SGI clinging to defective teachings, a mini-debate between Susan and Kathy

In article <3214A137.2...@erols.com>, Kathy Ruby <r...@erols.com> writes:

>I revere the Buddha that exists in each person, not some
>pie-in-the-sky Super-Buddha. And I'm trying to understand what form of
>Christianity you people are practicing here.
>Kathy SGI member

Just to refresh your memory Kathy, here is Susan's reply:

In article 3213688C.5...@erols.com, 

 r...@erols.com wrote:
>So are you saying that yes, there is a “Supreme Being” of some sort?? A
>Supreme Being named the Eternal Buddha who can bestow favors on his
>worshippers? Just grappling with a very foreign (to me) concept?

Why is this concept "very foreign" to you? it is the very heart of
Nichiren's teachings. don't you chant, during your Gongyo, the Juryo
(16th) chapter of the Lotus Sutra? if so, you yourself are paying homage
to the Eternal Buddha. as for "supreme being," that's your words, not mine.
Nichiren simply states that the Lotus Sutra is the highest teaching, and
that the Original/Eternal Buddha reveals himself in the Lotus Sutra for
the first time.

>>Buddha Shakyamuni as the expounder of these sutras is not eternal,
>>because the eternity of the Buddha is for the first time revealed in the
>>latter half of the [Lotus Sutra]. ...

>I’m more confused now, Susan. Are you saying that Shakyamuni Buddha is
>Eternal now, but he wasn’t before??? Doesn’t that kind of negate the
>meaning of the word Eternal?

The passage you quoted was a direct quote from *Nichiren*, not me. Do

you doubt his words? Nichiren was making the distinction that the Buddha
revealed his eternal nature *for the first time* in the 16th chapter of
the Lotus Sutra. you should know this, you've read the Sutra, right? or at
least "Lectures on the Sutra?" if not, please read the Lotus Sutra, and
you will find the answers.

When (if) you chant the Juryo chapter, you chant Shakyamuni's revelation:

"Since I obtained Buddhahood the number of kalpas that have passed is
immeasurable hundreds of thousands of myriads of tens of millions of
quintillions of asamkheyas. I have ever been preaching the Dharma,
teaching and converting numberless tens of millions of beings, causing
them to enter the Buddha Way. Since then it has been immeasurable kalpas.
For the sake of  the masses of beings by expedience I manifest Nirvana, yet
in reality I do not become extinct; I ever abide here preaching the Dharma."
(beginning with "Ji ga toku butsu rai..." and going to "...jo ju shi sep-po.")

(BTW: was it you who mentioned one day that we "missed" a character of the
Sutra in our Gongyo? well, I just checked the SGI Gongyo book, the section
 I listed above begins with "Ji ga toku bur-rai"...well no wonder! y'all
dropped half of the "butsu" character, which means "Buddha!" that explains
a LOT.)

If you are still confused as to why the Buddha did not reveal his Eternal
nature until the latter half of the Lotus Sutra, refer to the passage in
the Kanjin Honzon Sho where Nichiren states: "The Buddha made no mention
of this truth in the first half of the [Lotus Sutra], because he had not yet
found hearers intelligent enough to understand it." please also read the
16th chapter in its entirety, Shakyamuni explains exactly why he could not
reveal it before that point. it's a very simple concept, and at the heart
of Nichiren's Buddhism.

>>In this (saha) world, the Buddha is eternal, has
>>never been extinct, nor is to be reborn. ...

>And you know, doesn’t everyone (even we common mortals) possess eternal
>life? If the answer is yes, then how does the “Eternal Buddha” differ
>from the rest of us? Does he have special powers?

According to Nichiren, the Original/Eternal Buddha is the source of our
"seeds of Buddhahood." again from the Kanjin Honzon Sho, "It does not
mean, however, that any of the Buddhas gives the seed of Buddhahood to the
keeper of this sutra. The giver of the seed, the Lotus Sutra affirms, is none
other than the Original Buddha, who reveals himself only in this sutra."

The passage right after this quote speaks about the earlier sutras being
inferior to the Lotus, and why "immediate enlightenment" is a provisional
teaching:

"It is the perfect Mahayana sutra that reveals the Buddha's accomplishment
of a threefold procedure of teaching: to give the seed of Buddhahood to
his sons, to grow it, and to let it bear fruit. the Lotus Sutra is the most
perfect of sutras, because it completes the threefold procedure of
teaching. The keeper of this sutra is endowed with the three causes of
Buddhahood: the immanence of Buddha-nature, the wisdom for the realization
of Buddha-nature, and the qualifications required for the development of
Buddha-nature. All other Mahayana sutras, not excluding the Mahavairocana
and the Avatamsaka, which contain some excellent teachings such as of
"immediate enlightenment," should be regarded as hinayana or semi-Mahayana
sutras at most, because they do not reveal the threefold procedure of
teaching. How could we obtain our seeds of Buddhahhod by clinging to those
defective ones?"

When you replace the actual threefold teaching of the Lotus Sutra with
"immediate enlightenment" (i.e., "we are all Buddhas just as we are"), you
are clinging to a defective teaching. if you do not believe every word of
this sutra, then you are not a "keeper" of this sutra, and therefore not
endowed with the three causes of Buddhahood. this is according to
Nichiren, not I.

>>The true object of worship should be the Buddha at the moment of
>>this transmission. ...

>The Major Writings version says: “The true object of worship is described
>in the ceremony of transmission ...”, which seems to me includes the
>*whole* ceremony. This makes much more sense, since **the object of
>worship which Nichiren has in fact inscribed** (i.e., the scroll we call
>the Gohonzon) contains the whole cast of characters from the ceremony in
>the air, perfectly positioned. If he meant us to worship *only*
>Shakyamuni, he would’ve inscribed an object of worship with ‘Namu
>Shakymuni Buddha’ down the center, don’t you think?

I did not state Nichiren meant for us to "worship only Shakyamuni." but
where was the Buddha at the moment of the transmission? at the Ceremony in
the Air. from the Kanjin Honzon Sho:

"The true object of worship should be the Buddha at the moment of this
transmission. The scene of the transmission is described in the following
way: In the sky above the Eternal Saha-world is seen the [Precious] Stupa,
which is nothing but the representation of the Five Words. In this stupa
sits Original Buddha Shakyamuni on the right..."

This is an exact description of the Gohonzon.

>Elsewhere in the “True Object of Worship”, he clarifies that: “The
>enlightened life of Shakyamuni Buddha is our own flesh and blood. His
>practices and resulting virtues are our bones and marrow.” So when he
>speaks of Shakyamuni Buddha, he is really speaking of the Buddha nature
>which exists within each of us.

This is a good example of "Nichiren said this, but he _really_ meant..." a
very common mistake made by both NSS and SGI. the enlightened life of
Shakyamuni Buddha is indeed our flesh and blood! why? the answer is
contained in the Lotus Sutra, because the Lotus Sutra was the first Sutra
where the Buddha taught that "ordinary beings" can attain Buddhahood!
before that, only Bodhisattvas and "pratkeyabuddhas" (beings in the world
of Realization) could attain Buddhahood. now, in the Lotus Sutra, the
Buddha reveals that we can ALL attain Buddhahood! in the same Sutra,
Shakyamuni reveals the true nature of his enlightenment. so truly, the
Buddha's enlightenment is our own flesh and blood.

We are living proof of the Lotus Sutra, that ordinary beings can attain
enlightenment through faith in the Lotus Sutra. Nichiren offers us this
faith via Namu Myoho Renge Kyo and the True Object of Worship. whether or
not we want to believe with absolute faith, is our own choice. Nichiren
states that those who slander or disbelieve the Lotus Sutra will fall into
the Avici Hell (hell of incessant suffering). so you've got two choices,
according to Nichiren: believe, or disbelieve. he gives you the *free
will* to choose.

>I guess it’s all in the interpretation. To me, Nichiren’s Gosho
>encouraged us to use the Gohonzon as a clear mirror for observing one’s
>mind. To chant sincere daimoku and to see the mystic law of cause and
>effect functioning in our lives. This entreating of a Supreme Being to
>have pity on us --- that really turns my stomach! I already had plenty
>of opportunities to practice Christianity and I turned them all down ...

Then you'll have to stop practicing the First Silent Prayer...where you
offer gratitude to the shoten zenjin (universal forces within all life)
for your *protection*. asking for protection is something common in Nichiren's
teachings (and in Buddhist teachings in general)...protection from arhats
and Bodhisattvas ("Opening of the Eyes" is one i can think off the top of
my head), protection from the Buddhist gods, "calling" the Buddha to you,
etc. i don't think Nichiren considered it "begging" as you do, rather, he
considered it to be one of the "merits" of a keeper of the Lotus Sutra.
RE using the Gohonzon as a clear mirror: there are passages about
"polishing" a mirror which has become "tarnished," but the Gohonzon is
anything but a clear mirror, *IF* one does *not* have faith in the True
Object of Worship. IF you can't believe that Shakyamuni revealed his
eternal nature in the Lotus Sutra, then the Gohonzon becomes a tarnished
mirror for you. this is what Nichiren teaches, not i.

>No, I’m not. The Shoten Zenjin have always been explained to me to be
>protective functions in my environment. Here’s what my Gongyo book says
>for the first prayer:

>“I offer appreciation to the shoten zenjin, the functions in life and in
>the environment that serve to protect us night and day. I pray that
>their protective power be further strengthened and enhanced through my
>practice of the Law.”
>Hardly begging for stuff.

No one is "begging" for any protection of any sort in Nichiren's Buddhism,
but we do "invite" or "call" for such protection. i see that SGI has
re-worded the First Prayer. BUT you are still praying that their
"protective power be further strengthened and enhanced" through your
practice of the Law. you are not begging, you are praying for protection.
we are "inviting" the protection. no begging. :)

>Oh. That’s because he didn’t put a lot of emphasis on Shakyamuni and the
>Lotus Sutra. When he mentions “the Lord Buddha” in the Gosho, he is
>referring to the enlightened nature we all possess (which is manifested
>in the Gohonzon). As explained above and also mentioned in numerous
>other Gosho.

I  have to disagree with you that Nichiren didn't put a lot of emphasis on
Shakyamuni and the Lotus Sutra. To state this is to completely
misunderstand Nichiren's actual teachings! It's another case of "When
Nichiren said this, he was actually referring to..." why is there any need
to say what Nichiren was "really saying" or "actually saying" or
"referring to"?

Why aren't Nichiren's teachings, standing alone as a body of profound and
meaningful works, enough? what do you think the entire "emphasis" of
the Rissho Ankoku Ron was? If Nichiren didn't put a lot of emphasis on the
Lotus Sutra, why did Nichiren tell us to chant the phrase (translated) "I
devote/return my life to the Mystic Law of the **Lotus Sutra**?" why would
he want us to devote ourselves to something he didn't place a lot of
emphasis on? why would he call himself "the foremost practicioner of the
Lotus Sutra?"

I think that many people, even in SGI and NSS, would disagree with your
statement, Nichiren "didn't put a lot of emphasis on Shakyamuni and the
Lotus Sutra." because those 2 things are the whole emphasis of his
teachings, his Daimoku, his Gohonzon. in fact, it was the whole emphasis
of  his life...he told stories of his persecution due to the fact that he was
practicing the Lotus Sutra! when you make a statement such as the above,
IMO you are disrespecting the entire life of Nichiren Daishonin.

peace,
susan