Total Pageviews

Thursday, August 5, 2021

Nearly Everything the Nichiren Shoshu is Fake

Regarding the Nichiren Shoshu. Everything is fake in the Nichiren Shoshu: Fake transfer documents; fake DaiGohonzon; fake Patriarchal Zen and Shingon-like transmission (fake Transfer of the Water of the Law; and fake Yuiga Yoga or the Oneness of living Master and Disciple principles); fake Three Treasures; fake Three Great Secret Laws; Nichiko Hori justified the inclusion of apocryphal [forged and altered] Gosho with the following quote: "In terms of doctrine, it's justifiable." -- "Collection of Study Essentials for the Fuji School, Nichiko Hori; fake unbroken lineage which has been broken more than a dozen times.




Me: It is logically unthinkable that something so "important" as the DaiGohonzon would never have been mentioned by Nichiren. There are only two possibilities. Nichiren never wrote about it because he never inscribed it or, at the very least, he never deemed it the most important Gohonzon OR there was a very far reaching conspiracy to destroy any and every mention of it. There is no evidence of such a conspiracy.

NST member: The Daishonin did talk of the DaiGohonzon in the Gosho. What I am saying is that all you lot can say is that the Goshos in which he does are faked.

Me: Not in one Gosho in Nichiren's or Nikko's hand is any mention ever made of a Gohonzon of 1279, let alone of a special Gohonzon.

NST: What I say is that your argument is incomplete and facile because The DaiGohonzon was carved in 1279 and many Goshos were written before that. Me: What about those after 1279 in the Daishonin's or Nichiren's hand, none of which ever mentions the DaiGohonzon? Why is the first mention of the DaiGohonzon made in the 15th century, 150 years after the Daishonin passed?

NST: Hundreds of Goshos have been lost or burned. We do not know the content of these Goshos. For this reason alone, you can not say that the Daishonin definitely did not write about the DaiGohonzon.

Me: The burning of Gosho hasn't been evidenced, just asserted by Nichiren Shoshu. There are no first hand references to the "Dai-Gohonzon" no secondary references from any contemporary Priests or lay people and your claim would mean that such people as Toki Jonin and Shijo Kingo must have betrayed Nichiren too. The Daishonin would truly have to have been a very poor judge of character to have everyone dismiss his central doctrine and dictates so quickly after his death. There are not even any third or fourth generation references.

That's a bit too much burning Karla. Plus, the circumstantial evidence goes strongly against the "Dai-Gohonzon", the denunciation by Nikko's temple Honmonji and the fact that Wooden Mandalas were in style when Nichiu inscribed the DaiGohonzon. There are dozens of Gosho written after 1279. Shakyamuni Buddha, the Lotus Sutra, the Daimoku, and the Gohonzon are referenced many dozens of time. Why not the most important doctrine and principle of all, the doctrine of the DaiGohonzon? The early Nikko Temples had not heard of such a thing and roundly denounced it when they did. So, the burning conspiracy would have been so far reaching that it would have had to have involved the other Nikko founded Temples who logically should have been on your side of the claim. The burning theory would simply have had to involve too many dispirit people, each and every one of them being required to betray their Master and totally ignore what you say is a central doctrine of the faith. Why is our forgery argument for the DaiGohonzon so ill conceived? The Daishonin wrote so many lines of warning about forgeries and appropriations, for example: The Bodaishin Ron attributed to Nagarjuna but really written by Pui-Kung; "fabricated sutras" such as the Platform Sutra of Hui Neng and the Meditation Sutra of Shan Tao; and what the Lotus Sutra itself teaches, "fabricate their own scriptures" [Chapter 13]; and the claims of Kobo Daishi that Ichinen Sanzen is found in the Shingon Sutras. Nichiren also speaks about those who change and alter scriptures in the Kaimoku Sho. Nikko too speaks about those who forge writings. "How much worse will it be after his passing" [in this latter age]?" All these individuals and sects were inferior. To make themselves appear superior, they falsified documents and relics. Taisekeji was in a bad state and needed something to bolster their membership. What better than a "super Gohonzon".

NST: Yet you believe that some time in the mid-fifteenth century, Nichiren Shoshu completely invented a DaiGohonzon and changed it's whole philosophy & doctored Goshos but no one noticed, left the religion in disgust, or even wrote about it.

Me: Some did indeed notice and even referenced that Nichiu contracted leprosy for his transgression of forging the DaiGohonzon. Many others observed Taisekeji's aberrant doctrines and ignored them. Probably because they deemed them too outlandish and Nichiren Shoshu too insignificant as a backwater temple. In retrospect, they made a big mistake. The Kansho accords from the late 1400s of which Taisekeji was a signatory, also make no mention of the DaiGohonzon:

An Accord on the Principles of the Dharma:

"From ancient times there have been disagreements concerning the doctrines of our sect. This and that position have been taken, with no agreement, and differences of opinion exist until today. Further, these have become an obstacle to the prosperity of the Buddha-Dharma. This is too lamentable for words and is sad indeed to consider. So it is that now the worthy head monks of the temples of all lineages have discussed the situation and determined that as we try to propagate our teachings far and wide it will not do for our teachings to lack unity. For this reason we here synthesize the ancient disagreements of our past masters to express our intent to repay the debt of gratitude to our teachers. With glad hearts we declare the unity of main and branch temples alike and realize a unified harmony that will last forever. We wish from now on to be as inseparable as a fish and water, and that this firm covenant will never wither or be defiled. Let the lamp of the Dharma shine for more than ten thousand years and the blessed life of the enlightenment of the three assemblies endure forever." - Kansho Accord

Sometimes the Nichiren Shoshu claim to have secret documents that purport to demonstrate the DaiGonzon's authenticity and other times, they claim that all references were destroyed by the evil Minobu sect. I propose that they do not release these secret documents because they too would be proven to be forgeries. Probably they have already shredded them. Karla also referenced that there is a writing of Nikko where "I Nikko transmit this DaiGohonzon to Nichimoku", naming the DaiGohonzon of the third month of Koan, 1279. Unfortunately, there has never been any document referencing the Ita-Mandala of Taisekiji independently authenticated by experts before the time of Nichiu. Nichiren and Nikko often labeled Gohonzon as "DaiGohonzon" or "DaiMandala". Nichiren also describes just what that supreme object of worship represents, a depiction of the Buddha's transmission of the Dharma to the Bodhisattvas from underground at the ceremony in the air. Therefore, any mandala would be a representation of the Gohonzon and all such depictions are DaiGohonzon. What the Nichiren Shoshu has done is to objectify that in a transubstantiated plank. This is similar to what the Roman Catholics have done with unleavened bread as the actual body of Christ. All Nichiren Shoshu would have to do is show us one document in Nichiren or Nikko's hand from the "many treasures of Taisekeji". But they can't!

As for the ephemeral burned or lost Gosho that may or may not have existed and which may or may not have mentioned the plank Gohonzon, no one can really speculate as to their content. Yet the Nichiren Shoshu goes beyond speculation to claim that they did indeed make reference to the DaiGohonzon of 1279. Similarly, their argument that Nikko in one writing actually mentioned the burning of Gosho. However, even were this writing authenticated, no mention is made as to their content, least of all a mention of the plank Gohonzon of 1279. The only thing he mentions is that the other senior priests were embarrassed because Nichiren wrote these Gosho in the common vernacular of the Japanese people. Again, this document has yet to be authenticated. It is a strange accusation since these same priests preserved many dozens of Nichiren's writings in the Japanese vernacular.

Forgeries after forgeries. Even the SGI acknowledges what they used to teach was based on forgeries:

"This Heritage and the essential matters of the Gohonzon are documents of the transmission of the Law from Nichiren to the successive Master of the Seat of the Law. They concern the transmission bestowed at the treasure tower, the transmission of the Heritage of the Law exclusively from one to the next." --Hon'ninmyo Sho, Gosho Zenshu, p. 887)

FORGERY: Not in Nichiren's hand [This work contains a reference to the "Nichiren School" (Nichiren Shu), a term that has been in use only since 1536. Also the term, "received by a single person" is found nowhere in the authenticated writings of Nichiren.]

"This transmission is the oral transmission from Nichiren to one legitimate disciple, the secret transmission entrusted to only one person." "Ubuyo Sojo Ji" [Transmission Concerning the First Bath], Shinpen, p. 1710.

FORGERY: Not in Nichiren's hand and with principles that run counter to the Five Major Writings.

"The successive Shonin are all, without exception, Nichiren." (Nichiren Daishonin, "Seven Teachings on the Gohonzon Transmitted from Master to Disciple", Fuji Shugaku Yoshu, vol. 1, p. 32; Nichiren Shoshu Seiten, p. 379)

FORGERY Not in Nikko's hand and runs contrary to everything written in Nichiren's and Nikko's authentic works.

"I have appointed Byakuren Ajari Nikko as the So-kanzu, the general chief priest, and transfer the entirety and every detail of the true doctrine of Nichiren. The top senior priests down to every disciple must regard each of the successive High Priests transferred from Nikko to each in succession to be the So-kanzu, general chief priest,without any opposition as in this time for throughout eternity in the future. ("On the One-Hundred and Six Articles", Gosho Zenshu, p. 869)

FORGERY Not in Nichiren's or Nikko's hand and runs counter to everything they had written that is authenticated.

"The scholars in the world today cannot understand this because they have not learned the transmission of the Heritage." ("Rissho Kansho," Shinpen, p. 770)

FORGERY Not in Nichiren's hand. Not accepted by Priests or scholars of any school or independents except for the Nichiren Shoshu.

"We, ourselves, cannot produce the Gohonzon. Since it's the enlightened entity of Nichiren Daishonin, **no one** has the authority **other than the successive high priests** who have been the **sole heirs to the heritage of the True Law**. We take no part in this. Therefore, the objects of worship inscribed by those in the Butsuryu and Minobu factions [of the Nichiren sect] are absolutely powerless. They are worthless because they are fake. In fact, they contain the power of evil spirits. That is why they are dangerous." -- Josei Toda, Daibyaku Renge, 98, p. 98.

Assertions based on FORGERIES and lack of faith in Namu Myoho renge kyo.

"Members of the Minobu school of the Nichiren sect chant daimoku. They have the Gosho Their recitation of the sutra also includes the Hoben and Juryo chapters. And, in the Shoshinkai, which consists of ex-priests of Nichiren Shoshu , and the portions of the sutra they recite and the daimoku that they chant are identical to the practice we observe. Though their religion may seem the same as ours, they lack the **single, unbroken heritage of the law received directly** from Nichiren Daishonin. If one's faith is not based on this line of **inheritance**, it is worthless to embrace any Gohonzon, for no benefit will be forthcoming. That is to say, "Without the lifeblood of faith, it would be useless to embrace the Lotus Sutra." -- Daisaku Ikeda, Buddhism in Action, vol 3, p 254

Assertions based on FORGERIES and lack of faith in Namu Myoho renge kyo

"The Dai-Gohonzon of the high sanctuary of true Buddhism at the Nichiren Shoshu head temple, Taiseki-ji, is the basis of all Gohonzons. The Gohonzon, which we are allowed to recieve so that we can pray in our own homes, can be inscribed **only** by one of the **successive high priests who inherit the true lineage** of Nichiren Shoshu." -- Daisaku Ikeda, Buddhism in Action, vol. 1, pg. 21

Assertions based on FORGERIES and lack of faith in Namu Myoho renge kyo

"It goes without saying that our Soka Gakkai is an organization of Nichiren Shoshu believers. Therefore, worshipping the Dai-Gohonzon and serving the high priest is the **fundamental** spirit of the Gakkai." Daisaku Ikeda, Inaugural address of president Ikeda, 1960

STUPIDITY based on FORGERIES and lack of faith in Namu Myoho renge kyo

"Needless to say, the Dai-Gohonzon of the high sanctuary inscribed for all mankind is the most **fundamental** basis of the movement for the Nichiren Shoshu Soka Gakkai [they have since changed the name to SGI]. The Dai-Gohonzon has been preserved and handed down within Nichiren Shoshu from the founder, Nichiren Daishonin, to his successor, Nikko Shonin, and then to the third high priest, Nichimoku Shonin, up to the present 67th high priest, Nikken Shonin. I hope, therefore, that we will courageously dedicate ourselves to studying Nichiren Daishonin's teachings in order to deepen our faith and to propagation true Buddhism in each country or community, as we follow the high priest's guidance, and respect the traditions and doctrines of Nichiren Shoshu." -- Daisaku Ikeda, Buddhism in Action, vol 1, p 33

Assertions based on FORGERIES and lack of faith in Namu Myoho renge kyo.

2 comments:

  1. You are such a good person Dr mark we all love you

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you. Not knowing what to share with you, I came upon this profound passage:

    "...We ordinary people can see neither our own eyelashes, which are so close, nor the heavens in the distance. Likewise, we do not see that the Buddha exists in our own hearts. You may question how it is that the Buddha can reside within us when our bodies, originating from our parents’ sperm and blood, are the source of the three poisons and the seat of carnal desires. But repeated consideration assures us of the truth of this matter. The pure lotus flower blooms out of the muddy pond, the fragrant sandalwood grows from the soil, the graceful cherry blossoms come forth from trees, the beautiful Yang Kuei-fei was born of a woman of low station, and the moon rises from behind the mountains to shed light on them. Misfortune comes from one’s mouth and ruins one, but fortune comes from one’s heart and makes one worthy of respect." - New Years Gosho

    ReplyDelete