This is another in a series of daily articles concerning Kishio Satomi's book, "Japanese Civilization; Its Significance and Realization; Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles," which details the foundations of Chigaku Tanaka's interpretation of Nichiren Buddhism and Japan's role in the early 20th century.

---

Kishio Satomi’s book “Japanese Civilization: Its Significance and Realization, Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles” carefully cites the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren’s writings in explaining his interpretation of Nichiren’s teachings – what he calls Nichirenism. Nichiren’s writings are from the translation of his father, Chigaku Tanaka. The quotes from the Lotus Sutra use H. Kern’s translation and a translation by Chiō Yamakawa, a member of Tanaka’s Kokuchukai, the Pillar of the Nation Society. While most of Satomi’s book is a straightforward explanation of the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren’s teachings, there are a couple of odd interpretations.

Consider Satomi’s explanation of Chapter 13, Encouragement for Keeping this Sutra. In that chapter, as Senchu Murano translates it, we have Medicine-King and Great-Eloquence Bodhisattvas and their twenty-thousand attendants addressing the Buddha:

“World-Honored One, do not worry! We will keep, read, recite and expound this sūtra after your extinction. The living beings in the evil world after [your extinction] will have less roots of good, more arrogance, more greed for offerings of worldly things, and more roots of evil. It will be difficult to teach them because they will go away from emancipation. But we will patiently read, recite, keep, expound and copy this sūtra, and make various offerings to it. We will not spare even our lives [in doing all this].”

Later in the prose section of the chapter we have:

Thereupon the World-Honored One looked at the eighty billion nayuta Bodhisattva-mahāsattvas. These Bodhisattvas had already reached the stage of avaivartika, turned the irrevocable wheel of the Dharma, and obtained dhārāṇis. They rose from their seats, came to the Buddha, joined their hands together [towards him] with all their hearts, and thought, “If the World-Honored One commands us to keep and expound this sūtra, we will expound the Dharma just as the Buddha teaches.”

It is these Bodhisattvas who offer in gāthās the prediction of abuse and hardship to be expected by any expounder of the Dharma in the Sāha World after the death of the Buddha.

That’s not how Satomi sees it. Despite the fact that the Bodhisattvas from Underground and their leader Honge Jogyo don’t arrive until two more chapters later in the sutra, Satomi says that in Chapter 13 “the Buddha prophesied all things about Honge Jogyo, who was entrusted with all the rights and mission of the propagation of the Sutra in the future.”

These stanzas prophesied Honge Jogyo’s activity in the days of the Latter Law. At the beginning of Chapter XV, “Issuing-out-of-the-Earth,” these Bodhisattvas begged that they might preach Buddha’s True Law in the future, but, contrary to expectation, Buddha endeavored to dissuade them therefrom. They were utterly surprised. At that very moment, the innumerable Bodhisattvas, following the four leaders whose senior was named Viśiṣṭacāritra, Honge Jogyo, appeared in quick succession out of the Earth, but nobody knew, even from one of themselves, what sort of Bodhisattvas they were. The general astonishment increased more and more; at last, Bodhisattva Miroku (Skt. Maitreya), as the representative, asked Buddha, “Who are these Bodhisattvas who have just appeared out of the Earth? None of us, not even I, know who they are.” Then the answer came they were none other than His disciples from eternity, but the answer was ignotum per ignotius (Latin for “the unknown by the more unknown”) for them.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p41-43

There’s a similarly odd condensation of the sutra by Satomi in the telling of the story the Stupa of Treasures and the revelation of the Buddha’s emanated bodies who are preaching in the worlds of the 10 directions.

In Murano’s telling, the Stupa suddenly emerges from the earth and hangs in the air. A voice inside is heard praising Śākyamuni and saying his teaching of the Lotus Sutra is all true. When Śākyamuni is questioned about this voice he tells the story of Many Treasures Buddha and his vow to go anywhere to hear the sutra. When asked to open the Stupa and show Many Treasures to the gathering, Śākyamuni says that to do so would require him to call back all of the Buddhas of his replicas. He then emits a ray of light and calls back his replicas.

This is how Satomi treats this scene:

Buddha Shakyamuni has already revealed his perfect idea of truth as the Myōhōrengekyō. Thereupon He wished to expand and continue His creative activities and benevolence even into the far future, so here we must not neglect Chapter XI, entitled “The Apparition of the Heavenly Shrine.”

This chapter describes the appearance in heaven of a great and magnificent shrine decorated with the seven kinds of precious jewels, just in the very front of Shakyamuni who was in the pulpit. And then a voice was heard from within the shrine in admiration of Shakyamuni’s revelation of Truth. The voice spoke as follows, by the Buddha Tahō (Skt. Prabhūtaratna, i.e. the Buddha of Accumulated Treasures):

“Excellent, excellent, Lord Shakyamuni! Thou hast well expounded this Dharmaparyāya of the Lotus of the True Law. So it is, Lord; so it is, Sugata.”

Lord Shakyamuni then darted a bright ray from his brow toward the ten directions of space, whence a great multitude of Bodhisattvas happened to be coming to see Lord Shakyamuni, and they all assembled in this world. But this world was too small to let them sit down together, notwithstanding that they formed a diminutive part of the magnificent bodies of Lord Shakyamuni. Kern’s translation runs thus:

“At that moment the whole sphere was replete with Tathagatas, but the beings produced from the proper body of the Lord Shakyamuni had not yet arrived, not even from a single point of the horizon.”

Therefore, Shakyamuni enlarged this world to a vast one in the eight directions and purified it, thus He enlarged and purified the world three times. But we cannot help wondering, how it was done by Buddha Shakyamuni who had become Buddha only forty years earlier. One of the most important problems lies here, namely His eternal personality, which was suggested in the above story and will be properly brought to light in Chapter 16. But Buddha’s great hint was lost upon them so far as this Chapter 11 is concerned.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p39-40

Satomi certainly has a point about Śākyamuni’s great hint. If the congregation was surprised in Chapter 15 to learn that Śākyamuni had taught so many Bodhisattvas in the past, why didn’t they wonder about these countless replicas back in Chapter 11?

---

Table of ContentsNext

This is another in a series of daily articles concerning Kishio Satomi's book, "Japanese Civilization; Its Significance and Realization; Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles," which details the foundations of Chigaku Tanaka's interpretation of Nichiren Buddhism and Japan's role in the early 20th century.

---

The concept of Ichinen Sanzen is incorporated in Kishio Satomi’s Nichirenism.

In the chapter “Introduction” in the Hokekyo, the significant purport of the preaching of the Scripture is stated in idealized words. He afterwards elucidated the true value of human nature as it is for the first time in the second chapter. It is the unique theory and is different from all other Scriptures. The few essential lines of it are:

“The Law which Buddha attained to perfection is most rare and difficult to understand. None but between a Buddha and a Buddha truth of reality is unravelled. It is what I call Such Forms, Such Natures, Such Bodies, Such Powers, Such Functions, Such Dynamic Causes, Such Static Causes, Such Effects, Such Retributions and Such Consummate and Consistent Unities of Origin and End of all Beings ” (Yamakawa, p. 42 ; see Kern, p. 32).

According to Tendai this doctrine is termed “Mutual Participation of the Ten Worlds,” that is to say, Buddha classified human nature into ten worlds from Buddha to Hell. The possibility of the approximation of every being to the mortal Buddha was not admitted in any previous Scriptures, while in the Hokekyo it became clear that every being has the nature of Buddha or the divine essence in his very soul. So, if he looks within himself for his hidden treasure, namely the intrinsic value of personality, and leads it to realization, then he can make himself Buddha. Because these ten worlds participate in one another ten times ten. Hence the theory of “Mutual Participation.” If so, why such different worlds? Tendai and Nichiren explained it by “Tenfold Suchness,” Japanese technic “Jūnyo,” i.e. ten categories like the following :

1. Form or Essence (So).
2. Nature or Attribute (Sho).
3. Body or Manifestation (Tai).
4. Energy or Power or Potency (Riki),
5. Movement or Function (Sa).
6. Dynamic Cause (In).
7. Statistic Cause (En).
8. Effect (Kwa),
9. Retribution or Compensation (Ho)
10. Consummate and Consistent Unity of Origin and End (Hon-mats Kukyō Tow).

This causality or mutuality, “Tenfold Suchness of Reality,” shows the differences as such ten worlds. Each of the ten interrelated to each, and make a hundredfold worlds, and if each of these has the interrelation with “Tenfold Suchness,” then “A Thousandfold Suchness” and again if it is correlated with “Three States of the Body and Spirit,” we then have “Three Thousandfold worlds.” The Three States of the body and spirit (Japanese, San Seken, i.e, three kinds of the world) are nothing but another view of the world in Buddhism. This is shown in the following table :

1. All living creatures.
2. Earth or Land.
3. Five accumulated essences of the human body.
   1. Substance.
   2. Perception.
   3. Conception.
   4. Action.
   5. Knowledge.

It is wonderful that all these worlds are inherent in our minds; and this doctrine is termed “Ichinen Sanzen,” meaning “Three thousand Worlds inherent in one person.”

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p34-37

This theory is given special emphasis in Kishio Satomi’s Nichirenism.

The theory of the Tenfold Suchness in the Hokekyo … guides the principle of the Mutual Participation. According to it, all beings have all the natures and tendencies of their various personal characters innately. Real Suchness, the truth of the universe, exists in such a phenomenon. Reality and phenomena are inseparable. But if there is no one who keeps the truth, then the truth or the law is equal to nothing. However high and sublime the Supreme Being may be, if we ourselves do not enter the ideal of it, and do not realize in our own lives its principle and form, it is just an idol and our existence worthless.

Therefore, all the beings, Buddha and man, saint and layman, must be united under the fundamental primeval virtues of the supreme principle of our lives.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p79

For Satomi mutual participation encompasses both good and evil.

According to the principle of Mutual Participation, all natures are inherent in our mind a Priori, in other words, from God-nature to Satan-nature inhere in us. Therefore even the Buddha or God has quite naturally an evil nature or hellish mind; Buddha is Buddha because He cultivated Himself and He enlightened all hellish natures and made them refined. So also can we redeem evil-natured people. If there is no element of Satan or hell or evil or that sort of thing in God or Buddha, He is a mere spiritual cripple. How can He redeem evil natures? The conception of Sin must not be dramatized by mythology. Sin co-exists with divine nature in man and in God. But the difference between man and God depends on their effect for the enlightenment of natures. Thus, if we awake in our valuable nature and realize that its value continues everlastingly, in other words, from moment to eternity, from man to God, then we can recognize the true significance of lives. The doctrine of the Sacred Title is shown thus briefly.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p76

Satomi’s Nichirenism embraces the unity of opposites.

Keeping this in view it will be easy to understand that Nichiren’s idea consisted in “Coincidentia oppositorum” [unity of opposite] and “Synthetic union.” According to him, all beings on the one side are a mass of lust, but nevertheless they are, on the other side, Buddha in nature or Buddha in substance. Therefore, if they would self-awaken to their true value and strain every nerve to get near their intrinsic Buddhahood, significant lives would be established. For that reason he divided the Buddha into two kinds, viz. Buddha-in-Nature and Buddha-in-Realization. The former corresponds to normal man and the latter means Buddha himself. Besides, all beings from the Buddha to Hell or from man to all lower animate creatures are united in the highest principle, that is to say, Myōhōrengekyō.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p82

Satomi’s discussion of lust might be problematic for some. Still, taken in the context of the Ichinen Sanzen, this is hardly controversial.

Nichiren, moreover, intended to solve the problem of the relation between God and man. If the evil is denied, then goodness must be denied as a matter of course. There is no God outside of our lust, nor divine thing except our nature. Because our nature is existence as a whole, as is shown in the doctrine of the Mutual Participation. Therefore if our lust were annihilated divine nature would then also be nonexistent. From such a point of view he did not adopt Stoicism or asceticism, while on the other hand he did not admit secularism or vulgarism. With regard to this, he asserted that we must spiritualize lust and instinct, but not exterminate them.

Lust will turn into divine power if we spiritualize it. Let lust be divine power, let evil be goodness and let the wicked perform divine action: therein Nichiren’s thought lies. Once he writes to Shijo Kingo, a warrior, as under:

“Even when in the act of sexual intercourse if one devoted oneself to the Sacred Title, lust would be supreme signification and ‘Life and Death is Nirvana’ would be found in it ” (Works, p. 853).

He writes again to him :

“Utter Namu-Myōhōrengekyō’ even while drinking wine in company with your wife. Don’t let the heart suffer, don’t indulge in any pleasure. Be happy to utter the Sacred Title when fortune favors you or during the time of misfortune. Is it not the enjoyment of your own faith of the Hokekyo? ” (Works, Pe 711).

Thus did he teach his disciples, with views which totally differ from the Hinayana Buddhists’ view of Nirvana. Therefore such an excellent law of the Sacred Title was declared to Honge Jogyo from Buddha Shakyamuni in the Hokekyo for the purpose of propaganda in the beginning of the Latter Law.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p74-75

---

Table of ContentsNext

This is another in a series of daily articles concerning Kishio Satomi's book, "Japanese Civilization; Its Significance and Realization; Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles," which details the foundations of Chigaku Tanaka's interpretation of Nichiren Buddhism and Japan's role in the early 20th century.

---

Kishio Satomi’s Nichirenism may argue that “Confucius or Christ or Mohammed or any sages are nothing but one of the distributive bodies of this One and Only Buddha” but nothing distracted from the supremacy of the Lotus Sutra.

There is no doubt that Buddha himself repudiated all the sermons which he preached prior to the Hokekyo. We must take into account that there exists one scripture which was preached as the prolegomena or introductory scripture to the Hokekyo, entitled “ Muryōgi-kyo” (Skt, Amitārtha-sūtra). In the second chapter thereof, Buddha says:

“I did not reveal the truth during these forty years.”

The Muryōgi-kyo shows that all the preachings of Buddha prior to the Hokekyo are intended to help the understanding of the true Buddhism, which could not be preached in early days owing to the rudimentary culture of the people. Therefore, Buddha preached many different theories for the sake of training, and he tried all means in order to make people capable of accepting His true teaching. Moreover, it is mentioned in the same chapter thereof that those innumerable significations which were sermonized prior to the Hokekyo, emanated from the One Truth, and the One Truth is nothing but ” Suchness.”

But he did not sermonize about the “Suchness” in detail in that scripture, for he sinks into deep meditation as soon as the above preaching ends. He is going to reveal the truth as to how the pulpits of the Hokekyo open.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p34

As for the Lotus Sutra, Satomi’s Nichirenism is firmly in the Shōretsu family of Nichiren schools. Shōretsu schools consider the first half of the Lotus Sūtra as inferior, since the essence is found only in the second fourteen Honmon chapters. Itchi schools instead maintain that the entire 28 chapters should be considered as a whole. Nichiren Shoshu and Soka Gakkai are examples of Shōretsu schools; Nichiren Shu holds that the entire Lotus Sūtra is valuable.

[Nichiren] had come to know that the Hokekyo alone is the true teaching of Buddha and that all the rest are simply for the purpose of pious imposition (the end sanctifies the means), so he adopted the Hokekyo as the authority. For in all the Scriptures, except the Hokekyo, there is no principle enabling man to become God, because they do not evince the Mutual Participation of the Ten Worlds. Moreover, they look upon Buddha Shakyamuni merely as having been born in India and become Buddha six years after he left the castle of Gaya. In other words, these are their two fundamental weak points. Thus Nichiren made the Hokekyo his basis, without however neglecting the examination of the Hokekyo itself. He made the comparison between the two parts of the Hokekyo; the Shakumon, which is composed of the first fourteen chapters, and the Honmon, the remaining fourteen chapters of the Scripture. The one defective point which disregarded the Mutual Participation is eliminated in the Shakumon of this Scripture, but there remained one more weak point which I have already mentioned. Therefore he gave up the Shakumon in favor of the Honmon. Thus he championed the cause of the Honmon, and lastly he compared Introspection and Practice with Doctrine, and of course he acknowledged the superiority of the Introspection and Practice of the Hokekyo.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p16-17

Later, in discussing the superiority of the Honmon, Satomi writes:

There are two evident divisions in the Scripture, viz. the first fourteen chapters from I to XIV, which are called “Shakumon,” and the remaining fourteen chapters which are called “Honmon.” Let us contrast the characteristics of these two parts.

The idea of the former is a sort of mechanism and of the latter teleologism ; and again, the one is philosophical, realistic, inductive, comparative and materialistic, while the other is religious, idealistic, deductive, dogmatic and spiritualistic. Then those two opposite tendencies are blended into a consistent harmony in a systematic course. Two renowned scholars, Tendai, the Great Master in China, and Dengyo, the Great Master in Japan, are the chief authorities in the School of the Hokekyo, and at the same time they are known as the forerunners of Nichiren. But there is a great difference in their attitudes towards the Hokekyo. Nichiren based his position on the latter, the Honmon, but Tendai and Dengyo adopted the former, the Shakumon theory being accepted by them, whereas Nichiren accepted practice seriously; the difference being due to their different missions and times.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p33

Satomi strenuously defends Nichiren’s focus on the Lotus Sutra in exclusion to all others:

In respect of criticism, [Nichiren] strictly adhered to the authority of the Scriptures and facts, and often advocated the “Four Laws” of the Nehangyo (Skt. Mahāparinirvāṇa-Sūtra). Buddha says in it:

“Those monks shall trust the Four Laws: What are the four? Trust the Law, but not Man; Trust Signification of the Scriptures, but not mere words; Trust wisdom, but not knowledge; Trust the Perfect Scripture, but not the Scriptures in imperfection.”

Nichiren believed faithfully in this instruction of Buddha and therefore he could not help attacking all Buddhist sects. His criticism can be divided into two classes, the one is a general criticism and the other a special one. He thoroughly investigated all the Scriptures and he began by classifying them according to their signification and to Buddha’s words. …

So he sought for Buddha’s true teaching and attained the Truth of the Hokekyo. He also saw an express provision in the third chapter of the Scripture. It is somewhat as follows:

“Do not accept a single stanza from any other Scriptures ” (Yamakawa, p. 154 ; cp. Kern, p. 96).

And again, in the same chapter, Buddha says:

“If a man will not believe this Scripture and will destroy and abuse it, this means the destruction of the Buddha-Seed in the whole world. … That man shall fall into the Nethermost Hell after death (Yamakawa, pp. 146-7 ; Kern, p. 92).

Consequently Nichiren writes :

“All assurances about Attainment of Buddhahood in the pre-Hokekyo Scriptures are just like unto the stars and the moon in the water; all assurances about Attainment of Buddhahood which were preached prior to the Hokekyo are just like unto shadows of bodies. If I criticize them from a point of view of the sixteenth chapter of the Hokekyo, all the assurances of Attainment of Buddhahood with pious imposition are mere words when they deviate from the wisdom of the Duration of Buddha’s Life, the sixteenth chapter” (Works, p. 1301).

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p57-58

Satomi does not bend on the issue of Lotus Sutra exclusivity:

[Nichiren]…proclaimed most emphatically:

“All the sects are the radical way to Hell, while the Hokekyo is alone the truth in Buddhahood” (Works, p. 634).

But Nichiren by no means denies the relative value of the other Scriptures. He only contends that the Hokekyo is the sole truth to attain Buddhahood, consequently he denied all other Scriptures on that point. Therefore he says:

“If believers of the other Scriptures would only adore the truth of the Hokekyo, they would acquire the Principle of the Mutual Participation. Then all other Scriptures would be the Hokekyo, and vice versa. The Hokekyo does not deviate from all Pious- imposition-Scriptures nor vice versa. This is what is called Mysterious Law. As soon as this understanding was brought about, reading the Hinayana Scriptures is equivalent to reading the Mahayana Scriptures and the Hokekyo ” (Works, p. 1234).

Moreover, he says :

“You may judge everything in accordance with common sense unless it prevents the Path to Buddhahood.” (Works, p. 822).

Consequently, Nichiren examined all the sects and denounced the four representative ones.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p58-59

---

Table of ContentsNext

This is another in a series of daily articles concerning Kishio Satomi's book, "Japanese Civilization; Its Significance and Realization; Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles," which details the foundations of Chigaku Tanaka's interpretation of Nichiren Buddhism and Japan's role in the early 20th century.

---

In Kishio Satomi’s chapter on the Three Great Secret Laws he offers an explanation on how Nichirenism bridges the pantheistic vs. monotheistic religions and establishes a religion for the future that eventually declares “Confucius or Christ or Mohammed or any sages are nothing but one of the distributive bodies of this One and Only Buddha.”

There are two tendencies about the conception of God which must be noticed. The one is pantheism and the other is monotheism. Pantheism identifies God in nature, or looks upon Nature as partial appearances of the sole and absolute God. It shows immanency of God in opposition to deism. The Eleatics, Xenophanes, Parmenides, etc., advocated this theory in an early age, and Bruno, Spinoza, Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, Schleiermacher, Hartmann, Wundt, Lotze, etc., conceived this thought also. Spinoza is a pioneer of this thought in the modern age and his famous words “Deus sive natura ” (God is nature) are quoted as the motto of pantheism.

Pantheistic thought in the history of religion germinated mainly among Aryan races and, according to Tiele, what is called theanthropic religion. Pantheism, as a rule, has a great system and a great ideal, and gives us not only a sensitive satisfaction, but likewise a rational one. But in pantheism there is no union in its vast system, and so it is very difficult to fix the religious object which is the object of our sentiment. Therefore religious practice can hardly be the outcome of it. If we look upon the universe or nature as a religious object there is, indeed, no religious object. Or if we consider our slight efforts of daily life as divine acts or religious practice, it is equal to having no religious practice at all. To make such pantheistic thought possible a deistic thought or an atheistic color or maybe a polytheistic idea must be adduced.

On the other hand, monotheism has the One God who created this world from another world. The nature of God in monotheism is quite different from that of polytheistic gods. God is transcendent and we cannot mix up God and the universe. God and the world are totally different things. According to Tiele this is called theocratic religion, and originated among the Semitic races. The representative religion of the former is Buddhism, while Christianity is the highest development of the latter.

It is quite natural that mechanism or causality grew in the former thought and teleologism or finality comes from the latter. The characteristic of the former religion is tolerance and of the latter intolerance. Von Hartmann gave a suggestion concerning the future religion in his “Religionsphilosophie.” According to it the religion which is worthy of the future has to unite these two different tendencies in harmony. But we cannot find the possibility of the unity in the Bible nor in the ordinal Buddhist Scriptures. In other words, there are no foundations on which to unite them in these Sacred Books. In the Bible there is the chapter of “St. John” which accepted abundant pantheistic thought, under the influence of Scholastic philosophy, in order to fill up the original weak point of the Bible. But there is no foundation for uniting them in the whole Bible. Hinayana Buddhism is known as atheism in that it denies the Divine One and only aims at Nirvana. On the other hand, there are pantheism and monotheism in Mahayana Buddhism, for instance, the Shingon Sect, the Zen Sect, the Tendai Sect, etc., belong to pantheism, and the Shin Sect or Jodo Sect belongs to monotheism; but they also have no foundations on which to unite these opposite tendencies.

Nichirenism is the answer to this problem. First of all, in the Hokekyo, we have the doctrine of “Six Ors” which throws a light on this problem. According to this thought, the Primeval or Fundamental Buddha, whose deep sense of His existence is explained in Chapter 16 in the Scripture, as we have mentioned already, is unique and sole God in the Universe, and all the beings and all the divines or sages and wise men are nothing but His distributive bodies. It says:

or I explained about my own appearance, or about others’; or appeared myself, or under the mask of others; or showed my own action, or others’ ” (Yamakawa, pp. 459—60 ; cf. Kern, p. 301).

Moreover, it is stated in other lines :

“All young converted men! Whenever people came and saw me, I considered and observed their different degrees of faculty of faith and so forth, and I preached the Law under the different names (of Buddhas, gods, sages or wise men, etc.) and the strength of succeeding generations in various places; and again I revealed my lives and proclaimed that I shall be in Nirvana before long; and delivered mysterious laws with various pious impositions and allowed beings to feel ecstasy ” (Yamakawa, pp. 458-9; Kern, p. 300).

Therefore, Nichiren says:

“The Buddha of the ‘Duration of the Life of the Tathagata’ reveals Himself even in the lives of Grasses (Herbs) and Trees ” (Works, p. 1293).

It is evident that in these lines Nichiren’s One Buddha Centric Pantheism, as Yamakawa expresses it, is firmly established. And then the following view is possible, that Confucius or Christ or Mohammed or any sages are nothing but one of the distributive bodies of this One and Only Buddha. Nichiren recognized the One Buddha as the sole and highest existence, who revealed Himself as Eternal Buddha in Chapter 16 of the Hokekyo, but at the same time he acknowledged the divine nature as intrinsically inherent in all beings, according to the principle of Mutual Participation of the ten worlds. He holds with monotheism in the former sense and holds with pantheism in the latter sense. But as he says in his letter to a lady, Nichinyo (Works, p. 721), he took up the position of One Buddha Centric Pantheism as his ultimate decision. We can see here one of the reasons for determining what the condition of the future religion will be.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p84-87

It is interesting to note the difference between Nichirenism and Risshō Kōsei Kai’s emphasis on inter-faith cooperation. In The Stories of the Lotus Sutra Gene Reeves writes:

[E]ven when we think we cannot see him, the Buddha can be found right next to us. The Buddha may not even go by the name of a buddha. Sometimes perhaps he goes by the name of Christ, or Krishna, or even Jane. Belonging to a Buddhist temple or organization is not, in itself, the Buddha Way, nor is it the only way to enter or follow the Buddha Way. The “universal gate” is many gates, many more than you or I could possibly know in a lifetime.

The Stories of the Lotus Sutra, p71

And in Buddhism for Today, Risshō Kōsei Kai’s founder Nikkyō Niwano writes:

Through whatever sutra we may study the teachings of Sakyamuni, Sakyamuni himself is the same honored one who casts the same light of wisdom on us. Therefore, although the Lotus Sutra is certainly the most excellent teaching among the many sutras, it reflects a basic misunderstanding to despise other sutras by excessively extolling the Lotus Sutra.

Buddhism for Today, ppxviii

While Risshō Kōsei Kai would say infinite paths lead to the summit of the mountain, Nichirenism would say all paths lead to the Lotus Sutra and only the Lotus Sutra reaches the summit. There’s a middle path here somewhere.

---

Table of ContentsNext