"I have made a vow. Even if someone says that he would make me the ruler of Japan on the condition that I give up the Lotus Sutra and rely upon the Amida Sutra for my salvation in the next life, or even if someone threatens me saying that he will execute my parents if I do not say 'Namu Amida-butsu,' and no matter how many great difficulties fall upon me, I will not submit until a man of wisdom defeats me by reason. Other difficulties are like dust in the wind. I will never break my vow that I will become the pillar of Japan, I will become the eyes of Japan, and I will become the great vessel of Japan." -- Kaimoku Sho (Opening the Eyes)
Would this man of wisdom defeat Nichiren by reason of the following statements
ReplyDelete"I have problems with the following: 'our individual life energy, while inseparable from the ocean has it's own energy form, like a current - and this continues eternally. This individual energy eternally that reflects the karma of an individual.'
"For this is a form of 'eternalism' which basically disagrees with Buddha's pronouncement of Annata 'no individual self'. It is this clinging to an individual life stream that causes all of one's suffering"
Thanks
No, because as you pointed out, there are Three Truths, not merely two and "For these more than forty years I have not yet revealed the truth". Anatta is but part of the story. The Lotus Sutra both incorporates and sublates the other sutras. The wise man would have to defeat not only Nichiren but the Buddha.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteexcellent answer.
ReplyDeleteNichiren although not claiming to be a Buddha, however, he was definately a sage and enlightened human being who devoted his life solely to the Lotus Sutra.
ReplyDeleteHis acts testify his trust in the Lotus Sutra.
Indeedn ot only would one have to defeat Nichiren, but also have to debate again Lord Shakyamuni himself.
If even Buddha Many Treasures testifies Lord Shakyamuni to tell the truth, how can one win in a debate ?
The loser would recognised even before this debate would take place.
NMRK !
About 10-15 years ago, President Ikeda took this quote and distorted it so badly that it no longer bore any resemblance at all to the intent of the original. He did a whole lecture on it and said that the "pillar" refers to world peace, "great ship" refers to culture, and "eyes" refers to education. Right after that, we wrote a letter of refutation to SGI about this and other perversions of the doctrine made by President Ikeda.
ReplyDeleteToo bad they don't care about the teachings, Shannon.. Great point, Richard.
ReplyDelete