Other references: SGI | Shakyamuni | Issues in Buddhism | Lotus Sutra | Gosho | Devadatta | yamazaki | Rev. Horigome | Ikeda
Sanmibo Ajari (also spelled Sammi-bo, Sami-ko, Sammi-ko and Sammibo) was one of Nichiren's leading disciples. He had been initiated as a Tendai Priest and was thoroughly grounded in the Tendai Teachings on which Nichiren based his own. Its hard to find when he was converted to Nichirenism, but it is evident from the record that he was someone whom Nichiren relied on and turned to time and time again. And yet in his last days Sanmibo turned on his teacher and tried to betray him at the Atsuhara persecution, dying a miserable death as a result when for some reason he was thrown off of the horse he was unaccustomly riding. Consequently, rather than being known as a hero to posterity, he, like America's Benedict Arnold is known as a "traitor," like the famous "Devadatta" of Shakyamuni's time, and of the influence of Fundamental Darkness within us human beings. Usually his story is presented in a dualistic manner as a tale of an completely evil person. But the truth is that his story is more complicated, and like the story of Benedict Arnold, we all would benefit from understanding it more thoroughly. It says as much about the pitfalls Nichiren's remaining loyal disciples would later have, as it does about this one "renegade disciple." The late Reverend Horigome1, who was also the sixty-fifth high priest of the Nichiren(ism) "Fuji School" used his story as a lesson on the pitfalls of being a true Buddhist practitioner and having responsibility for teaching others.
Sanmibo Nichigyo was born in Shimosa province (now called Chiba)2. He became Nichiren's disciple from one of his visits to a Tendai Temple where Sanmibo was practicing already. Sanmibo seems to have thrown himself enthusiastically into propagating Buddhism almost from the very beginning of his practice.
Nichiren relied on Sanmibo so much that eventually he sent him to Kyoto. He was among those of Nichiren 's disciples to be sent to Kyoto to try to win over the Imperial Court, a list that included Nikko, Nichimoku, and later would include one of Nichiro's disciples Nichigo -- and apparantly had once included Nichiren's renegade disciple Shofu-bo. Once he was in Kyoto, he managed to enter the court and talk to retainers of the Emperor. He even was able to use his considerable debating skills in the image hall attached to one of these retainers Residences. He felt pride about this accomplishment. He wrote to Nichiren on his accomplishments and asked for advice.
Nichiren wrote back with detailed instructions and some strict admonishments. This Gosho , "How to talk to other sects" "Homon mousarubekiyo no koto"3 in 12694 states in about the middle:
You wrote that you had the honor to debate Buddhist Doctrine in the image hall attached to the residence. I can't understand why you would think that. Because you have become a monk and you have had the most precious teachings in Jambudvipa. Even if you were in front of a bodhisattvas of near-perfect enlightenment, you should not be awed. Brahma, Shakra, and other gods are the ones who were entrusted with the domain of our father, the Thus Come One Shakyamuni and promised to protect monks who embrace the correct teaching. Vaishravana and other gods are the masters of the four continents but the gatekeepers of these Brahma, Shakra and other gods. The Kings of the four continents are the retainers of Vaishravana. The islands of Japan can't even match the retainers of wheel-turning king of the four continents. The Emperor of Japan5is only the chieftain of these islands. You were only summoned by the servants of this leader, and yet you write in your letter such words as "summoned", "highness" and "honor". Does this mean after all that you look down upon Nichiren?
Nichiren Buddhism doesn't, and disciples of Nichiren should not let any of the "eight winds" drive them here and there. And Nichiren? was admonishing Sanmibo to stay on track and keep himself centered. The Imperial Court was a place of splender modeled after the Tang Dynasty courts with their pomp and ceremony. Anyone who has been to Kyoto or to Versailles knows what a dazzling place such places could be. Yet, Nichiren did not feel that the Emperor was anything more than an "Island Chief" by comparison to the great truths of the Lotus Sutra and of life. This is because for Nichiren the "Dharma" or "law" was superior to anyone. His strictness was not based on personal prejudice but on this notion of "dharma." Again and again as we shall see he would admonish all his disciples lay or ordained, that they should base themselves on law. These admonitions, coming from the Nirvana Sutra are called the "four assurances."
Even the Emperor is subject to Buddhist Law. And while Nichiren notes this in his first major remonstration, the Rissho Ankoku Ron6. This passage was edited out of Gosho published during the interwar period when Nichiren apologists tried to portray Nichiren as a Nationalist and A Shinto teacher (see tanaka.html).
He went on to say:
In general when the disciples of Nichiren go up to Kyoto, in the beginning they appear not to forget my teachings but later act like Sho-(f)u bo, who was possessed by the heavenly devil and went mad. You must not show the same face if you wish to avoid the wrath of the heavenly gods. It has not been a long time since you went up to Kyoto, but you wrote me that you have changed your real name. This is an act of madness. You surely have become to speak with Kyoto accent. If a mouse becomes a bat, it is neither a mouse nor a bird. You are neither a country priest nor a Kyoto priest. I am afraid that you are going the same way as Sho-u bo. You should use a country dialect or you surely look unsightly. You signed your letter as "Sonjo", but it is the same name as that of the Retired Emperor of Oki. This, that and other things I can't understand you.7
Buddhism has never been in awe of rank and privelage. And yet, those who practice it have often succumbed to its charms. This must have seemed like an incredible thing to say to an ordinary person like Sanmibo. And yet if one thinks about it, then one soon sees that this is the best guidance. We can't change who we are, and if we understand the Lotus Sutra, we soon understand that we don't need to. We all have the daily choice of either acting as "Votaries of the Sutra" or of not. One path leads to enlightenment through mastering and overcoming our troubles (Klesa in sanskrit) and suffering[Bonno Soku Boddai]. The other path leads nowhere at all.
Yet Nichiren felt he had to say it because of what had happened to Shofu bo. He had previously sent "Shofu-bo" there and the result had been a disaster. Shofu-bo had "turned on him" and now was among those who preached on the streets of Kamakura against Nichiren , with comments such as the ones Nichiren records in "Letter from Sado:" in 12728:
"The non-Buddhist teachers claimed that the Buddha offered only one wayto enlightenment, but that they had ninety-five. In the same way, the renegade disciples say,
"Though the priest Nichiren is our teacher, he is too forceful. We will spread the Lotus Sutra in amore peaceful way." In so asserting, they are being as ridiculous as fireflies laughing at the sun and moon, an ant hill belittling Mount Hua, wells and brooks despising the river and the ocean, or a magpie mocking a phoenix"Thus Nichiren was trying to save Sanmibo from joining them in their misunderstanding of what Nichiren was trying to do. Nichiren wasn't simply trying to impose his notions of Buddhism on Japan, or convert the elites of Japan so he could assume fame and fortune. He was aiming higher than that. Nichiren obviously, even in 1269 was trying to create a universal Buddhism that would be as true outside of Japan as it was inside. He was looking beyond the present moment and the little "Island Kingdom" to the Lotus Sutra's promise of universal salvation and the vision of the Bodhisattvas of the Earth. He succeeded in curbing his pride for a time. Sanmibo supported Nichiren through the persecutions around Tatsunokuchi, the exile in Sado and went on to be a leading disciple for years thereafter.
Shofu-bo on the other hand would be the one who struck Nichiren in the face during the persecutions in 1272, known as the Tatsunokuchi Persecution. Shofu-bo, ironically struck him with the fifth volume of the Lotus Sutra, which predicts such persecutions. This is described dramatically in the Gosho "The actions of the Votary of the lotus Sutra"9, which is also somewhat of a hagiography)
Sho-bo, Hei no Saemon's chief retainer, rushed up, snatched the scroll of the fifth volume of the Lotus Sutra from inside my robes, and struck me in the face with it three times.The irony of "Shofu-bo" striking Nichiren with the fifth volume of the Lotus Sutra was that that was the volume where it was said that "votaries" would be physically attacked and banished. Both of which were fates that were coming true at that very time. Nichiren was trying to prepare Sanmibo for a difficult journey. Only great personal bravery and endurance would allow him to complete it.
Sanmibo seems to have learned his lessons as well. He shared in the "Tatsunokuchi" persecution, almost losing his own head along with Nichiren his master. He was among those punished when Nichiren was punished. He was not a coward and his conduct was as brave as any of Nichiren 's other disciples. This bravery and personal courage was necessary in his next role, as a debator as we shall see. And indeed in the Gosho Letter of Petition from Yorimoto(also found at http://www.sgi-usa.org/buddhism/library/Nichiren/Gosho/LetterPetitionYorimoto.htm) he tells us10:
"I myself was one of those who accompanied him when the wrath of the authorities fell upon him on the twelfth day of the ninth month in the eighth year of the Bun'ei era (1271), and I was considered equally guilty and came close to being beheaded myself. Despite all this, do you still say that I hold my own life dear?"Sanmibo personal courage was as important in his efforts as as much as the quality of his expostulation. Indeed the two are related, courage to be truthful with oneself and courage in secular life are related.
He participated in a number of debates in subsequent years. Among which the most important was a debate with Ryuzobo in which Ryuzobo was willing to debate with Sanmibo where he hadn't been willing to debate with Nichiren himself for knowing he'd lose. Before that debate, in 1275, he received the Gosho 11 "Teaching Practice and Proof" with detailed instructions for preparing for a major debate. He seems to have done an excellent job and that debate appears to have been successful, however the consequence was that instead of Ryuzobo becoming Nichiren 's (and Sanmibo's) disciple, he simply tried to allege that Shijo Kingo had interrupted him and thus cause years of trouble for that Samurai Disciple. Such people reveal themselves when one tries to debate or dialogue with them. And you see the character of both debators in this account where Nichiren retells what happened in a letter written on behalf of Shijo Kingo, The Letter of Petition from Yorimoto recounts what happened at that debate12:
Briefly, the root of this matter is as follows. On the ninth day of the sixth month, Sammi-ko, who is a disciple of the Sage Nichiren , came to my residence and said:
"Recently a priestnamed Ryuzo-bo has arrived from Kyoto and settled in Kuwagayatsu, west of the gate of Daibutsuden temple. He preaches day and night, urging those who have questions about Buddhism to come and hold discourse withhim in order to settle their doubts about this life and the next. All the people in Kamakura, high and low, revere him as they would Shakyamuni Buddha. However, I hear that no one has ever actually debated with him. I want to go to Kuwagayatsu to debate with him and clarify whatever doubts the people might have about their next life. Won't you come and listen?"
At that time I was busy with official matters, so I did not originally intend to accompany him. However, I had heard that it concerned the Buddhist teachings, and I have often gone to hear preaching on that subject. Being a lay believer, however, I never said a single word. Therefore, I believe that a strict investigation on your part should be sufficient to reveal that I was not in any way abusive. In any event, during his sermon, Ryuzo-bo said,
"If anyone among you has a question about the Buddhist teachings, please do not hesitate to ask."13Thereupon Sammi-ko, the disciple ofthe priest Nichiren , raised the following question:
"That death is inevitable from the time of birth is certainly no cause for surprise; in addition, especially in recent times, countless people in Japan have perished in calamities. No one can fail to realize this transience, which lies before our very eyes. Under these circumstances I heard that you, a respected priest, had come from Kyoto to dispel the doubts of the people, so I came to listen. I was feeling hesitant, thinking it rude to ask a question in the middle of your sermon, so I am happy that you have invited anyone who has doubts to speak freely."
In a little bit of background, Ryuzobo was a priest from the Tendai School who had travelled to Kamakura from Mt Tendai in order to curry favors with the authorities. A legend says that he left Kyoto under allegations that he had eaten human flesh, but that is probably based on his belief in Mikkyo(Tendai Esotericism) and not on what he actually did. Nichiren once described the founders of the Mikkyo tradition as folks who "ate their father" in a reference to them as parasites or people who suck the life out of innocent folks religious efforts. At any rate, Dr. Stone in her book on Original Enlightenment and other scholars identify him with one of the disciples of the Senba line14. These were people who claimed to uphold the Lotus Sutra, but in fact preferred the teachings of Shingon. That is why Sanmibo starts his questioning with Kobo Daishi. The founder of Tendai had broken with Kobo and criticized his approach to religion, and yet even so his unfilial disciples -- to this day -- prefer his ideas to those of their own founder. This was one of the logical reasons why Nichiren practiced "Shakubuku." This deep deceit could only be dealt with with the tools of Buddhist Logic and debate.
...Sanmibo then went on to list the various doctrinal errors of various teachers finishing with those of Honen Daishi and asked:"What puzzles me first of all is this: I am a lowly person, born in the Latter Day of the Law in a remote land [far from the birthplace of Buddhism]. Yet fortunately Buddhism, which originated in India, has already been introduced to this country. One should embrace it by all means. However, the sutras amount to no less than five thousand or seven thousand volumes. Since they are the teachings of a single Buddha, they must essentially be one sutra. But Buddhism is divided into eight schools, if one includes Flower Garland and True Word, or ten schools, if one includes Pure Land and Zen. Although these schools represent different gates of entry, I would presume that their truth must ultimately be one."15
However, the Great Teacher Kobo,the founder of the True Word school in Japan, said,
`The Lotus Sutra, when compared with the Flower Garland and Mahavairochana sutras, not only represents a different gate but is a doctrine of childish theory, and the Buddha who expounded it is still in the region of Darkness.'He also stated,
`TheGreat Teacher T'ien-t'ai of the Lotusschool and others vied with one anoth-er to steal the ghee [of the True Word school].'The Great Teacher Tz'u-en,the founder of the Dharma Characteristics school, said,
`The Lotus Sutra is an expedient means while the Profound Secrets Sutra represents the truth; those sentient beings without the nature of enlightenment can never attain Buddhahood.'"Which of them are we to believe? Which are we to reject?Nichiren , using Shijo Kingo's voice then writes that Ryuzobo responded
"The Honorable Ryuzo answered,"How could I doubt the worthies and learned men of antiquity? Ordinary priests such as myself believe them with profound reverence."Then Sammiko retorted, saying: "These words do not impress me as those of a wise man. Everyone believes in those Buddhist teachers who were revered intheir own time. But the Buddha enjoins us in the Nirvana Sutra as his final instruction,`Rely on the Law and not upon persons.' The Buddha taught us to rely on the sutras if the Buddhist teachers should be in error. You say those teachers could not possibly be in error, but between the Buddha's golden words and your personal opinion, I am committed to the former."You can see the wonderful and simple logic used by Nichiren and his disciples. There was no need to befuddle people with BS, the sutras and commentaries spoke for themselves. One only needed to be willing to be honest with them and think clearly. For true Buddhists, the "Three Proofs" and "four reliances" are the basis of Buddhism. For more on this visit the page literal.html16
And you can also see here displayed the deep dishonesty so typical of people in established religions. Ryuzobo had heard at least some of the criticisms of these people before. Indeed Sanmibo and Nichiren had both learned from the same archives and teachers at Mt. Tendai. Yet he chose to ignore anything that might be inconvenient to him or cause him "disharmony" (ha-wagoso) with other people. He did not feel he could afford to be either personally honest or publicly honest. This shows in these critical passages.
The text goes on, "The Honorable Ryuzo asked,
"When you speak of the many errors of the Buddhist teachers, to which teachers do you refer?"Sammi-ko answered,"I refer to the doctrines of the Great Teacher Kobo and the Honorable Honen, whom I mentioned before."The Honorable Ryuzo exclaimed, "That is impossible! I would not dare discuss the Buddhist teachers of our nation. The people in this audience all follow them, and if angered, will surely create an uproar. That would be a fearsome thing.For those whose focus is on their own career and lives, personal honesty is secondary to harmony or "Wa." For those who are focused on the path of Buddhism, this is not Buddhism. To lie to the people simply to avoid angering them is to disrespect their potential to reach Buddhahood. Personal honesty and integrity are essentials for reaching enlightenment. To set aside the truth for the sake of "protecting people" or avoiding conflict is to betray the Dharma. It is called in Japanese "Ho-Bo."
"Then Sammi-ko said:
"Because you asked me to specify which teachers were in error, I mentioned those whose teachings contradict the sutras and treatises. But now you suddenly have reservations and refuse to discuss the matter. I think that you merely perceive your own dilemma. In matters of doctrine, to fear others or stand in awe of society's opinion and not expound the true meaning of the scriptural passages in accordance with the Buddha's teaching is the height of foolishness. You do not appear to be a wise or honorable priest. As a teacher of the Law, how can you not speak out when evil doctrines spread throughout the land, when the people fall into the evil paths and the country stands on thebrink of ruin? That is why the Lotus Sutra reads, `We care nothing for our bodies or lives.'Sammiko then cited other scriptures and went on...
"If you are a true sage, how can you begrudge your life in fear of the world or of other people?"A truly wise person respects the feelings of others, but also knows that to be afraid to speak the truth simply because of fear of others is to do those others a disservice. This is expecially true when one sees the world with a Buddhist perspective, because one sees how lies, distortions and mistakes propagate in people's lives bending and twisting them for generations if not corrected. Like a folk medicine that is used wrong, what should be medicine becomes poison in wrong or deluded hands.
Sanmibo then quoted from examples in secular literature, and then he refers to the sutras again:
"The Buddhist scriptures tell us that Bodhisattva Never Disparaging was beaten with sticks and staves, the Venerable Aryasimha was beheaded, the priest Chu Tao-sheng was banished toa mountain in Su-chou, and the Tripitaka Master Fa-tao was branded on the face and exiled to the area south of the Yangtze River. Yet was it not because they propagated the correct teaching that they gained the name of sages?"Nichiren and his disciples regularly cite the example of "Bodhisattva Never Despise." Bodhisattva never despise unflaggingly reminded people that they possess the Buddha nature. The point of the story is that if that is the case then people can do "the right thing." They can transform their understanding, see reality for what it is, and reach enlightenment. He did so even at the cost of being attacked and pelted with stones. Because he made such a cause the Buddha of his world "reappeared" in the world.
Then the Honorable Ryuzo replied,
"Such people cannot possibly appear in the latter age. We are the sort who fear society and dread the opinions of others. Even though you speak so boldly, I doubt that you actually live up to your words."17This shows the deep doubt that is infused secular authority, and still does in our own times. It is this doubt, the opposite of the feelings of "Bodhisattva Never despise" that is the real obstacle in the face of achieving anything lasting or wonderful in this world. The notion of "emptiness" actually implies that this world is a highly creative place. Nothing is etched in stone until we etch it. The doubt is based on the notion that somehow this, being the time of "Mappo" or the later age, is a time when people have such diminished capacity that they cannot possibly achieve anything worthwhile except in extraordinary cases. It becomes a license for selfishness and bad behavior with the excuse that that is the "way of the world and there is nothing to be done about it."
This is the converse of a creative life and is an incredibly destructive and false view. On the contrary we create "Karma" or our actions, through thought, word and deed and that means we determine our future. Nichiren puts it that "you can know the past causes by their effects at present, and you know the future by what you are doing now." Nichiren 's teachings are in fact deeply Buddhist teachings. The Lotus Sutra teaches us that we have the ability to "actually live up to our words" or at least to valiently try to do so -- even in this "benighted" "Latter day of the Law" we live in. And these words only reinforce and complete what is in the entire corpus of Shakyamuni's teachings.
This is not an idle promise, nor a "cheap one." These same Tendai priests in their cynicism would come to teach that people were already enlightened as they were. But Nichiren 's promise comes with the caveate that that enlightenment only shows through their thoughts, words and deeds. Just as enlightenment is imminent in the "ten worlds" of Ichinen Sanzen, so is fundamental darkness For Nichiren enlightenment is as enlightenment does. Enlightenment is the fruit of enlightened thoughts words and deeds. He and his disciples were "votaries of the sutras." They were in combat with the miseries and lies of life. They were not supposed to be in conflict with each other.
Nichiren tells us next that Sammiko retorted:
"How can you possibly know another's mind? Let me tell you that I am a disciple of the Sage Nichiren , who is now widely known throughout the country. Although the sage, my teacher, is a priest in the latter age, unlike the eminent priests of our day, he neither seeks invitations nor flatters people, nor has he earned the slightest bad reputation in secular mattersAs we can see by reading carefully, it is personal bravery that made men like Sanmibo and Nichiren that enables us to win converts and hope to convert the nation to True Buddhism. The choices are entirely creative. And while we cannot guarantee that such efforts will continue. Each day is a fresh challenge. It is difficult to know our own minds, but we can make a vow to hang on until we achieve enlightenment. And that vow is a source of energy and a source of creativity and hope. Indeed in the End, Sanmibo and Nichiren 's other disciples, including the lay leader Toki Jonin would usually leave their debate adversaries in the dust when finished in a fair debate. This just made their struggle with the more dishonest "powerful interests" all the more life and death. These people weren't about to engage in a fair fight. And indeed this debate ended as follows:
Nichiren tells us; "As Ryuzo-bo closed his mouth and turned pale, Sammi-ko persisted:
"With such paltry wisdom it is unwarranted for you to declare that you will dispel the people's doubts. The monks Kugan and Shoi thought they knew the True Law and intended to save the people, but they fell into the hell of incessant suffering along with their disciples and lay believers. If you, with your limited knowledge of Buddhist doctrines, preach in an attempt to save many people, then surely you and your followers will fall into the hell of incessant suffering. You had better reconsider such preaching from this day forth. I had not felt that I should speak in this way; but I, too, cannot be exempted from the Buddha's warning that if one sees a misguided priest sending others into hell with his evil teachings and fails to reproach that priest and expose his errors, then he himself is an enemy of Buddhism. Moreover, I feel pity that all those, both high and low, who listen to your preaching will fall into the evil paths. Therefore I am speaking out in this way. A wise man is so called because he admonishes the ruler when the country is endangered or because he corrects others' mistaken views. But in your case I can do nothing, because, no matter what error you may see, you will no doubt refuse to correct it for fear of society's reaction. Even if I had Monju's wisdom and Purna's eloquence, they would be wasted on you."18Nichiren tells us next:
So saying, Sammi-ko rose to leave; but the members of the audience, rejoicing, joined their palms together and sought to detain him, imploring him to teach them the Buddhist doctrines for a little while. However, Sammi-ko left.
I have no further details to add, so you may surmise what really happened. How could a person who believes in the Lotus Sutra and aspires to the Buddha Way possibly contemplate misbehavior or deliberately use foul language when the Buddhist teaching is being expounded? However, I leave this to your judgment.
Ryuzobo was from the upper classes, had studied at Mt. Hiei, but he wasn't about to engage in honest debate. Instead he made charges that the Samurai Shijo Kingo had disrupted the debate and tried to cause trouble. And as a result Shijo Kingo had to deal with persecution from his own "liege" Lord Emma. Shijo Kingo overcame those persecutions with the help of both Sanmibo and Nichiren himself. This letter of petition was written as a last ditch appeal, with Nichiren warning in the eight winds Gosho and other writings and personal messages that Shijo Kingo would be best to rely on the same combination of good logic, common sense, and courageous faith, that he was teaching. This is called "The strategy of the Lotus Sutra" and cannot help but win. Indeed that is the title of the Gosho that Nichiren refers to it in.
Nichiren would relied on Sanmibo and his other disciples time and time again. Nichiren not only relied on Sanmibo and his leading disciples to engage in debates, which they did, but he also gave them the job of teaching and helping his lay disciples. This job of Nichiren's priests in "ministering" to lay-believers was a full time job because in those days there were many lay disciples who were "unlettered" and neither had the time nor the ability to read written instructions, or study without such help. The disciples and learned lay leaders were able to read and write, but only the disciples had the time to study anything in depth or access to writtings. Thus the disciples were needed to "transmit" the teachings to lay believers so that they too could participate in the "sangha" or the body of believers and disciples. And senior disciples who were learned "even a little" participated in this. With these efforts to actually help people, each of Nichiren's disciples built up their own following. And with the debates and the conversions of influential laypeople, they actually won over temples to reside in and teach from.
In contrast, Monks like Ryuzobo used the teachings to build supporters but were afraid to confront the troubles of society or ordinary people. The role of Nichiren monks was to confront these troubles through the practice of "Shakubuku" which is the practice of "breaking and subduing" illusion and delusion. And that is both an inward and an outward practice. By getting help from monks, ordinary people could participate in this process. By sharing essential notions through parables and examples, they could help ordinary folks navigate the mind field of life to reach enlightenment. And Nichiren assisted this effort by constantly sending letters to these disciples in which he dispensed practical advice that incorporated Buddhist theory. That is the main reason that, while the Gosho major treatises were important to everyone, they were most important to the monks. While, these short letters, often little more than a few words and a thank you, were invaluable to all the disciples -- and have proved ever more so over the years.
And Sanmibo was more than a little involved with this. Nichiren seems to have trusted Sanmibo enough to have him sent everywhere. Not just in Kamakura, but all over. He and the other senior priests were sometimes sent like messengers, other times like envoys. And this was expecially true after his retirement to Minobu in A number of Gosho reference Sanmibo in this "ministering" capacity. For instance, "Letter to Konichi Bo" written in 127619 says:
"Those who believe in the Lotus Sutra should beware of and guard themselves against the sutra's enemies. You should know that the Nembutsu priests, the observers of the precepts,and the teachers of the True Word school - in fact, all those who refuseto chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo - as the enemies of the Lotus Sutra, no matter how earnestly they may read it. If you do not know your enemies, you will be deceived by them. How I wish I could see you personally and talk to you about these matters in detail! Whenever Whenever you see Sammi-bo or Sado-ko,who will visit your area from Minobu, have them read this letter to you"
Konichi-bo lived in Awa, which was near Nichiren's home town. Sanmibo was from Shimoza, which was near where Toki Jonin made his home. Sado-bo Niko would later spend most of his time in "Mobara" where his family home was and his father was the "Jito" or ruler. It seems that Nichiren kept his disciples busy travelling everywhere. He'd let them have a "home base" but they went where they were needed.
And this pattern applies to Sanmibo as well, besides visiting Konichibo, he visited the home of Lord Matsuno in 1276 in the Fuji area, where Nichiren refers to him (In the Reply to Lord Matsuno as follows20:
"Even an ignorant person can obtain blessings by serving someone who ex-pounds the Lotus Sutra. No matter if he is a demon or an animal, if someone proclaims even a single verse or phraseof the Lotus Sutra, you must respecthim as you would the Buddha. This is what the sutra means when it says,
"You should rise and greet him from afar, showing him the same respect you would a Buddha."You should respect one another as Shakyamuni and Many Treasures did at the ceremony in the "Treasure Tower" chapter.
Nichiren wanted all who practice the Lotus Sutra respect to one another. And he insisted, based on the words of the Lotus Sutra , that such respect was earned by the actions of the disciples in actually following and practicing the teachings of the Lotus Sutra .
As Sanmibo had learned near the beginning of his career when he visited Kyoto, Nichiren was very strict with all his disciples. That strictness was not based on his own personal wisdom but on the sutras themselves. And he taught that approach even to his less lettered lay disciples. He says in the same Gosho just quoted (Matsuno Dono Gohenji)21:
The priest Sammi-bo may be lowly,but since he can explain even a little about the teachings of the Lotus Sutra, you should respect him as you would the Buddha and ask him about the teachings.
"Rely on the Law and not upon persons" should be your guideline."22(This is also from the Matsuno Dono Gohenji)
Nichiren Buddhism has always been based on the principle of "follow the Law" and nothing so indicates this as that the person Nichiren praises in this Gosho is Sanmibo. This same principle is embodied in sayings of Nikko and other Buddhists over the years. Such as "If [even] the High priest teaches self serving doctrines, you should disregard him." In
Nikko's 26 Warning articles,23 or an even more explicit admonition where he purportedly said "If I ever get senile and start mumbling the nembutsu, then abandon me."
Nichiren thought of Sanmibo as one of his most reliable priests up until, it seems, the very moment of Sanmibo's death. In July of 1277, he writes in the Gosho "A Warning against Begrudging your Fief:24
"I have written a petition on your behalf. Although there are several priests there [in Kamakura], as they are too unreliable, I was thinking of sending Sammi-bo. However, since he has still not recovered from his illness, I am sending this other priest."
Indeed one gets the distinct impression from all the references to him prior to 1279, that Sanmibo was Nichiren's preferred deputy and maybe his intended successor. At the time this was written in 1277 Shijo Kingo had both Nissho and Nichiro available in his area to talk to. Apparantly he didn't feel he could rely on them completely even though these were his most senior disciples who would later assert that they were entitled to inherit leadership of his Sangha.
That doesn't mean that they weren't leaders or qualified successors. But Nichiren was very strict regarding his disciples. He intended them to work together and he tried to play to their strengths. Discretion and bravery seem to have been Sanmibo's strengths. These traits were inevitably tied to his weaknesses as we will see.
Both Nichiren and Sanmibo were ill in late 1277-1278. Shijo Kingo, who was a doctor as well as a disciple and a Samurai, was able to help them clear up their illnesses. In September 1278, Nichiren writes Shijo Kingo, the Gosho, "The Further the Source, the Longer the Stream"25:
"The ailing acolyte has recovered,which makes me very happy. Acharya Daishin died exactly as you foresaw. Everyone here praises you, saying that even a latter-day Jivaka would be no match for you. I think they may well be right. We have been telling each other that your predictions about Sammi-bo and Soshiro have come true exactly, just as two tallies match precisely.I entrust my life to you and will consult no other physician"
Sanmibo may have recovered his strength, but he didn't have long to live. And the following spring he died. It appears that he died of his illness, perhaps returning home first to Shimosa where the leading disciple Toki Jonin ruled. In May 1279, Toki Jonin received this letter called "On Establishing Four Bodhisattvas as the Object of worship." 26 which refers to his death:
Priest Nichigyo�s death was indeed pitiful. I recited the Lotus Sutra and chanted Nam-myoho-renge-kyo for him, sincerely praying to Shakyamuni, Taho and all the Buddhas of the ten directions to receive him on Eagle Peak. I have not yet recovered from my illness, so I have written only briefly. I will write to you again.Sanmibo Nichigyo had died sometime before May of 1279. It seems he died of some pitiful cause. It was a sad thing. Sanmibo was dead. The Daishonin was offering prayers on his behalf. The story might have ended here but it has quite an epilogue instead.
This Gosho "The Further the Source, the Longer the Stream27 was written on "the fifteenth day of the ninth month in the first year of Koan (1278)", which means it was written towards the end of the year 1278 on September 15. Some Fuji Scholars maintain that this was a reference to Sanmibo's final illness. They also suppose that Nichiren was talking about it in terms of "punishment for slander of the law. Why would they maintain this?
Well the answer is that Nichiren seems to have been told something that changed his mind about his leading disciple. And the first clue we have for that is in the following quote from On Persecutions befalling the Sage:" 28Where Nichiren writes first about how three of the "renegade priests" had died after being thrown from their horses, "Ota Chikamasa, Nagasaki Tokitsuna and Daishin-bo"..."can be attributed to their treachery against the Lotus Sutra." And then he goes on to say first:
Yet with Nagoe no Ama, Shofu-bo, Noto-bo, Sammi-bo and others, who are so cowardly, close-minded, greedy, and filled with doubt, it is like pouring water on lacquerware or slicing at thin air.And:
There was something very strange about Sammi-bo. However, I was afraid that any admonition would be taken by the ignorant as mere jealousy of his wisdom, and therefore, I refrained from speaking out. In time his wicked ambition led to treachery, and finally to his doom [during the Atsuhara Persecution]29. If I had scolded him more strictly, he might have been saved. I did not mention this before because no one could understand it. Even now the ignorant will say that I am speaking ill of the deceased. Nevertheless, I mention this for the benefit of other believers. I am sure that those who persecuted the believers at Atsuhara were frightened by the fate of Sammi-bo.30This Gosho was written on the first of October in 1279. Something had changed Nichiren's mind about Sanmibo's illness and death between May 1279 and October 1279. What was it? Why would Nichiren say such things about his leading disciple? What had happened? The modern day representatives of the Fuji school interpret the above passage as referring to Atsuhara. The translations reflect that interpretation. Unfortunately the direct reference to Atsuhara is probably an interpolation of those translators. Lets review what they say.
There are a number of interpretations that rely on this translation of the passages. It has been traditionally the Fuji School that has focused on that treachery, expecially the Sokagakkai which would make Sanmibo an example of how not to practice Buddhism. And the core of the stories that have built up within the Fuji School, whose main temple is located neighboring Atsuhara, is that the core of the "treachery" lay in a disagreement between Nikko Shonin and Sanmibo.
President Ikeda writes in his lecture on the heritage of Buddhism31:
Now let us turn to Sanmibo, a disciple who turned against Nichiren Daishonin. Sanmibo was one of the leading disciples, but, like Devadatta, he disrupted the unity of the Daishonin's followers and finally died a violent death.He then quotes the above passages from < href="http://www.sgi-usa.org/buddhism/library/Nichiren/Gosho/PersecutionsBefallingBuddha.htm">"On the Persecutions suffered by the Sage and then says:
In this passage the Daishonin indicates an important point. He wanted to give guidance to Sanmibo and point out his errors, but his surroundings prevented him from doing so. Before he was aware of it, his disciples had created an atmosphere in which it would have caused more harm than good to scold Sanmibo. Sanmibo Nichigyo was an educated priest who had studied at Enryaku-ji temple in Kyoto, then the highest seat of learning in Buddhism. Learned and eloquent, he breezed to a brilliant victory in his debate with Ryuzobo, a famed scholar of the Tendai sect. He had the tendency, however, toward false pride in his talents and, at the same time, obsequiousness to social power. He lacked the true pride and determination to uphold the supreme teaching of Buddhism, no matter what. In his reply to this priest, the Daishonin writes, "In your letter you mentioned the great honor you had to give a lecture at the family temple of a court noble. But it seems very strange for you to say that kind of thing.... by speaking of your 'great honor, are you not in essence expressing your low opinion of me, Nichiren?"32 It seems that Sanmibo placed the Daishonin's Buddhism below the aristocratic authority of the country's religious center in Kyoto.In Ikeda's analysis, you would think that "On Debating other Sects" was written in 1278 instead of in 126934. I certainly got that confusion. But if you read carefully Nichiren's writings, at least as indicated in the Petition quoted above, Sanmibo had travelled considerably between 1269 and 1279 and proved over and over again that he was not a coward. Yet he had engaged in the act of treachery. I can only think of other purported "traitors" in history such as Benedict Arnold, or others who have turned on their religious groups such as the Lawyer Yamazaki in Japan who turned on Sokagakkai in the 80's. Benedict Arnold had been a loyal patriot of the revolution, until the combination of a Tory Girl Friend, flattery, lack of recognition for his efforts, and his "ego" caused him to turn on the cause. He too had demonstrated bravery and courage over and over again, and yet has gone down in History as a great traitor and a "coward." It is said that a thousand time zero is zero.
The fact is something had gone very wrong for Sanmibo, very wrong with his relationship with Nichiren Daishonin, and consequently Nichirenism had lost an erudite and capable priest. What was it that went wrong?
Well the answer to that, for the Fuji School seems to be the Atsuhara persecution, Nikko Shonin, and the role that Sanmibo and Nikko play in interpreting that persecution. This persecution played a decisive role in the events that shaped the birth of the Fuji School, and that would shape the history of Nichirenism.
In 1278, Nikko had been active at Shijuku-in temple in Suruga Province, near Matsuno, where he was registered as a priest. Years earlier he had converted several of the resident priests, including Nichiji, who later became one of the six seniors (and seems to have died in China). However, Nikko Shonin's drew the suspicious eye of the temple's administrator Gon'yo, who petitioned the government in 1278 to have Nikko Shonin and the others expelled on the grounds that they were spreading heresy. sup>35 At his instigation and due to the large amount of priests and temples who converted to the Daishonin's teachings as a result of their propagation efforts, a directive came down from the governing clergy of the Tendai School to try to stop this movement by ousting such priests from their temples and seizing their lands < Nichiren Daishonin wrote an appeal called the Shijukuin Moshi-jo., which was submitted by Nikko along with Nichiji Shonin, Jibu-bo Kenshu and Shoken, calling for a debate to settle the issue, but it was ignored.
It was around this time that Lord Matsuno died, but his clan endured and would later erect a Hokke-do (Lotus Hall) which became Ren'ei-ji Temple for Nichiji Shonin. Even so, the presence of these younger priests meant that Sanmibo was no longer the "go to guy" for this area. Sanmibo was from Shimosa in what is now Chiba prefacture. His home province was distant from Shimosa. Nichiji and Nikko were both from this area.36
Meanwhile after Nikko was expelled from the Temple in Shijuku-in, he moved to nearby Atsuhara35 village. At Atsuhara he became active at the temple named "Ryusen-ji." Nikko transferred his activities to the Tendai temple Ryusen-ji in Atsuhara Village in the Fuji area of Suruga. His efforts again won him converts among the priests, and, what was more significant, among the local farmer population as well. "They were Shimotsuke-bo Nisshu, Echigo-bo Nichiben, Shou-bo Nichizen and Mikawa-bo Raien."37. Nearby were Ueno Village where Nanjo Tokimitsu, "Lord Ueno" was active, and the before mentioned Matsuno's. These new converts had lots of company.
The typical method for Nichiren monks was to "push" their local temples to engage in debate. At Ryuzenji Temple and other temples where the priests were not Tendai Priests, or were not sure that they'd win a debate, this method had little chance of success. The chief priest of Ryusenji Temple was absent, and the man running the temple was a "Nyudo" (lay priest), and Nembutsu believer, named Gyochi. This "priest" seems to have been for all intents and purposes someone with the mindset of a layman and probably little learning at all. Nyudo Gyochi�s behavior is mentioned in the �Ryusenji Temple Petition� (a letter of complaint to the government)38 in the words of Nikko Shonin:
He called farmers on the temple property to hunt with him. He hunted quails and raccoon dogs, killed deer that had been chased by wolves, and ate them in the residence of the Chief Priest. Also, he put poison in the pond in front of the Sanctuary to kill many fish, and then sold them in a remote village. Everyone who heard and saw was astonished. It is the root of the destruction of Buddhism. It surpasses any sadness!39(�Ryusenji Moshijo� Gosho p.1404)His letter may have been written on behalf of the priests he'd converted but it simply upped the ante of the dispute. In all probability Gyochi was the younger son of some local Jito, or even the local Jito himself, who had taken on oaths in order to take more full control over a local temple on his families own property. After Nichiren's death, this was to prove a frequent problem with local Jito's, who would often act like "landlords" with the supposedly independent temples in their areas. This would frequently mean that the chief priests of those temples had to be related to these Jito's in order to have a chance of operating with any kind of independence. Gyochi demanded that Nichizen, Nisshu and Nichizen, who had converted and been renamed, as well as Mikawa-bo Raien, who had also taken faith, write an oath to discard their faith in the Lotus Sutra and begin reciting the Amida Sutra again. Only Mikawa-bo Raien agreed. Gyochi then demanded that the other three leave the temple. Nichizen did; the others stayed.40
The priest Shoshin Kawabe writes42:
The Daishonin sent Sanmi-bo Nichigyo and Daishin-bo to help Nikko with his propagation. Under these conditions, Gyochi conspired with government officials to suppress the Hokkeko believers. On April 8, 1279, one of the Hokkeko believers, Shiro, was beheaded during a festival. In the same year, in August, another member named Yashiro was injured. Gyochi spread false rumors that these events were the work of Nisshu and the Hokkeko believers. The Atsuhara 42 Hokkeko farmers never yielded to this plot. However, Sanmi-bo and Daishin-bo, instead of standing behind Nikko, caved in to their fear and became followers of Gyochi. What a pity that instead of protecting Hokkeko believers, they attacked them.Gyochi was not content with making the lives of resident priests miserable. He decided to harrass local lay believers. And even without being harrassed, it is likely that they noted the un-priestly behavior of this "wolf in sheeps clothing" caused local ordinary folks to be exceedingly unhappy to be giving donations to a temple headed by such a man. So when "On April 8, 1279, one of the Hokkeko believers, Shiro, was beheaded during a festival."43 In all probability he had simply been rude to Gyochi or some Samurai loyal to him. But things got worse. In August of that year, farmers harvesting rice on disputed land were arrested and charged with trespass. Things rapidly got out of hand. Gyochi (the more you read this the more you think that he probably was related to Hei No Saemon as well), sought help from the Government in Kamakura. And he got it, from the Chief of Police for the entire Country himself -- Hei No Saemon. And these guys turned the proceedings into a circus. Nikko needed help.44
The only problem with this whole thesis, is that unless there were two Sanmibo's, which is unlikely given the overall context, Sanmibo could not have possibly been part of the Atsuhara persecution in April or later of 1279. By then he was already dead. If he was ever at Atsuhara during this mess it would have been late in 1278.
So this thesis of the Fuji School, that Sanmibo played the role of Devadatta" in the Atsuhara persecution is simply a mythical legend. The idea of him directly attacking Nikko instead of supporting him sounds appealing but doesn't fit the facts. Why would he have done so? It is hard to find specific accounts from actual histories. The story is an oral legend perhaps handed down and elaborated on for generations. As history it just doesn't add up.
It appears that Sanmibo had had a long illness, since Nichiren refers to him as ill in 1277. A Japanese member writes:
Sanmibo might have been sent to Atsuhara to support Nikko. But he left Atsuhara, perhaps some time in 1278 , and went back Shimosa, his birth place, to die there in spring of 1279. There is no evidence that he had committed an apparent treachery to Daishonin in Atsuhara as some writers imagines. We can even suppose that he left Atsuhara with Daishonin's permission. Because in the biggest crisis of Nichiren's sect at Atsuhara, such an important leader as Sanmibo couldn't have leave the battle field without the permission of Daishonin. If he did so, the words which Nichiren gave to his death in "On Establishing the Four Bodhisattvas as the Object of Devotion" in May of 1279 must have been much severer. The reason why he left Atsuhara might be his bad health, as some goshos suggests.If Sanmibo went to Atsuhara and did something against Nichiren, Nichiren didn't find out about it until after he died. Therefore it could not have been the kind of thing that was obvious and flashy, like riding horses with Hei-no Saemon, or directly discouraging members. Perhaps it was simply that Sanmibo had expressed his desire to lead the Sangha, or jealousy of Nikko. It is hard to figure out what actually happened, but that would have been enough. It appears that the imagination of later writers has obscured an important message that his death could have provided had Nichiren himself not been ill and on deaths door himself. It is the admonition side to the encouraging message of the Gosho "On Itai Doshin".
Our freind goes on:
But after he left Atsuhara, till the time he died, around him something happened against his teacher's will. Nichiren wrote "In time his wicked ambition led to treachery, and finally to his doom". This part of the translation seems to contain some interpretation or imagination of the translator. The original text of this part is much shorter. If translated word for word, it goes "He got wicked (hara-guro) and met his doom (Tai-nan)".The word "tai-nan" is often used in Gosho. For example Shakyamuni met nine "Tai-nan", i.e. nine great persecutions. Of course in the case of Sanmibo, he met "tai-nan" because of his wicked mind. So the sentence should be translated "doom", "big accident" etc. In the original text, however, there is nothing to indicate that Sanmibo had had an intended wicked plan or had committed an criminal deed. He is told only abstractly to get wicked. "Hara" means the belly. "Guro" or "kuro" is black. "Hara-guro" means that someone has a bad thought. You may be able to translate it as "wicked ambition", but the phrase "led to treachery" is apparently the translator's imagination.43Apparantly Sanmibo developed a "black heart", "wicked ambition" or had a wicked plan at some point before his death. And apparantly he "met his doom" as a result. The Gosho doesn't actually tell us how. And that is how these things really work. It is rare that treachery is so flashy and obvious as the accounts people like to tell. It is tempting to embellesh them as my original mentor does here and is published at the "Buddhist Information Group"44:
Another more telling incident led to his downfall. Nikko Shonin, though he was Sanmibo�s junior in faith, was given the responsibility of leading an intense Shakabuku campaign in Atsuhara. Sanmibo was ordered to assist him. Sanmibo probably considered this an insult, and failed to live up to his responsibilities during the debates with the other sects in the region. He held a deep grudge against Nikko Shonin and at the time of the Atsura persecution, betrayed the Daishonin. He sided with the leader of the Tendai sect against Nikko Shonin and during the arrest of several believers he rode along side the government officials sent by Hei-no Saemon. His horse reared and he was thrown to the ground.Obviously the version that has him on the Horse is inconsistent with the facts but plays well on the imagination. It is easy to imagine a formerly favored disciple riding a horse against his master.
Sanmibo indeed was senior to Nikko , and older. Perhaps he just wasn't up to being involved in a difficult negotiation on account of his illness, Because he was sick Sanmibo had not been involved in these activities from the outset. He could hardly have been expected to "take over" from Nikko now that Nikko .html">Nikko was making the efforts. Additionally if he was ill, Nichiren might have sent him to aid Nikko knowing he couldn't take over even if he want to -- and telling him so. Of course he wasn't up to riding a horse either. In 1279 he was already dead.
As confucian ethics were involved. Sanmibo should follow his masters directions, but he couldn't "allow" himself to follow a junior in faith also due to confucian notions. The result was that this courageous and learned man may have picked exactly the wrong time to let pride get in the way of his practice. He too had spent considerable time in propagation activities in that part of Suruga, he was senior to Nikko and the others there, and so it might have been hard for him to take a seconding position. Perhaps that was what Nichiren was referring to. Perhaps he hadn't been willing to cooperate and support these younger priests such as Sadobo Niko, Nichiji, and Nikko, all of whom were younger than him. Or the young "Jito's" such as those from the family of Lord Matsuno, or the young Lord Ueno, who was only 18 at the time. Sanmibo, unwilling to continue supporting juniors, and ill with what turned out to be a terminal illness asked leave of his master and was allowed to return to Shimosa where he died and Lord Toki reported his death. The treachery was entirely in this unwillingness of disciples to work together as their own personal "turf issues" began to emerge as more important than unity. Perhaps that is why Nichiren praised Sadobo Niko and Nikko Shonin so thoroughly in his Gosho for their "Itai Doshin," the emergence of this turf seeking was a kind of fundamental darkness far more serious than formal enemies such as Hei No Saemon or Gyochi. It was the "enemy within." If so, there is a far more universal interpretation to this story than that offered by the Fuji School that it was an issue solely of one evil turncoat. Nichiren may have been talking to all his disciples.
And that would be consistant with the fact that this legend developed over time predominantly within the Fuji School. Nikko would not have forgotten the incident and would have wanted to warn other priests about the importance of supporting the person in charge no matter whether "senior" or "junior." This was basically the position of Nikko and his disciples. Nikko could even have been the source of the information about Sanmibo.
Nichiren would have expected his complete cooperation when he sent Sanmibo to help Nikko. If he didn't want to support Nikko and said so, then that would be enough to alarm anyone about the course of future events. Going home to die, after expressing such regrets or trying to undermine a fellow priest, would have been enough of a bad cause to perhaps warn people that they needed to set aside their "turf issues." Itai Doshin comes from knowing when to lead and when to follow And perhaps this was a test that he failed.
Ikeda makes a big deal out of this interpretation as elaborated by the imagination45. He writes:
During the Atsuhara Persecution, Sanmibo was dispatched to the Fuji area to assist Nikko Shonin, who ranked below him. Then, becoming victim to the scheming of Gyochi, acting chief priest of Ryusen-ji temple of the Tendai sect, he turned against Nikko Shonin. The consequence you know well: "He met his doom," dying a violent death. I suspect he was not pleased about having to go and assist one of his inferiors who was leading the struggle against the persecution. On that struggle hinged the rise or fall of the Daishonin's Buddhist order. Even in such a decisive battle, he was preoccupied with his own resentment that he had not been assigned the leading position. He was completely dominated by egoism, and a desire for fame and fortune.If this had been actually what had happened it wouldn't be the last outbreak of this phenomenom. Nor would Ikeda himself be free from such feelings, as he himself attests in his essay "stormy April" This "pride" would cause even more problems after Nichiren's death as one can see if one reads about the six priests and the various schools of Nichirenism that rose after his death. Or one simply looks at the various conflicts within each of the various schools, the Kenshokai, Reiyukai, Rissho Koseikei. All of them have had conflicts caused by leaders with big egos who could not cooperate with one another, often each insisting that he was the "true disciple" of a predecessor or the one who had the only correct way to practice Buddhism. Instead of being grounded on facts, these people all had "black hearts" "Hara Guro" which caused them to be unable to work together. Perhaps Sanmibo had been on Nichiren's short list to lead things following his death. Perhaps Atsuhara was part of a test that began with his trip to Kyoto.
Whatever the test was, Sanmibo failed it and died. If he was involved in Atsuhara, and did indeed come into conflict with being asked to support Nikko Shonin, then his "foolish pride" might have driven him to the point where he could be manipulated by others. But the Daishonin doesn't say he went into active rebellion. The real problem that Sanmibo had is one that has manifested again and again in leaders claiming Nichiren's mantle. "Hara Guro" is really an expression of "fundamental darkness" and is a common fiend we all face. Not just the property of flashy outside enemies. Indeed one expression of "hara guro" is the tendancy of those who do lead to turn perfectly good religions into cults.
The two fuji school groups, Nichiren Shoshu and the Gakkai, frequently bring up Sanmibo's life and treachery in their arguments with each other. Usually they try to make it seem that Nichiren had long known about Sanmibo's weaknesses and that his treachery was inevitable. Maybe that is so. Unfortunately they usually hang such feelings on others without looking within or doing genuine self reflection. Indeed usually the story is told in an effort to enforce loyalty from their own followers with this story and impress people with the consequences of defying authority. One might think from the way the story was used that Sanmibo was incensed at receiving guidance to not become a bat and that therefore his ten year later rebellion was just another case of "uchi iri/revenge". And because it was Nikko Shonin who Sanmibo was supposed to be supporting it is used as the model for the conflicts after the Daishonin passed. They note, correctly, that what happened to Sanmibo wasn't that different from personality conflicts that occured after Nichiren's death. For them his death was a forshadowing of the future and the cause of his death his unwillingness to support Nichiren's "true" successor Nikko.
But of course it is easy for people at the pinacle of power, with no threats to their own positions and status to judge Sanmibo or his faith this way. They can forget any personality conflicts they may have and simply blame Sanmibo for his "lack of faith." Yet what is learned by that?
Sanmibo had the ambition and the courage to be Nichiren's "true successor." It turns out that so did Nikko. So did Nissho, so did Toki Jonin. In fact if "wicked ambition"/hara guro were the sole fault of this one disciple, there wouldn't be hundreds of new age and original schools of Nichirenism in our own day, and the fights between some of these practitioners wouldn't provide grist for outside observers to dismiss Nichiren's teachings. The point of holding up a mirror is to see our own faces. Nichiren was trying to warn his other disciples to learn from Sanmibo's tragic example, not to label his opponants as demons or monsters. Instead:
I mention this for the benefit of other believers. I am sure that those who persecuted the believers at Atsuhara were frightened by the fate of Sammi-bo.46Therefore to me the lesson to learn from Sanmibo, is not that Sanmibo was particularly evil or unique, but on the contrary, his case was something that was all too common. The path of rebellion and conflict is a possibility whenever ones personal ambitions meet ones beliefs. When someone has a position we want, a job we'd like, something we want. It is all too easy to develop a "black heart" "hara guro." It seems possible that Sanmibo didn't rebel because of doubts about Buddhism or about the honor and character of Nichiren, but because of turf issues with Nikko that were not so clearly defined as most scholars of the Fuji school would have them. After Nichiren died, the next generations would be characterized by these same kinds of "turf issues" over and over and over. It was rare that these priests would work together in "Itai Doshin."
To the people of the time Sanmibo's death wasn't just an accident, but an omen of something being wrong. It helped end the Atsuhara Persecution. Hei No Saemon had to let the other lay people go and to let the converted Priests continue to practice Buddhism. Thus it was a victory for Nichirenism. And Sanmibo's life gave Nichiren Buddhism its "Devadatta" motiffe and demonology. (See devadatta.html, fundamental.html, or yamazaki.html)
Sanmibo died in 1279. It must have been a heavy blow. The worst part of Sanmibo's "hara guro" is that it occured when Nichiren needed his disciples to be ready to move on after his death. The bright light in this is that Nikko and Niko worked together so admirably. They proved that priests could work together in harmony with lay leaders. This was encouraging and Nichiren was able to draw sustenance from having a dual lesson in the value of itai doshin. When Nichiren died in 1282 he hoped that they would continue to do so. Samibo had had the combination of seniority, courage and self-confidence that would have made him a good successor and had been his right hand for many years, and yet he was nearly defeated in his last moments by fundamental darkness. That had to stand as a lesson to the others. Perhaps Nichiren could only think of the Devadatta story, but Sanmibo had been loyal, and it would have been better if Nichiren could have "saved him". And unfortunately Nichiren didn't have anyone with the capacity to be a clear successor. His senior priests such as Nissho and Nichiro proved incompetant at dealing with the Bakufu, and his disciples Toki Jonin and Nikko didn't have the seniority to unite the others behind them. "Hara Guro" would infect his disciples more generally after his passing. Perhaps if Sanmibo had lived he would have made a worthwhile successor to Nichiren. Such moments of "black heart" are present in all human beings and have to be resisted equally by everyone. It would turn out that Sanmibo's case was just the first in many "small" betrayals of Nichirenism by competing and rivalrous monks and lay leaders. After Nichiren died Nikko would claim to be Nichiren's direct disciple and all the others would contest that position. And worse, each of those disciples would have successors who would do the same in return.
This story has also been used quite differently by more humble and self reflecting practitioners. And this is the appropriate use for it -- as a warning for all of us. That use doesn't require anyone to accept oral legends or possibly apocryphal "transfer documents" at all. One can simply base it on the records as written. It is enough to note that pride and vanity are common attributes of teachers and leaders. The exemplar of that use of this story is the way that the late teacher Reverend Horigome47 uses this story.
President Ikeda tells us in his guidance book "From Today Onward"48that "In 1924, at the age of 25, Nichijun Horigome studied in Kyoto." he then says:
"admonishing himself with the Gosho 'On debating other Sects,'49, On debating other Sects is a long theoretical Gosho.
"If a mouse becomes a bat, it is neither mouse nor bird. You are neither a country priest nor a Kyoto Priest and I think you are going the way of Shofu-bo.50.he committed himself by writing his firm determination:
Today, having come to Kyoto for study, I find that I have found much new meaning in this writing...In order to avoid making the same mistake as Sanmi-bo I must be extremely strict with myself."President Ikeda goes on to show how Reverend Horigome used Sanmibo's example of how not to develop and manifest "pride" "envy" and "vanity", or similar negative emotions. He knew that Sanmibo's brilliance hadn't kept him from getting in trouble or dying a miserable end. Leaving out the "flashy" ellaborations, this story becomes an admonition to all of us.
- Seven Gosho were written to Sanmibo. Only one has been translated completely. The one that has been translated is:
- "Teaching Practice and proof"
- The "On Talking to other Sects"("Homon Mosaru Beki Yo no Koto") I still can't find translated in its entirety. But after several years of pushing for a translation There are two available. One is reproduced from one of Ikeda's lectures. The other was done by a member from Japan and is a bit rougher in the English. I've used the member's translation, but it agrees well with the one finally provided:
- http://www.buddhistinformation.com/on_debating_with_other_sects.htm
- Our more literal (and thus rougher):
- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/irgosho/message/9718
- And this passage appears to come from a longer Gosho that may not actually have been written to him:
- http://www.everlife.org/insights_frame.htm
- "�For those who wonder what to make of Sakyamuni�s shocking declaration that he initially attained enlightenment before the beginning of time, I will take you into my confidence regarding my own inner realization on this matter. First, the Buddha had recounted that we, mortal beings, have suffered since time immemorial through a myriad of births and deaths � so much so that we cannot conceive of reaching the ever-distant shore of enlightenment even in our dreams. [While his disciples watched with gaping mouths,] in the Lotus Sutra he revealed that the inception of his Perfect Enlightenment was as old as eternity [and, that his aim in revealing this was to help every mortal achieve an identity equal to his own]. In this way, he conveyed that we, ordinary humans, possess the enlightened essence originally endowed to all buddhas before the beginning of space and time. The Lotus Sutra is the most compassionate of all sutras as it produces the jewel that all mortals, without exception, have always possessed: that is, the Perfectly Enlightened Threefold Body of Everlasting Life [whose Universal Reality, Blissful Wisdom, and Mortal Manifestation constitute our whole self]. From this perspective, you should be able to assert to those who are unaware of it that the Lotus Sutra is supreme among all the Buddha�s teachings.� � NICHIREN (Priest Sammi Ajari, c. 1275 or 1277)
- A Number of Gosho reference Sanmibo. These are also the sources for the relevent quotes above. The Gakkai's major writings (which are about half of the more important Gosho ) give you the following listing:
http://www.sgi-usa.org/cgi-bin/displayword.cgi?termid=10379 1277: A Warning against Begruding your Fief 1279:http://sgi-usa.net/buddhism/library/Nichiren/Gosho/4BoddhisattvasObjectWorship.htm Another Translation: http://etherbods.com/gosho/gosho-eng/4BoddhisattvasObjectWorsh.shtml
Sanmibo is often referenced, both as a person, or because of Gosho said to have been sent to him. Below is a list of some of the URL's I've found that mention him:
- Ikeda References:
- http://www.buddhistinformation.com/on_debating_with_other_sects.htm
- http://www.jinzainet.org/speechs/speech0372002.html
- Reverend Horigome
- As part of his lecture on the "Shoji Ichidaiji Kechimyaku Sho:"
- http://www.laureldistrictstudy.homestead.com/files/Heritage_of_Ultimate_Law_of_Life_pdf.pdf
- Everlife foundation quotes from a Gosho (I can't find the source) addressed to Sanmibo (It may be apocryphal):
- http://www.everlife.org/insights_frame.htm
- Biographical and study sources:
- http://www.sgi-usa.org/buddhism/library/SokaGakkai/Study/Entrance/LifeDaishonin.htm