Many Nichiren Sects and Scholars mistake Hongaku for Hongaku Shiso
"Needless to say, the explanation I wrote about Hongaku and Shigaku have nothing to do with the ideology of Hongaku of Medieval Tendai, which teaches that we need not practice because everyone is already enlightened."
Hongaku and Shigaku
Hongaku means original enlightenment, Shigaku means the attainment ofenlightenment. To explain the meaning, between Hongaku and Shigaku, there, are some parables. For one example, a man is in a dark room with furniture, but he can not see and make use of anything inside theroom because it is dark. However, when once he turns on the light, he is able to see the furniture clearly in the room. In this situation, the furniture was there from the beginning, however, he sees it only after he turns on the light. It is not that the furniture suddenly appeared, the furniture was always there. It was just that he could not see it... The fact that the furniture was there from the beginning stands for the "Hongaku." And turning on the light and being able to see the furniture stands for the "Shigaku."
Another example, there was a blind man. He could see nothing. One day an excellent doctor came to see him and had an operation on his eyes. As a result, the doctor opened his eyes and he is then able to see the sun and the moon. As we know, the sun and the moon were originally there (Hongaku). But he saw them for the first time when his eyes were cured (Shigaku).Therefore, when one attains enlightenment (Shigaku), they never fail to attain the original enlightenment (Hongaku). And it is not until when one has Shigaku, that he becomes aware of Hongaku (Oh! Everything is originally in the enlightened state!!).
So, until the time we have Shigaku, we should make use of our power of belief that this world is in reality the Buddha's Pure Land. Nichiren Daishonin said in his writings named "Junyoze, no koto": On Dreams and Waking Reality; after cleaning off the deluded thought and view, then you will see that everywhere in the dharma world is the, Pure Land of tranquil light, and that the body of your own is the Tathagata of original enlightenment (Hongaku) possessing the three bodies in-one."
Note. The parables regarding "Hongaku and Shigaku' are from the Mahaparinirvana-Sutra (pp.522-523, Vol- 2) which Rev. Honda cited in his book along with "Junyoze no koto."
Regarding my last letter about Hongaku and Shigaku Other schools of Nichiren say that the Jumonryu is using forgeries to support our view, and Rev. Honda would be rolling over in his grave" Does the word "forgery"indicate " Junyoze no koto' , this Gosho is one of Roku-nai Goshos, so it should be considered as a genuine Gosho. I think the attitude of discarding every Gosho that contradicts one's own opinion would prevent one from understanding properly Nichiren Buddhism. Moreover, I was surprised to hear the name of Rev. Honda. mentioned, because the answer note I wrote about Hongaku and Shigaku was what I studied from Rev. Honda's book named "Daizokyo Yogi" (a commentary on the essential point of the Buddhist Canon), which consists of thick eleven volumes, and Rev. Honda preaches about Hongaku and Shigaku in PP35-37 of its fourth volume, where Rev .Honda himself cites the very same part of "Junyoze no koto" that I translated and wrote about on another occassion. So that is of course no problem.
Incidentally, I have obtained almost all the books of Rev. Honda, and Studied them. So I want to say that people should not have a false or fixed idea on the teachings of the Jumonryu, the Bukkoku Hokke Kai or true Buddhism. Needless to say, the explanation I wrote about Hongaku and Shigaku have nothing to do with the Ideology of Hongaku of middle-oldT'ien-T'al, which teaches that we need not practice because everyone is already enlightened.
Let s think more like a Buddhist.
Contending with each other over whether a cone is round or triangle is nonsense. If our one eye and another engaged in a controversy over their views, it would be ridiculous.or if someone seriously had a tug of war with his one hand and another, it would seem very strange. Buddhism is not to be a fool, Enlightenment is to understand consistently what seems a contradiction at a glance to us worldly beings. Buddhism teaches us that it is A at one time, but another time it teaches it is B. Both A and B are the true aspects of the reality, but People tend to think A and B are not compatible because of their habitual flat thinking, Buddhism expects us to grow up toward the third dimension. In other words, we are apt to be a 'Tanbankan' (a foolish trainee) who is carrying a board on his shoulder and can see only one side of the way, then falls into a ditch a last. So Buddhism suggests Tanbankans to put such a board down from our shoulder (this is the Shakubuku), but Tanbankans would not easily stop disputing with each other (they think such a disputing is Shakubuku, but it isn't). If we do not care about this point, Nichiren's Buddhism will be a supplier of endless disputing as if disputing is the only work for the Nichiren Buddhists.
Hongaku Shigaku what is the difference?
Some of the other Nichiren schools and scholars think -Junyoze no Koto" is a forgery... But teachers of Jumonryu (followers of Nichiju) do not. Rev. Honda used this Gosho to support his view not only in -Daizokyo yogi- but also even in -Hokekyo Kogi" ("Lectures on the Lotus Sutra") the copy of which stated he had in his last note. Also Rev, Honda put this Gosho into his "Seigoroku- (analects of sacred words). Moreover. another famous teacher of Jumonryu, Rev. Nisshi Nakagawa also put this Gosho into his "Seigoroku' (analects of sacred words). I think the reason why other's insists that this Gosho is a forgery is that it upsets their biased view on Nichiren's Buddhism. It is a matter of course that this Gosho, and all Goshos listed on the "Roku Nai" do not bother the correct view of Jumonryu at all. Sects who dispute this original list "Roku Nai" dated exatly after St. Nichirens death, either have dicarded goshos or have added goshos from or too this ORIGINAL LIST; one only need simple logic to see clear in this instance...When one goes back to Nichiren's teachingsas did our orthodox founder Nichiju Daishoshi one may accept Nichiren'steaching exactly as they are!
Moreover, many Nichiren scholars and sects bring forward the so-called "Hongaku shiso" (ideology of Hongaku) and refutes it citing Rev. Honda's words in -Hokekyo kogi-, with which he thinks it a refutation to my last note regarding "Hongaku and Shigaku." And they hate Hongaku monism and thinks Hongaku monism is not the view of Jumonryu (followers of Nichiju),
I agree with them on the point that "Hongaku shiso- is wrong. But it is totally beside the mark to refute us with refuting "Hongaku shiso". Because the, term " Hongaku-itself never mean nor imply the "Hongaku shiso"- People misunderstand to take the term "Hongaku" immediately as "Hongaku shiso." This is the most critical and fundamental error in theirview, as I explained before, the term "Hongaku" only means the "Original Enlightenment." This, as everyone can see, very easily, is what is preached in the Honmon (Original Doctrine), especially in the Chapter 16 "Measure of life". On the other hand, in the Shakumon (Manifestation Doctrine) it preaches on the basis of "Shigaku" (Attainment of enlightenment).
Therefore, needless to say, the subject of "Hongaku and Shigaki" is parallel to the subject of "Honmon and Shakumon." If I add a little more explanation here, in the Shakumon there is a matter of attaining" but in the Honmom there is no such a matter because Honmon is the view or world which is preached from the stand point of Original (Eternal). In other words, Shakumon is based on dualism and preaches distinction (Discrimination) between worldly beings and Buddha; Honmon is based on monism and preaches that when Buddhism only upholds dualism, it loses its life.
There are in the world many other religions like Judaism, Christianity or Islam which is based on dualism with the teachings of absolute discrimination between divinity and humanity. And they are wrong in their object of Worship and doctrine of Ultimate dualism. In other words, it is a matter of common knowledge that Nichiren Buddhism is a religion of monism, because the Lotus Sutra (Hokekyo) is the teaching of One Vehicle (Ichi-jo). More importantly, it does not mean mechanical monism but means the monism that can only be attained by our faith of whole-hearted devotion (Namu). In this sense, chanting Namu Myoho Renge Kyo (Daimoku) wholeheartedly is essential for this monism. It is so to speak a bridge between dualism and monism. And this is the theory of Soku shin-Jobutsu (attaining buddhahood in this very body) of Nichiren Buddhism. So if one stays attached to the view that the dualism is the ultimate substance of the doctrine of Nichiren Buddhism, where can one find the chance of Jobutsu (attaining buddhahood)? With such a wrong view, Buddha and we have to be the parallel lines forever. In the 'Kanjin honzonsho" (On the Object of Worship in Contemplation), Nichiren Daishonin states:
"Now the saha World Of the Original Time is the Ever-abiding pure land", apart from the Three Calamities and outside of the Four Kalpas. The Buddha has not already been extinguished in the past and will not be born in the future. "Those who are converted are of the same essence."This is identical to the complete possession of the three thousand (realms.) of one's own mind, the three types world" (In the Kanjin Honzon Sho). How do people read this essential part of this Gosho? Do they reject the "Kanjin honzon sho' as a forgery, too. Moreover, "Hongaku shiso' is a distorted view derived from the erroneous understanding of the doctrine of Buddha's three bodies. This view does not take the three bodies as a united whole.
Instead, after separating worldly beings and Buddha, the view links the Dharma Body (but this is merely an abstract one which is equivalent to a man in the dark or a blind man before the operation in the parables I wrote about on another occasion) only to the worldly beings and the other two bodies (Enjoyment Body and Response Body) to the Buddha, Then, one who has this view stays conceited thinking that it is the worldly beings that are the Original Buddha and Buddhas like Shakya, Taho are merely the Manifestation Buddha. In this way this view shuts the door to attaining buddhahood. Therefore, the subject of "Hongaku shiso" is a matter of misunderstanding regarding the doctrine of Buddha's three bodies. That is by no means the matter of 'Hongaku and Shigaku', One must not be confused to connect the two wrongly.
I will again cite the "Junyoze no koto":
"It is like waking up to reality from a dream in which one sees various illusions. After cleaning off deluded thoughts and views, then one sees that everywhere in the dharma world is the Pure Land of tranquil light, and that the body of your own is the Tathagata of original enlightenment possessing the three bodies in one."
Let us see the underlined part, it expresses the ultimate state of us which comes after cleaning off the deluded thought and view (practice). And what one should know here is that the "Tathagata of original enlightenment possessing the three bodies in one" is the very"Actual Buddha' (Ji-Butsu.) revealed in the Chapter 16 of the Hokekyo, That is by no means the Ideality (Abstraction) of Unmanifest Original Enlightenment (Hongaku no ritai) or Abstract Buddha (Ributsu). Accordingly, there was no room for argument in here from the first without peoples confusion and misunderstanding. If theyhave some more confusion in these regards, they should read carefully the writings of Nichiren Daishonin or teachers of Jumonryu, especially Nichiju Daishoshi's "Fuji- sho" instead of those commentaries written by the other sect's and, or, scholars. So they will surely find the break-through.
Written by Reverend Sorin Yasuhara
HONGAKU AND SHIGAKU
CORRECTING H.G. LAMONT'S CRITICISM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HONGAKU and SHIGAKU:
Hongaku means Original Enlightenment. Shigaku means the attainment of enlightenment. To explain the relationship between Hongaku and Shigaku, there are some metaphors. For one example, a man is in a dark room with furniture, but he can not see and make use of anything inside the room because it is dark. However, when once he turns on the light, he gets to be able to see the furniture clearly in the room. In this situation, the furniture was there from the beginning, however, he sees it only after he turns on the light. It is not that the furniture suddenly appeared. The furniture was always there. It was just he could not see it. The fact that the furniture was there from the beginning stands for the Hongaku. And the fact that turning on the light and getting to be able to see the furniture stands for the Shigaku. Another example, there was a blind man. He could see nothing. One day in excellent doctor came to see him and had an operation on his eyes. As a result, the doctor opened his eyes and he gets to be able to see the sun and the moon. As we know, the sun and the moon were originally there (Hongaku). But he saw them for the first time when his eyes were cured (Shigaku).
Therefore, when one attains enlightenment (Shigaku), he never fails to attain original enlightenment (Hongaku). And it is not until when one has
Shigaku that he becomes aware of Hongaku (Oh! Everything has been originally in the enlightened state!!).
So, until the time we have Shigaku, we should make use of our power of belief that this world is in reality the Buddha's Pure Land. Nichiren Daishonin said in his writing named "Junyoze no koto", "Like waking up to reality from a dream where one saw various illusion; after cleaning off the deluded thought and view, then you will see that everywhere in the dharma world is the Pure Land of tranquil light, and that the body of your own is the Tathagata of original enlightenment (Hongaku) possessing the three bodies in one."
Some say that "Junyoze no koto" is a 'forgery' ? However, this Gosho is one of Roku-nai Goshos. So it should be considered as a genuine Gosho. I think the attitude of discarding every Gosho that contradicts one's own opinion would prevent one from properly understanding Nichiren Buddhism. The note I wrote about Hongaku and Shigaku was from what I studied from Rev. Honda's book named "Daizokyo Yogi" (a commentary on the essential point of the Buddhist Canon), which consists of eleven thick volumes. Rev. Honda preaches about Hongaku and Shigaku in PP35-37 of the fourth volume, where he cites the very same part of 'Junyoze no koto' that I translated and wrote in the last answer note. So that is of course no problem. Incidentally, I have obtained almost all books of Rev. Honda and studied them precisely before. So I want to say that people should not have a false fixed idea of the teachings of Kempon Hokke or true Buddhism Needless to say, the explanation I wrote about Hongaku and Shigaku have nothing to do with the Ideology of Hongaku of medieval old T'ien T'ai, which teaches that we need not practice because everyone is already enlightened.
Rev. Sorin Yasuhara
Kempon Hokke Shu
FOLLOW UP TO CORRECTING H.G. LAMONT'S VIEW:
September 22, 1998
As you know the parables regarding "Hongaku and Shigaku" I wrote before was from the Mahaparinirvana Sutra (pp.522-523 Vol,2) which Rev. Honda cited in his book along with the "Junyoze no koto".
Answer to Mr. Lamont's last note
1) Lamont and some of the other sect's scholars thinks "Junyoze no Koto' is a forgery. But teachers of Jumonryu (followers of Nichiju) do not. Rev. Honda used this Gosho to support his view not only in "Daizokyo yogi" but also even in "Hokekyo Kogi" ("Lectures on the Lotus Sutra") the copy of which Lamont stated he had in his last note. Also Rev. Honda put this Gosho into his "Seigoroku" (analects of sacred words). Moreover, another famous teacher of Jumonryu, Rev. Nisshi Nakagawa also put this Gosho into his "Seigoroku" (analects of sacred words). I think the reason why he insists that this Gosho is a forgery is that it vexes his view on Nichiren Buddhism. It is a matter of course that this Gosho does not hinder the correct view of the Jumonryu.
2) Lamont brings forward the so-called "Hongaku shiso" (ideology of Hongaku) and refutes it citing Rev. Honda"s words in "Hokekyo kogi," with which he believes is a refutation of my last note regarding "Hongaku and Shigaku'. Lamont hates Hongaku monism and thinks Hongaku monism is not the view of the Jumonryu (followers of Nichiju).
I agree with him on the point that "Hongaku shiso" is wrong. But it is totally beside the point to refute us with refuting "Hongaku shiso". Because the term "Hongaku" itself never means nor implies "Hongaku shiso". He misunderstands to take the term "Hongaku" as meaning "Hongaku shiso". This is the most critical and fundamental error of his view.
As I explained earlier, the term "Hongaku" only means "Original Enlightenment". This, as everyone can very easily see, is what is preached in the Honmom (Original Doctrine), especially in the Chapter 16 'Measure of life'. On the other hand, the Shakumon (Manifestation Doctrine) preaches on the basis of "Shigaku" (Attainment of Enlightenment). Therefore, needless to say the, subject of "Hongaku and Shigaku" is parallel to the subject of "Honmon and Shakumon".
To add a little more explanation here, in the Shakumon there is a matter of "attaining" but in the Honmom there is no such matter because Honmon is the view or world which is preached from the stand point of Original (Eternal) Buddha, In other words. Shakamon is based on dualism and preaches distinction (discrimination) between worldly beings and Buddha; Honmom is based on monism and preaches the ultimate equality of worldly beings and Buddha. If Buddhism does not preach monism and only upholds dualism, it loses its life. There are in the world many other religions like Judaism, Christianity and lslam which are based on dualism and the teachings of absolute discrimination between divinity and humanity. And they are wrong in their object of worship and doctrine of ultimate dualism. In other words, it is common knowledge that Nichiren Buddhism is a religion of monism, because the Lotus Sutra (Hokekyo) is the teaching or One Vehicle (Ichi-jo). More importantly, it does not mean mechanical monism but means monism that can only be attained through faith and whole-hearted devotion (Namu). In this sense, chanting Namu Myoho Renge Kyo (Daimoku) wholeheartedly is essential for this monism. It is a bridge between dualism and monism and the theory of Sokushin-Jobutsu (attaining buddhahood in this very body).
So if one remains attached to the view that dualism is the ultimate substance of the doctrine of Nichiren Buddhism, where can we find Jobutsu (attaining buddhahood)? With such a wrong view, Buddha and we would remain parallel lines forever.
In the "Kanjin Honzon Sho" (On the Object of Worship in Contemplation), Nichiren Daishonin states "Now the Saha World of the Original Time is the
Ever-abiding Pure Land apart from the Three Calamities and outside of the Four Kalpas. The Buddha has not already been extinguished in the past and will not be born in the future. Those who are converted are of the same essence. This is identical to the complete possession of the three thousand (realms) of one's own mind, the three types of world" (translated by Lamont).
How does Lamont read this essential part of this Gosho? Does he also reject the "Kanjin Honzon Sho" as a forgery? "Hongaku Shiso", on the other hand, is a distorted view derived from the erroneous understanding of the doctrine of the Buddha's three bodies. This view does not take the three bodies as a unity. Instead, it separates worldly beings and the Buddha. The view merely links the Dharma Body (but this is merely an abstract one which is equivalent to a man in the dark or a blind man before the operation in the parables I cited above in the first note) to worldly beings and the other two bodies (Enjoyment Body and Response Body) to the Buddha.
Then, one who adopts this view becomes conceited thinking that the worldly beings are the Original Buddha and Buddhas like Shakya, Taho are merely Manifestation Buddhas, In this way this view shuts the door to attaining buddhahood. Therefore, "Hongaku shiso" is a misunderstanding regarding the doctrine of the Buddha's three bodies. That is by no means the matter of "Hongaku and Shigaku". One must not confuse or connect incidentally, the part of the Gosho I cited from the Junyoze no koto:
"It is like waking up to reality from a dream in which one sees various illusions. After cleaning off deluded thoughts and views, then one sees that everywhere in the dharma world is the Pure Land of tranquil light, and that the body of your own is the Tathagata of original enlightenment possessing the three bodies in one."
This expresses our ultimate state of life after cleaning off deluded thoughts and views through practice. The "Tathagata of original enlightenment possessing the three bodies in one" is the very "Actual Buddha" (Ji Butsu) revealed in Chapter 16 of the Lotus Sutra. It is not Ideality (Abstraction) of Unmanifest Original Enlightenment (Hongaku no ritai) or the Abstract Buddha (Ributsu).
Accordingly, without Lamont's confusion and misunderstanding, there is no argument. If he has any more confusion in this regard, he should read carefully the writings of Nichiren Daishonin and the teachers of the Jumonryu, especially Nichiju Daishoshi's "Fuju-sho" instead of those commentaries written by the other sect's's scholars. Then he will surely experience a break-through.
With Gassho,
Rev. Sorin Yasuhara
No comments:
Post a Comment