Main Gosho Lotus Sutra Nichiren Dai-Shonin Nichirenism Fuji School
Lineages of the six elder priests:
Chart:
click on Chart
Nikko shonin Niko Shonin Toki Jonin/Nichijo
Nissho Shonin Nichiro Nitcho
Nichiji Nichimoku Shonin Nippo Shonin
Lord Hakiri Sources Literal Issues

The Six Elder Priests

Introduction:

Nichiren appointed six elder priests just before he died at the house of Ikegami Munenaka on October 13 1282. He was sixty years old and worn out from years of hardship and poor diet. He may also have had stomach cancer or some other ailamentary tract disease. Nichiren Dai-Shonin designated These Six Senior Disciples (Roku Roso) to carry on his work after his death. He fully expected them to work together and cooperate in every way, but apparantly they did not. This lack of cooperation led to the first schisms in Nichiren Buddhism. It is the genesis of these schisms that this page is seeking to explore. Understanding the origins of the Nichiren Schools is key to understanding the birth of the Fuji Schools, and of the other rival lineages of Nichiren Buddhism.

Before reading further on this page, if you are not already familiar with Nichiren's biography, visit:
my page on, Nichiren Daishonin and perhaps some of the assorted links there.
Or these "outside pages" with overlapping and yet very different stories of his life:
Nichiren Shu:http://la.nichirenshu.org/nav/nichirenstart.shtml
Mike:http://campross.crosswinds.net/Ryuei/NichirensBio.html
Note that the only thing that Rev. Kubota and Rev. Murano have in common is hostility towards Nikko Shonin and the Fuji School
http://www.geocities.com/bukkokukai/identityofnichiren.html
Fuji School
http://www6.ocn.ne.jp/~nichiren/TimelineE.html
SGI:http://www.sgi-usa.org/buddhism/library/SokaGakkai/Study/Entrance/LifeDaishonin.htm
http://www.hokke.co.uk/buddhism/daishonin.htm
http://www.fortibet.org/~kaikabuyo/nichirenshoninodaimokuandgohonzon.html
Scholarly:
http://www.nanzan-u.ac.jp/SHUBUNKEN/publications/jjrs/pdf/555.pdf
http://www.nanzan-u.ac.jp/SHUBUNKEN/publications/jjrs/pdf/547.pdf

Who were they?

The six elder priests were the surviving members of Nichiren's inner circle of disciples and people who had demonstrated their loyalty and willingness to cooperate with each other over and over again. For instance in the Gosho, "On Itai Doshin Nichiren Daishonin praised "Hoki-bo" (Nikko) and "Sado-bo" for their efforts in dealing with a major persecution and said that:

Hoki-bo and Sado-bo, and the believers in Atsuhara, have proved the strength of their resolve.

If the spirit of many in body but one in mind (itai doshin) prevails among the people,they will achieve all their goals, where-as if one in body but different in mind, they can achieve nothing remarkable.

And there were plenty of similar stories about the devotion of each of the other four senior priests.

These six disciples can be enumerated as being:
BenAjari (Yamato-ajari) Nissho (1221-1323),(62 years old at the time of Nichiren's death
Daikoku-ajari (Chikugo-ko) Nichiro (1245-1320),(40 years old at the time of Nichiren's death)
Byakuren-ajari (Hoki-ko) Nikko (1246-1333),(37 years old at the time of Nichiren's death)
Sado-ko (Mimbu-ajari) Niko (1253-1314),(30 years old at the time of Nichiren's death)
lyo-ko (lyo-ajari) Nitcho (1252-1317),(31 years old at the time of Nichiren's death)
and Renge-ajari (Kai-ko) Nichiji (1250-1305?).(33 years old at the time of Nichiren's death)
Later Toki Jonin ordained himself and is usually counted as one of the founders of the Nakayama lineages of Nichirenism.

Why Six? -- Ordination Center

Daniel Montgomery gives us the reasons for appointing six disciples to carry on Nichiren's death legacy and create a "Nichiren School". He was establishing the independence of his group. Independence meant establishing an "ordination center". This implies a goal of eventually having a centralized organization with a lead school, which bolsters Fuji School claims -- but it doesn't imply that Nikko was meant to be the "true leader" of the established religion he had in mind. Indeed he seems to have been thinking of establishing it, at least initially, at Minobu and to have envisioned a cooperative leadership. At any rate, to have proper ordination you need six monks. Three to perform the ceremony, and three to witness. With Six monks you could perform your own ordinations and were no longer dependent on Tendai. Thus "six senior priests" was a requirement for carrying on his work in unity. There was a basic expectation of unity involved.

Two Tiers of leaders

Nichiren death also appointed a second tier of "direct disciples" when he was near deaths door, and so there was an formal hierarchy of disciples and an informal pecking order as well. These six direct disciples and the 12 or so additional "direct disciples" who would all play a role in later history had complex relationships. And besides these formal dsiciples there were other "direct disciples" who were also disciples of one or more of these persons and direct disciples of each of the disciples. It could get confusing.

For example, both Nippo, Nitcho, and Nichimoku were direct disciples of Nichiren and were also direct disciples of Nikko's as well. There were actually two Nippo's and two Nichiu's, and sometimes our Japanese friends don't make the distinction as to which one they are talking about or even seem confused about this themselves.

These ties of "lineage" became even more confusing in subsequent ages because the formal lines were often bridged by crossovers, cross-training, and similar interactions, not just within Nichirenism, but without -- between Nichiren schools and Tendai Schools. For more on this see my Nichirenism page. To the converse case, sometimes monks from one school would have a schism within their own school which would later manifest itself in new alliances and cross-overs in affiliation. Thus it shouldn't surprise anyone that, for example, the Fuji School is represented by at least 7 schools at Mt. Fuji and more all over Japan, and that some of these schools are on opposite sides of various doctrinal divides. Later monks would refine, redefine, and sometimes "reform" the legacy of these priests. And the result is a confusing array of modern schools and inheritances. I heard there were some 1000 plus schools of Nichirenism in the present age -- and I am not surprised. But this digresses. For more on this see my Nichirenism page.

See sources page for link to Daniel's book1

Nichiren's death and the Succession

The various groups each have their story of what happened as Nichiren reached his final days. These versions agree about a number of things. All accounts agree that Nichiren was invited to take the cure at some hot springs. Left Minobu to travel there, but only got as far as Ikegami Munenaka's residence near what is now Tokyo. There the accounts diverge somewhat. However on some particulars they agree. Daniel Montgomery says:

"The immediate task of 'sowing the seed of Buddhahood' was entrusted to the six Senior Disciples and their followers. These men had served the master faithfully for many years. The oldest of them Nissho, had known Nichiren since they were students together at Mt. Hiei. The second Nichiro, a nephew of Nissho, had been with him since he was a boy and and shared many of his adventures. All six had proven their worth over the years. Now they solemnly cremated Nichiren's body at Ikegami...and then bore the ashes back to Minobu, as he had requested. In his last letter he had said: 'No matter where I die, please build my grave on Mount Minobu, becaues that is where I spent nine years reciting the Lotus Sutra to my heart's content. My heart lives forever on Mount Minobu.'(Hakki Dono Gosho, Shingyo Hikkei, 105)."

...

Nichiren also had a practical reason for choosing the six: each of them could minister to a specific geographical area where he was already established. The first two Elders, Nissho and his nephew Nichiro, would continue to work in the capitol of Kamakura. Nikko, the third Elder, was responsible for the provinces of Suruga, Kai, and Izu, where he already had built up a personal following. Niko had a temple and influentual freinds in Kazusa. Nitcho was in Shimosa with his stepfather Toki Jonin, the most important of Nichiren's lay disciples. And finally Nichiji, the youngest of the six, was the son of a wealthy landowner (Jito) in Suruga. Between them, the six were strategically located where they could evangelize north-eastern Japan in the area around modern Tokyo[The Kanto region]. 2

The most important thing was that Nichiren felt they could be relied on to work together as a team. He had talked repeatedly of "Itai Doshin" in his letters.

Fuji School Version:

For the Taisekiji Branch (Nichiren Shoshu) of the Fuji School, the story is that:

Nichiren "bequeathed" an inheritance to Nikko Shonin(the so called 'Golden Utterance') and wrote two transfer documents. one at Ikegami and the other at Minobu. One insists that Nikko had been appointed the chief priest of Minobu Temple and the other that he is "He is to be the supreme leader for the propagation of Honmon." The other five refused to accept his leadership, so later, Nikko would take these documents, the "Dai-Gohonzon" and move to Taisekiji. In 1332 he would pass away, bequeathing that inheritance to his disciple Nichimoku, who would unfortunately die while travelling to Kyoto to remonstrate with the Emperor.

That is Nichiren Shoshu's version of the story.

However, There are controversies surrounding these documents, and a strong possibility that they are "forged documents" and thus apocryphal("disputed" Gosho. Indeed that notion is hardly disputed at all in scholarly circles, where the scholar notes the difference in style of both letters from Nichiren's usual style of writings, the contradictions between the documents, and the facts that they didn't surface until years after they were supposedly penned, were alleged as forgeries from the beginning and so convieniently "disapeared" in a dispute between the Takedas and their enemies -- all argue against taking these documents as literal proof that the Fuji School was established formally by Nichiren. What we get instead, is the origins of a tradition that has it's base on Nikko and his disciples certainty that they "ought to have been" in charge of a unified Nichiren School. The case can be made that Nikko was right that the schools should have remained united. The further case can be made that this unity was broken. Who broke the unity and why is a more nuanced question.

For more on this subject visit these pages on my site:
More on Nikko Shonin
More on the Fuji School
Nichiren Shoshu, and their opinion:QA56
More on the transfer documents
Disputed Gosho, Literal Issues and Apocryphal writings
outside my site:
The Takeda Clan and also:Takeda Clan historical timeline

The Last Days and other "bequeathals."
Critique

If Nichiren Shoshu has its version of what Nichiren did when he was near deaths door, which lionizes Nikko Shonin so do the Nichiren Shu groups. If they dispute the transfer documents, and oral assertions that Nikko should have been the chief priest of Minobu by Nichiren's intent, they don't dispute oral inheritances because they too postulate that Nichiren passed on various instructions and inheritances to his leading disciples. Indeed Daniel Montgomery writes (on page 145):

Minobu, the founders temple, fell within the territory alloted to Nikko. But Minobu was holy to all the disciples, not just Nikko, and so they arrainged to supervise it jointly in rotation....But this complicated scheme ran counter to the more natural way of just letting Nikko, who lived nearby take care of everything."

A Nichiren Shoshu member notes; "Obviously, even the Nichiren Shu priests have to acknowledge that even without "transfer documents" or formal transmissions, "Mt. Minobu" not only lay within Nikko's territory. But the breakdown of the rotational system meant that Nikko was forced to act as" [de-facto] "chief priest there -- even when it was the turn of the other elder priests. They all acknowledge that Niko's natural seat was Mobara, and that the others were "guests" at Minobu until they decided differently in joint action -- which was in fact the situation until Nikko departed."

Not surprisingly those accounts don't place any oral legacy on the five priests so much as on a junior priest" [Kyoichimaru -- later to travel to Kyoto and have some mixed success with the Emperor Gotoba there]. "This should be surprising given the vehemence in which they deny the plausability of the Nichiren Shoshu Fuji lineage claims on behalf of Nikko. After all if Nichiren gave oral instructions to the other disciples he may well have given oral instructions to Nikko himself. But to admit that would be to admit that even if the transfer documents are forgeries, the issues they address had been real. The fact remains that inheritors of Nissho, Niko, and Nichiro include oral heritages in their accounts and so their vehement denial of Nikko's later claims to legitimacy aren't as consistent as they'd like to present them.

However, it is impossible to prove a negative. If the notion of "kechimyaku" heritage, and lineage falls orally and through apocrypha on Nikko and Nichimoku in the Fuji Schools then it is inconsitant to attack this heritage while claiming that a similar heritage falls on this junior priest in the "five priests" version of the story. But actually this information relates to the time after the six priests. For more on this story see nichirenism.html#kansai

Senchu Murano writes:3

On October 8th, 1282, six steward disciples were chosen. On the 10th, there was a distribution of mementos and, on the 11th, thirteen year old Kyoichimaro was summoned. After being briefed on the evangelical mission thus far, the Saint gave him the assignment of spreading the Lotus Teaching to the people in Kyoto and the western regions of Japan. Tutored by Nichiro, he lived up to expectations and is remembered as Nichiz�.

Daniel Montgomery goes into more detail, telling how this acolyte would train heavily in both physical and mind and then journey to Kyoto, camp outside the Imperial compound and wait for a while. The irony is that according to Fuji School teachings Nichimoku died en-route to Kyoto, while Nichizo would succeed in winning over the Emperor. Winning for himself the title of "chief abbot" or "high priest" of Nichirenism, and the title "Dai-Shi" for the Dai-Shonin.4

Why the different versions?

Thus we have within the Fuji School version and outside, competing versions of stories all based on oral histories often written years later. And each of these interprets the history of Nichirenism subsequent to Nichiren's death completely differently. To get any idea of what actually happened requires one to thread between the accounts and try to find on which points they agree, which they don't agree on, and why they agree or disagree. One can't get the real picture from any of the individual groups. In this essay we are looking at what happened between the six priests. If we can do that then we can strip both Fuji School shingon-like esoteric mumbo jumbo, and peer through the accounts to see where each is lying, spinning or most often passing on divergent stories based on long ago fights and conflicts. All sides rewrote events in some details, to make their heros look better. And this started shortly after Nichiren's death.

Indeed the earliest proven "apocryphal" works or "forged Gosho" of Nichiren were hagiographies. For instance the Nanzen article Review Article on Nichiren's biographies and Hagiographies notes:

"the Goden dodai, was written by Nichid� (1283�1341), a third-generation disciple. What purports to be an autobiographical account contained within the apocryphal Hokke honmonsh� y�sh� (STN 3: 2158�68) was probably written around the same time.

Other "pious forgeries" would be later trotted out at various points to serve debating Nichiren Monks, or to back up doctrines claimed by Nichirenism's leaders. Indeed the monks of the various schools asserted editorial rights over even the Rissho Ankoku Ron, as we will see shortly. Thus the later "fuji school" disciples of Nikko, may well have felt justified in memorializing those oral instructions by creating apocryphal "pious forgeries." despite Nikko Shonin's explicit instructions to not do so in his 26 Admonitions. They, as we will see, felt perfectly justified in doing all that they could to claim that Nikko's line was the orthodox line.

For a NST version of this story see http://www.taisekiji.net/features/tokimitsu.html

Tending the Ashes

Regardless of whose version you believe, all the accounts I've read agree that Nichiren asked that his body be carried back to Minobu and cremated there. And then acceded to the priests wishes that he be cremated and the ashes returned to Minobu instead.Senchu Murano writes:

"According to the Ganso kedo-ki" of Nitcho, Nichiren Shonin said before his death,

"After I die, put my body in a cauldron and send it to Minobu."

However, Nichiro answered him,

"If we could make it to Minobu in a day or half a day, we could do as you say. But it's very far to Minobu. Please let us cremate you. We'll place your remains in Minobu without fail."

To this, the Shonin replied,

"You're absolutely right. Then, make it so, Nichiro."

The quotation continues:

Thus, Nichiren Shonin was cremated at Ikegami on the 21st of October. His ashes, guarded and transported by his disciples, left lkegami and arrived at Minobu on the 25th of October.5

Murano continues:

For some reason, Niko and Nitcho were not present at Nichiren Shonin's death or funeral. It was difficult, in those days, to easily and quickly communicate with outlying areas and Niko and Nitcho were propagating in far away districts hence maybe they could not be notified in time of Nichiren's death and funeral.6

Senchu Murano minimizes the fact that Niko may not have been present at Nichiren's death. But this is a strange omission for one who supposedly was the best choice for "Zasu" of the Minobu School. I suspect that the reason for him not being present, like that of other junior priests is innocent. Indeed, I think that the reason they weren't there is tied to the Mongol invasion. One of the earliest artistic and legal references to Nichirenism is in the form of an image of a local Jito fighting the Mongols during their invasion. This image shows a young Nichiren monk swinging his Juzu as if they were a sword. This Jito was a Nichiren follower and years later he went to Kyoto to press his case that not only did he deserve a bigger fief, but he had been a hero during the Mongol invasion. His sector had been the only sector the Mongols had succeeded in making landfall in. Maybe one of my Japanese friends can pin down who that monk was -- but in any case it could be that all the younger monks were accompanying their "flock" to the front. This is pure speculation, but it makes a nice way to explain the facts.

However, the fact remains that Niko's assigned temple was also where he preferred to live. Indeed he is buried in remote Mobara. Both Niko Shonin and Nitcho, and Nichiji -- who was there -- were also very junior disciples. They were appointed as six priests in order for Nichirenism to have its own ordination platform, not because they were equal in seniority. In Buddhism "seniority" is not usually an issue unless one is caught up in religious politics, but religious politics is probably inevitable and alas that would soon be the case. The difficulty of Niko and Nitcho to make it in time to the Daishonin's death bead is a warning of just how difficult that would be.

The others may not have felt they needed to be present until it was too late to send for them in time, or they simply may not have had time to send for them in the first place. In any case they were still included in the deliberations -- by proxy of their more senior monks.

Rotating Observances

The monks agreed to Tend Nichiren's grave. Besides the six disciples, Nichiren was supported by a second tier of direct disciples (the six plus 12 more),making eighteen priests. Nine (Nichii, Nippo, Echizen-ko, Nitchi, Nichiji, Nichimoku, Nisshu, Nichiben and Nikke) had entered the priesthood under Nikko. Others entered the service of one or more of the other senior disciples after Nichiren's death.

H.G. Lamont, translating the writings of Nichijun Shonin, of the Kempon Hokke School, writes:

Nichiren entered Parinirv�na on the 13th day of next month. His ashes were buried at Minobu on October 26. On January 23, 1283, the one hundredth day memorial service was held for Nichiren at Minobu. Many disciples and lay followers of Nichiren assembled there, but Nik�, and Nitch� were [again] absent. The disciples present discussed their duties at Minobu. The problem was the location of Minobu. Nikk� lived within 60 kilometers from Minobu; and Nichiji, within 80 kilometers. But all the other Senior Disciples lived in farther districts. Kamakura, where Nissh� and Nichir� lived, was 200 kilometers from Minobu; Mama, the residence of Nitch� 280 kilometers; and Mobara, the abode of Nik�, 330 kilometers. In those days travelling was very hard work. It took four days to transport Nichiren's ashes from Ikegami to Minobu. The disciples talked over the problem and decided that twelve more fellow disciples be added to the list of priests on duty, and that the term of shifts be shortened to one month.

Jacqueline Stone tells us that for most of the time that the fiction of rotating observances was in effect it was Nikko and his disciples who had to bear the brunt of the upkeep and maintenance of Nichiren's grave. The priests avoided travelling to Minobu until the Niko "solved" both the problem of Lord Hakiri's "slander of buddhism" and the "problem" of Nikko and his criticisms. They would gather long enough to depose him, end the fiction of a rotational system, and install Niko as interum and part time rector at Minobu.

Why Tend His Grave?

All of these disciples had been touchingly devoted to Nichiren, and seemingly devoted to one another as well. Nikko and Niko had worked together on more than one occassion. Nissho and Nichiro were related by blood, as was Nitcho and Toki Jonin. They all agreed to tend his grave. Why was this important?

Well there are a number of reasons why this was important. The first is that tending Nichiren's grave would have given the monks a common activity to bind them together in some kind of unity. Since each of them had a different territory the tendancy to start their own schools would have (and was) otherwise been overwhelming. Monks, like lay people need a centered practice. And monks, like lay leaders of a religion, are prone to ambition, ranking, turf battles, and religious politics involving religious infighting. Without some means to bring them together, they would have soon drifted apart.

Secondly, the gravesite would have been a nucleus for an ordination center. This was important in the case that Mt. Tendai never would be converted to respect the Lotus Sutra as supreme. There is enough indirect evidence that Nichiren wanted something like this, that it should be obvious. But apparantly it wasn't obvious to the various disciples.

The third reason, is also the reason that Nikko argued against the other disciples carrying off certain of Nichiren's personal effects. He specifically complained about Nichiro taking Nichiren's annotated scroll of the Lotus Sutra and the small statue of Shakyamuni. Both of these items had been intended for Nichiren's gravesite. The reason for leaving the Lotus Sutra scroll would have been to make it available to study. The only reason for taking it would have been if one didn't intend for others to study it. Nichiren's gravesite was intended as a place for monks to pray and meditate. The small statue of Shakyamuni wasn't intended for people to pray to, but for monks to meditate on. The Lotus Sutra was intended both for meditation and study. Had they remained at Minobu, Minobu would have remained a place to come to to study the Lotus Sutra and meditate on Nichiren's teachings. Every practice is best when it is a balance of faith, study, and discussion. Nichiren did not want stupid disciples and he didn't want feuding ones.

All these reasons are embodied in one ceremony which the head temple of Nichiren Shoshu to this day conducts every day. That ceremony is the Ushitori Gongyo. And the practice of chanting daimoku and reciting the sutra at Nichiren's grave would have served as a time for training disciples, regenerating tired or worn out spirits, and getting to know one another better and mending fences. As was soon demonstrated once the system was abandoned, this wasn't a matter to consider lightly. I believe that there is no doubt that by abandoning the rotation, the monks all broke Nichiren's intent. The five elder priests by the "sin" of commission. Nikko by giving up on them.

Modifying the Rotation

HG Lamont goes on:

Thus the schedule of attendance was arranged as follows:
January,
Nissh�
February,
Nichir�
March,
Echizenk� and Awajik�;
April,
Nitch�
May,
Nichiji;
June,
Shimotsukek� and Echigok�;
July,
Igak� and Chikuzenk�;
August,
Nichiji and Izumik�;
September,
Nikk�
October,
Nik�,
November,
Nichijitsu and Nichimoku;
and December,
Jakunichib� and Tambak�.

Kubota goes on to tell us that:

"The document of this schedule, which was signed by Nissh� Nichir� Nikk� and Nichiji, is still preserved today. Nikk� signed his name as he was the secretary of the meeting."

Kubota is (naturally) hostile to the Fuji School and is here making a case against Nikko and the Dai Gohonzon, but If you carefully examine and deconstruct Kubota's case you see something going on here that was important. Kubota emphasizes Nikkos' role as scribe rather than as "leader" but this role of Nikko's as "scribe" was part of his perceived role as "true disciple. Only the term hadn't yet acquired the connotation of "One True Disciple" that would take amplification by his disciples.

Reliability

Already, the priests were balking at unity. Niko and Nitcho once again couldn't make the meeting. Nissho and Nichiro are protesting that the journey is difficult for them. They are all trying to find "stand ins" for themselves and are bargaining as if this were a promise they had made that was an "extra thing" that they could take or leave.

But for Nikko this ceremony, and everything Nichiren had said or done was important. It was important to all of the monks, but Nikko seems to have understood why. Maybe the oral history is true and indeed Nikko was indeed closer to Nichiren. He is indeed the one who kept the closest records of his speeches and sayings. He was the one on hand the most during Nichiren's leactures at Minobu. And you can see referents to Nichiren's distrust of the "Kamakura" priests such as Nissho and Nichiro in letters such as the Gosho "A Warning against Begrudging your Fief":

"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."

The only priests he could have referred to were Nissho and Nichiro. One wonders why he would have considered Nichiro and Nissho "unreliable."

The Esoteric Critique

I believe that Nichiren hadn't trusted this letter to the other priests in Kamakura, because he wanted to keep them from directly confronting the authorities on the subject of Shingon and Tendai and had been trying to maneuver the shogunate into allowing a debate. A Fair Debate would have won over impartial observers and definately won the Nichiren School legitimacy. Which is precisely why the authorities were seeking to avoid such an eventuality. "Unreliable priests" or "loose lips" sinking "ships" would have taken on the authorities in a way that would have made it impossible for Shijo Kingo to win over his lord. It wasn't that Nichiren didn't rely on Nissho and Nichiro, it's just that Nichiren knew that these people were so enthusiastic they might not be able to keep their ideas until the right moment. Nichiren trusted them to carry out his will in Kamakura, but wasn't so sure they understood the national dimension of the battle. This certainly is my take on what happened after Nichiren's death. I can't believe that Nichiren ever formally appointed Nikko chief priest because otherwise what the five elder priests did would be incomprehensible. What I think happened instead was that Nichiren assumed that his disciples would continue operating in synch -- and they didn't. With the betrayal and death of Sanmibo, Nichiren had lost the one person he relied on most in Kamakura.

As senior priests, Nissho and Nichiro were trusted to lead efforts in Kamakura. If Nichiren didn't trust Nissho, he hadn't told him so. Nissho was senior in age and rank and Nikko was probably supposed to defer to him on some issues. But Nikko and Nichiro were nearly the same age and nearly the same rank. As Junior priests, Nichiji and Nitcho were entrusted to support the efforts of all of the others (which they endeavered to do). Niko too had been intended to be based in Mobara and carry out shakubuku efforts from there. Each of them had an established base of operations and their own branch temple. If the Daishonin had intended Niko to be the chief rector of Minobu he'd have called for him sooner and said so explicitly. With Nikko all he needed (at least so one would think) was the status quo ante to continue. Thus some of what the Fuji School later developed, may well be based not just on his sense that he was the one who understood his masters teachings the best but also on the actual facts of the succession at the moment it occured.7

Disunity and Unilateralism

You can also tell how seriously Nissho and Nichiro took the "rotational system by what happens next. No sooner than they made the revised agreement, than they decided not to take even that seriously. For Nissho and Nichiro, the political centers were where the action was. Nichiren's grave. was soon to fall into serious disrepair.

Jacqueline stone writes:

"After Nichiren's death, in accordance with his wishes, the six senior disciples established a rotating custodianship of his grave on Mt. Minobu. Each of the six was to watch over the grave for two months out of the year. However, each had his own local following to attend to, and those in Kamakura had to contend with suppression from bakufu officials, which had been renewed following Nichiren's death. The watch was soon reduced from two months to one, and additional monks were added to the rotation. For logistical reasons, these additional monks came largely from among Nikko's followers, who were based chiefly in Kai and Suruga provinces. Even with these modifications, however, the watch proved difficult to maintain. Within two years, the custodianship system seems to have broken down entirely. When Nikko arrived at Minobu in 1284 for the founders third annual memorial service (that is, two years after Nichiren's death), he found the gravesite desolate and neglected and resolved to reside permanently on the mountain in order to protect it."8

Nitcho and Niko hadn't been able to make the first annual service, (which was 100 days after Nichiren's death. Apparantly the second anniversary service was more successful. But then everyone decided to stay at home? Nikko had to use his own disciples to "fill in" for the other leading priests. The others didn't seem to feel it necessary to 'honor' their commitment to "tend the grave." So at the time that Nikko and his disciples were putting their efforts into preaching to layfolks, and teaching acolytes and other disciples, and Nissho should have been among them, taking his turn tending Nichiren's grave. What was he doing instead?

A Person of Wisdom

In the Gosho "The Embankments of Faith" written to the wife (Sennichi Ama) of Abutsubo Shonin, probably in 1275, Nichiren writes:

"Slander can be either minor or serious, however, and sometimes we should overlook it rather than attack it.The True Word and Tendai schools slander the Lotus Sutra and should be severely rebuked. But without great wisdom it is hard to differentiate correctly between their doctrines and the teachings that Nichiren spreads. Therefore, at times we refrain from attacking them, just as I did in "On Establishing the Correct Teaching for the Peace of the Land"

Now, his "less reliable" Kamakura disciples probably never saw this Gosho on the Embankments of faith, and while Nichiren had not publicly attacked the Tendai School, Nichiren had indeed written a number of Gosho that were severely criticial of it and the Shingon School. He had also instructed his disciples to keep those teachings secret or to save them for a future public debate. Apparantly Nissho hadn't been listening to this advice.

In the Gosho "Teaching Practice and Proof" written to Sanmibo, Nichiren had given permission to refute Shingon in Debate:

"No matter which school you may debate, if the teachings of the True Word school are mentioned,clearly refute that school's distorted views6

However, Nichiren is giving dispension to refute those beliefs in public debate. He clearly was being carefull about what he was saying in public. There were good reasons for this. As noted previously, it is also unclear about how much he trusted his leading disciples in Kamakura with his doctrines. Nissho or Nichiro were not picked as leading disciples because they were perfect human beings, but because of their seniority and devotion. Sanmibo may have known about these concerns, but he was dead. As anyone involved in any organization knows, age and seniority don't always come with common sense.

Revising the Rissho Ankoku

What happened was that, instead of visiting Minobu in 1283 and 1284,(the third anniversary and the fourth one) Nissho Shonin spent 1283 working on a rewrite of the Rissho Ankoku Ron. Daniel Montgomery recounts that he was a "gentle man" who would have preferred a life of scholarship to vigorous missionary activity. Nissho was himself a scholar and had once been Nichiren's classmate. He had heard Nichiren's gradually evolving criticisms of the established schools, the difficulties of the Government in the face of the severe "Mongol" menace, and wanted to take some action to bring about a rectivation of the situation. Doubtless he had participated in some of the debates such as the ones conducted by Toki Jonin or the now dead Sanmibo and absorbed their message. In any case he must have believed that it would be fulfilling the Daishonin's dream if this Rissho Ankoku Ron were to be resubmitted, so naturally he included these explicit criticisms of Tendai and Shingon in the rewrite. He was only exercising an "editorial privelage" that other priests would exercise with decreasing legitimacy over the succeeding years. I'm sure he had hopes, that after the Mongol Invasion and other demonstrations of the truths of Nichiren's earlier prophesy that they might this time listen.

Like most ideas that seem good at the time they are fist thought of, it may not have been such a good idea to do this. Nichiren's Rissho Ankoku Ron had concentrated on the errors of the teachers Honen and the schools Zen and Nembutsu. These were "outside" the established sect system. The Tendai and Shingon both had Imperial sanction and were considered completely orthodox by most people. Apparantly he did this unilaterally. And you can tell that Nikko at least had reservations about this because of his cryptic remarks in one letter he writes inquiring about the results. when Nikko criticizes the condition of Nichiren's gravesite, we can also infer that he is also criticizing the condition of Nichirenism and Nissho's revised Rissho Ankoku Ron. Nikko could not have come out and criticized him directly -- and that was a shame because Nichiren had warned about the dangers involved in the remonstrations Nissho was preparing to put into writing. Nissho wasn't prepared for the resulting storm.

(see my pages on Nissho) and Nikko.

Bungling

Sure enough the results were disasterous. Up until this point Nichiren's disciples hoped to stage a debate ala Dengyo or T'ien-t'ai and win over the Bakufu and "kenmitsu taisei" organized religious groups to Nichiren's teachings. However, this revision by making Nichiren's critiques of Tendai and Shingon explicit and public had the opposite effect from that intended.

Just as with Nichiren DaiShonin's original submission, this one also brought out a mob which tried to burn down the Hamado hermitage. Nissho calmed them down by telling them that he was a loyal Tendai priest who simply wanted to reform Tendai Buddhism. Nissho and Nichiro also used the argument that they were simply Tendai reformers and were not trying to establish an illegal sect when the War Minister Yoritsuna again tried to suppress Nichiren Buddhism in 1285. War Minister Yoritsuna demanded that they join the other sects in praying for the peace of the Hojo family (who controlled the Kamakuran Shogunate). In order to protect the fledgeling Nichiren Buddhist community in Kamakura, Nissho and Nichiro relented and participated in the prayers, though they did petition for a debate with the other schools.

If Nissho and Nichiro hadn't been willing to face the consequence of their criticizing Tendai and Shingon they should have left Nichiren's original document as it was. Now they had to deal with pressure from the Tendai Sect to go along with already existing pressure from Shingon, Zen and Nembutsu. Nissho had been foolish to engage in criticism he was unwilling to back up. At the same time, he technically was a Tendai Priest, and in fact, Nichiren's teachings were far more filial to Dengyo's Hokke (Lotus Sutra) teachings, than the Mikkyo teachings of Jikaku Daishi that were favored by Tendai, and so they had a strong claim to be "reformers." At the same time Nichiren was a teacher of "Mappo" and Saicho a teacher of "Shoho", and what Nichiren was teaching was indeed radically different from Tendai. It was unfilial to Nichiren to claim to be simple "Tendai Reformers." So when Nikko was complaining about the priests who were not tending Nichiren's grave, he was indirectly criticizing them for the bungled way that they resubmitted the Rissho Ankoku Ron.

Compared to the upright and fearless response of Nichiren to threats of persecution this was cowardly, and after a few years of trying to find ways to defend it it became part of the disgust that Nikko Shonin later would demonstrate towards his colleagues in Kamakura. Now Tendai and Shingon teachers had bruised feelings, no way to rationalize accommodation to Nichirenism and thus the beginnings of a problematic and often violent relationship that was to continue to the modern era with not just Zen, Jodo, and Ritsu -- all of whom had been criticized within the existing religious framework, but now with the Tendai Sect, Shingon, and the Bakufu (Shoguns) themselves. Had they left the document alone, and tried to bring about a debate without displaying their hand they could not only have successfully defeated the priests of those sects in debate -- which they had already demonstrated they could do at the temple level repeatedly. They could have provided a rationalization for admitting Nichirenism into the legitimate system of primary religion in Japan. After all Nichiren, like Dengyo before him, hadn't seen himself as creating a sect, but as teaching Buddhism. It was a difficult distinction that Nissho had failed to make until backed into a corner. As a result there never was a fair nationally sponsered debate, and it wasn't until the time of Hideyoshi and Nobunaga that any kind of national debate was conducted at all, and that was rigged.

Enter Niko Shonin

Around one year later, in 1285, Niko returns to Minobu to "help" Nikko with his duties there. Nikko was so glad to see him he put him in charge of training acolytes. Nikko wasn't happy with what was going on in Kamakura. Nichiren had expected goo things from his disciples. And Niko and Nikko had worked together well in the past. Nichiren had praised both Niko and Nikko by name; Sadobo and Hokibo, and was titled 'On Itai Doshin'. There was no reason not to expect them to continue to work together. Unfortunately it was not to be so. By 1289, Nikko gave up on Minobu and left.

Leaving Minobu

Unfortunately, when his former disciple "Niko" came to join him at Minobu in 1285, he also contrived to undermine his position vis a vis the owner of the estate the Temple was located on (Mt. Minobu). In the process he won over Lord Hakiri to his side. Lord Hakiri had ambivalent feelings towards the Nembutsu Sect, but even more ambivalent feelings to criticisms from Nikko. He had committed some "infractions" against the dharma, including donations to Nembutsu Temples, a statue of Shakyamuni, and other errors. Nikko had defended him in the past, when the other priests had criticized him, but now Niko not only defended him, contrived a means for Lord Hakiri to save face by making a statue of Shakyamuni and putting a copy of the Lotus Sutra in its hands.

Nikko or his disciples would later summarize their issues as follows �On the Matters That the Believers of the Fuji School Must Know� (Fuji Isseki Monto Zonchi no Koto) (Gosho Zenshu, pp. 1601�09) and �Refuting the Five Senior Priests� (Gonin Shoha Sho) (Gosho Zenshu, pp. 1610�16). According to Nikko Shonin�s account, the five senior priests� errors can be summarized as follows:

1) The five senior priests asserted that the Daishonin�s teachings belong to the Tendai school and that he spread the teaching of the Lotus Sutra, following the teaching of Dengyo.
Strictly speaking, most of Nichiren's teachings did indeed draw on their Tendai Heritage. But Nikko was right to point out that it did not follow that Nichirenism was within the Tendai School. Asserting this was a response to their failure to bring about a genuine debate between the schools.
2) They visited Shinto shrines in various places such as Ise, Mount Izu, Hakone and Kumano.
Religious syncretism would eventually enter the Fuji School as well. But Nichiren had taught that because of slander the Gods had departed the shrines and wouldn't return to them as long as it continued.
3) They regarded copying of the Lotus Sutra as a legitimate practice and encouraged it.
Teaching this was to emphasize the difference in 'praxis' between Tendai and Nichirenism. Believers in Nichirenism signal devotion by chanting the title and words of the Lotus Sutra, not by copying it.
4) They allowed their disciples enter the priesthood and receive the precepts at the Tendai sect�s head temple at Mount Hiei.
The whole purpose for appointing six disciples was to make this unnecessary
5) They called the Daishonin�s letters written in the common language of the time (Japanese phonetic characters) as their teacher�s shame and destroyed them.
All the disciples valued Nichiren's words, but Nissho and Nichiro seem to have emphasized his formal treatises. The most encouraging Gosho are often the shortest and least formal ones. Its a good think Nikko (and Toki) valued them.
6) They made a statue of Shakyamuni and regarded it as an object of devotion.
These last two points were part of a lasting difference between the schools. Over time, the Nikko schools would emphasize the Calligraphic Gohonzon more and more.
7) They disrespected Gohonzon inscribed by the Daishonin, hanging them behind Shakyamuni�s statues, mistreating them by leaving them in a corridor or burying them with bodies or selling them off for profit."

This conflict presaged future conflicts between the schools founded by these individuals. Nikko seems to have valued the Dai-Honzon (even if not the wooden Dai-Gohonzon he definately showed preference for the calligraphic mandala in his letters). Nikko seems to have felt that any representation of Shakyamuni alone was too much a "reification" of the Buddha and that it would be better to worship the calligraphic mandala until such time as other means might be proper. By defending Hakiri, Niko was able to render Nikko's position untenable. The other senior priests were prepared to depose Nikko from his position as defacto head of Minobu, and without Lord Toki's or Lord Hakiri's support Nikko could not avoid this future eventuality, and so Nikko left Kuon-ji and founded new temples at the foot of Mt. Fuji.

Nitcho and Lord Toki

Nitcho was criticized by Nikko Shonin as one of the "five elder priests." This is such a vital part of the legends of Nichiren Shoshu, that my old Gosho reference (Volume One) had a footnote that claimed (more than likely completely unfactually) that Toki Jonin had had a son by Nitcho's mother by the same name as Nitcho, and that it was this son who later went to Omosu Seminary to help Nikko teach there. At the same time the Fuji School refrains from lamblasting Nichijo/Lord Toki and treats his assumption of the role of "one of the five elder priests" with kid gloves. Yet they use Nitcho's testament in favor of Nikko's lineage as "proof" that Nikko had a lineage.

Nitcho had been the chief priest of a Temple granted to him by Lord Toki, who had become a Nyudo even before Nichiren died. After, supposedly catching him drunk, Lord Toki had deposed him and taken over administration of that temple himself. This supposedly happened around the same time that Lord Toki took it on himself to ordain himself using an esoteric Lotus Sutra based ceremony. Daniel Montgomery tells us that Lord Toki was constrained from being ordained by Nitcho supposedly by his Confucian principles (which would have frowned on his step-son ordaining his step-father), but in any case that would have offended Nitcho on the same grounds of respect for hierarchy and seniority. Thus there is no getting around the fact that what Nichijo did, whatever his reasons, was incendiary. Some say that he ordained himself after forcing his nephew to leave. Lord Toki could also have gone to any of the other senior priests. It seems that he was asserting his leadership and equality with all the other six priests. Its no wonder that shortly after Nitcho left. I wonder who could restrain the urge to take a stiff drink at the news that ones step father was leaving the "world" to become a monk. That also would have meant leaving his mother. Toki's lineage would come to be known as the "Nakayama Lineage" and paradoxically would become known for its "strictness."

It also was a symptom of the chaos that had devolved on these disciples, since the whole reason for having six of them was to do ordinations traditionally -- at Minobu. This was shortly after Nikko had been forced from Minobu. So when in 1292 Nitcho left for his home area near Mt. Fuji and Nikko's Taisekiji, he was warmly welcomed. The upshot of this is that Nitcho joined Nikko at Omosu Seminary. Later he is said to have written a reference to Nikko as having been right in the original dispute with the others.

Carving Bailiwicks

Niko happilly installed himself as chief priest of Minobu and took over. As soon as he could he transfered Minobu to one of his own disciples and retired to Mobara. He was buried in Mobara. He was happy to carve his name as successor to Daishonin and his disciples continued that tradition, all the while his real heart remained in Mobara. The priests feigned unity when they got together, but as the incident with the funeral rotation indicates, they weren't really concerned about unity. With the exception of Nikko and his entire lineage, one gets the feeling they weren't even trying. And after Nichimoku Died, the same attitude infected the Fuji School. Each of them, and the next generations after them, seemed determined to carve out their own "bailiwick" as they single mindedly pursued their dreams of Kosenrufu. Eventually the result was that even "Minobu" was reduced to an isolated outpost and the center of the action moved first from Kamakura to Kyoto, and then from Kyoto to Edo in the sixteen hundreds. It wasn't until then that the fortunes of all the early Eastern Provinces bases of operation (Minobu and Taisekiji aren't all that far away) were to be restored. We will discuss that more at the pages Fuji School and Nichirenism

When Nikko began seriously criticizing the "five elder priests" around that time, they all pretended to be surprised. Perhaps that is another reason that Nikko's disciples came to believe they had the "true lineage." and documents were "found" (and later lost again) to prove it (see transfer.html Also see hara.html)

Each of these priests developed their own "bases of operation" into seperate lineages, and each of those lineages in turn later broke into new lineages. They argued about various doctrinal issues, nearly converted Emperors and most of the Capitol Kyoto by the end of the 15th century, and time and time again came close to making a positive difference in Japan. They don't seem to have put any real effort into maintaining unity, but part of that is the age old admonition to "follow the law" not the man. Even so, the result of their rivalries was that the various lineages of priests sometimes betrayed or crossed each other, and often failed to keep their promise to work together to "resolve their differences so that you may speak as one at Eagle Peak."

For the rest of this story, you need to see the pages fujischool.html, read the stories of these two (Nikko and Niko. Later transfer documents would surface which would "prove" that Nichiren had explicitly transfered his lineage to Nikko (see transfer.html). If so these others grossly ignored him. One Priest nippo.html, firmly straddled the line between the lineages. He went with Nikko to Taisekiji-ji, but then returned, first to his temple on Mt. Shichimen, and then to build an ecumenical temple in Kamakura at the place of Nichiren's near beheading. He also is credited with creating Nichiren Shoshu's object of worship, the Dai-Gohonzon.

A Legacy of Accomplishment

Even so, they did their best to carry on Nichiren's legacy. They travelled to the far reaches of Japan to its Capitols, petitioned Shogun and Emperor. Nichiji even went as far as Mongolia in his zeal to propagate the Lotus Sutra. They created a religion that can only be called "Nichirenism.". For more on their legacy follow the links provided.

To continue the story from here visit either my Fuji School page, or my Nichirenism page

For more see:
nichirenism.html for a discussion of Nichiren Schools and their history
nichirenism.html | back to index | fujischool.html

Footnotes

  1. Fire in the Lotus page 143
  2. Fire in Lotus page 144
  3. http://campross.crosswinds.net/Ryuei/HokkeShu_01.html
  4. Senchu Muranohttp://la.nichirenshu.org/nichiren/eden/eden-16.htm"
  5. The source for this is Graham Lamont's translation of a work by Nichiju Shonin, at this website: http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Bridge/7743/nichijuu1.html
  6. Ibid, also "fire in the Lotus"
  7. also:"A Warning against Begrudging one's Fief" written in 1277:
  8. Senchu Murano:http://la.nichirenshu.org/history/nikkowronglydesignatedfoundernichirenshoshu.htm
  9. Original Enlightenment and the Transformation of Medieval Buddhism pages 334-336
  10. Quotes are from the Gosho:http://www.sgi-usa.org/buddhism/library/Nichiren/wnd/concord/pages.view/476.html
  11. The rest of the links in here are provided as URL's to the sources.

Links and sources

For more see nichirenism.html
Further readings:
On Nichiren:
http://www.bea.hi-ho.ne.jp/sigong-12472/nichiren.htm
http://www.garyrossproductions.com/samples/uhfs/uhfschap.pdf
Senchu Murano's version of things: http://la.nichirenshu.org/history/history.htm#chapterVIseniorDisciples
Sources also include "Fire in the Lotus", Jacqueline Stone's essays and books, and several biographies of Nichiren and histories of Nichirenism.
Other links and sources are embedded in the pages
Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1