Facts can't contradict themselves by Stephanie Maltz

"Kobo Daishi thereupon formed his hands in the wisdom mudra and faced south. Suddenly his mouth opened and he turned into the golden-colored Buddha Mahavairochana." Now in what year of the reign of what ruler did this happen?  In China from the time of the Chien-yuan era (140-134 B.C.), and in Japan  from the time of the Taiho era (701-704), among the records of events kept by priests and the laity, those of important occurrences have always been accompanied by the name of the era in which they took place.  With an event as  important as that described, why then is there no mention of who the ruler was, who his high ministers were, what the name of the era was, or what day and hour the event took place? MWIV (p.248) 

This excerpt is from one of Nichiren's letters to point out how he felt regarding documenting important events.  Now, I am sure that if he did inscribe a Honzon for the Whole World, and this was the most powerful Honzon, and that He was transferring it to Nikko, Nichiren would have made sure to document the occasion. Doesn't this make total sense to Gakkai and Shoshu believers? 

If you think otherwise it is a *big* mistake. Nichiren Shoshu Priests  insist that letters about this event were lost in fires (?).  They would  like us to believe that an event of this magnitude would only be written about  once or twice.  Would only one fire destroy each and every reference to a so-called Supreme Gohonzon? 

Let's say that Nichiren did inscribe the DaiGohonzon. After the inscription why didn't Nichiren include something like:  "Make sure you pray to the DaiG" or "The DaiG was established for your Happiness" or  "My enlightened life is in this Mandala" in all the letters (not just the ink). The "Sumi Ink" phrase is way over-worked. Nichiren says according the the NSIC translators, "I inscribe my life in Sumi Ink". Is what Nichiren really saying that his life is now in the Ink? 

The only phrase has ever been quoted to justify the Dai-gohonzon is the line, "I, Nichiren , inscribe my life in sumi ink" (this is a deliberate mis-translation, but let's leave that aside for now).  However, this line was written in 1273, six years before the date assigned to the Dai-gohonzon.  The second reference is the "Shonin go-nanji" (The correct translation would be "Persecutions befalling Saints". There is no mention of "the Buddha's behavior", as SGI translates it)  of Oct.1, 1279, when Nichiren says , "The Buddha fulfilled his purpose in forty years, T'ien t'ai took thirty years and Dengyo some twenty years....for me, it took twenty seven years....."   

This simply means twenty seven years from 1253 to the present of 1279 when the letter was written, in reference to the Atsuwara persecution.  But this letter was not sent to believers in Atsuwara District near Fuji, but to Shijo Kingo for believers in Kamakura.

The people in Fuji were few but the bulk of believers were in Kamakura, so Nichiren wrote the letter to Kamakura to reassure them, rather than writing to the believers in Atsuwara.   

From this single statement, the NST/SGI say that this is the only reference to  the Dai-gohonzon.  But the phrase, "the purpose of the Buddha's advent" is a well-known quote from the Lotus Sutra, and it refers to the preaching of the Lotus Sutra.  There is no mention at all, in this particular letter, of any Gohonzon.  Do you think that Nichiren would have left only a single, cryptic reference and not even mention "Gohonzon" in the letter? 

But, the fact remains that not one, NOT ONE reference to this Mandala in any letter proves without a shadow of a doubt that Taisekiji's claim is speculation based on a fairy tale and wishful thinking.  Remember, destructive religions grow from authorities, or in this case priests, manipulating truths based on illusions and faith.The Lotus Sutra identifies the problem with wrong beliefs and then shows how to live free and incorruptible. With its honesty, the Lotus Sutra gives us prosperity and happiness. Nothing can fly in the face of reason.  What can happen, is that something can  fly in the face of common sense.  A wholly different phenomenon. The reason  something can't "fly in the face of reason" is because the facts determine how one should think about things, and the facts can't contradict themselves. 

Is circumstantial evidence enough to support the idea of the existence of the DaiGohonzon? 

Einstein is supposed to have said, 

"Perhaps the most incomprehensible thing about the Universe is that it is comprehensible (at least in part) to the human mind."   

A field of study, like Nichiren's Buddhism has certain facts which are specific to it, and it is easy to draw connections between those facts when you have only a few of the facts. Then, you can make a "conclusion" and based upon those facts, that the "DaiGohonzon" is possible. 

It takes effort to think and to challenge. And a huge amount of effort. It'd be great if you could just sit back, but that's not the way the process works.I personally, when figuring out the DaiGohonzon was a forgery, tried to prove it was authentic, with facts and hard data. I couldn't."