The argument advanced here is not that Nichiren did or did not embrace original enlightenment thought, but that Tendai original enlightenment thought and Nichiren’s teaching both represent different appropriations and developments of a new, distinctively medieval paradigm of Buddhist liberation, embodied in different social and institutional contexts and given a different ideological thrust. The example of Nichiren and his later tradition will serve to illustrate that the doctrines of the new Kamakura Buddhism cannot be understood simply as emerging from the matrix of medieval Tendai original enlightenment thought, nor simply as reacting against it, nor as retaining its philosophical subtleties while eliminating its morally ambiguous areas. Rather, the various streams of both medieval Tendai and the new Kamakura Buddhism, in a complex web of mutual influences, now appropriating, now rejecting, together developed and were themselves expressions of a shared “nonlinear” reconception of the problem of salvation, which in each case was fleshed out in the specifics of a different religious vision and ideological orientation. (Page 241)

Nichiren … held that Buddhahood is accessed in the moment of embracing in the Lotus Sūtra:

“As life does not go beyond the moment, the Buddha expounded the blessings that come from a single moment of rejoicing [on hearing the Lotus Sūtra]. If two or three moments were required, this could no longer be called the original vow of the Buddha of great undifferentiating wisdom, the single vehicle of the teaching of immediate enlightenment that enables all beings to attain Buddhahood.” (Page 230)

The transmission concerning “the three bodies of the perfect teaching” (engyō sanjin) clarifies the Buddha of the “Fathoming the Lifespan” chapter of the Lotus Sūtra. This Buddha is said to possess all three kinds of Buddha body (trikāya, sanjin): the manifested body (nirmāṇakāya, ōjin), or physical person of the Buddha who appears in this world; the recompense body (saṃbhogakāya, hōjin), or the wisdom the Buddha has attained through practice, conceived of as a subtle “body”; and the Dharma body (dharmakāya, hosshin), or the Buddha as personification of ultimate truth. These three “bodies” originally represented attempts to organize different concepts of the Buddha, or to explain the differences among various Buddhas appearing in the sūtras. For example, Śākyamuni who appeared in this world was considered a Buddha in the manifested-body aspect; Amitābha, a Buddha in the recompense-body aspect; and Mahāvairocana, a Buddha in the Dharma-body aspect. Chih-i, however, interpreted these three bodies as the attributes of a single, original Buddha, the Śākyamuni of the sixteenth chapter of the Lotus Sūtra, enlightened since countless dust-particle kalpas ago. For Chih-i, the unity of the three was mediated by the recompense body, which he saw as central. (Page 184-185)

The four broad categories of transmission … may be said to encapsulate the entire T’ien-t’ai/Tendai system of doctrine and meditation, reinterpreted from a hongaku perspective. They deal, from four different perspectives, with the same concept: the total and perfect identity of the single thought-moment with the cosmos or dharma realm, a reality cognized as empty, conventionally existing, and both simultaneously. This reality is held to be the essence of Chih-i’s inner enlightenment, the deepest meaning of the Lotus Sūtra, and the truth to be accessed by the practitioner. (Page 184)

In the Ichijō shō and similar texts, “Lotus Sūtra” is taken in its ultimate sense to refer not to a scriptural text, but to the perfectly interpenetrating dharma realm in its totality, and the “five profound principles” are interpreted as attributes of the dharma realm. For example, its “name” is conventional truth (saṃvṛti-satya, zokutai), its “essence” is the principle of the true aspect, and so forth. This transmission draws on Saichō’s concept of the “three kinds of Lotus Sūtra” (sanshu Hokke), … which it explains in this fashion: the “fundamental Lotus Sūtra” indicates the primordial origin, prior to the advent and preaching of the Buddha; the various teachings of the Buddha’s lifetime, Hinayāna and Mahāyāna, true and provisional, are the “hidden and secret Lotus Sūtra”; and the Lotus Sūtra that represents the fifth period in the Buddha’s preaching life and integrates all earlier teachings is the “explicitly preached Lotus Sūtra.” Thus all truth, whether prior to words or formally articulated, and of whatever sūtra, is subsumed within “the Lotus Sūtra.” (Page 183)

The concept of the “three thousand realms in a single thought-moment” is not, however, merely an analysis of the structure of reality. It is the “realm of the inconceivable” to be discerned in meditation by the practitioner, who in so doing realizes one’s own identity with the totality of all that is. Kanno Hiroshi, in an essay on ichinen sanzen, lists five soteriological implications of this concept.

1. By virtue of the ten suchnesses, which constitute “the true aspect of the dharmas,” all beings in the hierarchy of the ten dharma realms, from hell-dwellers at the bottom to Buddhas at the top, are shown to have a common ontological structure, upon which the mutual inclusion of the ten realms can be asserted. Thus, the ichinen sanzen concept structurally clarifies the basis upon which deluded beings can realize Buddhahood. Specifically, because the Buddha realm is inherent in the human realm, ordinary worldlings can potentially become Buddhas.
2. As a corollary, the ontological equality of all beings is established, whatever their place in the hierarchy of the ten dharma realms.
3. Just as the Buddha realm is contained even in the hell realm, so the hell realm is contained even in the realm of Buddha. This undergirds the claim that the Tathāgata still possesses the nature of evil innately and thus clarifies the basis of the Buddha’s compassion, upon which his salvation of evil beings can become reality.
4. The subjective individual and the objective dharma realm are shown to be nondual; hell-dwellers live in hells, Buddhas in Buddha lands, and so on. Thus, potentially, the individual’s realization of Buddhahood can transform the outer world. As will be noted in chapter 6, this implication of the ichinen sanzen concept undergoes particular development in the teaching of Nichiren.
5. All existential possibilities, from the utmost suffering of the hells to the Buddha’s liberation, are implicit in the present thought-moment of the ordinary person; thus, all potential is located within the individual. (Page 181)

As noted in chapter 1, this mutual encompassing of the mind and all dharmas marks an important difference between Chih-i’s thought and that of Hua-yen and other forms of Mahāyāna in which the dharmas are said to arise from the one mind.

Chih-i begins by noting that the mind comprises “ten dharma realms.” These ten realms (jikkai) refer to the ten categories of living beings: hell-dwellers, hungry ghosts, asura demons, humans, gods, voice-hearers, condition-perceivers, bodhisattvas, and Buddhas. While these ten are ranged hierarchically from the viewpoint of provisional existence, from the viewpoint of emptiness, they lack independent self-nature and therefore co-penetrate, thus making “a hundred dharma realms.” The mutual encompassing or co-penetration of the ten realms (jikkai gogu) collapses any ontological distinction between the Buddha and the beings, implying that the nine realms of unenlightened beings possess the Buddha nature inherently, while the Buddha possesses the nine realms of unenlightened beings. The mutual inclusion of the ten realms represents an important characteristic of Chih-i’s thought: there is no original “pure mind”; good and evil are always nondual and mutually possessed. The most depraved icchantika is endowed the Buddha realm, while the Buddha is still latently endowed with the realms of unenlightened beings. This would eventually give rise to the controversial T’ien-t’ai doctrine of “inherent not being extirpated” even in the mind of the Buddha.

Each of the ten realms further possesses the ten suchnesses (jūnyoze) that constitute the “true aspect of the dharmas” as set forth in the following passage of the Lotus Sūtra:

“Only a Buddha and a Buddha together can fathom the true aspect of the dharmas, that is to say, the suchness of their characteristics, the suchness of their nature, the suchness of their essence, the suchness of their power, the suchness of their activity, the suchness of their causes, the suchness of their conditions, the suchness of their effects, the suchness of their recompenses and the suchness of their ultimate equality from beginning to end.”

Chih-i explains these ten suchnesses as follows:
” ‘Characteristics’ has its point of reference externally. What can be distinguished by being seen is called ‘characteristics.’ Nature has its point of reference internally. That which intrinsically belongs to oneself and does not change is called ‘nature.’ That which is the central quality [of something] is called ‘essence.’ The ability to influence is called ‘power.’ That which constructs is called ‘activity.’ Repetitive causes are called ‘causes’ [i.e., karma]. Auxiliary causes are called ‘conditions.’ Repetitive results are called ‘effects.’ Retributive effects are called ‘recompenses.’ The first, ‘characteristics,’ is called the ‘beginning’; the ninth, ‘recompense,’ is called the ‘end’; and the place to which they belong is ‘ultimately equal.’ ”

Each of the ten realms contains the ten suchnesses. The ten dharma realms, interpenetrating to form a hundred realms that each simultaneously possesses the ten suchnesses, comprise the thousand suchnesses.

Moreover, each of the ten dharma realms may be understood in terms of the three realms (san seken): the realm of the five skandhas or aggregates, the realm of sentient beings, and the realm of the land. The “realm of the five skandhas” represents an analysis of the sentient being in terms of its psychosomatic constituents: forms, perceptions, conceptions, volitions, and consciousness. The “realm of living beings” views the living being as an independent existent that can be said to belong to one or another of the ten dharma realms. The “realm of the land” is the objective realm in which the beings dwell. Because each of the ten dharma realms, which embodies the ten suchnesses, can also be understood in terms of these three categories, Chih-i says, “One realm comprises thirty kinds of realms.” Thus, the ten dharma realms, co-penetrating, yield a hundred realms; multiplied times the ten suchnesses they yield a thousand suchnesses; and multiplied times the three realms they equal three thousand realms.

The number three thousand is itself arbitrary; the point is that “all of reality is an integrated, interdependent unity,” as Paul Swanson puts it. (Page 179-181)

The first and most fundamental, “contemplating the realm of the inconceivable” (kuan pu-k’o-ssu-i Ching, kanfukashigi kyō), is to discern that the present object of contemplation is identical with the true aspect of reality, that is, the threefold truth. This is the portion of the text that sets forth the “single thought-moment comprising three thousand realms.” Since explanations of this concept in English sources are few, and since it is important not only in the medieval Tendai context but to the discussion in chapter 6 of Nichiren’s thought, it is worth presenting here in some detail.

The “single thought-moment” indicates the briefest possible instant in the thoughts of ordinary worldings that arise from one moment to the next, while the “three thousand realms” indicates the whole of phenomenal reality. In explaining the structure of “one mind” being “three thousand realms,” Chih-i says:

“Now one mind comprises ten dharma realms, but each dharma realm also comprises ten dharma realms, giving a hundred dharma realms. One realm comprises thirty kinds of realms, hence a hundred dharma realms comprise three thousand kinds of realms. These three thousand are contained in a fleeting moment of thought. Where there is no mind, that is the end of the matter; but if mind comes into being to the slightest degree whatsoever, it immediately contains the three thousand.”

Although each “thought-moment” is here said to “contain” the three thousand realms, Chih-i is careful to make clear that, in his system, the mind is not prior to dharmas:

“One may say neither that the one mind is prior and all dharmas posterior nor that all dharmas are prior and the one mind posterior. … If one derives all dharmas from the one mind, this is a vertical relationship. If the mind all at once contains all dharmas, this is a horizontal relationship. Neither vertical nor horizontal will do. All one can say is that the mind is all dharmas, and all dharmas are the mind. Therefore, the relationship is neither vertical nor horizontal, neither the same nor different. It is obscure, subtle and profound in the extreme. Knowledge cannot know it, nor can words speak it. Herein lies the reason for its being called ‘the realm of the inconceivable.’ ace;” (Page 178-179)

The Mo-ho chih-kuan [Great Calming and Contemplation] explains the “threefold” aspect of this contemplation as follows. First is “entering [the insight of] emptiness from the [viewpoint of] the conventional”; that is, one contemplates the conditioned, dependent nature of all phenomena, which are without permanence or self-essence. From the perspective of this insight, all categories, hierarchies, and boundaries are collapsed; it is a discernment of ultimate equality. The discernment of all phenomena as empty frees one from attachment to desires and intellectual constructs and is said to correspond to the insight of arhats and bodhisattvas of the Tripiṭaka and shared teachings. Next is “entering [insight into] the conventional from [the discernment of] emptiness.” Having discerned the nonsubstantial, contingent nature of things, one cognizes their provisional existence as phenomena arising through dependent origination and is thus able to act in the world in a soteriologically effective way. This discernment reestablishes categories and distinctions, but without biased attachment or false essentializing; it is said to correspond to the wisdom of bodhisattvas of the separate teaching. Last is the “contemplation of the Middle Way that is the supreme meaning.” Here one contemplates phenomena as both empty and provisionally existing, discerning both aspects simultaneously. This is said to correspond to the wisdom of the Buddha and of the perfect teaching. This progression through the three contemplations of emptiness, conventional existence, and the middle described here is called the “sequential threefold contemplation” (tz’u-ti san-kuan, shidai sangan). However, Chih-i defines as superior the contemplation in which all three truths are discerned simultaneously; this is the “perfect and immediate calming and contemplation” (yüan-tun chih-kuan, endon shikan). (Page 177-178)

“Reversal” may be seen as a subset of correspondence and association; it denotes a case where the identification of two elements functions to invert their conventional meanings. The logic of original enlightenment itself entails precisely this sort of reversal. It proceeds not from cause (practice) to effect (realization) but from effect to cause. Thus, it inverts conventional notions of enlightenment as a linear process of cultivation culminating in eventual realization; rather, enlightenment is held to be inherent, and it is only when based upon this insight that cultivation is considered meaningful. Cultivation then becomes the expression of original enlightenment. It is because of this reversal of conventional perspective that original enlightenment thought has been referred to as representing a “Copernican revolution.” Reversal as an interpretive technique recapitulates this fundamental reversal at the heart of the notion of original enlightenment. (Page 164)