Fire in the Lotus was published in 1991. As a result it does not address the excommunication of Soka Gakkai members by Nichiren Shoshu on Nov. 28, 1991. It also discusses groups such as Nichijo Shaka’s Buddhist School of America that have since disappeared. But on a whole, it stands up well today.
That’s not to say that I don’t have any complaints. Montgomery erroneously conflates the Parable of the Priceless Gem of Chapter 8, The Assurance of Future Buddhahood of the Five Hundred Disciples, with the Parable of the Priceless Gem in the Top-Knot of Chapter 14, Peaceful Practices.
Another parable in the Sutra treats the matter from a different angle. A young man became drunk after an evening of carousing and passed out. A wealthy friend had to leave him there, but decided first to do him a favour. He took a valuable jewel and placed it in the drunken man’s topknot. Surely, he reasoned, when his friend woke up, he would notice the jewel, use it to pay any expenses, and still have plenty left over for whatever he wanted.
But this did not happen. When the drunken man got up the next day, it never occurred to him that he was now wealthy. First he was thrown out of the inn for not paying his bill. Then things went from bad to worse. He wandered from place to place, doing odd jobs when he could and living from hand to mouth.
Years later, his wealthy friend ran into him and was shocked by his appearance. ‘What happened to you?’ he asked. ‘How did you lose all your money?’
‘What money? I never had any. You know that.’
The money from the jewel I left in your topknot. I left it for you so that you could pay your expenses, invest the rest, and go into business for yourself.’
The poor man dug into his topknot and, sure enough, there was the priceless jewel! It had been there all along. He had been a rich man, carrying a fortune with him wherever he went, but he had never known it.
So it is, says the Buddha, with everyone. The priceless jewel, the Buddha nature, lies within us untapped. The only difference between the Buddha and us is that he knows this, has unraveled his topknot, and exposed the jewel of the Buddhahood. (Page 50)
Then there’s the question of how one writes the Daimoku in English. For most of the book, Montgomery uses Namu Myoho Renge Kyo. But occasionally Soka Gakkai’s spelling with Nam sneaks in. It is understandable when Montgomery is quoting a Nichiren Shoshu or a Soka Gakkai source, but then it pops up unexpectedly:
Even more extraordinary is the story of Nisshin Nabekamuri, the ‘pot-wearer’ (1407-88). A representative of Toki Jonin’s Nakayama School, he arrived in Kyoto at the age of 22, and promptly set to work writing a thesis in imitation of Nichiren’s, which he called, ‘Establish the Right Law and Rule the Country’. When he finished it he presented it to Shogun Ashikaga Yoshinori, which was a mistake. The Shogun had once been an ordained monk on Mount Hiei, and had inherited a bitter hatred for Nichiren Buddhism. He decided to break Nisshin for his impertinence. The young priest was arrested and tortured. Nisshin was not tortured only once, but daily for two years. The Shogun took a perverse delight in watching the sufferings of the priest; he supervised the daily tortures by fire, rack, sword, and whatever else he could think of. Nothing would make Nisshin stop chanting, Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. Finally the Shogun ordered that a metal pot be jammed over his head to keep him quiet, but from underneath the pot could still be heard, Nam-myoho-renge-kyo! Nam-myoho-renge-kyo!
Nisshin’s ordeal might have continued indefinitely had not the cruel Shogun been assassinated one day while watching a theatrical performance. Nisshin was released, and the pot was removed from his head. He rebuilt his temple, which had been destroyed, took up his drum, and went back to the street corners to chant, Nam-myoho-renge-kyo! Nam-myoho-renge-kyo! Never one to avoid a challenge, he is said to have triumphed in 60 religious debates in the course of his 65-year career. (Page 161-162)
One assumes Montgomery got this version of the tale from Nichiren Shoshu/Soka Gakkai materials, but the inconsistency grates.
Montgomery has something of pattern of picking up material whole. For example, in discussing Shariputra’s dislike for women he quotes from Buddha-Dharma: New English Edition, published by the Numata Center for Buddhist Translation in 1984.
However, there is a delightful Sanskrit story that even Shariputra met his match when he encountered a woman saint in heaven and asked her, ‘Now that you have the ability, why don’t you change yourself into a man?’ Instead of answering him, she turned him into a woman and asked him if he felt any different.
That “delightful Sanskrit story” is actually the Vimalakīrti Sūtra and the “saint in heaven” is actually a goddess who has been living in Vimalakīrti’s room for 12 years. Here’s Burton Watson’s translation of the exchange:
Shariputra said, “Why don’t you change out of this female body?
The goddess replied, “For the past twelve years I have been trying to take on female form, but in the end with no success. What is there to change? If a sorcerer were to conjure up a phantom woman and then someone asked her why she didn’t change out of her female body, would that be any kind of reasonable question?”
“No,” said Shariputra. “Phantoms have no fixed form, so what would there be to change?”
The goddess said, “All things are just the same—they have no fixed form. So why ask why I don’t change out of my female form?”
At that time the goddess employed her supernatural powers to change Shariputra into a goddess like herself, while she took on Shariputra’s form. Then she asked, “Why don’t you change out of this female body?”
Shariputra, now in the form of a goddess, replied, “I don’t know why I have suddenly changed and taken on a female body!”
The goddess said, “Shariputra, if you can change out of this female body, then all women can change likewise. Shariputra, who is not a woman, appears in a woman’s body. And the same is true of all women—though they appear in women’s bodies, they are not women. Therefore the Buddha teaches that all phenomena are neither male nor female.”
Then the goddess withdrew her supernatural powers, and Shariputra returned to his original form. The goddess said to Shariputra, “Where now is the form and shape of your female body?”
Shariputra said, “The form and shape of my female body does not exist, yet does not not exist.”
The goddess said, “All things are just like that—they do not exist, yet do not not exist. And that they do not exist, yet do not not exist, is exactly what the Buddha teaches.”(Page 90-91)
All things considered, Fire in the Lotus is an excellent addition to any library devoted to Nichiren and the Lotus Sutra.
Next: Original Enlightenment and Nichiren as the Original Buddha