Nichiren uses the term “object of worship” or honzon to mean not only a physical icon used for ritual, contemplative, or devotional purposes— the common meaning of the word in his time—but also the principle or reality which that object is said to embody. His various writings explain the object of worship in this latter sense from two perspectives. From one view, it is the original Buddha. For example:

[The people of] Japan as well as all of Jambudvīpa should as one take Śākyamuni, master of teachings, of the origin teaching as their object of worship – that is to say, Śākyamuni and Many-Jewels within the jeweled stūpa along with all the other Buddhas, flanked by Superior Conduct and the others of the four bodhisattvas.

In other writings, the object of worship is said to be the Lotus Sūtra, or Myōhō-renge-kyō, itself:

Question: What should ordinary worldlings in the evil days of the last age take as their object of worship?

Answer: They should make the daimoku of the Lotus Sūtra their object of worship. …

Question: . . . Why do you not take Śākyamuni as the object of worship, but instead, the daimoku of the Lotus Sūtra?

Answer: … This is not my interpretation. Lord Śākyamuni and T’ient’ai [Chih-i] both established the Lotus Sūtra as the object of worship…. The reason is that the Lotus Sūtra is the father and mother of Śākyamuni and the eye of all Buddhas. Śākyamuni, Dainichi, and the Buddhas of the ten directions were all born of the Lotus Sūtra. Therefore I now take as object of worship that which gives birth [to the Buddhas.]

These two views at first seem contradictory. However, if “Säkyamuni” in the passage first cited is understood to be the eternal Buddha, the apparent contradiction dissolves. The eternal Säkyamuni and the Dharma (i.e., the daimoku of the Lotus Sütra) are two aspects of an identity; the “three thousand worlds in one thought-moment as actuality” for Nichiren describes both the insigh t of the original Buddha and the truth by which that Buddha is awakened.