Two Buddhas, p65-66In its original context, the message of the “one buddha vehicle” first articulated in Chapter Two was directed from the marginal Mahāyāna movement toward the Buddhist mainstream, that is, the majority of monks and nuns who counted themselves as śrāvakas and aspired to the arhat’s nirvāṇa. But a thousand years later, in medieval Japan, the Mahāyāna was the mainstream; that is, Japanese Buddhism was entirely Mahāyāna, and there were no śrāvakas, except those mentioned in texts. Largely through the influence of the Lotus-based Tendai Buddhist tradition, the idea that buddhahood is at least in theory open to all had gained wide currency. In Nichiren’s reading, the thrust of the Lotus Sūtra’s one-vehicle argument therefore shifts in significant ways. No longer is it about opening buddhahood to specific categories of persons previously excluded, that is, to people of the two lesser vehicles. Rather, it is about opening buddhahood as a reality for all beings, in contrast to what Nichiren deemed purely abstract or notional assurances of buddhahood in other, provisional Mahāyāna teachings. Recall that, in the Tendai tradition in which Nichiren had been trained, the Lotus Sūtra is “true” and all others are “provisional,” meaning that the Lotus Sūtra is complete and all-encompassing, while other teachings are accommodated to their listeners’ understanding and therefore partial and incomplete. For Nichiren, now in the age of the Final Dharma, only the Lotus Sūtra embodied the principles by which Buddhist practitioners could truly realize enlightenment.