from demons and Tendai Warrior Monks.
There were some remarkable things happening in the Muromachi period in Nichiren Buddhism. On the monastic front, the monks of Nichirenism studied with Tendai monks at Mt. Hiei, and at monasteries in other parts of the country. They also engaged in debates and propagation activity. In this way some temples that started with Tendai and other sects, became Nichiren Temples. And also temples were founded in various places as patrons were found or members raised the money. And of course there was also conflict with Tendai, and between Nichiren Schools.
A remarkable center of propagation in this period was Kyoto, the southern capitol. The people there were urbane, there was a middle class, and they took to Nichirenism in droves. Daniel Montgomery says that it was also popular at the imperial court. He writes about a monk named "Ryugi in Nichizo" who travelled to Kyoto. This monk, inspired by having met Nichiren personally, trained himself first. He exercised mind, body and spirit. He copied the Lotus Sutra using very tiny characters, and then he headed to the Emperors castle. In 1294 he began to preach outside the Emperors walls. In 1307 he was exiled to Toda Province in Shikoku, but in 1321 he returned and was allowed to build a temple named Myoken-ji outside the palace moat. When the emperor Godaigo wanted prayers for his victory over the Hojo's, none of the priests except for him would pray for him. Ryuge did, and the Emperor returned to power. Myoken-ji became an Imperial Temple for the royal family in 1333.
He was followed by other priests from Nichiren Schools. Nichimoku himself travelled to Kyoto to joint this remonstration on behalf of the Fuji School and while he didn't make it a temple was founded named Yobo-ji that was to dominate the Fuji School until the Tokugawas came to power. Toki Jonin, Nichijo was soon represented by a temple named Honko-ji, and more importantly, there were soon Nichiren members all over the city. In the Fourteenth and fifteenth centuries they made progress in creating internal harmony and created something called the Kansho accords to enable that harmony to continue.
And of course even the Fuji School wasn't
He writes in "The Will of Nichiju Shonin A Matter that Nichiju's Disciples Should Know" in 1388:
Testament (meaning the Testament on the reverse Side)
Item: a matter which the disciples should understand.
Because the lineage's of the Six Disciples of the Great Saint [Nichiren] as well as the lineage's of Temmoku and others all have points wherein in methods and in the Buddha Dharma, they go against the means of conversion of the Great Saint, I am not in agreement with them. Nichiju is one who directly reverses and returns to Nichiren Daishonin. The disciples should profoundly understand this. However, at Mama in Shimosa there is a Submission as well as an Oath. Even so, because they differ from the Great Saint Principles in doctrines as well as method, I abandon these. This is a situation of �abandoning evil spiritual friends."
Nichiju's Disciples should guard the above standpoint: for those who go against this standpoint it shall be the sin of Blasphemy Against the Dharma and falling to hell. Therefore, for times hereafter, this testament is as stated. The twenty-fifth day of the Eighth Month of the Second Year of Kakei (1388)1
Nichiju was holding up the spirit of this great principle of "Fuje-fuse." These sort of teachings have come down to us through modern groups such as the Kempon Hokke Shu and the Honmon Butsuryu Shu, but they embody a general spirit of Nichiren Buddhism which is one we in the west are quite comfortable with. It is expressed in the expression "follow the Law not the person." Later disciples would uphold this same principle in a surprising variety of ways.
The progress in Kyoto wasn't made for free. Kyoto was always under the watchful eyes of the "evil warrior monks" of Enryaku-ji. These "knights" defended the mountain, and had been conducting wars on behalf of their temples since long before Nichiren was born. Indeed there is a famous quotation from the "Tale of Genji" that is part of the original enlightenment debate. The warrior monks attacked Nichiren temples and believers in Kyoto several times. The Kansho accords were signed in part so that the various otherwise rivalrous Nichiren Schools could cooperate in holding off those monks. Daniel Montgomery tells us that Nichiren monks even made progress with converting the Imperial Household. They became arrogant. Monk disciples of Nichiju came to town preaching that Nichiren monks and disciples should not accommodate Tendai. They even had the effrontery to visit Mt. Hiei to challenge monks to debate there.
It became too much for the monks of Enryakuji. They sent their hordes of warrior monks down on Kyoto and attacked the people there. They burned temples and tried to destroy the monks, but they failed to destroy Nichiren Buddhism and instead laid the foundation for their own destruction under the Tokugawas. One wonders what might have happened had they converted to the best in Nichiren's teachings instead of opposing them. They failed to destroy Nichirenism but they did burn temples. It must have seemed like hell at the time.
Of course this issue of "accommodation versus exclusivism" was more thorny than the participants would probably have liked. For one thing, as mentioned in the six priests story, each of the priests dealt with the issues in their own way. And one of the things they had to deal with was the Tendai Sect. Nichiren was a Tendai Monk, and his teachings were entirely within a Tendai Framework. That is why the rift between Nikko and the other five priests was so nearly inevitable. The boundaries of that relationship had to be established, and they were not going to be established quickly or easilly. For many of the early years of the Nichiren Hokke Shu, Nichiren monks studied with Tendai Monks at places such as Mt. Hiei, and there they were exposed to Tendai ideas, and they debated freely (within bounds) with other Tendai Monks. Thus there was a two way traffic of ideas for much of the early period of Nichiren Buddhism. This period, from 1332-to the 1500's, is known as the "Muromachi Period" after the dominant Asakagi Shogunate's homebase. During that time both religions were influencing each other.
Jacqueline Stone (see bio page), in her book "Original Enlightenment and the Transformation of Medieval Japanese Buddhism" recounts a dialogue between two priests, one of the Fuji Lineage, and the other of a Tendai lineage based in Kamakura, in which the priest says that Nichiren had received a "transmission" from the Tendai Teacher "Shunpan" who was also the teacher of the Senba lineage which was in rivalry with the Kanto area Nichiren Lineages.(See this page shunpan.html for more discussion). Already, early in the Fuji School's history we see them emphasizing the importance of "Kechimyaku" or inheritance in their understanding of Nichiren's teachings. "Oral" teachings and traditions are an integral part of this.
Thus at the time that Nichirenism was birthed there was also a lot of ferment occuring in Buddhism in general, and one of the ideas they had to accommodate was that of "original enlightenment. One of the earliest of the Apocryphal documents that she points to is one in which the ideas of the "fourfold rise and fall" are commented on negatively. During a debate with the Tendai School, she tells how a "Gosho" was trotted out which called that teaching a "teaching of the devil." (an incorrect teaching). The fourfold rise and fall basically taught the idea that Buddhism is superior to non-buddhism, Mahayana to Hinayana, The teachings of the Lotus to provisional Mahayana, and then "Kanjin" or "mind contemplation" was superior to the theories of the text. There were other variants on the idea of the fourfold rise and fall as well, and eventually the Fuji School came up with its own variant in which Nichiren's version of the Lotus Sutra -- the original gate, or sixteenth chapter -- was superior to Shakyamuni's Lotus Sutra, Kanjin (mind contemplation) to Kyoso(shakyamuni's teachings).
Nichiren's Buddhism is based on the notion of attaining Buddhahood in ones present form. This is a promise in the Lotus Sutra. The idea of Original enlightenment is drawn from reading this "Juryo Chapter" or "Lifespan of the Buddha chapter". In that chapter, the Buddha says that he is always preaching the Lotus Sutra, but that it is only because our minds are deluded that we can't see that that is true.
Original Enlightenment is presaged on the notion that we are like a filthy mirror and that if only we can remove the 'tarnish' we can see clearly the original enlightenment reflected there. In this view the "sufferings of life" become the cause for Buddhahood. In some of its extreeme forms the sufferings of life are Buddhahood, and people don't need to do any work or self improvement to reach enlightenment, just have faith in that fact. Some of Nichiren's disciples embraced these ideas, and some rebelled against them. And mostly they discussed and argued them and came up with variants on what they meant.
There are many Gosho that teach original enlightenment ideas, and they were very popular in Nichiren Buddhism up until this century.
Unfortunately the Nichiren Scholar Asai Yorin pointed out that nearly all the Gosho attributed to Nichiren containing original enlightenment ideas have envelop problems. That is few of them have legitimate autographs, and most are copies of copies of copies. He came to the conclusion that most of them were apocryphal. Other Scholars since then have disputed specifics of this claim, but the general observation remains indisputable. The solution that modern Fuji Scholars came up with was to claim that the "evil five priests" destroyed Gosho not written in the Kanbun or Classical Chinese scholarly language, and so the originals of these documents were only handed down because of the work of the Good priest Nikko and his disciples. But this is nonsense, even if there is a grain of truth. It is true that most of the works containing strong original enlightenment language were Gosho written to commoner members. So it is not surprising that some of these should lack originals.
It is also true that the founders of Nichiren Buddhism were mainly interested in his treatises, but they also would have preserved oral teachings and any writings he had made. Even if they weren't canonical, people like Toki Jonin and Nikko Shonin, and the others highly valued his writings. Toki indexed many of the canonical works that passed through his hands. He very well could have missed quite a few. One must note that most of the ones not on his list also show up as being from other parts of the country such as Kyoto, Sado Island, or other places that were more than a days ride for him. So this issue merely shows that even if you have most of the documents of a teacher, you can still end up with controversies over what he actually said or wrote. The scholars who revise Asai Yorin's works have come up with 5 categories of works: Indisputable, probable indisputable, questioned, questionable, and blatant forgeries. Even now new things are always turning up. Two short Gosho turned up recently during renovations of a small shrine. They had been hidden away in plain site for nearly 700 years.
And finally, the source of much of the apocrypha lies in the tremendous ferment of the "Muromachi" period following Nichiren's death. Much of it represents the commital to writing of materials that were "oral."
All of the Nichiren Traditions have oral histories, legends, and myths, indeed all of Buddhism and the Judeo-Christian Religions have oral componants and origins. In earlier periods, religious teachers sometimes didn't write their ideas. For that reason, the sutras themselves started primarily as orally transmitted teachings. They were designed to be memorized and recited. Since most religions pass on content, and most are heavy on allegory, struggling with the teachings, and even finding hidden meanings or insight from meditating or contemplating the teachings, this only seems a problem because they then insist that their particular view of the teachings is the only correct one. It is part of our hubris as human beings to think that we are the ones with the only right answer. And it was for that reason that Shakyamuni taught his "elephant teaching." Within Nichiren buddhism is also the heritage of the "head temple"/"branch temple" system, in which competing head temples would develop entire lineages of their own, and branch teachings would sometimes be former head temples, independent lineages, or sometimes form their own competing lineages later. It is for this reason that these histories, legends, myths, and apocrypha become an issue. You can't always "refine" a teaching down to some literal adherence to a teacher. You have to go on the basis of "meaning over words," "intent" over surface meaning.
For this reason, you can't completely discount apocrypha or oral teachings entirely, even if they are probably the results of generations of teachers, or teachers writting generations later. They often represent "oral teachings" that have been written down in order to preserve their fine ideas. And they often represent "homages" to the founders. If the Buddha never literally had 32 distinguishing marks, that doesn't mean we can discount the message of what those marks mean. This isn't just a problem with Nichiren's teachings. For example, this study was recently published on Nagarjuna and it shows the scope of the problem. For more on this subject see the literal.html Link.
The Fuji School has the "Ongi Kuden." And Nichiren Shu priests will tell you that that work is apocryphal, and yet they have a very similar "kuden series" of their own. That may mean that they were both derived from Nichiren, or it may mean that the authors had the same Tendai teachers. Both those works have elements similar to Tendai Teachings. It was this consonance that led to Asai Yorin's suspicions that they were apocryphal. They were written down in both Tendai and the Nichiren Schools hundreds of years later. Yet, those teachings, being oral, could well have been taught during Nichiren's lifetime as well. He may have been teaching based on oral tradtions he had received earlier. The above quote about shunpan shows that such oral teachings have been a part of Nichirenism from the beginning. There are some schools of Nichirenism that accept some works, some accept others, and the Honmon Butsuryu shu refuses to accept any teaching as Nichiren's unless it is 100% verified. That doesn't keep them from having their own opinions about what those teachings mean, and their own founder seems to weigh as heavilly on their doctrines as does Nichiren himself. You just can't get around the issue of using good judgement or not.
When the Tokugawas came to power they sought to break the power of all potential rivals. And that meant Nichirenism, and it meant all others. They attacked the Shinran Sects, allowed the warrior monks of Mt. Hiei to attack Kyoto and then they destroyed mt. Hiei. They sought to destroy the power of Nichiren schools and subject them to Imperial, and Bakufu, will. They did so by repression, staging bogus debates, and by making the various schools bow to them and become agents of the state at the same time. At that time the "Fujefuse" ideas became those of an embattled underground. Kempon Hokke style beliefs became illegal. The various schools all survived either by practicing accommodation or by going "underground". No matter how they survived they ceased doing shakubuku and focused on individual practice and worship. Some, like Nichikan Shonin of the Fuji School survived by redefining their beliefs. Over time all the schools became somewhat corrupted by efforts of the Tokagawas to make the established Nichiren Schools "agents" of registering people who lived in the country and collecting taxes for the Government. This led to many of the schools becoming "Funeral Buddhist Schools" where lay-people were encouraged to be ignorant of Buddhism. By the time of the end of repression Nichiren Buddhism was in strong need of revival and all of Buddhism was in disrepute.
The other thing that happened was that the "center" of power shifted. In 1333 it had shifted to Kyoto, 'causing' 'branch' temples of the original founders to become centers of teaching. In 1600 it shifted again, to the new location Edo, now known as Tokyo. For example the Fuji School was dominated by "Yobo-ji," located in Kyoto area, up until the time of Nichikan Shonin and it should be no surprise that the Fuji School (which was closer to Edo than Kyoto) should have "revived" as soon as power shifted to the Tokugawas, and sure enough it did. The result was that the Tokugawa period also saw the rebirth of many of the original temples of Nichirenism as they were "reformed" into teaching schools and centers of doctrine once again. It is also no coincidence that the headquarters of Nichiren Shu is the Honmon-ji temple located in Ikegami -- since that is right next to present day Tokyo.
Chigaku Tanaka was very influential on the development of Nichiren Buddhism between World War I and World War II. Unfortunately his influence was mostly negative. He identified it heavilly with nationalism, ancestor worship, and Shinto, and due to his influence the Gosho was printed with all Nichiren's copious criticisms of Japan edited so that he would appear to be a fawning and synchophant devotee of the Emperor. This led to such anomalies as Nichiren (and other Buddhist Schools) banners being worn by fanatic Kamakaze pilots. For more see:
- Tanaka
After World War II, Nichirenism was revived by the efforts of both "New religions" and the older established religious movements. It also began propagating outside of Japan. This effort was led, within Japan by the "New Religion" movements, most of which had roots from before World War II, but prospered in the chaos and rootlessness of the post war era. The Reiyukai, and the Rissho Koseikei, both led by charismatic leaders, were both formed before World War II, but prospered in the post war climate. Nichiren Shoshu pioneered by the Sokagakkai under first Josei Toda and then the Charismatic leader Ikeda, became the largest single organization in Japan and also established beachheads in the rest of the world. Most of these "new religions" were eventually limited by the results of the infighting and politics of charismatic hierarchical organizations. And so the more traditional Buddhist movements also began to gain larger followings, including the Nichiren Shu, Kempon Hokke Shu and Honmon Butsuryu Shu, along with, literally, hundreds of other Nichiren Buddhist groups, including an exclusively monastic group founded by Nichidatsu Fujii.
The Nichiren schools have traditionally referred to themselves as the Hokke Shu or "Hokke Sect" and that is presently represented by more than 20 or so major sects: Nichiren Shoshu, Nichiren Shu, Honmon Butsuryu Shu, Kempon Hokke, and now the Sokagakkai. There are also tiny groups of note such as Nichidatsu Fujii's group, Nipponzan Myohoji. There are also a few lay based "new age" sects based loosely on his teachings such as the "Reiyukai", "Rissho Koseikei"(also This page), and "Seikai Kyuseikyo". or by some recognings that same Sokagakkai USA I'm part of. Don Ross, a former Gakkai member, has a link to most of these organizations at his website: http://nichirenscoffeehouse.tripod.com/.
For more reading go to:
NS: http://la.nichirenshu.org/history/history.htm#chapterVIseniorDisciples NST: http://www.cebunet.com/nst/history.html Educator source: Nichiren in the context of his times: http://www.wsu.edu:8000/~dee/FEUJAPAN/FEUJAPAN.HTM
- Jacqueline Stone's book on Original Enlightenment traces the lineages, as do works other writers, and Daniel Montgomery's book "Fire in the Lotus." I took the names from both these sources and also the translations of Graham Lamont and others. A nice tree is on page 303 of Jacqueline Stone's book.
- This is from page 304 of Jacqueline Stone's book "Original enlightenment and the Transformation of Medieval Japanese Buddhism."
- The Shoji Ichidaiji Kechimyaku is among the Gosho "questioned" by some modern scholars, starting with Asai Yorin, largely on account of it's "original enlightenment" content.
- Second Rank Sozu Nichiju (Signature) Cited in the Kempon Hokke Seitan,642-643, as well as Tradition of Nichiren's Doctrine (Nichiren kyogaku no dento), pp 35-36; the original of the Testament (Okibumi) was written on the back of the Fujumon or Recitation Text for Nichiju's young disciple Nichimyo, who died at the age of eighteen, and is extant at Jakkoji Temple in Kyoto) and borrowed from one of Bruce Maltze's (and his wife's) many posts and materials.
See also Michael Ryu's article at this page:http://www.crosswinds.net/~campross/Ryuei/HokkeShu_06.html