The influence of Nichiren’s ideas on the general public during the Muromachi period (1334-1568) may be seen in the fact that many of Kyoto’s machishū, or townsfolk, became followers of the Nichiren sect. The machishū, who rose from Kyoto’s autonomous guilds, fostered what could be called the Lotus machishū culture. Some of the Nichiren adherents were upperclass townsmen who acquired great wealth and became leaders of the machishū. The Hon’ami family, famous in the fields of the fine and decorative arts, and the Chaya family, which was engaged in foreign trade, are representative of this class.

When Nichiren temples in Kyoto were attacked by the monks from Mt. Hiei during the seventh month of the fifth year of Temmon (1536), the machishū took the lead in defending the temples. This episode ended with the defeat of the followers of the Nichiren sect. Twenty-one Nichiren temples were destroyed by fire, and the priests took refuge at their subtemples or other temples in Sakai and Osaka with which they had connections. It was estimated that tens of thousands of Nichiren Buddhists lost their lives, and the Nichiren Lotus faith in Kyoto stood on the brink of ruin. However, when permission to rebuild the temples of those priests who had taken refuge in Sakai was granted in the eleventh year of Temmon (1542), the Lotus machishū played a central role in rebuilding Kyoto, and commerce, industry, the arts, and literature once again thrived under their aegis.

What, then, were the bonds between the machishū of Kyoto and the Nichiren sect? It could be that the spirit of positive accommodation with and vigorous cultivation of reality seen in Nichiren’s idea of the Lotus Sutra concurred with the interest of the machishū in working for profit.

Thus the culture of the Lotus machishū which originated in the Muromachi period quickly revived itself after a temporary interruption and was succeeded by the arts and literature of the Momoyama (1568-1615) and Edo (1615-1868) periods. …

One is intrigued by the large number of Nichiren Buddhists who were prominent leaders in the world of arts and letters down to the end of the Edo period. Of course, their works did not necessarily reflect their faith in Nichiren Buddhism, but some extant works do appear to be the fruits of that faith. The link between Nichiren Buddhism and the artistic culture of the Momoyama and Edo periods appears to be the townsman class (chōnin), which supported both. It is akin to the link between the machishū culture of the Muromachi period and the Nichiren Lotus faith, a relationship that was continued by the townsman class of the Momoyama and Edo periods. It should also be pointed out that most of the popular new sects in Japan down to the present day have been dominated by the Nichiren faith. Bearing this in mind, faith in the Nichiren sect and veneration of the Lotus Sutra should be regarded as important foundations of Japanese culture and religion.

Although it is well known that Nichiren established the Nichiren sect based on the Lotus Sutra, it should be noted that he was the first to emphasize the third realm, which stresses the need to practice the true law and endure life’s trials. The repeated sufferings of Nichiren, such as his exile to Izu at age forty and his exile to Sado at age fifty, became turning points and helped him to understand the third realm of the Lotus Sutra. He compared himself to the bodhisattva martyrs mentioned in the sutra. In particular, he compared himself to the bodhisattva Eminent Conduct and other bodhisattvas who sprang up from the earth. Surviving writings from Nichiren’s days of exile in Izu show that he started to quote from the third realm of the Lotus Sutra at that time, and this led to the development of ideas that are unique to Nichiren.

Chih-i’s understanding of the unifying truth of the Lotus Sutra as a synthesis of the microcosm (one mind) and the macrocosm (three thousand realms), good and evil, and ideals and reality is related to the general attitude in China that laid stress on the actual world. On this point, it differs in nuance from the reverence of the Lotus Sutra found in India, where the wonderful law as the one vehicle was viewed as the truth of an undifferentiated, universal equality. Chih-i’s thinking on emptiness is a clear manifestation of this difference. Chih-i’s logic of emptiness is based on the three concepts of emptiness, transience, and the middle. The first concept indicates the attainment of the state of emptiness by abandoning attachment to actuality (or transience, chia in Chinese). The second concept, which is the reverse of the first, means that one should not remain in the state of emptiness but should return once again to actuality and live correctly in the real world. In the first concept, transience is denied and emptiness is established, but in the second concept emptiness is denied and actuality is revived. The third concept concludes that emptiness must not be forgotten even after returning to actuality or transience; it is the middle path that unifies emptiness and transience. The second concept, returning from emptiness to actuality, reflects the Chinese stress on ordinary reality. These three concepts were expounded in the Sutra on the Bodhisattva’s Original Action (P’u-sa Ying-lo pen-yeh-ching), which was compiled in China in about the fifth century. Chih-i used ideas from the Lotus Sutra to add new flesh to and systematize these concepts.

The Hossō teaching that only a few people could attain buddhahood not only discouraged people from hoping for enlightenment; it also was in close agreement with the court’s policy that Buddhism was primarily for the protection of the state and its high officials and was not to be propagated among commoners.

By the end of the ninth century, this situation had radically changed due to the establishment of two new schools, Tendai and Shingon. Large numbers of monks and lay believers had come to accept the position that buddhahood could be attained during a person’s lifetime through intense practice. Moreover, monks from these traditions, especially the Tendai school, argued that buddhahood was a real possibility for everyone, including commoners, not just a chosen few in the nobility. In order to make the rapid realization of enlightenment possible, new religious practices were introduced, developed, and interpreted.