Response to SGI leader Zafwan on Quora

Zafwan:

"The origin of OM (AUM) is attributed to the concept of Brahma-Atman. Brahma is the Universal Truth, while Atman is the Soul (of the individual). OM is meant to encode the principle that Oneness of Individual with the Ultimate Truth - is the way of salvation.

This is very similar to Nichiren Buddhism, which teaches that Devotion (Namu) or Oneness with the truth of life (MyohoRengeKyo) - is the way of salvation and attaining enlightenment. Both perspectives employ Sound (Chanting) as a sacred path of practice.While Brahma refers to the Universal Law of reality - or the Tao - then it is quite comparable with the Mystic Law (Myoho) of the Lotus Sutra.

The main difference between Hinduism and Buddhism is the concept of Atman or Soul. Buddhism focuses on the concept of Action (Karma) and rejects having a fixed soul. The reason is that one can change own karma but cannot change the fixed soul. Karma is created by the individual through the working of the Law of Cause and Effect (Renge). Renge in Nichiren chant encodes the dynamism of Simultaneity of Cause and Effect.

So one can say that Myoho Renge mirrors Brahma-Atman (but in a more dynamic sense).

A marriage between the Lotus Sutra and Hinduism presents Vajrayana Buddhism with its mantra: OmManiPadmeHum (“Praise to the jewel in the Lotus”) similar to Nichiren chanting of NamMyohoRengeKyo (“Devotion to the wonderful Law of the Lotus”)

Both chants - as well as the concept of OM - are included within in the Lotus Sutra - emphasising on the sacredness of Sound (through Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara who appears in the Lotus Sutra as Bodhisattva Kannon, Perceiver of Worlds Sounds : Avalokitasvara | Dictionary of Buddhism | Nichiren Buddhism Library

The similarities then are many and the essence is very close. But I think that OM (if understood as the universal truth) is more abstract in essence rather than NamMyohoRengeKyo - which is about individuals' devotion (Namu) or individual’s own desire and determination (to be one with the Universal Law).

Another difference is that MyohoRengeKyo encodes the Mystic Law operative in the Ten Worlds of reality (including the worlds of sufferings). To transform the worlds of individual’s sufferings - one has to be in harmony and devotion (Namu or Nam) with the Universal Truth.

This inclusion of Transformation of the worlds of reality into enlightenment gives Lotus chanting more expansive (or detailed) dimension, as the Lotus is about transformation (flourishing over mud). But in both practices it is the Sound that is the common to be viewed as sacred.

“Voice makes the Buddha’s work” - Nichiren The Voice Does the Buddha’s Work

Response to Zafwan:

In The Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana, Ashvaghosha writes:

"As the World-honored one, considering the inferior intellectual caliber of Shravakas (Men of Learning) and Pratyekabuddhas (Men of Self Realization), taught them only the doctrine of the non-personal atman, [and did not make any further demonstration of the doctrine], the people have in the meantime formed a fixed idea of the transitoriness of the five skandhas, and being terrified of the thought of birth and death, have fanatically craved for Nirvana.

In order that this clinging may be eliminated, be it clearly understood that the essence of the five skandhas is uncreate, there is no annihilation of them; that since there is no annihilation of them, they are in their [metaphysical] origin Nirvana itself."

Nichiren teaches:

“Mahākāshyapa and Ānanda,” they said, “lived on for twenty or forty years after the passing of the Buddha, preaching the correct teaching. Presumably they conveyed the heart of all the teachings that the Buddha had propounded during his lifetime. Now we find that what these two men emphasized were simply the concepts of suffering, emptiness, impermanence, and non-self. Ashvaghosha and Nāgārjuna may be very wise, but are we to suppose that they are superior to Mahākāshyapa and Ānanda? This is our first objection. 

“Mahākāshyapa obtained his enlightenment through direct encounters with the Buddha. But these two men, Ashvaghosha and Nāgārjuna, have never encountered the Buddha. This is our second objection. 

“The non-Buddhist philosophers who preceded the Buddha taught that life is permanent, joyful, endowed with self, and pure. Later, when the Buddha appeared in the world, he declared that life is marked by suffering, emptiness, impermanence, and non-self. Now Ashvaghosha and Nāgārjuna insist that it is permanent, joyful, endowed with self, and pure. This being so, we must suppose that, since both the Buddha and Mahākāshyapa have passed away from the world, the devil king of the sixth heaven has taken possession of these two men and is trying to overthrow the teachings of Buddhism and replace them with the teachings of the non-Buddhists. 

“If that is so, then these men are the enemies of Buddhism. We must smash their skulls, cut off their heads, put an end to their lives, see that they get no more to eat. Let us drive them from the country!” 

Such were the declarations of the Hinayana believers. And Ashvaghosha and Nāgārjuna, each having only a few allies, were forced day and night to listen to these shouts of calumny, and morning and evening to bear the attacks of sticks and staves. 

But these two men were in fact messengers of the Buddha. For in the Māyā Sutra, it is predicted that Ashvaghosha will appear six hundred years, and Nāgārjuna, seven hundred years, after the Buddha’s passing. The same prediction is also recorded in the Lankāvatāra Sutra, and of course in the Buddha’s Successors Sutra as well. 

But the Hinayana believers would not heed these predictions, and instead attacked the Mahayanists blindly and without reason. “Since hatred and jealousy . . . abound even when the Thus Come One is in the world, how much more will this be so after his passing?” says the Lotus Sutra. Looking at the time of Ashvaghosha and Nāgārjuna, one begins to have a little understanding of what these words of the sutra really mean. Moreover, Bodhisattva Āryadeva was killed by a non-Buddhist, and the Venerable Āryasimha had his head cut off. These events, too, give one cause for thought." - On Repaying Debts of Gratitude, one of Nichiren's Five Major Works.

Perhaps there is no Joy, "TRUE SELF", Permanence, or Purity from Zafwan's SGI practice. 

BTW There was no response from Zafwan.