Some might say that Nichiren, who claims that followers of Amida Buddha and zen buddhism will fall in the hell of incessant suffering, is belligerent and therefore, would fall into the realm of asura. Moreover, it is said in the "Peaceful Practices" (14th) chapter of the Lotus Sutra: "Do not try to expose faults of other people or of other sutras and do not despise other monks." So, they might wonder whether or not Nichiren has been abandoned by gods because he has not been following these words of the Lotus Sutra.
In response, I would cite the following words of the Mo-ho chih-kuan:
There are two opposing ways of spreading Buddhism:
the aggressive and persuasive. Such statements in
the "Peaceful Practices" chapter as "do not be critical
of others" represents the persuasive way, while such
words in the Nirvana Sutra as "arm yourselves with
swords and sticks, and behead those who break the
teaching of the Buddha" stand for the aggressive way.
Though these two ways are opposite in nature, they both
benefit the people.
Grand Master Miao-le explains this in his Chih-kuan fu-hsiang-chuan hung chueh as follows:
Regarding the two ways of spreading Buddhism, it is
stated in the third fascicle of the Nirvana Sutra that those
who uphold the true dharma should arm themselves with
swords and bows and arrows even if they would not be able
to uphold the Five Commandments and maintain integrity.
And they should protect the true teaching as resolutely as
did the ancient king called Sen'yo the great, who is said to
have beheaded a Brahman on the spot when the Brahman
slandered Buddhism. The sutra also cites as an example,
an order issued by a new doctor who found that the milk-
medicine prescribed by his predecessor was doing harm
to the people. It says, 'Those who would use it should be
beheaded." These are examples of an aggressive means of
spreading Buddhism. Although various scriptures preach many
ways of spreading Buddhism, they all reduce to these two
ways in the end: the aggressive and persuasive.
In his commentary on the Lotus Sutra (Fa-hua wen-chu), Grand Master T'ien-t'ai explains the difference between the aggressive means of the Nirvana Sutra and the persuasive means of the "Peaceful Practices" chapter:
Someone asked: "The Nirvana Sutra says that those
who wish to uphold the true dharma should befriend
themselves with the king, arm themselves with bows
and arrows, and crush the enemies of the true dharma.
The 'Peaceful Practices' chapter of Lotus, however, says
that they should keep distance from those in power, humble
themselves, and be kind to enemies. Is there not quite a
difference between the two, the harsh way of the Nirvana
Sutra and the gentle way of the Lotus. I say in response,
Although the Nirvana Sutra preaches mostly the aggressive
means of propagation, it also preaches the benevolence of
the bodhiisattva who loves all the people just as one loves an
only child. So, it is not that it does not recognize 'persuasion'
as a means of propagation. Although the 'Peaceful Practices'
chapter mainly preaches the gentle means of propagation,
another chapter of the Lotus Sutra says that anyone who does
harm to the practitioner of the Lotus would have his head split
into seven pieces. Thus, this sutra also endorses the aggressive
means. In other words, each of them preaches one or the other
as the situation demands."
Grand Master Chang-an in his annotations to the Nirvana Sutra states:
Regardless of monks or laymen, those who uphold the
dharma should not lose sight of the fundamental aim of
spreading the great teaching even at the cost of Buddhist
commandments. Upholders of the true dharma can not
be concerned with trivial matters, as it is said in the sutra
that they would not maintain dignity. In the past when the
world was at peace and the true dharma could be spread,
it was only necessary for them to keep Buddhist commandments,
not arms. Today, however, when the world is in full danger
and the true dharma is hidden, they have to keep arms, not
Buddhist commandments. Regardless of the past or present,
if the time is full of danger, they should arm themselves: and
if at peace, they should observe the Buddhist commandments.
Thus, the means of propagation should be chosen according to
the conditions of the time; it can not be said to be one way or
another.
As for your criticism that I, Nichiren, am belligerent, I am afraid that scholars today probably agree with you. Even my own disciples can not get rid of the same doubts as yours and act just like men of issendai despite my repeated remonstrations. So I have cited interpretations of T'ien-t'ai and Miao-le just before to guard against such criticism.
Now, two ways of propagation, the persuasive and aggressive, are incompatible as water and fire. The fire dislikes the water and the water hates the fire. Those who prefer the persuasive tend to laugh at those who practice the aggressive and visa versa. so, when the land is full of evil and ignorant people, the persuasive means should take precedence as preached in the "Peaceful Practices" (14th) chapter of the Lotus Sutra. However, when there are many cunning slanderers of the true dharma, the aggressive means should take precedence as preached in the "Never-Despising Bodhisattva" (20th) chapter.
It is the same as using cold water when it is hot and fire when it is cold. Plants and trees are followers of the sun, so they dislike the cold moon. Bodies of water are followers of the moon, so they lose their true nature when it is hot. As there are lands of evil men as well as those of slanderers of the true dharma in this Latter Age of the Decadent Dharma, there should be both aggressive and persuasive means of spreading the true dharma. therefore, we have to know whether Japan today is a land of evil men or that of slanderers in order to decide which of the two ways we should use.
Suppose someone asks whether or not it would be effective to carry out the aggressive means of propagation when the time requires the persuasive means and visa versa. To this question I would say it would not be effective. It is said in the Nirvana Sutra:
Bodhisattva Kasyapa inquired of the Buddha how
did His body become as indestructible as a diamond.
He responded to Kasyapa: 'The Buddha has an
indestructible body by virtue of upholding the true
dharma in My past lives. Good men! In order to uphold
the true dharma, you must arm yourselves with swords
and bows and arrows even if you can not observe the
Five Commandments and maintain your dignity. No
matter how hard you preach, unless you aggressively
defeat the evil opponents of Buddhism, you would not
be able to save yourselves and others. You should know
that such a person is an idle man. Even if you observe
commandments and practice pure conduct, you should
know, you will not attain Buddhahood. Should a monk
upholding the true dharma aggressively defeat violators
of the Buddhist commandments, probably they all would
become angry and try to harm him. Even if he were killed,
he is worthy of being called an observant of the
commandments and savior or himself and others."
Grand Master Chang-an says that whether we should adopt the aggressive means of propagation or the persuasive means must be decided according to the conditions of the time, and therefore, we cannot say either one way or the other. Grand Master T'ien-t'ai says of this: "It all depends on the time. Sometimes resort to the aggressive means, other times use the persuasive means." For instance, we can not harvest rice by cultivating rice paddies and planting rice seeds at the end of autumn.
During the era of Kennin (1201-03) two monks named Honen and Dainichi emerged to establish the schools of the Pure Land and Zen respectively. Honen declared that in the Latter Age of the Decadent Dharma not even one out of one thousand could obtain Buddhahood by means of the Lotus Sutra, whereas Dainichi maintained that Zen is the essence of Buddhism transmitted by non-literary and non-verbal means. As these two false teachings spread all over Japan, scholars of Tendai and Shingon Buddhism are afraid of the Pure Land and Zen followers and try to cater to their whims just like a dog wagging its tail in front of its master and mice terrified by a cat. Preaching in the service of kings and generals, they themselves speak of what would lead to the destruction of Buddhism and country. Such scholars of Tendai and Shingon Buddhism will fall into the realm of hungry spirits in this life and the hell of incessant suffering in future lives. Even if Tendai scholars reside in mountain forests and meditate on the '3,000 in one thought' doctrine or Shingon scholars stay in remote tranquility to concentrate on the three mystic practices (finger signs, spell words, and meditation) without fail, how can they attain Buddhahood without knowing whether the time calls for the aggressive means or the persuasive means of propagation?
Some people might wonder what is good about accusing those followers of the Pure Land and Zen Buddhism, making enemies of them. In response, I will cite the Nirvana Sutra:
Suppose there is a virtuous monk who does not
accuse anyone of harming Buddhism, does not
try to purge him or punish him. You should know
that such a monk is an enemy of Buddhism. In
case the monk accuses such a man, purges, and
punishes him, such a monk is a disciple of the
Buddha who truly follows Him.
Grand Master Chang-an explains this in his annotations to the Nirvana Sutra:
Those who destroy Buddhism are enemies of Buddhism. Those heartless people who keep friendly relationships with such evil doers by overlooking their sins are their enemies. Those who are kind enough to try to correct them are the upholders of the true dharma and true disciples of the Buddha. To prevent a friend from committing evil is really a friendly act. Therefore, one who accuses those of harming Buddhism is the Buddha's disciple.; and one who does not purge evil doers is an enemy of Buddhism.
Why did Sakyamuni Buddha, Taho Buddha, and many Buddhas in manifestation coming from all over the universe gather together in the 'Appearance of a Stupa' (11th) chapter of the Lotus Sutra? It was for the purpose of making sure that the Lotus Sutra would spread forever. As we think of the intention of those Buddhas who wished to spread the Lotus Sutra for the benefit of all the people in the future, their compassion seems greater than that of parents who see their only child faced with great suffering. Having no sympathy with those Buddhas, however, Honen tightly shut the gate to the Lotus Sutra so that no one in the Latter ages of the Decadent Dharma could enter it. It is a pity that Honen made them cast away the Lotus; it was just like fooling an idiotic child into throwing away his treasure.
Why shouldn't we warn our parents if we know that someone is trying to kill them? Shouldn't we prevent an evil drunken child from killing his parents? Shouldn't we prevent an evil man from setting a temple on fire? Should we leave our only child untreated when he is seriously ill? Those who do not discourage followers of Zen and Pure Land Buddhism in Japan are the same as those who do nothing to prevent evil acts. They are what Chang-an referred to when he says, 'Those heartless people keep friendly relationships with evil doers by overlooking their sins are their enemies.' I, Nichiren, am like a compassionate parent of everyone in Japan, whereas everyone in the Tendai school is their worst enemy. Hasn't Chang-an stated, 'To prevent a friend from committing an evil act is really an act of friendship.' Those who do not aspire to Buddhahood will never attain it.
Lord Sakyamuni Buddha was abused by all Brahmans as an evil man. Grand Master T'ien-t'ai was spoken ill of as 'a man who destroys his own five-foot body with his three inch tongue' by the three Southern masters and Four Northern masters of Buddhism in China and Monk Tokuitsu of Japan. Grand Master Dengyo was laughed at by scholar monks of Nara for not having seen the capital of T'ang China. However, these masters had nothing to be ashamed of because they were abused for the sake of the Lotus Sutra. Praise by the ignorant should be regarded as most dishonorable. Perhaps Tendai and Shingon monks would be happy to see me, Nichiren punished by the Kamakura Shogunate, though it is pitiful and strange of them.
Sakyamuni Buddha gave up his land of eternal tranquility for this world of suffering; venerable Kumarajiva traveled all the way from India to China; Grand Masster Dengyo risked his life in going to China to study Buddhism; Bodhisattva Deva was killed by Brahmans; Shishi Sonja was beheaded by the king; Bodhisattva Yakuo burned his elbow to offer it as a light in gratitude for the preaching of the Lotus; Prince Shotoku peeled off the skin on his finger to write in blood the title of the Bonmo-kyo; when Sakyamuni was a Bodhisattva, he sold his own flesh in order to make an offering; Gyobo Bonji used one of his own bones to write down the true teaching. These are examples of those who spread Buddhism 'in the way best suited to the situation,' as Grand Master T'ien-t'ai put it. Keep in mind that Buddhism must be spread according to the times. My exile is merely a trifle in this present life, which is not lamentable at all. Instead, I feel it is a great joy as I am sure I will be rewarded with great happiness in my future lives.
Commentary:
For those who, even after reading this Chapter of the Opening of the Eyes, persist in misunderstanding the import of the teachings on Nichiren regarding the gentle and forceful practices, here are some other pertinent passages from the writings of Nichiren:
“If, failing to understand this principle, one were to practice shoju or shakubuku at an inappropriate time, then not only would one be unable to attain Buddhahood, but one would fall into the evil paths. This is firmly laid down in the Lotus and Nirvana sutras, and is also clearly stated in the commentaries by T’ien-t’ai and Miao-lo. It is, in fact, an important principle of Buddhist practice.” (pg. 126)
“Some people criticize me, saying, ‘Nichiren does not understand the capacities of the people of the time, but goes around preaching in a harsh manner—that is why he meets with difficulties.’ Other people say, ‘The practices described in the “Encouraging Devotion” chapter are for bodhisattvas who are far advanced in practice; [Nichiren ought to follow the practices of] the “Peaceful Practices” chapter, yet he fails to do so.’ Others say, ‘I, too, know the Lotus Sutra is supreme, but I say nothing about it.’ Still others complain that I give all my attention to doctrinal teachings. I am well aware of all these criticisms against me. But I recall the case of Pien Ho, who had his legs cut off at the knee, and of Kiyomaro (Pure Man), who was dubbed Kegaremaro (Filthy Man) and almost put to death. All the people of the time laughed at them with scorn, but unlike those two men, those who laughed left no good name behind them. And all the people who level unjust criticisms at me will meet with a similar fate.
The Encouraging Devotion chapter says, ‘There will be many ignorant people who will curse and speak ill of us.’ I observe my own situation in this passage. Why should it not apply to all of you as well? ‘They will attack us with swords and staves,’ the passage continues. I have experienced this passage from the sutra with my own body. Why do you, my disciples, not do likewise?” (pg. 209)
Question: “How should one practice if one takes faith in the Lotus Sutra?” (pg. 125)
Answer: “Shoju is to be practiced when throughout the entire country only the Lotus Sutra has spread, and when there is not even a single misguided teacher expounding erroneous doctrines.”(pg. 126)
“The methods of shoju and shakubuku are also like this. When the correct teaching alone is propagated and there are no erroneous doctrines or misguided teachers, then one may enter the deep valleys and live in quiet contentment, devoting one’s time to reciting and copying the sutra and to the practice of meditation. This is like taking up a writing brush and inkstone when the world is at peace. But when there are provisional schools or slanderers of the correct teaching in the country, then it is time to set aside other matters and devote oneself to rebuking slander.” (126 & 127)
“Therefore, we must look at the world today and consider whether ours is a country in which only the correct doctrine prevails, or a country in which erroneous doctrines flourish.” (pg. 127)
“One should practice only the shakubuku method of propagation, and if one has the capacity, use one’s influence and authority to destroy slander of the correct teaching, and one’s knowledge of the teachings to refute erroneous doctrines.”(127)
“Question: Then it would be wrong to say that faith in any sutra or any Buddha of the expedient and provisional teachings equals faith in the Lotus Sutra. But what of those who believe only in the Lotus Sutra and carry out the five practices set forth in the sutra or follow the practices described in the ‘Peaceful Practices’ chapter? Could we not say that their practice accords with the Buddha’s teachings?
“Answer: Anyone who practices Buddhism should first understand the two types of practice—shoju and shakubuku….
“In this age, the provisional teachings have turned into enemies of the true teaching. When the time is right to propagate the teaching of the one vehicle, the provisional teachings become enemies. When they are a source of confusion, they must be thoroughly refuted from the standpoint of the true teaching. Of the two types of practice, this is shakubuku, the practice of the Lotus Sutra. With good reason T’ien-t’ai stated, ‘The Lotus Sutra is the teaching of shakubuku, the refutation of the provisional doctrines.’
“The four peaceful practices [in the 'Peaceful Practices' chapter] correspond to shoju. To carry them out in this age would be as foolish as sowing seeds in winter and expecting to reap the harvest in spring. It is natural for a rooster to crow at dawn, but strange for him to crow at dusk. Now, when the true and the provisional teachings are utterly confused, it would be equally unnatural for one to seclude oneself in the mountain forests and carry out the peaceful practice of shoju without refuting the enemies of the Lotus Sutra. One would lose the chance to practice the Lotus Sutra.
“Now, in the Latter Day of the Law, who is carrying out the practice of shakubuku in strict accordance with the Lotus Sutra? Suppose someone, no matter who, should unrelentingly proclaim that the Lotus Sutra alone can lead people to Buddhahood, and that all other sutras, far from enabling them to attain the way, only drive them into hell. Observe what happens should that person thus try to refute the teachers and the doctrines of all the other schools. The three powerful enemies will arise without fail.
“Our teacher, the Thus Come One Shakyamuni, practiced shakubuku during the last eight years of his lifetime, the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai for more than thirty years, and the Great Teacher Dengyo for more than twenty.” (pg. 394, “On Practicing the Buddha’s Teachings”)
“The Lotus Sutra is the teaching of shakubuku, the refutation of the provisional doctrines.” (pg. 392)
“Although few people slander the Lotus Sutra with actual words of abuse, there are none who accept it. Some appear to accept the sutra, but their faith in it is not as deep as their faith in the Nembutsu or other teachings. And even those with profound faith do not reproach the enemies of the Lotus Sutra. However great good causes one may make, or even if one reads and copies the entirety of the Lotus Sutra a thousand or ten thousand times, or attains the way of perceiving three thousand realms in a single moment of life, if one fails to denounce the enemies of the Lotus Sutra, it will be impossible to attain the way.” (WND p. 78)
“The Great Teacher Nan-yueh has stated, ‘If one sees a foe of the Lotus Sutra and yet fails to censure him, one becomes a slanderer of the Law and will fall into the hell of incessant suffering.’ Even a man of great wisdom, if he sees such a person and fails to speak out, will fall into the depths of the hell of incessant suffering, and as long as that hell shall endure, he will never escape.” (pg. 1021-1022)
“But the men of the Tendai school [who do not refute misleading teachings] are all great enemies of the people. [As Chang-an has noted,] ‘One who rids the offender of evil is acting as his parent.’” (pg. 287)
“For persons of the Tendai Lotus school to chant Namu-myoho-renge-kyo themselves and yet give their approval when others repeat the Nembutsu would be strange enough. Yet not only do they fail to remonstrate with them, but they criticize one who does confront the Nembutsu school, which is strange indeed!” (pg. 856)
“The question, however, is not whether one lives in the Former, the Middle, or the Latter Day of the Law, but whether one bases oneself upon the text of the true sutra. Again, the point is not who preaches a doctrine, but whether it accords with truth.” (pg. 168)
“A good believer is one who does not depend upon persons of eminence or despise those of humble station; who does not rely on the backing of superiors or look down on inferiors; who, not relying on the opinions of others, upholds the Lotus Sutra among all the sutras. Such a person the Buddha has called the best of all people.” (pg. 880)
“In both secular and religious realms, as is plain to see, good persons are rare while evil persons are numerous. Why, then, do you insist upon despising the few and favoring the many? Dirt and sand are plentiful, but rice and other grains are rare. The bark of trees is available in great quantities, but hemp and silk fabrics are hard to come by. You should put the truth of the teaching before everything else; certainly you should not base your judgment on the number of adherents.” (pg. 125)
“To ignore the supremacy of the Lotus Sutra and assert that other sutras stand on a par with it is to commit the worst possible slander of the Law, a major offense of the utmost gravity.” (pg. 61)
“Among my disciples, those who think themselves well versed in Buddhism are the ones who make errors. Namu-myoho-renge-kyo is the heart of the Lotus Sutra. It is like the soul of a person. To revere another teaching as its equal is to be like a consort who is married to two emperors, or who secretly commits adultery with a minister or a humble subject. It can only be a cause for disaster.” (pg. 903)
“Our seeing, hearing, and making no attempt to stop slander that, if we spoke out, could be avoided, destroys our gifts of sight and hearing, and is utterly merciless.
“Chang-an writes, ‘If one befriends another person but lacks the mercy to correct him, one is in fact his enemy.’ The consequences of a grave offense are extremely difficult to erase. The most important thing is to continually strengthen our wish to benefit others.
“Many such examples of slander are also found among Nichiren’s disciples and lay believers.” (pgs. 625-626)
“Now, in the Latter Day of the Law, who is carrying out the practice of shakubuku in strict accordance with the Lotus Sutra? Suppose someone, no matter who, should unrelentingly proclaim that the Lotus Sutra alone can lead people to Buddhahood, and that all other sutras, far from enabling them to attain the way, only drive them into hell.” (pg. 394)
“The Lotus Sutra is the teaching of shakubuku, the refutation of the provisional doctrines.” (pg. 392)
“If, failing to understand this principle, one were to practice shoju or shakubuku at an inappropriate time, then not only would one be unable to attain Buddhahood, but one would fall into the evil paths. This is firmly laid down in the Lotus and Nirvana sutras, and is also clearly stated in the commentaries by T’ien-t’ai and Miao-lo. It is, in fact, an important principle of Buddhist practice.” (pg. 126)
“‘Rely on the Law and not upon persons.’ Even when great bodhisattvas such as Universal Worthy and Manjushri, men who have returned to the stage of near-perfect enlightenment, expound the Buddhist teachings, if they do not do so with the sutra text in hand, then one should not heed them.
“The Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai states, ‘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.’ Here we see that one should accept what is clearly stated in the text of the sutras, but discard anything that cannot be supported by the text.” (pg. 109)
“A sutra says: ‘Rely on the Law and not upon persons. Rely on the meaning of the teaching and not on the words. Rely on wisdom and not on discriminative thinking. Rely on sutras that are complete and final and not on those that are not complete and final.’ The meaning of this passage is that one should not rely upon the words of the bodhisattvas and teachers, but should heed what was established by the Buddha.” (pg. 872)
“If we merely rely upon the commentaries of various teachers and do not follow the statements of the Buddha himself, then how can we call our beliefs Buddhism? To do so would be absurd beyond description!
“Therefore, the Great Teacher Chisho stated that, if one claims that there is no division of Mahayana and Hinayana among the sutras and no distinction of partial and perfect among revelations of the truth, and therefore accepts all the words of the various teachers, then the preachings of the Buddha will have been to no purpose.”
“T’ien-t’ai asserted, ‘That which has a profound doctrine and 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.’ He also said, ‘All assertions that lack scriptural proof are to be branded as false.’ How would you interpret such statements?” (pg. 56)
“The learned authorities in the world today suppose that there is no harm in mixing extraneous practices with the practice of the Lotus Sutra, and I, Nichiren, was once of that opinion myself. But the passage from the sutra [that I have just quoted] does not permit such a view.” (pg. 1014 & 1015)
“Therefore, the Great Teacher Chisho stated that, if one claims that there is no division of Mahayana and Hinayana among the sutras and no distinction of partial and perfect among revelations of the truth, and therefore accepts all the words of the various teachers, then the preachings of the Buddha will have been to no purpose.” (pg. 56)
“In a country where non-Buddhist teachings have already spread, one should use Buddhism to refute them. For example, the Buddha appeared in India and defeated the non-Buddhists; Kashyapa Matanga and Chu Fa-lan went to China and called the Taoists to task; Prince Jogu was born in the country of Japan and put Moriya to the sword.” (pg. 80)
“This passage from the Nirvana Sutra recounts the evil words that the various non-Buddhists spoke against Shakyamuni Buddha because he refuted the scriptures preached by their original teachers, the two deities and the three ascetics….In other words, persons who show no desire to hear or believe in the Lotus Sutra or who say that it does not match their capacity, though they may not actually slander it in so many words, are all to be regarded as persons of hatred and jealousy.” (pg. 206)
“Our own age is not unlike theirs. The Taoists Ch’u and Fei of China, and Moriya in Japan, by relying on the major and minor deities of their respective countries, became enemies of Shakyamuni Buddha.
“There is a difference between the Taoists and Moriya on the one hand and our contemporary priests on the other in that the former preferred gods to a Buddha while the latter have replaced one Buddha with another. However, they are alike in that they all abandoned Shakyamuni Buddha.” (pg. 838)
“But in ancient times, before the Buddhist teachings were introduced to this country, people knew nothing about either the Buddha or his teachings. It was only after the battle between Moriya and Prince Jogu that some people took faith in Buddhism, though others did not.
"The situation was similar in China. After Matanga had introduced Buddhism to China, he held a debate with the Taoists. When the Taoists were defeated in debate, then for the first time there were people who put their faith in Buddhism, though there were many more who did not.” (pg 514)
The 20,000,000 peaceful Buddhists who died at the hands of the violent Muslims and Rajput [Hindu] heretics in India and Kashmir during the Middle Ages would never have happened were they to have taken up the forceful practices of the Nirvana and Lotus Sutra. They were as ignorant as birds and beasts.
No comments:
Post a Comment