Two Buddhas, p72This second chapter of the Lotus Sūtra represents the Buddha as declaring, “I will now definitely expound the truth” and “having openly set aside skillful means, I will teach only the highest path.” These statements, together with the passage from the Lotus Sūtra’s introductory scripture, Sūtra of Immeasurable Meanings — “For more than forty years I have expounded the dharma in all manner of ways through adeptness in skillful means, but the core truth has still not been revealed” — constituted for Nichiren significant proof that the Lotus Sūtra superseded all prior, provisional teachings. They were, he said, like a great wind scattering dark clouds, the full moon appearing in the heavens, or the orb of the sun blazing in the blue sky, revealing the possibility of buddhahood for all.
Category Archives: 2buddhas
Syncing the Ten Realms and Three Thousand Realms with the Buddha
Two Buddhas, p71-72The interpenetration of ten realms reveals that, in principle, there is no difference between an ordinary person and a buddha; both embody the three thousand realms in a single thought-moment. But in ordinary, deluded persons the buddha realm remains dormant and unrealized, and they are trapped by suffering. In the case of a buddha, the buddha realm is fully expressed; that is, all the other nine realms are illuminated, elevated, and redirected by it to work in an enlightened way. For Nichiren, this fully realized state was embodied in the daimoku. We could say that chanting the daimoku aligns or “syncs” the ten realms and three thousand realms of the practitioner with those of the Buddha, enabling direct realization in the very act of practice.
Chanting and Seeing the Buddha in One’s Mind
Two Buddhas, p70-71Like other Buddhists of his day, Nichiren understood the six paths as actual cosmological realms into which beings are born repeatedly in accordance with their deeds, and the four holy paths of śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, and buddhas, as higher states achieved through cultivation. But at the same time, he understood all ten realms as lying “within ourselves.” In his major treatise “On the Contemplation of the Mind and the Object of Worship” (Kanjin honzon shō), Nichiren explains this by way of illustration. When one looks at another person’s face, they appear sometimes ecstatic, sometimes furious, and sometimes calm, or they might wear expressions of foolishness or perversity. Rage, he explains, is the hell realm; greed, the realm of hungry ghosts; foolishness, the realm of beasts; perversity, the asura realm; joy, the heavenly realm; and calm, the human realm. The four holy paths do not appear outwardly but can be known by introspection. Our understanding that all things are insubstantial and fleeting reflects the realms of the two vehicles of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas within our own mind. The affection that even a hardened criminal feels for his wife and children is an expression of the inner bodhisattva realm. Because the nine realms within one’s own mind can thus be demonstrated, Nichiren says, one should believe that the buddha realm is present as well.
In the above quotation, “seeing” the Buddha in one’s mind might suggest a specific cognition or insight, but for Nichiren, this meant chanting the daimoku, the expression of faith in the Lotus Sūtra. Though he encouraged study and intellectual understanding of the Buddhist teachings, the benefits of the daimoku, he said, are the same whether chanted by a wise person or a foolish one. He illustrated this by the analogies of fire that burns without intent to do so, or a newborn infant nourished unknowingly by its mother’s milk. At the beginning of [Chapter 2], when Śākyamuni Buddha first begins to speak, his opening words are: “Profound and immeasurable is the wisdom of the buddhas.” “What is this wisdom?” Nichiren asks. “It is the embodiment of the real aspect of all dharmas, the ten suchnesses realized by the Buddha. What is that embodiment? It is Namu Myōhō-renge-kyō.”
Opening the Buddha Realm within the Nine Realms
Two Buddhas, p69-70Nichiren took the ichinen sanzen concept that Zhiyi had briefly delineated and made it the foundation of his teaching. For Nichiren, ichinen sanzen was “the father and mother of the buddhas.” He often referred to it in its “short form,” so to speak, as the mutual inclusion of the ten dharma realms… . Because the “ten suchnesses” (referred to at the beginning of the “Skillful Means” chapter) and the mutual inclusion of the ten realms are both concepts integral to the single thought-moment that is three thousand realms, the one implied the other, and Nichiren could take “the real aspect of all dharmas” or the ten suchnesses as pointing to the mutual inclusion of the ten realms. For him, this teaching was unique to the Lotus Sūtra and was what qualified it as the “wonderful dharma.” In one passage, he writes: “The sūtras that the Buddha preached for more than forty years before the Lotus do not set forth the mutual inclusion of the ten realms. And because they do not set forth the mutual inclusion of the ten realms, one cannot know the buddha realm within one’s own mind, and because one does not know the buddha realm within one’s own mind, the buddhas do not manifest externally either. … But now with the Lotus Sūtra, the buddha realm within the nine realms was opened, and those who had heard the Buddha’s forty and more years of preaching — bodhisattvas, persons of the two vehicles, and ordinary beings of the six paths — could for the first time see the buddha realm within themselves.”
The Inconceivable Realm
Two Buddhas, p68-69[T]he “three thousand realms” denotes “all dharmas” or “all phenomena.” In that sense, the number “three thousand” might be considered somewhat arbitrary. Nonetheless, it refers to a constant set of patterns that for Zhiyi constituted the “real aspect of the dharmas.” Because each one [of the ten dharma-realms, from hell to buddhahood,] contains all ten within itself, there are a hundred realms, each endowed with the ten suchnesses. The resulting thousand realms each entail another “three realms” or three aspects of living beings: (1) the “five aggregates (skandhas),” or momentary mental and physical constituents that unite temporarily to form living beings; (2) living beings considered as individuals belonging to one or another of the ten realms, such as hell dwellers, hungry ghosts, humans, and others; and (3) the insentient container worlds, or environments, that living beings inhabit.
In translating, we often say “three thousand realms in a single thought-moment” because that is natural English, but, strictly speaking, it is not correct. As Zhiyi goes on to explain: “Were the mind to give rise to all phenomena, that would be a vertical [relationship]. Were all phenomena to be simultaneously contained within the mind, that would be a horizontal [relationship]. Neither horizontal nor vertical will do. It is simply that the mind is all phenomena and all phenomena are the mind. [This relationship] is subtle and profound in the extreme; it can neither be grasped conceptually nor expressed in words. Therefore, it is called the realm of the inconceivable.”
In essence, the most minute phenomenon (a single thought-moment) and the entire cosmos (three thousand realms) are mutually encompassing: the one and the many, good and evil, delusion and awakening, subject and object, self and other, and all sentient beings from hell dwellers, hungry ghosts, and animals up through buddhas and bodhisattvas as well as their corresponding insentient environments — indeed, all things in the entire cosmos — are inseparable from the mind at each moment. However, only in the state of buddhahood is this fully realized. Zhanran comments, “You should know that person and land both encompass three thousand realms in one thought-moment. Thus, when we attain the way, in accordance with this principle, our body and mind at each instant pervade the dharma-realm.”
Even the Slightest Thought
Two Buddhas, p68On the basis of [ten suchnesses], Zhiyi formulated a grand, architectonic concept that came to be called the “single thought-moment entailing three thousand realms” (ichinen sanzen). In a famous passage, he writes: “Now a single thought [literally, “one mind”] comprises ten dharma-realms, and each dharma realm also comprises ten dharma-realms, giving a hundred dharma-realms. A single realm comprises thirty kinds of worlds; hence a hundred dharma-realms comprise three thousand kinds of worlds. These three thousand are contained in a single moment of thought. Where there is no thought, that is the end of the matter, but if there is even the slightest thought, it immediately contains the three thousand [realms].”
Form, Mind and Causality of Suchness
Two Buddhas, p67-68What do “character, nature, substance, potential … and essential unity” actually mean? … Zhanran, Zhiyi’s later disciple, explains that these ten can be grouped in three modalities — form, mind, and causality — that characterize all existents. “Character,” which could also be translated as “mark,” “sign, or “aspect,” is what can be seen externally; in the case of a person, it denotes one’s outer appearance. “Nature” is internal, what belongs to that person intrinsically. “Substance” denotes the union of these two as a particular individual; each existent, in Tendai thought, has both physical and mental aspects. “Potential” is the capacity for action, while “function” is the exertion or display of that potential. These two suchnesses thus pertain to space. “Cause, condition, result, [and] effect” refer to the dimension of causality, and therefore, time. “Causes” are volitional acts, or karma. “Conditions” are the circumstances that condition actions. “Result” is the potential karmic consequence inherent in a volitional act, and “effect” is its eventual manifestation. All ten are “essentially unified,” or ultimately consistent. For example, the character, nature, function, causes, and results of a denizen of hell will reflect and perpetuate misery; those of a bodhisattva will express insight and compassion.
Ten Suchnesses Three Ways
Two Buddhas, p66-67In the opening passage of Chapter Two, Śākyamuni declares that only buddhas can “completely know the real aspects of all dharmas — that is to say, their character, nature, substance, potential, function, cause, condition, result, effect, and essential unity.”…
In the East Asian commentarial tradition, this passage is referred to as the “ten suchnesses” or “such-likes” (J. junyoze) because each of the “real aspects” is preceded in the Chinese text by the words “suchness” or more literally “like such” (nyoze). “Such” or “suchness” (tathatā in Sanskrit) is one of many terms for reality in Buddhism, denoting that a buddha perceives things just as they are, without imposing reifying concepts or descriptions. In their translation, Kubo and Yuyama call these ten the “real aspects” of the dharmas or phenomena, but one could also refer to them collectively in the singular as the “real aspect” shared by all phenomena. By punctuating this passage that enumerates the “ten suchnesses” in three different ways, Zhiyi derived the threefold truth … of emptiness, conventional existence, and the middle. To this day, the passage is often ritually recited three times, representing the threefold truth and its threefold discernment.
The Great Instruction
Two Buddhas, p39-40With the audience having been enumerated [in Chapter 1, Introductory], the Buddha then teaches a Mahāyāna sūtra identified in Sanskrit as Mahānirdeśa. However, nothing of the content of that teaching is provided, and mahānirdeśa is a generic term that simply means “great instruction.” Kumārajīva’s Chinese translation, however, renders this as “a Mahāyāna sūtra named Immeasurable Meanings,” and by the fifth century, a text purporting to be this very sutra was circulating in China, also with the name Sūtra of Immeasurable Meanings (Ch. Wuliang yi jing), said to have been translated by a monk named Dharmāgatayaśas. No Sanskrit original, or reference to the Sanskrit original, has been located, nor are any other translations attributed to Dharmāgatayaśas, leading scholars to consider the text to be a Chinese apocryphon, a work composed in China that purports to be not only of Indian origin but spoken by the Buddha himself. It achieved canonical status in China, where it is regarded as the first of three sūtras comprising the so-called threefold Lotus Sūtra. The text itself is short, not quite thirty pages in English translation, and has only three chapters. The first describes the bodhisattvas present in the assembly and reports their lengthy praise of the Buddha. In the second, the Buddha praises the importance of the Sūtra of Immeasurable Meanings and then gives the actual teaching, which is that, although buddhas teach immeasurable meanings, they all originate from a single dharma, which is without form. Also in the chapter the Buddha says, “For more than forty years I have expounded the dharma in all manner of ways through adeptness in skillful means, but the core truth has still not been revealed.” East Asian commentators would find great meaning in this statement, for it serves to position the Lotus Sūtra as the Buddha’s final teaching. The third and longest chapter is devoted to ten benefits accruing to those who hear one verse of this sūtra or keep, read, recite, and copy the sūtra.
The Nature of Buddha Nature
Two Buddhas, p94-95The Hossō school represents an intriguing case, in that its doctrinal position offered a steadfast minority opposition, not only to the Tiantai/Tendai schema of the five periods, but also to the entire notion of buddhahood as a universal possibility. Hossō thought distinguishes two kinds of buddha nature: buddha nature as suchness or principle (J. ri busshō), which is universal, and active buddha nature (gyō busshō), which is not. Buddha nature as principle is quiescent and does not manifest itself in the phenomenal world; thus its universality does not mean that all beings can become buddhas. Achieving buddhahood depends on the presence of “untainted seeds” originally inherent in the ālaya or storehouse consciousness, the root consciousness underlying samsaric existence in which all deeds and impressions are stored as “seeds” or latent potentials, later fructifying in the form of experience. According to Hossō doctrine, individuals can be divided into “five natures” according to what sort of seeds they possess. Some have “active buddha nature,” that is, seeds that enable them to practice the bodhisattva way and become buddhas. Others have seeds that allow them to practice the path of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha. These individuals can reach the nirvāṇa of the arhat, but they cannot become buddhas. Another group has a mixture of two or more of these three kinds of seeds: bodhisattva, śrāvaka, pratyekabuddha. Which kind of seed will develop is not predetermined; such persons are therefore said to be of “indeterminate nature.” Last, there are those who possess no untainted seeds and thus can never escape saṃsāra. They can, however, better their condition by accumulating merit through Buddhist practice.
Against the Lotus Sūtra’s claim that the three vehicles are the Buddha’s skillful means while the one vehicle is true, Hossō thinkers put forth this division of human capacity into five natures; they argued that the three vehicles of the śrāvaka, pratyekabuddha, and bodhisattva are true, while the one vehicle is a skillful method, designed by the Buddha to lead persons of the indeterminate group to follow the bodhisattva path and become buddhas, rather than taking the lesser path of the two vehicles. To support this argument, they invoked the Lotus Sūtra’s theme of “resuscitating” śrāvakas and restoring them to the bodhisattva path — as when the Buddha, in Chapter Three, reminds Śāriputra of his long-forgotten bodhisattva vow. Saichō, the Japanese Tendai founder, countered in part by drawing on Huayan (J. Kegon) thinkers to argue that suchness has not only a quiescent aspect as universal principle (fuhen shinnyo), but also a dynamic aspect that manifests itself as the concrete forms of the phenomenal world (zuien shinnyo). He also maintained that suchness has the nature of realizing and knowing. Thus, there was no need to postulate seeds in the store consciousness of only certain individuals as the cause of buddhahood. Saichō equated suchness in its dynamic aspect with active buddha nature, and because suchness is universal, everyone has the potential to realize buddhahood.