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 relationship between Nichiren’s teachings and Japan were refined by Chigaku Tanaka. That relationship sprang from the very founding of the island nation. As Kishio Satomi explains:

[W]hat are the Japanese National Principles which were recognized as the ideal of the world by Nichiren? Well, his problem has a most intimate relation with the theory of the Holy Altar. But the doctrine of the Holy Altar was not so clearly demonstrated until it was fully defined in modern times. As already mentioned, the theory of the Holy Altar was made clear by Tanaka, as also the problems of the Japanese National Principles were explained systematically by Tanaka for the first time at Nichiren’s suggestion.

There exist two of the oldest Japanese chronicles, the one is called “Ninon Shoki” or “Nihongi” and the other “Kojiki.” The former is superior to the latter for several reasons, and is translated into English by Aston, therefore I will explain the former.

Japan was established two thousand and six hundred years ago and has never since been broken nor reformed. However, there is something that ought to be noted by the nations concerning the history and the ideal of her establishment.

When the Sun-Goddess, the ancestor of the Imperial family and the nation, bestowed the land of Japan on her grandchild, she gave three kinds of treasures, viz. a mirror, a sword and a gem-bead. And she decided that the Three Treasures should be the signs of the Imperial Throne. Then what do these three symbolize?

The Mirror symbolizes Wisdom, the Sword Courage, the Gem-Bead Humanity. She meant these Three Treasures to interpret the Japanese Imperial Throne.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p188-189

Historical accuracy or quibbling by academics were distractions according to Satomi:

There are many doubts concerning the former volumes of this chronicle [of old matters in Ancient times] from a historical point of view. Many scholars have discussed them. Nevertheless the statement of the chronicle must not be regarded as a mere mythological story. The statement of the Nihongi is indeed the faith of the nation and the principle of the State. Even supposing that it might have been written as a fiction, nothing could interrupt the ideal of the nation. We find its value in the fact that it had the strongest influence on the nation during three thousand years, nay even still at the present day, it is the principle of the nation. Even if it is not matter of fact, at least it is certain that the statement of the chronicle was the national spirit from the ancient ages. At any rate this national ideal during three thousand years was always the supreme reason of the state’s existence, no matter what the researches of historians may have been on this particular point.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p197

Satomi finds three national principles guide Japan and are the measure of its greatness:

According to the statement of the Nihongi, which is the national spirit of both the Emperors and the subjects, there are three fundamental principles which are the reason of Japan’s existence. The Jimmu’s rescript, which was announced prior to his accession ceremony, and the Emperor’s proclamation, which was made on his leaving Kyūshu for the main land, will explain the Three Principles.

The Three Principles are, Gathered Happiness, Achieved Glories, and Cultivation of Righteousness. These three are called “Japan’s National Principles.” But the National Principles are not merely Japan’s principles but are indeed meant for the world’s benefit. So we must not take a narrow view of the term “the Japanese National Principles” (Nippon Kohutai implying: National teaching, fundamental character of the State, the ideal of the country, etc. But it is too difficult to translate formally into any foreign language). The propagation and realization of the Three Principles were believed to be the task of the Japanese nation, of the Emperors and subjects alike. Of course, the Emperors are the masters and the leaders, and the subjects are the assistants. Therefore the Imperial tasks of Japan are called “Heavenly Task” (Tengyo), the term which was used by the Emperor Jimmu. And the Three Principles are the highest rules of Japan, which the Emperors as well as the subjects must obey absolutely and implicitly. The ultimate aim of Japan’s Three Principles is absolute peace all over the world.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p198

---

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 relies heavily on the importance of the final 14 chapters of the Lotus Sutra, the Honmon, to the exclusion of all else.

The Great Master Dengyo, with reference to [the precept platform], adopted the Shakumon centric idealistic commandment, while he rejected the Hinayanistic ones and those of the general Mahayanism. Dengyo, however, held, with the Shakumon centric commandment, the former fourteen chapters of the Hokekyo; therefore, he could not go further with the Honmon. Consequently, he adopted the Tenfold Prohibitive Commandments of the Bonmokyo (Skt. Brahma Djāla Sūtra), holding at the same time with the Shakumon centric idealistic commandment.

Nichiren, on the contrary, adopted only the Honmon-centric one and strictly prohibited any other kinds; because he saw the reason from the fact and the proof of the Scriptures that there is no authority maintained concerning the formal commandment in the days of the Latter Law. It would be too ineffectual to stipulate that a man should be such and such only by formal rules in this world of five turbidities or impurities.

We must attach more essential significance to commandment by refraining from such external rules; in other words, it is much more important to give signification of life in the depths of people’s minds than to give the ordinal arrangement of actions and appearances. Of course, there is no doubt that these old-fashioned commandments were very effective at one time in early ages but are too formal and too powerless to adapt to the age of the Latter Law. The age and people must have more internal authority, namely the commandment must be such as to give fundamental rules in the internal personality, with the most simple and authoritative dignity. Nichiren, therefore, rejected the Hinayanistic and general Mahayanistic commandments in consideration of their powerlessness, and, it may be added, with the authority of many Buddhist Scriptures on this point. He says:

“Now, the commandments are the Hinayanistic Two Hundred and Fifty rules. … With reference to the first commandment, namely “Thou shalt kill no living being,” in all the Scriptures except the Hokekyo, it is said that the Buddha kept this law. But the Buddha, who is revealed in these Scriptures with pious imposition, starts by killing, so to speak, from the point of view of the Hokekyo. Why? Because, although it seemed that the Buddha in these Scriptures kept the law in His daily affairs, yet He did not keep the True Commandment of “Kill no living being because He killed the possibility of Attainment of Buddhahood of all other beings except Buddhas Themselves, so that the beings were not allowed to attain Buddhahood. Thus, the leader, the Buddha, is not yet released from the sin of Killing, how ‘much less the disciples” (Works, pp. 365—6).

Therefore, Nichiren gives significance to one’s free will, which means in a sense an imperative category. This is a different point from that of the ordinal commandment which governs several of our acts superficially. He united the teachings and commandments which are explained together in the Nehan-gyo, from the point of view of the doctrine of the Hokekyo.

Although a man makes himself a perfect Buddhist, if it is limited to a mere individual personality and has no positive effect in protecting and spreading the Buddhist Law, then all exertions are in vain. How ever much one may be faithful to the mere individual formal commandment, it is of no use unless one awakes to the signification of one’s existence. Thus Nichiren thought. According to him, the signification of one’s existence can be filled up with ardent vows for the protection and enlargement of the Law.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p96-98

Upholding this interpretation was the center of Satomi’s Nichirenism:

The protection of moral law is the sole task of human life, and this is the greatest invention and discovery of our lives. When one digresses from and acts against the moral principle, one is no longer worthy of being a human being, thus Nichiren thought. Consequently, weapons, army, education, commerce or the life, everything must be for the sake of true human life, which means the practice and the protection of moral laws. Buddha says in the Nehan-gyo:

“In spite of a man accepting and keeping the Five Commandments, he cannot be called a man of the true Mahayana Buddhism. One who protects the right law is the man of the true Mahayana Buddhism, even though he does not keep the Five Commandments. The man who protects the right law shall be armed. Him do I call the true practitioner of the Buddhist Commandments though he is armed.”

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p105-106

---

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.

---

For Kishio Satomi, individual salvation was of little use. Saving the world requires entire countries to act.

[A]ccording to Nichiren, if religion really wants to redeem the world, it must religionize the country. … He thought that the state is the unit of the world, and that the individual could never be the unit of the world. In other words, it is useless to uphold the fallacy that if religion instructs individuals one by one, the world, will, naturally, sooner or later, become religionized. On the contrary, let us suppose that the state has the conviction of true morality, and of politics, education and diplomacy, or that everything has been done morally; then the individual who belongs to the state is, as it were, a snake in a narrow and straight bamboo-tube. It may seem like bondage, nevertheless such a right bondage must be welcomed. Is the so-called free will surely free? Man cannot live without being to a certain extent in bondage, though one may be proud to live and decide everything by one’s own free will, for free will, too, is a sort of bondage. … Hence the country that is moral must take up as her mission the task of the guardianship and espousal of truth, morality and righteousness with all her accumulated power. However religionized a man may be, if the country is not made just, then even the man of righteousness is liable to be obliged to commit a crime in an emergency for the sake of a nation’s covetous disposition. … Nichiren, therefore, examined the essence of the various countries and he decided Japan as being the typical moral country. According to Nichiren, Japan is distinctly the typical country based on strict morality, consequently the mission of Japan consists in setting an example of the moral country to the world. Therefore, he says :

“The first and great Supreme Being shall be established in this country ” (Works, p. 104).

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p108-110

Masaharu Anesaki, wrote “Nichiren, The Buddhist Prophet”  in 1916. Satomi felt  Anesaki held a very wrong view of Nichiren’s relationship to Japan and the world. Satomi wrote:

[On the question of Japan and the world, Masaharu] Anesaki gives the following explanation:

“In this latter sense, Japan meant for him the whole world ” (Anesaki, ” Nichiren, the Buddhist Prophet.” Harvard University Press, p.98).

But this appears to be incorrect because the character of “the World” does not mean here the world in the usual sense, but it means “the World Benefit,” namely one of the Four Siddhānta, the Four Instructive Methods (Shi-shits-dan). In other words, this is a special technical term, the full name is “The Completion of the world with the benefit of delight” (Sekai Shits-dan Kangi no Yaku). Hence, “the World is Japan” means “Japan has the mission to propagate the law of the Hokekyo and thereby redeem the world.”

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p110-111

And Satomi considered the idea of Japan forcing redemption on other countries something Nichiren would endorse.

It is evident that [Nichiren] proclaims the necessity of subjecting all countries to one moral law, approving, of course, the pluralistic existence of all countries. But it is totally different from the Utopian’s fancy, because of his positive adoption of all material forces.

Therefore the commandment of his religion is recognized by the act of keeping and practicing the Hokekyo for his own sake and at the same time for the sake of humankind. Consequently, the vow and its practice are the essential elements in his religion. In order to keep the law bodily means that in daily life we must be determined to do anything. Rich men shall protect the law by means of their wealth and learned men shall extend the law by means of their knowledge and wisdom, etc. All the accumulated power of human civilization must make it a duty to help to realize the law on the earth. In an emergency, we shall be martyrs to the law. In short, we must keep the law for dear life and then the sincerity and signification of life will be realized. Such being the case with individuals, the country, too, must be established on righteousness. The country is, indeed, an organ for the realization of the moral law of security with all her accumulated powers. When the country attains to such conviction that it becomes the highest organ for the protection of righteousness, and that it can sacrifice itself whenever it is obliged to do so for the sake of the law, then the ideal World will be realized before our very eyes. …

To realize this ideal we are expected to have absolute faith even at the risk of our lives. Although persecution, innumerable difficulties and troubles might be our lot we could go through fire and water if our faith were strong and true.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p112-113

One can understand how such sentiment encouraged those who sought to make Japan a world power through conquest in Asia. And, as I’ll show later in discussing Japanese Lotus Millennialism: From Militant Nationalism to Contemporary Peace Movements,” these same teachings of Nichiren empower the modern peace movement in Japan.

---

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 considering Kishio Satomi’s ideas regarding Nichirenism it is important to put his 1923 book in historical perspective. By the 1920s, the Japanese had reformed their country’s government, social structure, educational system, and more. They were the first non-Western people to industrialize. They had won two foreign wars and acquired territories overseas. But these successes provided little comfort to government leaders. Leaders were increasingly uneasy about Japan’s future. (Source)

For Satomi, military might was necessary to secure the ideal Buddhist land.

[Protecting the Right Law is] apparent in the Hokekyo. It says in Chapter XIV:

“It is a case, Mañjuśrī (Japanese, Monju or Monjushiri), similar to that of a King (Tenrinjo-o; Skt. Chakravarti-raja), a ruler of armies, who by force has conquered his own Kingdom, whereupon other Kings, his adversaries, wage war against him. That ruler of armies has soldiers of various descriptions to fight with various enemies. As the King sees those soldiers fighting, he is delighted with their gallantry, enraptured, and in his delight and rapture he makes to his soldiers several donations, such as villages and village ground, towns and grounds of a town ; garments and head-gear ; hand-ornaments, necklaces, gold threads, ear-rings, strings of pearls, bullion, gold, gems, pearls, lapis lazuli, conch-shells, stones(?), corals ; he, moreover, gives elephants, horses, cars, foot soldiers, male and female slaves, vehicles and litters ” (Kern, p. 274 ; Yamakawa, p. 415).

Therefore, Nichiren proclaims :

“Know ye, that when these Bodhisattvas act in accordance with the positive instruction, they will appear as wise kings and attack foolish kings in order to instruct them; when they will act negatively then will they appear as priests and propagate and keep the right law ” (Works, p. 103).

In that relation did Nichiren acknowledge military force, he accordingly wrote an instruction to one of his great supporters, Shijo Kingo, who was a typical Japanese warrior:

“Prefer the art of war to any other art, even any branch connected therewith shall be rooted in the Law of the Hokekyo ” (Works, p. 907).

Of course in this connection it is not his intention to interfere with anything relating to the substance itself, but it is mentioned for the fundamental enlightenment of all existence. In this relation Buddha makes the suggestions:

“All the pluralistic laws which are preached in several instances, do not contradict nor contravene Suchness by their signification. Even the moral books in the world or political words or industry or the like may be explained to the people, they shall all comply with the right law” (Yamakawa, pp. 539-40 ; there are no equivalent lines in Kern).

Hereupon Nichiren emancipated the ordinal conception of religion into the broadest sense, which is the synthetic creation. The moral books in the above quotation, imply philosophy, ethics, literature or the like; political words mean legislation, the judicature and administration, and industry means agriculture, commerce and the manufacturing industry, etc. Nichiren gave this instruction to his disciples:

“The priests among my disciples shall be the Masters to the Emperors or the ex-Emperors, and the laymen shall take seats in the Ministry; and thus in the future, all the nations in the world shall adore this law” (Works, p. 583).

He goes on to say :

“In brief, my religion is the law path” (Works, p. 391).

Therefore, for Nichiren, the professional practice of religion is not only the method, but verily also the justification and purification of our daily lives at every turn. Keeping this in mind, read the following instruction of Nichiren to Shijo Kingo:

“Consider your daily works in your Lord’s service as being the practice of the Hokekyo” (Works, p, 893).

Thus, he established the religious method of the synthetic creation, and he decided that the country should be the unit of the worldly salvation.

Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p106-108

---

Table of ContentsNext