Total Pageviews

Saturday, April 21, 2018

The Bizarre Buddhism of Nichkan ,SGI and Nichiren Shoshu

SGI members see what they want to see and believe what they want to believe. They have not delved deeply into the truth of even their own teachings. Perhaps I can help them.

Nichikan wrote: 

"We recite the Hoben Pon (2nd chapter) to smash the provisional sutras, we recite the Juryo Hon (16th Chapter) to smash the Hoben Pon, and we recits the daimoku to smash the Lotus Sutra".

Nichiren wrote:

“Nowhere in all the five thousand or seven thousand volumes of sutras listed in the K’ai-yüan era catalog do we find a single scriptural passage that expresses disapproval of the Lotus Sutra and advises one to discard it or to cast it aside, nor any passage that says it is to be classified among the sundry practices and abandoned. If you disagree, you had better find some reliable passage from the sutras that will support your view, so that you may rescue Shan-tao and Honen from their torments in the hell of incessant suffering."(Coversations Between a Sage and Unenlightened Man).

Yet you do Gongyo and chant the Daimoku every day to this slanderer's Gohonzon. Why would you ever think for a moment that you too could escape the torments of hell?

In the "Toke Sanne Sho [On the Three Robes of Nichiren Shoshu]," Nichikan Shonin cites Nikko Shonin and Nichimoku Shonin as the Treasure of the Priest when revealing the Three Treasures of Nichiren Shoshu, and then states, "I say that all the Masters, the successive direct successors to the bestowal of the Law, are in this way included in the Three Treasures." (Seiten, p. 971)

Nichikan's Six Volume Writings" (Rokkan sho) is composed of the following: 

1)."The Threefold Secret Teaching" (Sanju hiden sho): In this writing Nichikan exhorts us us to abandon the Lotus Sutra and only embrace Namu Myoho renge kyo. This is bizarre since Namu myoho renge kyo means devotion to the Lotus Sutra (Myoho renge kyo).

2)."The Meanings Hidden in the Depths" (Montei hichin sho). In this equally bizarre writing he changes the Great Secret Law of the Object of Worship in terms of the person from the Original Eternal Buddha Shakyamuni to Nichiren Daishonin.

3)."Interpretations Based on the Law" (Egi hanmon sho). In this equally strange writing, Nichikan teaches that the Lotus Sutra was preached by Shakyamuni to explain Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism rather than Nichiren Daishonin explaining the Lotus Sutra through his commentaries. 

4)."Teachings for the Latter Day" (Mappo soo sho). In this writing, Nichikan attempts to overturn the use of statues as Objects of Worship despite the fact that Nichiren utilized and revered a Statue of Shakyamuni Buddha as an Object of Worship throughout his life, praised both Dozenbo, Toki Jonin, and Shijo Kingo for fashioning statues of Shakyamuni Buddha, and wrote about both "wooden and painted" images.

5)."The Practice of this School" (Toryu gyoji sho). In this slanderous writing, Nichikan says we chant the Daimoku to smash the Juryo Chapter and chant the Juryo Chapter to smash the Hobenpon. 

6). The "Toke Sanne Sho" (The Three Robes of this School) explains the origin and significance of the traditional gray robe, the white surplice and the prayer beads of the Nichiren Shoshu priests. Here, he also goes on to overturn the Three Treasures of the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren by asserting that Nichiren is the Treasure of the Buddha and that the heritage of the Law, the succession, is through the bequethal to one sole individual or the successive High Priests of Nichiren Shoshu (the Treasure of the Sangha). On the Juzu, he wrote:

"The Juzu is a means to guide persons of inferior capacity and force them into ascetic practices." 

"Juzu require an eye-opening ceremony before use. This can be done at your local temple." (Six Volume Writings," Rokkan-sho, p. 225) 

The Ryokkan Sho, far from being an Enlightened writing, is a bizarre writing.

Nichiren Daishonin, on the other hand, writes:

"When the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai applied the simile of ghee to the Lotus Sutra, basing himself on a passage in the Nirvana Sutra, he declared that among all the sutras the Lotus Sutra is worthy to be compared to ghee. The True Word teaching was introduced to China from India two hundred years or more after the time of T’ien-t’ai. How then could T’ien-t’ai possibly have stolen the ghee of the True Word teaching and called it the ghee of the Lotus Sutra? Of all strange events, this would be the strangest!

What evidence is there then for calling persons who lived two hundred years or more before the True Word teaching was even introduced to China thieves? Are we to put faith in these writings of the Great Teacher Kobo? Or are we to put faith in the Nirvana Sutra where the Buddha likens the Lotus Sutra to ghee?

If we are to regard the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai as a thief, then how are we to interpret this passage in the Nirvana Sutra? And if we accept the passage in the Nirvana Sutra as reliable and conclude that the writings of Kobo (Nichikan) are incorrect, then what are we to think of people who put faith in such erroneous teachings? All I can say is that one should compare the writings of the Great Teacher Kobo (Nichikan) and the pronouncements of the Buddha, and then put one’s faith in the one that proves to be correct." (On Prayer).

"But those who follow the teachings of Nichiren honestly discard the mistaken doctrines of the provisional teachings and the incorrect theories of the mistaken teachers, and, with all sincerity, put their faith in the correct teaching and the correct doctrines of the correct teacher. Accordingly they are able to gain the lotus of the entity and to manifest the mystic principle of the entity of the Land of Eternally Tranquil Light. This is because they put their faith in the golden words of the Buddha indicated in the “Life Span” chapter of the essential teaching and chant Namu-myoho-renge-kyo."(Entity of the Mystic Law)

Since the SGI fails, on this one vital criteria of putting "their faith in the golden words of the Buddha indicated in the “Life Span” chapter of the essential teaching", their land is the land of devils and hardships and not the Land of Eternally Quiescent Light. Wherever the teachings of the SGI spread, the people suffer and more tragedies and calamities occur. On the other hand, even one true practicer of the Lotus Sutra in a city or a country will bring good fortune and peace to the people.

Nichikan also wrote:

"The three groups of shomon disciples 
accumulated good fortune since sanzen 
jintengo [before being guaranteed 
enlightenment), and those who received 
the seed and reached enlightenment on 
hearing the first chapter of the Lotus 
Sutra accumulated good fortune since 
Gohyaku jintengo. How possibly could 
those who first received the seed during 
the lifetime of the Buddha all without 
exception achieve enlightenment in a 
mere two-thousand years? [They 
couldn't!] The reason is this: the 
effectiveness of Shakyamuni's teachings 
begins at Kuon Ganjo, but ends with the 
two-thousand years of the Former and 
Middle Days of the Law. ... Therefore 
the people of the Latter Day of the Law 
all innately have yet to possess the seed 
and so are of the capacity to receive the 
original seed of enlightenment directly." 
(Rokkan-sho, p.110)

Who can understand such nonsense? He is like SGI leaders. Nichikan just makes things up out of thin air. What ever pops into his head he writes and calls it the True Teachings. Nichiren says about such men who fail to preach with Sutra in hand, even though they be great bodhisattvas, don't listen to them. Nichikan wasn't even a Bodhisattva. He was a madman and he inscribed the Gohonzon to which SGI members fuse. How could every last member of the SGI fail to become a madman? Here is more proof.

Nichikan writes in his Montei Hichin-Sho ["The Teachings Hidden in the Depths of the Text"]: 

"Therefore know this: *"One of Perfect Freedom"* is His true state  (honchi). Bodhisattva Jogyo is His transient reflection. And Nichiren is the manifestation of His true state (kenpon).

Nichiren Daishonin never revealed it and he never held back anything. Nichiren Shonin teaches that his true identity is that of Jogyo and hidden in the depths of the Juryohon is that he, as well as we, are Three Bodied Tathagatas, one with the Original Eternal Buddha Shakyamuni, our original teacher.

The Juryo (16) and Jinriki Chapters (21) of the Lotus Sutra and the Goshos, the Entity of the Mystic Law (Totaigi Sho), The Opening of the Eyes, The True Object of Worship, and Repaying Debts of Gratitude, explain why the Nichikan Gohonzon is a demon infested condition for the ruin of the individual, the nation, and the world.

'I likewise am the Father of the World, 
The One who saves 
from the various sufferings and travails" (Lotus Sutra Chapter 16)

"At that time the Buddha spoke to Superior Practices and the others in the great assembly of bodhisattvas, saying: "The supernatural powers of the Buddhas, as you have seen, are immeasurable, boundless, inconceivable. If in the process of entrusting this sutra to others I were to employ these supernatural powers for a immeasurable, boundless hundreds, thousands, ten thousands, millions of asamkhya kalpas to describe the benefits of the sutra, I could never finish doing so. To put it briefly, all the doctrines possessed by the Thus Come One, the storehouse of all the secret essentials of the Thus Come One - all these are proclaimed, revealed, and clearly expounded in this sutra. (Lotus Sutra Chapter 21)

Nichiren comments on this passage:

Answer: In this passage, Shakyamuni Buddha explains that he is entrusting to the Bodhisattvas of the Earth, his original disciples, the five characters of Myoho-renge-kyo, which is the essence of the Lotus Sutra. Shakyamuni, who attained enlightenment countless kalpas in the past, says elsewhere, "By now the original vows that I made have already been fulfilled. I have converted all living beings and caused them all to enter the Buddha way." Thus, he has already fulfilled his earlier vow. Then, intending to charge his disciples with the task of accomplishing widespread propagation in the fifth five hundred years after his death," he called forth the Bodhisattvas of the Earth and entrusted them with the heart of the sutra, the lotus of the entity of the essential teaching. This passage represents the ultimate purpose for which Shakyamuni Buddha appeared in the world, the secret Law that he attained in the place of meditation. It is this passage that gives proof of the lotus of the entity that, for those of us who live in the Latter Day of the Law, assures the attainment of Buddhahood in both the present and future." 

Accordingly, at the present time in the Latter Day of the Law, other than the envoy of the Thus Come One, there can be no one who understands and produces this passage as proof of the lotus of the entity. Truly it is a passage of secret meaning. Truly it is a matter of great concern. Truly it is to be honored and admired. Namu-myoho-renge-kyo, Namu-myoho-renge-kyo!" (Entity of the Mystic Law)

"Answer: 'One: Japan and so on to the whole of Jambudvipa should uniformly take the Master of teachings Lord Shakya of the Original Doctrine as the Object of Worship." (Repaying Debts of Gratitude)

Now, when the Eternal Buddha was revealed in the essential section of the Lotus Sutra, this world of endurance (Saha-world) became the Eternal Pure Land, indestructible even by the three calamities of conflagration, flooding, and strong winds, which are said to destroy the world. It transcends the four periods of cosmic change: the kalpa of construction, continuance, destruction and emptiness. Sakyamuni Buddha, the Lord-preacher of this pure land, has never died in the past, nor will He be born in the future. He exists forever throughout the past present and future. All those who receive His guidance are one with this Eternal Buddha. (Opening of the Eyes)

In the same chapter, another passage reads: ‘The duration of My Life, which I obtained through the practice of the way of bodhisattvas, has not yet expired. It is twice as long as the length of time stated above: 500 dust-particle kalpa.’ This reveals the bodhisattva realm within our minds. The bodhisattvas described in the fifteenth chapter, ‘Appearance of Bodhisattvas from Underground,’ who have sprung out of the great earth, as numerous as the number of dust-particles of 1,000 worlds, are followers of the Original Buddha Sakyamuni who resides within our minds." (The True Object of Worship)

Nichikan asked us to abandon Shakyamuni Buddha and the Lotus Sutra. This is the purport of his Object of Worship. The Nichikan Gohonzon is neither based on the Lotus Sutra (Myoho renge kyo) nor on Shakyamuni Buddha of the Juryo Chapter of the Lotus Sutra. It is not based on the teachings of Nichiren Daishonin. Chanting to this Gohonzon is as if you were to take and revere the offering of a sumptuous meal from the murderer of your parents or praising the one who has kidnapped your child. You along with the offender (Nichikan) will both fall into the Lower Realms and the Sutra's promise of peace and security in this life and a fortunate birth in the next will allude you.

Further Proof of my assertion is the fact that SGI would take up this Gohonzon as their banner of propagation in the first place; the bizarre worldview of the SGI where Daisaku Ikeda is revered and praised at the expense of the Sutra, the Buddha, and Nichiren Daishonin; the misfortune that invariably befalls its leaders; and the lack of insight of the general members.

If you send me your Nichikan or Nichinyo Gohonzon, we will see to it that it is burned respectfully as an offering to Devedatta, the Ten Demon Daughters, the Lotus Sutra, and Shakyamuni Buddha or you may burn it yourself while reciting the Daimoku and the Jiga-ge for the repose of Nichikan, the greatest destroyer of Buddhism in human history

For Shinkei... they can chant the Daimoku day and night but that still doesn't make them Nichiren Buddhists

Someone on the Independent Sangha wrote:

"This is a point that is not only in Nichiren Buddhism - the Christians, the Jews, and other religions have broken down into different ways in which to practice. Hence sects in Buddhism. people imho strive to be individuals, unique - I am not sure many wake up and say I want to be part of a group where we all do the exact same thing. Go to a Jehova meeting, white shirts, women in dresses, the main person reading on stage reads from their bible or watchtower. they are carbon copies of each other. they do not have branches, sects or any differences between them. actually I think they are the only whole religion in the world. what you are saying sounds to me like you feel that the only way for Buddhism to be whole is be all the same. I say how boring. no need for conversation, or questions... squash all seeking spirits. Just follow the one in front of you and if you turn around the one behind is doing the same so it does not matter which direction you are going it is all the same. rather than be carbon copies why not just stop fighting? Isn't fighting anti-Buddhist? Respect and metta - compassion and understanding will bring light to Buddhism.' 

Response: 

Correcting wrong thought is the practice of the Bodhisattvas of the Earth in the Latter Day. It was the practice of Shakyamuni Buddha and Nichiren Daishonin. Lets take your idea to its logical conclusion...One school or individual decides it's ok to chant the Daimoku and to worship Amida Buddha. This person or sect calls itself Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism or "I am a Nichiren Buddhist" because they chant the Daimoku of the Lotus Sutra. Many people will get the insanely wrong idea that this is correct and some will even be led to believe that Nichiren Daishonin believed that all teachings lead to Buddhahood. Another places a statue of Jesus on the altar and instructs others that individual destiny is shaped by a greater being . This person too, erroneously believes that as long as one chants the Daimoku he is a Nichiren Buddhist. Yet another is a Japanese militarist like Ishiwara who believes and teaches that Japan has a mandate to spread the Daimoku by whatever means. He assembles several divisions of zealous youth, arms them to the teeth and indoctrinates them with the Lotus Sutra teachings, "We do not value our own lives, we value only the Supreme Way." He leads them on a crusade against the Chinese heretics to convert them to the Daishonin's teachings. He not only calls himself a Nichiren Buddhist but others maintain that he is a great Wheel Turning King of Japan born to protect the Law by forcibly infusing and diffusing the teachings that have originated in Japan.* If you really study the teachings of Nichiren Daishonin and take the teachings of the Lotus Sutra to heart, you can never come to the interpretations and conclusions of these men. I would argue that they can chant the Daimoku day and night but that still doesn't make them Nichiren Buddhists. Those who continue to argue that all are Nichiren Buddhists who chant the Daimoku, regardless of their beliefs, will quickly destroy the sublime teachings of the Lotus Sutra. Anyone who fails to take the Lotus Sutra, Shakyamuni Buddha of the Juryo Chapter, and Nichiren Daishonin as teachers and who fails to take their teachings to heart, can not be considered a Nichiren Buddhist. We are all individuals by virtue of causes and conditions. This does not change by embracing the same Law, practice, and faith as Nichiren Daishonin. Damson, apple, pear and cherry blossoms are all flowers. They all grow from the earth and they are all nourished by a single shower of rain.

*One may only take up arms in defending the true Law and the believers. Nichiren taught that the way to spread the true Law is through a horizontal transmission [though the people] and vertical transmission [through converting the sovereign]. The vertical transmission too, according to Nichiren, is based on a constitution or decree of the sovereign making the Lotus Sutra the national religion. Both horizontal and vertical transmission is based on compassion, dialogue, and debate.

No benefit in chanting the Daimoku while slandering the Lotus Sutra

Namaste : I was looking at a Indo-European Language Chart. It began at Proto Indo-European then went to Indo-Iranian, then to Indic, then to Vedic Sanskrit, then it had two languages that were not separated by a line, they were Classical Sanskrit & Middle Indic (Pali, Prakrits). Why was this chart this way, is it because they are so similar? Narapati m. Pali-English English-Pali | Pali grammar | Pali Alphabet 
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 

Nagara - m. city. Naagarika - urban. Naama - n. name, mind. Namo - ind. honour. Narapati - m. king. Naar( - f. woman. Nara - m. man. Naatha - m. lord, refuge. „aati - m. relative. Nattu - m. nephew. „aatu - m. knower. Naavaa - f. ship, boat. Naavika - m. navigator. Nava - nine. Navama - ninth. Navuti - ninety. Netu - m. leader. Niraahaara - without food. N(ca - mean, low. Nicaya - n. accumulation. Nidahati - (ni + daha) lays aside. Nidhaaya - ind. p.p. having left aside. Nigacchati - (ni + gamu) goes away. Nigama - m. town, market N(harati - (n( + hara) takes away, removes. Nikkhamati - (ni + kamu) departs. Nikkha.nati - (ni +kha.na) buries. N(la - adj. blue. N(rasa - sapless, tasteless. N(roga - healthy. Nis(dati - (ni + sada) sits. Nitta.nho - arahant (Desireless One). Nivattati - (ni + vatu) ceases. 

Namaste or Namo transliterates into Namu (Indo-Aryan Prakrits.) not Nam there simply is no justification for the transliteration of Namaste to Nam . Nam can only be found in the Vietmamese dictionary meaning "burnt". 

Viet-nam or nam of Vietnam meaning possibly to go to a southern region or area, going south. To Chant Nam would not mean devotion to the law but would translate to mean burnt- Myohorengekyo or I guess possibly going south. If you find a english to Viet'nam'ese dictionary you will find this to be the case. 

Namah; Pali: Namo; to submit oneself to, from to bend, bow to, make obeisance, pay homage to; an expression of submission to command, complete commitment, reverence, devotion, trust for salvation, etc. -- Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms; with Sanskrit and Sanskrit -Pali index. William Edward Soothill & Lewis Hodous (page 298) 

If you study the religions or history of India the origin of Namaste (Namah; Pali: Namo) a sanskrit language from a time before the birth of the Buddha. Namo was used as above. Nam is not a correct translation in any way shape or form. Nam simple has no origin or relation to Namaste and completely alters the meaning and invocation of the title of the Lotus Sutra. 

Namaste (num'e sta'), n. a conventional Hindu expression on meeting or parting, used by the speaker usually while holding his palms together vertically in front of the bosom. [?]  -- Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary (page.949) 

Transliterate; to change (letters, words, etc.) into corresponding characters of another alphabet or language: to transliterate the greek --Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary. (page. 1505) 

Transliterate; To represent (letters or words)in the characters of another alphabet. The American Heritage Dictionary. (page. 719) 

Translation; 1.The rendering of something into another language. 2.a version a different language: a french translation of hamlet. 3. change or conversion to another form, appearse, etc.; transformation: a swift translation of thought into action. 4. act or process of translating; stateof being translated. 5. Mech. motion in which all particles of a body movewith the same velocity along parallel paths. 6. Telegraghy. the retransmitting or forwarding of a message, as by rely. 7. Math. a function obtained from a given function by adding the same constant to each value of the variable of the given function and moving the graph of the function a constant distance to the right or left.  -- Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary. (page 1505) 

Translational, adj--- translationally, adv-syn 2. Translation, paraphrase, version refer to a rewording of something. A translation is a rendering of the same ideas in a different language from the original: a translation from Greek into English. A paraphrase is a free rendering of the sense of a passage in other words, usually in the same language: a paraphrase of a poem. A version is a translation,esp. of the Bible, or else an account of something illustrating a particular point of view: the Douy Version. -- Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary. (page 1505) 

If someone still can not understand that Nam simply has no origin in any prakrit or sanskirt language that has any relation to the transliteration from Namha, namo, namaste to nam , it can only be from not wanting to see the truth or just ignorance of the process of learning or thinking. Lets look at the thinking process based on a linguistic's point of view. 

What are the pros & cons. of the eclectic approach vs. the theory base approach? 

Namo ind. honour. Narapati m. If you are eclectic, you take in all the data you can and you ask all the questions you can think of, and you try to synthesis what you know. Because there is no particular direction to the questions you ask, you may ask interesting questions that will not occur to others. You may see facts which others will not see. The difficulty will be in knowing why or how these facts are important or whether they hang together. 

If you are theory-based, the theory tells you what facts to look for and what questions to ask. It provides a framework for your synthesis, and thus allows you to synthesize more neatly, and with less effort (because you are excluding irrelevancies). However, there will be some things that you never notice because the theory doesn't tell you to look for them. The theory will tell you to look in other places for other facts, and thus allow you to give a better description in some ways, at the same time as it may prevent you from finding some relevant things. 

Clearly, a mixture of the two is preferable: a framework gives you something to hang your work onto, but you don't want to be so blinkered that you can't see beyond the framework. 

In a theory-based approach, you have to try to find the answer to the question you are working on by using only the tools made available by the (latest version of) a particular theory. If the theory is appropriate for this domain of research and already accounts for a lot of other data within the same domain, then it just might be sufficient to solve your problem as well. 

In practice, theories dealing with complex phenomena are probably never perfect. We hope that they get better with time, but every improvement raises new questions and opens up new avenues of research. 

In the eclectic approach, you suppose that the most satisfactory answer to your question cannot be found in the latest version of your theory, so you look elsewhere and if you think you have found the answer elsewhere, you try to combine the new idea with the theory you already have. Nowadays there are millions of scientists around the world working on different theories of various phenomena. Sometimes these phenomena overlap with each other, e.g. biologists and chemists are both interested in the processes that are involved in creating life. So in such cases, it seems quite possible that one group can have the answer that another group is looking for, even without knowing it. n. name, mind. 

Namo ind. honour. What you're looking at is, of course, an oversimplification, as any such diagram would have to be. Old Indic (or, more properly, Old Indo-Aryan) was, like all well-established languages, a bundle of dialects, only of few of which are represented by what is commonly called `Vedic Sanskrit'. The others properly go under the generic label `Prakrit' (whose literal meaning is roughly `common language' as opposed to Sanskrit, which means `refined language'). Just about the only reason `Prakrit' typically appears on such charts as a label for certain varieties of Middle Indo-Aryan as opposed to Old Indo-Aryan is that it's only in the Middle Indo-Aryan period (roughly 1000 B.C.E. to 1000 C.E.) that you begin to get written records in Prakrit, as opposed to occasional Prakrit words or expressions getting into documents written primarily in Sanskrit. 

On the other side of the coin, once you get past about 1000 B.C.E. the language referred to as `Vedic Sanskrit' has developed into the language `Classical Sanskrit', so `Classical Sanskrit' is pretty much contemporary with Pali, Apabhramsa, Magadhi, and the other Middle Indo-Aryan Prakrits. The difference is that the Prakrits were *living* languages, as are the Modern Indo-Aryan languages like Hindi and Bengali: children were routinely learning them from their families and friends, and people were using them as all-purpose means of communication. Sanskrit, on the other hand, had turned into a literary language; few if any people learned it as their first language, but rather used it for very formal, elevated, or elite conversation and writing. It had become something like Latin in Mediaeval Western Europe -- and still to some extent has that status today. And so `Sanskrit' is never considered a `Middle Indo-Aryan' language, even though the `Classical' period of the language's *literary* history was coeval with the period that the Middle Indo-Aryan languages were being spoken, because most of the vocabulary and grammar of Classical Sanskrit was consciously based on that of the Vedic period, when Sanskrit had itself been a living language in the fullest sense of the term. 

There's no question that Sanskrit and Prakrit are very similar. Both are descended from Old Indo-Aryan, and almost all Sanskrit-speakers in any age have also of necessity been Prakrit-speakers. And, especially in the usage of the educated classes, because of the status that Sanskrit enjoys in the Hindu world the similarity is going to be emphasized; it's been said that any word that is a possible word in Sanskrit is ipso facto also a possible word in Hindi. So there would always be strong tendencies to keep the two types of language recognizably similar (while still maintaining the indications of class distinction that they imply; for instance, unlike the Prakrits Sanskrit never lost the Proto-Indo-European dual number or the three distinct past tenses, these being felt to be distinctive markers of an elite, highly civilized language). But it would be incorrect to say that the Middle Indo-Aryan Prakrits evolved out of Vedic Sanskrit; it would be more correct to say that they evolved out of Old Indo-Aryan Prakrits (of which we have *almost* no record), with a little bit of infusion from Sanskrit. 

The next section is I believe a good personal experience and further explanation of this issue. In my mind this ends anymore doubt to the controversy of whether to Chant Nam or Namu. Otherwise I can only conclude that a persons thinking process is not able to comprehend a basic documented fact that is backed up by all the known transliterations, dictionaries and literary proof. Also notwithstanding the testimonies of linguist and scholars in every direction. 

Great Vowel Shift 

From the Hokkedaimokusho ("On the Title of the Lotus Sutra"), Nichiren propagates the sacred formula "Namu Myoho Renge Kyo" (not Nam Myoho Renge Kyo) as being infallible as a means to achieve Buddhahood. "When the Buddha preached the Lotus Sutra, he disclosed the basket of all sutras. At this time living beings of the nine worlds saw for the first time the treasure of the basket of all sutras of forty years [period of Buddha's preaching]. 

"Is not, however, the title of the Lotus Sutra the heart of the 80,000 (i.e. all) sacred scriptures and the eye of all the Buddhas?" 

Nichiren said that we should chant the title of the Lotus Sutra wholeheartedly, in purity of mind,  stimulated by the wondrous recitation of the formula of Avalokitesvara (Chap. 25 of the Lotus Sutra). Attention has to be paid even to the sound of the utterance in order to gain deep joy and peace. Salvation by faith in a sacramental efficacy of "Namu 

Myoho Renge Kyo" which Nichiren propagates, and this activity for lay believers who cannot penetrate into the fine delicacies of the Sutra, can engage with their body and mind by recitation of the Title of the Sutra and the Sutra itself. 

"They have to regard it more delightful than a blind-born man who opens his eyes for the first time and sees his parents, or more rare than somebody who has been overthrown by a strong enemy, will have the chance to be dismissed and see again wife and children." (Borsig, op.cit, 375) 

From the Great Nirvana Sutra: 

"When someone enters the great ocean and bathes, he already has used water from al the various rivers." 

By chanting the title: "Namu Myoho Renge Kyo" we consume all the sutras, their teachings and blessings. 

I, like most of you, chanted the "6 Character Counterfeit Daimoku" while a member of Nichiren Shoshu/SGI. After I left in January 1975 I started reading other books about Nichiren Buddhism that were published by scholars and sects other than the SokaGakkai or Nichiren Shoshu. I noticed that in ALL the books that were not published by the Soka Gakkai, the Daimoku was written as "Namu Myoho Renge Kyo." 

But, if the book was published by the SGI/NShoshu, the daimoku was written as "Nam....." I called a friend who was a translator for Nichiren Shoshu, and she told me that they were instructed to write the daimoku as "Nam...", but it really was "Namu Myoho Renge Kyo." Since then, we learned about the "great vowel shift" in Japan in the 14th century, and the fact that the Soka Gakkai asked Taisekiji to drop the "mu" so they could chant faster. 

Needless to say, Universal Virtue woke me up, and every day during my morning and evening service I say "thank you". By the same token, when we tell those who insist that Nam is OK, that they have forgotten "a whole character", we fulfill the function of Universal Virtue. 

You might ask yourself, how can so many people be fooled? 

I found this story in, "The Transmission of the Dharma-pita" 

"A man lives up to a hundred years 
Without seeing a heron. 
Another man lives for only one day, 
But he has seen a heron. 
This man has much more wisdom and fame" 
At that time, Ananda was walking nearby and heard the bhiksu's recitation. 
He said to him, "the stanza you are reciting was not spoken by the Buddha. 
You should say, 
'If one man lives for a hundred years 
without perceiving the rise and fall of things, 
and if another lives for only one day 
but perceives the rise and fall of things, 
this [second] man possesses much more wisdom 
than the one who lives a hundred years.' 

Moreover, there are two kinds of people who slander the Buddha. One kind of people are infidels who slander the Buddha out of hatred and resentment. The other kind, though believers, do not properly accept and understand the meanings of the Sutras and are also considered slanderers of the Buddha. Just as a man with no feet and no mouth is nonfunctioning, these two kinds of people are nonfunctioning, as they cannot understand the proper meanings of the words jati (rebirth) and aristaka (heron) mentioned in the Sutra." And he also uttered the following stanza: 

An ignorant man has no wisdom; 
His actions are useless. 
If a wise man does not accept the Dharma, 
His wisdom is like poison. 
By hearing the recitation of right knowledge, 
One may gain the fruit of liberation. 

The bhiksu who recited the stanza returned to the place of his teacher and said, "Ananda said,'The World-honored One spoke thus: If one man lives for a hundred years without perceiving the rise and fall of things, and if another lives for only one day and perceives the rise and fall of things, the second man is much better than the one who lives a hundred years." The teacher said to his disciples, "Ananda is getting old. His memory has become poor." And he also uttered the following stanza: 

If a man reaches senility, 
He loses his power of memory. 
His wisdom and vigor 
Also grow old. 

He also said to his disciple, "Recite as you do. Do not follow his words." When Ananda went again to that place, he heard [the bhiksu] reciting the same stanza. The Elder Ananda said to him, "I have told you, this was not spoken by the Buddha." He answered Ananda, saying, "My teacher said that Ananda was getting old and that his memory had become poor." Ananda reflected and wished to go to the teacher to tell him the meaning. Then he considered the mind of the teacher: Would he accept his words? He saw in his mind that the teacher would not accept the meaning. He thought again: Was there any other bhiksu who could tell the teacher? And he saw that nobody could tell him. Ananda considered the matter, *

"If the Buddha were in the world, 
I would report the matter to him 
and to Sariputra, Maudgalyayana, Kasyapa, and others. 
But the Buddha and all the others have entered nirvana. 
I also wish to enter nirvana. 
By the power of the Buddha, 
the Dharma will abide for one thousand years." He also uttered the following stanza: 

Recluses such as they 
Have all passed away. 
Now between them and me, 
No distinctive mark will there be. 
I am now thinking of myself 
As a bird wafting in the wind. 
They have entered nirvana, 
Having cleared all impurities and bonds. 
They were lamps in the world 
That dispelled the darkness of ignorance. 
Of those great energetic ones 
Who observed numerous rules and ceremonies, 
I am the only one surviving, 
Like one tree remaining in a forest. 

The following quotes are from the Gassui Gosho, commonly known as the "Letter on Menstruation". This letter was written to the wife of Daigaku Saburo, answering her questions. The date of this writing is the 17th of the 4th month in the first year of Bun'ei Era (1264). 

"You should know that the merit of the Lotus Sutra is the same whether you chant the whole eight scrolls or just one scroll, one chapter, one stanza, one phrase, one character, or the Daimoku. For instance, a drop of ocean water contains the water of numerous rivers, large and small, while a wish-fulfilling gem produces numerous treasures. In this sense, a drop of ocean water is the same as numerous drops and a gem is the same as numerous gems. One character of the Lotus Sutra is like this one drop of ocean water or one wish fulfilling gem. Numerous characters of the sutra are like numerous drops of ocean water or numerous wish-fulfilling gems." 

"Since the Lotus Sutra is the true teaching of Shakyamuni Buddha, anyone who chants even one character of it will not fall into the three evil regions......" 

"If they don't believe in the Lotus Sutra, but consider it equal to other sutras; if they believe it superior to other sutras but practice other sutras all the time, with the Lotus Sutra only sometimes; if they believe in the Lotus Sutra but befriend "Pure Land" Buddhists who do not believe in it and slander it; or if they associate with those who claim that the Lotus Sutra is too difficult for us in the Latter Age of the Decadent Dharma to practice, but do not regard them as slanderers of the true dharma-such people will fall into the hell of incessant suffering. All the merit of these people accumulated in this life will vanish instantly, and even the merit of practicing the Lotus Sutra will eclipse temporarily. You should know that these people will go to the hell of incessant suffering. It is as certain as raindrops falling from the sky and mountain rocks rolling down into valleys." 

"As for chanting "Namu Ichijo Myoden" although it means the same, you should chant "Namu Myoho Renge Kyo" as Bodhisattva Vasubandhu, Grand Master Tien-T'ai and others did. There is a reason for me to say this." 

Following the instructions of Nichiren Daishonin I declare the following: 

1. As for chanting Nam Myoho Renge Kyo, although it may mean the same, you should chant "Namu Myoho Renge Kyo" as the Great Bodhisattva's of the past did, as well as Nichiren Daishonin. To ignore this is not following the instruction of Nichiren Daishonin, but some inferior wanna-be Buddhist Honcho. 

2. Nichiren Shoshu and SokaGakkai members have declared that the Lotus Sutra is inferior in this time period, and that it has lost it's power. These two groups have declared that Nichiren is a liar and continually spit on Shakyamuni Buddha's words. The members of these two groups will go to the hell of incessant suffering, for certain. I believe the words of Nichiren Daishonin, therefore I know that this is true. 

"It is written in the Lotus Sutra that one, who believes in every sutra, every Buddha and Bodhisattva, observes Buddhist precepts but doesn't believe in the Lotus Sutra and slanders it, will fall into the three evil regions without fail. In my opinion, everybody, laymen as well as monks, seem to slander the Lotus Sutra recently" 

3. By throwing Shakyamuni out of his own religion, by declaring a Bodhisattva (Jogyo) superior to the Eternal Buddha Shakyamuni, by declaring that the Lotus Sutra has no power, or has lost its power the members of Nichiren Shoshu and SokaGakkai cults observe some sort of Anti-Buddhist practice that slanders the intent of Buddhism Itself! These groups are the cause for calamities in the world.

*This story of Ananda was also cited by Nichiren.

Much of the previous work taken from the works of Steven Schaufele

Steven Schaufele, Ph.D. home: Yusheng Street Asst. Prof. of Linguistics, English Department Lane 8, #10, 2F Soochow University, Waishuanghsi Campus Shihlin District Taipei 11102 Taipei 11118 Taiwan, ROC Taiwan, ROC (886)(02)881-9471 ext. 6504 (886)(02)835-6966 Fax: (886)(02)883-5158 fco...@mbm1.scu.edu.tw 

Steve writes: I keep hearing people say that mu means could or can't, not or nothing. This is completely erroneous. Where is your source, please post it. The Sanskrit of Namu means Devotion that is it . Nam does not mean devotion. The only thing that can be found for the definition of Nam is in a Vietnamese dictionary. Nam is not Japanese or Indo, Sanskrit or Pakrit. Only Namu Namo Namaste, this transliterates into Namu not nam!! 

Also someone said its what in the heart, I believe what is in the heart of faith is important to but we cannot change Namu to Nam. Otherwise why even say Myohorengekyo. This statement sounds nice but to drop a character and alter Nichiren's invocation and teachings I am sure is not what is in any of our hearts! 

Dictionary: 

Nam. Phtro'ng-south (sao-th) /dong- . South-east- (ist) / t`ay- south wind.....  (Viet-ANH ANH-VIET BY Thung Dung Tu-Dieu- Vietnamese dictionary pg.164) OR Nam-- Burnt (English to -Vietnamese dictionary pg.561)

Author of above? Bruce? or Stephanie Maltz?

Graham Lamont, however, refutes Maltz', SGI,'s Hongaku view

FORGERY: HONGAKU NOT NICHIREN'S DOCTRINE by Graham Lamont

(Here Lamont refutes Rev. Yasahara's view of Hongaku)

It is has been stated that opposition to hongaku is wrong and that 
the “Matter of the Ten Thusnesses” (Junyoze no koto) is a 
genuine work simply because it is recorded in the “Rokunai gosho” 
collection. 

1) The “Rokunai” catalogue is not any guide to authenticity; although 
at one time it was a slightly better standard for genuine works than 
the “Rokuge” collections, the naive belief that it was compiled on the 
first anniversary of Nichiren’s death has long since been discredited; 
it is a catalogue from long after. (“Nichiren Shonin Ibun jiten”, 
1212c); as far as I can see the first reference to such collection is 
by Honjobo Nichijitsu of the Nakayama Lineage in 1461. Clearly given 
the state of Nichiren Buddhism then under the influence of the most 
corrupt monistic tendencies of the Medieval Tendai (chuko Tendai) 
establishment, the “Rokunai mokuroku” is by no means any guarantee
of authenticity; in light of the sophisticated studies done in modern
times when access to texts of various sects and lineages became 
easier, to cling to the notion that any document in this collection is 
ipso facto reliable and genuine is the height of ignorance and 
naivete. 

[Note: in Maltz’s so-called “Kempon Hokke Vision, v. 3, no.
6, p. 7, Yashuhara admits that this was compiled not later than 120
years after Nichiren; plenty of time for all sort of forgeries to be admitted
to the canon.] 

Of all the forgeries under Nichiren’s august name, this particular
document is perhaps the most egregious fake, because it can be shown 
to be derived from a work FALSELY attributed to Genshin (Eshin sozu: 
942 1017) and included in “Eshin sozu zenshu”, v. 3, the “Essential 
Notes on Attaining Buddhahood in this Very Body by the ‘Hokke’” 
(“Hokke sokushin jobutsu yoki”); the “Junyoze no koto” itself was long 
ago a subject of dispute even in traditional times and was once 
regularly attributed to (of all people) Jikaku Daishi (Ennin: 
794-864), a man whose errors Nichiren sharply attacked! As to the 
“Essential Notes on Attaining Buddhahood in this Very Body by the 
‘Hokke’”, of which this work is clearly a revision or adaptation, at 
various times it was also attributed to Kakucho (960 1034); textual 
studies by Shigyo Kaishu showed decades ago that the present “Junyoze 
no koto” and the “Essential Notes on Attaining Buddhahood in this Very 
Body by the ‘Hokke’” extremely close. (See Asai Yorin, “Nichiren 
kyogaku no kenkyu”, pp. 275-277, 303); this conclusion, far from being 
overturned in recent years has been adopted by standard reference 
works: (See“Nichiren Shonin Ibun jiten”, 503c) Moreover, even the 
editors of the “Showa Teihon” in the Nichiren Sect, who were not very 
strict in separating out forgeries decided to put this “Junyoze no 
koto” in the Continuation Section (zokuhen) which is reserved for 
questionalbe texts. (v. 3, 2030-2033; no.3)

[Note, even if one were to concede that this work is by Nichiren, it 
is supposedly from the year (Shoga 2 = 1258) and thus would have less 
significance than Sado and post-Sado writings.] 

Let us now turn to the assertion that Honda Nissho was fervent believer
in this hongaku monism, so beloved of Maltz and other “ex” Gakkai “New Agers”. 

From the Kanjin Honzon-Sho, Nichiren Dai Shonin (trans. Kyotsu Hori), 
Chapter 4 (Upholding the Lotus Sutra and Attaining Buddhahood),

Pages 88-96 


Question (20): You have not responded to the serious question raise earlier regarding the Buddha residing in our minds, have you? 
Answer: It is said in the Sutra of Infinite Meaning (Muryogi-kyo), an introductory teaching to the Lotus Sutra: "though unable to perform the six kinds of  practice leading to Buddhahood: charity, observing precepts, perseverance,  effort, meditation and wisdom, upholders of this sutra will inevitably receive merits from practicing  them." The second chapter of the Lotus Sutra states: "We wish to hear the way to perfection;" and in the Nirvana Sutra it is said: "'Sad' in the Saddharmapundarika (Lotus Sutra) means 'perfection'." Bodhisattva Nagarjuna says in his great Wisdom Discourse (Daichido-ron) that "sad" means "six" while the Annotations on the Four Mahayana Treatises (Wu-i wu-te ta-cheng ssu-lun hsuan-i chi) by Hui-chun of T'ang China means "perfection" in India. The Annotations on the Meaning of the Lotus Sutra (Fa-hua i-su) by Chi-tsang states that "sad" is translated as "perfection"; whileGrand Master T'ien-t'ai states in his Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra (Fa-hua hsuan-i) that "sad" is a Sanskrit term which is translated as "miao" (wonderful) in China. 

I fear that I may debase these passages if I try to interpret them, but I dare do so in order to answer your question. The gist of these passages is that Sakyamuni Buddha's merit of practicing the bodhisattva way leading to Buddhahood, as well as that of preaching and saving all living beings since His attainment of Buddhahood are altogether contained in the five words of  myo, ho, ren, ge, and kyo (Lotus Sutra of the Wonderful Dharma) and that consequently, when we uphold the five words, the merits which He accumulated before and after His attainment of Buddhahood are naturally transferred to us. Thus, it is stated in the Lotus Sutra (chapter four, "Understanding by Faith) that four great sravaka such as Kasyapa rejoiced in their understanding of the teaching of the Lotus Sutra enabling sravaka to attain Buddhahood, and reported to the Buddha that they had been given invaluable jewels without asking for them. This represents the attainment of Buddhahood by the sravaka realm contained in our minds.

Not only the sravaka but also Sakyamuni Buddha is within us. For we encounter such a statement like this in the second chapter of the Lotus Sutra: "It was My (Sakyamuni's) original vow to let all beings become like Myself. My vow has now been fulfilled. I have helped them all enter the way of the  Buddha." Does this not mean, that Sakyamuni Buddha, who has attained Perfect Enlightenment, is our flesh and blood, and all the merits He has accumulated before and after attaining Buddhahood are our bones? 

Moreover, the eleventh chapter of the Lotus Sutra "Appearance of the Stupa of Treasures", states: "Those who uphold the teaching of this sutra are deemed to serve Me, Sakyamuni, and Taho Buddha. They also serve Buddhas in manifestation here who adorn and glorify their respective worlds." This means that Sakyamuni Buddha, Taho Buddha, and all the Buddhas in manifestation are in our minds, and that we, upholders of the Lotus Sutra, will follow their steps and inherit all the merits of those Buddhas. 

This is the meaning of the passage in the tenth chapter of the Lotus Sutra,"The Teacher of the Dharma", which reads: "Those who hear of this Lotus Sutra even for a moment, will instantly attain Perfect Enlightenment." A passage in the sixteenth chapter of the Lotus Sutra, "Duration of the Life of the Buddha", contends: "It has been many hundreds of thousands of billions of nayuta of kalpa (an incalculably long period of time) since I have attained Buddhahood." It means that Sakyamuni buddha, within our minds, is an ancient Buddha without beginning, manifesting Himself in three bodies, and attained buddhahood in the eternal past described as 500 dust-particle kalpa ago. 

In the same chapter, another passage reads: "The duration of My life, which I obtained through the practice of the way of bodhisattvas, has not yet expired. It is twice as long as the length of time stated above: 500 dust-particle kalpa." This reveals the bodhisattva-realm within out minds. The bodhisattvas described in the fifteenth chapter, "Appearance of Bodhisattvas from Underground", who have sprung out of the great earth, as numerous as the number of dust-particles of 1,000 worlds, are followers of the Original Buddha Sakyamuni who resides within our minds. 

They are like T'ai-kung-wang and Duke of Chou, retainers of King Wu of the Chou dynasty in ancient China, who at the same time served the King's young son, King Ch'eng; or Takeuchi-no Sukune of ancient Japan, a leading minister to Empress Jingu, who concurrently served her son, Prince Nintoku. Just like them Bodhisattvas Jogyo, Muhengyo, Jogyo and Anryugyo, the four leaders of those bodhisattvas sprung up from the earth, are simultaneously followers of the Original Buddha and Bodhisattvas who reside in the minds of us, ordinary people. 

Therefore, Grand Master Miao-le has declared in his Annotation on the Mo-ho chih-kuan (Mo-ho chih-kuan fu-hsing-chuan hung-chueh): "You should know that both our bodies and the land on which we live are a part of the 3,000 modes of existence which exist in our minds. Consequently, upon our attainment of Buddhahood, we are in complete agreement with the truth of '3,000 existences contained in one thought', and our single body and single thought permeate through all the worlds in the universe." 

  ------------------------------------------------------------ 

Let us take a look at Honda’s “Hokekyo kogi”
(“Lectures on the Lotus Sutra”); commenting on the “Chapter of the 
Measure of Life of the Tathagata”: in volume 2, p. 215, he 
specifically states in commenting the first line of the central “Jiga 
ge”: 

“The saintly patriarch relying on the vast numbers preaches the 
innumerable, and therewith judges it to reveal the Beginningless 
Really-existing Original Buddha of Concrete (or Tangible) Character 
of the Enjoyment and Response [Bodies], when as he says it ‘is the 
Beginningless Ancient Buddha of kalpas as many as the dust of 
countries touched or not by the dust of five hundred of tens of 
trillions of nayutas of asamkheyas of great trichiliocosms (gohyaku 
jinden gô) and so on to the Three Bodies that are revealed’, it is 
this. Although in discussing this Original Buddha there are those who 
cull out the Buddha Who practiced and manifested the Effect and point 
to the Ideality (Abstraction) of Unmanifest Original Enlightenment 
(hongaku no ritai) and take this Abstract Buddha (ributsu) that is the 
unenlightened worldling (bombu) to be the Original Buddha (hombutsu) 
and take the Actual Buddha (jibutsu) as the Manifestation Buddha 
(shakubutsu);" 

"This is by no means (kesshite) the conclusion of the 
faith and practice of [the Bodhisattva] Converted by the Original 
Buddha (honge). However, among the Saint’s latter lineages they 
frequently assert this doctrine and advocate that it is the sublime 
doctrine revealed by the ‘[Chapter] of the Measure of Life’ alone and 
the Ultimate Theory exceeding the {Bodhisattva] Converted by the 
Original Buddha (honge); the ignorant heedlessly would follow suit. 
Alas! This child is to be pitied !” 

The passage is reasonably clear: in interpreting this central part of 
the “Lotus Sutra” Honda makes it clear that the Buddha spoken of in 
Chapter Sixteen is of a concrete or tangible character (gutaikaku) 
relating to the Enjoyment and Response Bodies (hojin and ojin) and he 
utilizes a phrase from the “Kanjin honzon sho” to describe this 
Buddha; although there are some who have tried to twist the phrase to 
mean something else Honda is fairly clear: he believes in the “Actual 
Buddha” (ji butsu) and dismisses the theory of the Abstract or Ideal 
(ritai) Original Enlightenment, which, as every scholar should know, 
is oriented towards the Dharma Body (hosshin) of the Buddh

(See the comparison between the two views, the “Beginningless
Ancient Buddha” and the “Hongaku Uncreate Three Bodies” in Asai Yorin,
“Nichiren kyogaku no kenkyu”, pp. 287-315, especially the summary on 
p. 295) 

It should be noted that Honda’s description tallies with the idea 
found in the “Kaimoku sho” (STN, v. 1, 5536-8) where Nichiren says the 
feature that separates the “Hokekyo” from all other Mahayana Sutras is 
the concept of the “revelation of the original” (kempon) of the 
Enjoyment Body (hojin) and of the Response Body (ojin). (Shigyo 
Kaishu, “Nichiren no ‘Kanjin honzon sho’ no busshin ron ni tsuite” p. 
181, cites this “Kaimoku sho” passage to show Nichiren was NOT 
oriented towards the Hosshin based hongaku view of the Buddha


Significantly Honda then goes on to criticize in no uncertain terms 
those ignorant people who willy-nilly follow those who take ri hongaku 
to be the Original or Fundamental Buddha and take the Actual Buddha to 
be a a mere Manifestation Buddha. (This hongaku doctrine is clearly 
expressed in “On the Reality of the Dharmas” (Shoho jisso sho) (STN, 
v. 1, 724 l. 11)), a work much praised by Taisekiji and the Soka 
Gakkai. Surely this fact is significant: the position vehemently 
proclaimed by the Fuji Branch is the very position which Honda 
condemns as being by no means the final doctrine of Nichiren Shonin; 
he then continues by noting the prevalence of this view among the 
latter-day religious groups of the Nichiren movement he pities the 
children who blindly take this view point. Could there be a better
description of Maltz and his Soka Gakkai followers? Truly they are to
be pitied !

As for Yasuhara’s claim that Honda cited the “Junyoze no koto” in the
“Daizokyo yogi” (“Essential Doctrine of the Great Sutra Store”), I do 
not doubt it; but in what context did he use it? 

Moreover, as the title implies this appears to be an over-all view of the 
Buddhist canon, not the quintessential Truth of all Truths, the “Lotus Sutra”. 

Nor again can Yasuhara wriggle out of the charge of promoting
Medieval Tendai by saying that the Medieval Tendai (Chuko Tendai) idea 
required no practice; of course, the people who introduced this sort 
of thought into the Nichiren canon tack on chanting the Daimoku and so 
on in order to make their fundamental alteration of Nichiren’s world 
view more acceptable and plausible.

Moreover, even some Chuko Tendai works included some kind of nod in the 
direction “practice”. The sin here is to twist Nichiren’s doctrine of an 
actually-existing Buddha into this abstract Hongaku in which the worldling is 
the Original Buddha. 

In fact, those people who passed off such works as these as genuine 
writings of Nichiren fundamentally changed the metaphysics behind his 
religion from the concept of an objective, actual Eternal Buddha Who 
is omnipresent and even in our minds and Who out of Great Compassion 
grants us His merit through the Daimoku into that of a highly 
subjective monistic view in which the Buddha Body is reduced to a mere 
projection of ourselves. (Again: see the writings by Shigyo and Asai 
cited above.) 

Despite attempts by various groups (such as the forerunners of the
modern so-called Nichiren Shu) to reconcile the two concepts of the Buddha Body,
they are fundamentally different and the people who combined them always gave
the Hongaku view precedence. 

Because of the relative complexity of some of the issues I will defer
this. (Again: see the writings by Shigyo and Asai cited above.) 
I have to say Maltz’s recent statements seem to bear out my belief 
that he and his followers really do not understand the difference 
between hongaku thought and the historical Nichiren’s hommon thought. 

The terms “hombutsu” (original Buddha) or “hondo” (original land)
do not of themselves imply the hongaku monistic world view. Likewise the
concept of the Buddha in our minds does not imply the Tathagata of 
Original Enlightenment. [Likewise on rare occasions “hongaku” can be 
synonym for the actual Original Buddha but this appears to be a 
relatively rare usage and that is clearly not what is meant in these 
forgeries attributed to Nichiren.] Denying “Hongaku” is not equivalent 
to denying the Original Buddha (hombutsu). Quite the contrary it is 
defending and giving honor to the Original Buddha Shakyamuni! 

There is much more I could say and possibly will say on this subject but I
want to make the following observations:  First: Maltz has declared on the basis of
one passage in Stone’s book that every one who dares to oppose his Soka Gakkai 
Hongaku philosophy is “out of bounds” and “in the penalty box”. Who gave him 
authority to cut off rational discussion in this preemptive and dictatorial 
way? 

Cannot anyone see what is happening here? Not only is he chiming in
with the Gakkai/Taisekiji metaphysical view (he only differs from them 
where he needs a hook to pull in their members or ex-members to build 
his own organization) but he is acting like an absolute ruler in 
cutting off discussion! 

Well, let us see who is in the “penalty box” with me:
Most of the Old Jumonryu (followers of Nichiju) before the lineage 
began to decline. (Unless, of course, Kubota and Yasuhara want to 
show me that these men were gung-ho for “Ri hongaku”.) 

The above cited scholars, Asai Yorin and Shigyo Kaishu, two of
the best historical and textual scholars of the mid-twentieth century
Tamura Yoshiro, author of the monumental work, “Kamakura Shin Bukkyo 
no kenkyu” (“A Study of the New Buddhism of Kamakura”) 
Miyazaki Eishu (I believe he is an acquaintance of Rev. Kubota) who 
says in his excellent little reference work “Nichiren jiten” p. 261, 
where he labels the “Ongi kuden” and “Onko kikigaki” forgeries and 
notes that if Nichiren used these concepts it was as a warning and was 
exceptional, for Hongaku was not really part of the original Tendai 
doctrinal system."

For Shinkei...Why SGI mechanical Daimoku is meaningless 2

"Well, your answers are quite sad to read. Instead of going back to the source and re-reading Nichiren you say, "what you say about the severe retribution for not following your brand of Shakyamuni's teachings is truly astonishing".........how is this my brand? It's Nichiren's teaching. I didn't find "passages to support (my) beliefs"........and "goshos are open to interpretation, despite (my) insistence that (I) alone know the truth". Goshos are exactly as they are written, no interpretation at all when it's so clearly spelled out. You say that my statements do not "pass the rationality test".

And you say "there cannot only be One Way". (Sorry, that's Nichiren' message, there is ONLY one way, not two or three.) "There are many paths to enlightenment as there are seekers". Fine words, but they are a different teaching. They are not Nichiren's and they are not the Lotus Sutra. In case you didn't notice, Nichiren is a fundamentalist, and his is an exclusive practice, i.e. the Lotus Sutra only. Likewise, Shakyamuni says that he has "not yet revealed the truth", which is found only in the Lotus Sutra. You can't be a Nichiren Buddhist if you don't believe Nichiren's words.

Nichiren was a "scriptural Buddhist". He relied solely on the sutras. His earliest credo was from the Great Nirvana Sutra..... "Trust the Dharma, do not trust human teachers. Trust the wisdom (of the Buddha) do not trust human consciousness. Trust the sutras of final meaning, do not trust the sutras of non-final meaning."The Buddha taught three kinds of teaching: provisional, expedient, and final. The final is the Lotus Sutra, with the Nirvana Sutra as a "gleaning".

T'ien t'ai said: "If something agrees with the (Lotus) Sutra, then record and use it. Do not believe in oral transmissions." In the Tendai tradition of Nichiren's day, there was a "zenification" happening, which implied that there was some meaning that was higher than the text. Nichiren rejects this completely. Unfortunately, the SGI/NST philosophy is in this vein , and is completely in opposition to Nichiren.....

You rely on the opinions of Ted Morino....even if they contradict Nichiren. This SGI talk is simply "New Age mysticism in Buddhist robes". It is not Nichiren Buddhism. (It's easy for Ted Morino to tell you anything because you haven't looked it up for yourself. Isn't this risky, like taking a stock broker's word for an investment? I had no luck until I read everything for myself).

Like it or not, Nichiren was a strict fundamentalist. His words, "All other sutras lead to hell" is a direct quote, correctly translated. Jesus is a "bad teacher" and his teaching causes terrible suffering, especially after death......only Nichiren used the name "Honen" in this type of example. Obviously, he didn't know about Jesus, but the principle is the same. Sorry to shock you, but it's not me who says so, it's Nichiren himself. And Nichiren says that if people find him to be too strict, then they must consider Shakyamuni to be even more strict in the Lotus Sutra. Nichiren merely reiterates the teaching that Shakyamuni transmitted to him at the ceremony in the air (Chapter 11, Lotus Sutra).

Instead of going on in this vein, let me be blunt. You practice Soka-Buddhism,.not Nichiren Buddhism. .Do you think that a fake honzon can give the same benefit as a real one? The answer is that you are not getting the benefits that Nichiren described. I don't doubt that you feel your practice benefits you. Christians get benefits also, even miracles. So does every religion in the world, including paganism, shamanism, even Norman Vincent Peale's positive thinking. It's not the yardstick that we can use to compare the "results". I can use my mental strength to create a miracle, because the human mind is truly remarkable. However, the human mind is not the equivalent of the Buddha mind, even though the latter is found in each of us.

Don't you see that the lack of knowledge about Nichiren (what have you been reading for 14 years? Ikeda? WT? But never the Lotus Sutra? Does this pass the "rationality test"?)....this lack of knowledge about Nichiren has fueled a philosophy that is completely removed from the original writings? You can recite the daimoku, but if it doesn't reflect the truth, then you miss the benefit. This kind of chanting will lead you to someday find the Lotus Sutra again, perhaps in a future life, but it misleads you now. Shall I quote goshos that are specific on this point? I'm not saying this to inflame you or to give you "fire and brimstone". It's the exact teaching that Nichiren presented, and it mirrors the Lotus Sutra perfectly. If you truly believe that the Lotus Sutra is removed from Shakyamuni and the daimoku of Nichiren, then your chanting is a provisional teaching, not the true teaching. (I'm paraphrasing a specific gosho, this is not my own invention.) I wish it were otherwise, then it would be easy to "receive and keep" this teaching. But it's very hard to believe and practice in an evil age, harder that to carry a load of dry grass through a fire without getting burned, etc.

You're happy with SGI's version of Nichiren, but don't fool yourself into thinking that the benefit "is all the same". And don't expect me or anyone else who has walked both roads to buy into the SGI "crock". I've been there and back.....so have many others. As for the "world peace" angle, more people have quit SGI than have stayed. Conservatively, half million gohonzons have been sold in this country but the membership today is probably under 30,000 in the US. Do the math for yourself. If there is so much benefit via the SGI way, why have so many left? People don't leave if they are benefitting from something.

Realistically, the Gakkai is a means to drive people away from the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren. How many Americans have a bad taste in their mouth for Nichiren, just because they were shuttled through the SGI? How many people can tolerate the heavy handed "senior leader" tyranny? How many lives have been ruined, marriages broken up, and careers wasted? How many people have been crushed by the demands of insane activities, min-ons and conventions? Or "guidance"? In order to create "world peace" SGI would have to go back and win these people back again. It won't happen.

Don't bother to convince me otherwise on these points, I saw more in my years with SGI than you can even imagine. And I talk to new people every day, who left five or more years ago. It hasn't changed and the horror stories are still the same. My e-mail is full, every day, of posts from people who write about their pain over the SGI experience. Do you think that these people are lying to me, and would waste their time in writing if they hadn't been spiritually duped or abused by leaders? Shall I believe you and tell these people that they must be mistaken? Shall I adopt the stance of "denial", and lie to myself about what I went through? I see very clearly the pattern that my life had in SGI. It's only because I practice the orthodox way that I can see with crystal clarity what my own life is about, and what it was about then. (I am being very specific here, and the precise experiences that I refer to are the basis of my spiritual convictions. They are significant and substantial, not just "feelings".) Are you saying that this "actual" proof of mine is invalid? Or that I can't compare the differences between then and now? Are you doubting my experience that the real benefit did not happen until I "parted from the false and adopted the true"? (That's from the sutra.)

If you find Nichiren's words too harsh to accept at face value, then stay with Soka-"Buddhism". But don't try to convince me that "it's all the same". The "results" are completely different and the final destinations are in opposite directions. I'm sorry you don't study for yourself but rely on "scholars" like Ted Morino .........it's lethal. You can accept the New Age philosophy without much personal damage....but when you use new Age to destroy the teaching of Nichiren, then it's a different scenario. You can strike your fist at the air without damage , but if you strike a rock, then your hand will break. To attack other teachings is to strike the air, but to attack the Lotus Sutra (and SGI says it has no power, a serious attack) is to strike a rock. It doesn't matter if you do so in ignorance, your hand will still break. It doesn't matter if you give the order to kill people or if you are the soldier who carries out the order, the retribution is the same. Teacher and disciple fall to hell together. Do you recognize these last two statements? They're directly from Nichiren.

Enough said. I sincerely hope you consider both sides carefully. We are a network, not a "leader-based' organization like SGI, so don't think that I'm trying to get you to switch for the sake of "our side". The purpose of this post is not to drum up membership, like some "shakabuku campaign". The issue is doctrine only, and the truth. Not some interpretation (based on lies, sadly)......all "benefits" flow from the truth. The philosophy that you described in your letter (new-age buddhism) is not Nichiren. No amount of rationalization will make it so. At least admit to the "revisionism" of SGI and consider seriously if it hasn't altered the truth. Then consider what benefit can come from adopting the truth, and what harm comes from accepting a lie. Base it on the words of Nichiren and the Lotus Sutra only. Don't make "me" the issue. It's cult mentality to attack the messenger, to see things as "us" vs. "them". Remove "me" from the discussion and look at the issue of doctrine only. If you don't study the doctrine you can be duped." -- Bruce Maltz

For Shinkei...Why SGI mechanical Daimoku is meaningless 1

"The fifth volume of Great Concentration and Insight states, “There is a type called Zen men, but their masters and disciples are blind [to the truth] and lame [in practice], and both masters and disciples will fall into hell.” In the seventh volume we read: “[There are ten ways necessary for understanding and practicing Buddhism correctly. Of these, except one], the nine ways have nothing in common with the ordinary priests of the world who concentrate on the written word, nor do they have anything in common with the Zen masters who concentrate on practice. Some Zen masters give all their attention to meditation alone. But their meditation is shallow and false, totally lacking in the nine ways. This is no empty assertion. Worthy persons of later ages who have eyes to see will understand the truth of what I say.” 

The seventh volume of On “Great Concentration and Insight” states: “‘Priests who concentrate on the written word’ refers to men who gain no inner insight or understanding through meditation, but concern themselves only with characteristics of the doctrine. ‘Zen masters who concentrate on practice’ refers to men who do not learn how to attain the truth and the corresponding wisdom, but fix their minds on the mere techniques of breath control. Theirs is the kind of [non-Buddhist] meditation that fundamentally still retains outflows. ‘Some Zen masters give all their attention to meditation alone’ means that, for the sake of discussion, T’ien-t’ai gives them a certain degree of recognition, but from a stricter viewpoint they lack both insight and understanding. The Zen men in the world today value only meditation [as the way to realize the truth] and have no familiarity with doctrinal teachings. In relying upon meditation alone, they interpret the sutras in their own way. They put together the eight errors and the eight winds, and talk about the Buddha as being sixteen feet in height. They lump together the five components and the three poisons, and call them the eight errors. They equate the six sense organs with the six transcendental powers, and the four elements with the four noble truths. To interpret the sutras in such an arbitrary manner is to be guilty of the greatest falsehood. Such nonsense is not even worth discussing.” — The Opening of the Eyes 

SGI members go to toso after toso, chanting one million Daimoku after another, yet they sometimes assert that the prime point of the Lotus Sutra is the oneness of SGI mentor and disciple or that the Lotus Sutra teaches interfaith and other times they assert that the prime point of the Lotus Sutra is the Buddha-nature possessed by all beings. They know nothing of the doctrines contained in the 16th Chapter of the Lotus Sutra and the Opening of the Eyes. They lack both insight and understanding. In the end, they are guilty of the greatest falsehoods. 

There are several reasons for the slanders and distortions which characterize SGI’s teachings: 

1). Except for Makiguchi, the SGI members have not experienced martyrdom. They have had a relatively easy go with propagation and have, on occasion, resorted to bullying tactics themselves, something a Buddhist who has experienced severe persecutions first hand would never resort to. 

2). The way of the Samurai and Bushido [way of the warrior], remnants of the retainer/lord relationship, the principle of saving face, and the Zen Buddhist model of master/disciple relationship characterizes the Soka Gakkai 

3). Possibly the greatest digression from the Way of Buddha and Nichiren Daishonin is the zennification of the SGI. The Buddha stated: “be a lamp unto yourself” and the Buddha as well as the Daishonin taught that we should follow the Law and not persons. It should be obvious that the SGI exhortations to seek guidance, going so far as to have a Guidance Division, is actual proof of this distortion. Those who embrace the highest Law and the Supreme Object of Worship, need never be impelled to seek guidance and develop what is virtually a master/disciple relationship with anyone, even one deemed a senior in faith.

In Zen Buddhism, whatever the master says is followed without hesitation or question. In SGI, one often hears, “Follow no matter what.” I have heard such arbitrary non-Buddhist opinions as, “‘If you sincerely follow the guidance of your leaders, even if they are wrong, you will gain tremendous benefit.” Such teachings are endemic in the Soka Gakkai and in Zen. This is not the Lotus Sutra Buddhism of Shakyamuni Buddha and Nichiren Daishonin. 

Even if the SGI were to adopt the Object of Worship of the Original Doctrine and admit that the identity of the Original Eternal Buddha was Lord Shakya, it will take many generations to purge the SGI of the Way of the Samurai, Bushido values, the way of lords and retainers, and the insidious master/disciple teachings of Zen. 

The Lotus Sutra and the writings of Nichiren Daishonin trump the worldly ephemeral successes of the two mentors. The ten million Soka Gakkai converts, by virtue of their false mistaken faith and practice based on the Taisekaji teachings mixed with value creationism, Yui Yoga, and Bushido, have become demons who will destroy True Buddhism in no time. Nichiren states in the writing, Happiness In This World: 

“There is no true happiness other than upholding faith in the Lotus Sutra. This is what is meant by “peace and security in their present existence and good circumstances in future existences.”” 

He further states in Embracing the Lotus Sutra: 

“Now, if you wish to attain Buddhahood, you have only to lower the banner of your arrogance, cast aside the staff of your anger, and devote yourself exclusively to the one vehicle of the Lotus Sutra. Worldly fame and profit are mere baubles of your present existence, and arrogance and prejudice are ties that will fetter you in the next one. Ah, you should be ashamed of them! And you should fear them, too!” 

One million times zero equals zero. Since the Soka Gakkai rejects the Lotus Sutra teachings and Buddha Shakyamuni of the Juryo-hon Chapter of the Lotus Sutra, how can SGI member’s happiness be anything but an ephemeral happiness? SGI members’ happiness is based on worldly fame and profit, not unlike the zenmen. 

We hear over and over about what SGI, "achieved” but what did they really achieve? Nichiren states, quoting the Nirvana Sutra:

“Kashyapa, because [in the past] I devoted myself to the correct teaching, I have been able to achieve this diamond-like body that abides forever and is never destroyed.” 

In the USA there are perhaps twenty or thirty million new evangelical believers in the last ten years. They espouse great happiness but Nichiren states, “because [in the past] I devoted myself to the correct teaching…” We should ask ourselves, are the Soka Gakkai teachings the correct teachings? Is it correct to abandon Shakyamuni Buddha and the Lotus Sutra? The ten million Soka Gakkai adepts faith and practice is based on a dream or more appropriately termed a nightmare, the nightmare of the Taisaekaji teachings expounded by Toda and Ikeda: 

“…the Gohonzons that we recieve are also the living flesh of the Original Buddha whose eyes have been opened according to the principles of the actual Ichinen Sanzen in the passages depths of the Juryo Chapter and the true attainment of Buddhahood by plants and trees. Why would this very Gohonzon not be the true aspect of the eye opening of wooden and painted images? This is absolutely not found in the heretical sects outside of Nichiren Shoshu, and is a profoundly secret doctrine which only Nichiren Shoshu possesses.”– Daisaku Ikeda Soka Gakkai Daibyaku Renge 

“….He knew all too well that the age of the Latter Day of the Law had already come, when prophecy foretold a decline in the power of Shakyamuni’s Buddhism; he knew it would have been entirely inappropriate to bring back Shakyamuni’s Buddhism as a new set of beliefs. He was able to bring the people a totally new kind of Buddhism because he was convinced of his identity and missions to save all people in the Latter Day of theLaw.” — Daisaku Ikeda (pg. 212 Selected Lectures on the Gosho)

The Lotus Sutra admonishes him: 

“Shame on such monks! — they will preach their own fictions.”

And Nichiren states: 

“I had gone to many centers of the religion during those twenty years, in the quest of Buddhist truths. The final conclusion I arrived at was that the truth of Buddhism must be one in essence. Many people lose themselves in the labyrinth of learning and studies, through thinking that every one of the diverse branches might help to the attainment of Buddhist ideals.” — Works pp 1770-71 

And again in Myoho Bikuni Go-henji: 

“According to the Zen Sect, the true teachings of Shakyamuni Buddha are not transmitted through sutras. They say that sutras including the Lotus Sutra are like a finger to point at the moon or a ferry to cross a river; and that it is no use after seeing the moon or crossing the river. Zen Buddhists say such a thing as they learned, without thinking what they say. But they are actually slandering Shakyamuni Buddha and preventing propagation of the Lotus Sutra. Thus, the people in this country are all committing a grave sin, more serious than the Five 
Evils, without realizing it.”

In Those Initially Aspiring to the Way, he writes: 

“…As for other types of people, it would appear that, even if they do not understand the meaning of the Lotus Sutra and are ignorant but have earnest faith, then they will invariably be reborn in a pure land. For it says in the Lotus Sutra, “They will be born in the presence of the Buddhas of the ten directions,” and “She will immediately go to the World of Peace and Delight.” These passages give clear proof that one who has faith in the Lotus Sutra will be reborn in a pure land. 

Chapter 3 of the Lotus Sutra states: 

“Whether during the Buddha’s lifetime
Or after his extinction
If there be any who slander
Such a sutra as this,
Who, seeing those who read and recite,
Write or hold this sutra, scorn and despise, hate and envy them
And bear them a tenacious grudge.
Concerning the recompense of such people’s sin,
After their lifetimes end
They will enter into the Avici hell.” 

Although neither the evangelicals nor the SGI members have faith in the Lotus Sutra, it is better to be an evangelical who doesn’t slander the Lotus Sutra than an SGI member who slanders both the Lotus Sutra and the true believers of the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren. Their holier than thou pronouncements based on the heretical SGI teachings are a castle built on sand.

As far as SGI’s assertions that the SGI teachings frees one from birth and death, that is not possible if one is to believe Nichiren Daishonin that the Lotus Sutra is the means: 

“What I call the Heritage of the Great Thing Concerning Life and Death is nothing else than the Scripture, the Lotus of the Perfect Truth. Fo rthe Sacred Title of the Lotus was handed down from the two Buddhas, Sakyamuni and Prabhuta-ratna (Taho or “Many Treasures”), to the Boddhisattva Visista-caritra (Jogyo or “Emminent Conduct”), when the Buddhas appeared in the Heavenly Shrine, and from eternity the heritage has been kept without interruption.”

In another writing, we read, 

“Then to utter the Sacred Title of the Lotus with the conviction that the three are one — the three, that is, Sakyamuni, the Buddha who from eternity has realized Buddhahood; the Lotus Sutra, which leads all beings without exception to Buddhahood; and we, beings in all the realms of existence.” 

How can you be one with Buddha Shakyamuni who from eternity has realized Buddhahood if you reject Him? Chanting mechanical daimoku with no conviction in Shakyamuni is not the way to free oneself from the fetters of birth and death. 

On Establishing the Correct Teaching states; 

“The host said: There are numerous passages that could be cited and a wide variety of proofs. For example, in the Golden Light Sutra we read: “[The four heavenly kings said to the Buddha], ‘Though this sutra exists in the nation, its ruler has never allowed it to be propagated. In his heart he turns away from it, and he takes no pleasure in hearing its teachings. He neither makes offerings to it, honors it, nor praises it. Nor is he willing to honor or make offerings to the four kinds of Buddhists who embrace the sutra. In the end, he makes it impossible for us and the other countless heavenly beings who are our followers to hear this profound and wonderful teaching. He deprives us of the sweet dew of its words and cuts us off from the flow of the correct teaching, so that our majesty and strength are drained away. Thus the number of beings who occupy the evil paths increases, and the number who dwell in the human and heavenly realms decreases. People fall into the river of the sufferings of birth and death and turn their backs on the road to nirvana.” 

The Selection of the Time states: 

“The Buddha says determining the future, “Depend upon the teaching, not upon the people. Bodhisattva Nagarjuna says, “If one depends upon the scripture it is a correct argument; if one does not depend upon the scripture it is an incorrect argument.” T’ien-t’ai says, “Again, if it conforms to the scripture, quote and use it. If there is no corresponding sentence or corresponding meaning, then one should not believe and accept. ” Dengyo says, “Depend upon what the Buddha taught, not upon the oral tradition.” If one follows these scriptures, treatises and commentaries, then one should not base oneself on dreams. Once should only treasure the passages in the scriptures and treatises…” 

Since the SGI abandons the scriptures, treatises, and commentaries, what is it that they have faith in? The words and the oral teachings of Toda and Ikeda? I don’t see anything about a mentor being necessary for attaining Buddhahood nor that new car or raise.

Nichiren writes: 

“The essential key to Nichiren’s disciples and followers is, namely, adherence to the Lotus Sutra.” 

The Lotus Sutra states: 

“But if one, after the Buddha’s extinction,
In the midst of an evil world
is able to preach this sutra, this is indeed hard…..(LS Ch.11) 

What the Soka Gakkai teaches is not “this Sutra”. 10,000,000 million SGI believers or 1,500,000,000 Muslims, are not equal to one Nichiren believer that has faith in the golden words of the Sutra. Most SGI members haven’t even read the Lotus Sutra. They go by the hearsay of the mentor, the Human Revolution, or the World Tribune. The SGI teachings on the Master-disciple relationship, value creation, receiving and giving guidance, no worth or role for solitary Bodhisattvas, the practice of shoju in this degenerate evil age, are all hearsay and oral teachings which Nichiren completely rejected. How sad for them. How sad that SGI members confuse Anger or Rapture for Buddhahood. 

Nichiren states: 

“Then what teaching should the country of Japan learn if its people are to free themselves from the sufferings of birth and death? As for this question, the Lotus Sutra states, “After the Thus Come One has entered extinction, I will cause it [the Lotus Sutra] to be widely propagated throughout Jambudvipa and will see that it never comes to an end.” 

Note, it doesn’t say to cause "Value Creationism”, “Human Revolution”, or “Taisekaji Mysticism” to spread.

In the Opening of the Eyes, we also read: 

“It is also laid down that one should “rely on sutras that are complete and final and not on those that are not complete and final.” We must therefore look carefully among the sutras to determine which are complete and final and which are not, and put our faith in the former. Bodhisattva Nagarjuna in his Commentary on the Ten Stages Sutra states, “Do not rely on treatises that distort the sutras; rely on those that are faithful to the sutras.” The Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai says, “That which accords with the sutras is to be written down and made available. But put no faith in anything that in word or meaning fails to do so.” The Great Teacher Dengyo says, “Depend upon the preachings of the Buddha, and do not put faith in traditions handed down orally.” Enchin, also known as the Great Teacher Chisho, says, ‘In transmitting the teachings, rely on the written words [ofscriptures]. ‘”

SGI's relies on the inferior teaching of the Human Revolution and those Nichiren Shoshu teachings that distort the Sutra and the teachings of Nichiren Daishonin. They depend more on the preaching of Daisaku Ikeda than they do on the preachings of the Buddha and Nichiren Daishonin and they hardly rely on the written words of the Sutra and Nichiren Daishonn. They are far more evil than the Zen men who make no pretense of practicing what the Buddha taught.