The four devils consist of the devil of the five aggregates, the devil of the defilements, the devil of death, and the devil king of the sixth heaven. The devil of the aggregates refers to the inherent insecurity, anxiety, and outright suffering which results from trying to identify with the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness. The devil of the defilements refers to the ways in which self-centered desires inevitably arise based upon the needs of the body and mind for nourishment, security, pleasurable stimulation, and self-aggrandizement. The devil of death refers to the dread, fear, and terror that arise in the face of the inevitable dissolution of the body and mind upon death. The devil king of the sixth heaven, or Mara, refers to those things in life that tempt us to forget about Buddhist practice and live only for worldly goals and aspirations. The devil king of the sixth heaven personifies all those people, situations, and inner impulses which tempt or threaten us to forsake Buddhism and return to the old cycle of unthinking habit, fleeting pleasures and familiar pains. One could say that the other name for the devil king of the sixth heaven is “the devil we know” who attempts to frighten or cajole us away from the unfamiliar territory of liberation back into the vicious cycle of our self-centeredness. Interestingly, the devil king of the sixth heaven is also included on the calligraphic mandala, probably to show that even he is not outside the power of the Eternal Śākyamuni Buddha, and that ultimately even the devilish functions can be turned to the realization of buddhahood.

Describing his early considerations as to whether he should risk remonstrating against slander of the Lotus Sūtra, Nichiren wrote, “If I spoke out, I realized, the three obstacles and four devils would overtake me.” (Hori 2002, p. 53; see also 106-107) The “three obstacles and four devils” (J. sanshō-shima) are described in the writings of Tiantai Zhiyi (538-597). The following passage is a good example of Nichiren’s citing of this teaching and his explanation of it:

Therefore, it is stated in the Great Calming and Contemplation, fascicle five, “As practice and understanding of ‘calming and contemplation’ progress, the three obstacles and four devils compete to interfere with the practitioner. … Do not follow them or fear them. When one follows them, one will fall into the evil realms; and if one is afraid of them, one will be unable to master the True Dharma.” This is exactly what I have experienced with my own body. Also, this should be a clear mirror for my disciples and followers to reflect upon. Please practice with reverence, thereby producing nourishment for the future practitioners of the Lotus Sūtra.

The “three obstacles” in this citation refer to defilements, evil karma, and painful retributions. The defilements are the obstacles arising from the three poisons of greed, hatred, and delusion; evil karma refers to the obstructions arising from wives and children; and the painful retributions are obstructions caused by the rulers of a country, parents, and others. Among the “four devils” that cause hindrances is the king of devils in the sixth heaven in the ream of desire. (Hori 2010, p.adapted)

The three obstacles and the four devils were Zhiyi’s way of cataloging all the various phenomena that can keep us from practicing Buddhism. The three obstacles consist of self-centered desires or defilements, the karma or unwholesome habits that arise from those defilements, and the painful consequences of such activity.

In Japanese Buddhism, the heavenly gods and benevolent deities (J. shoten zenjin), are the guardian deities (J. shugojin) who protect the practitioners of Buddhism. The calligraphic mandala that Nichiren inscribed to represent the “focus of devotion” (J. honzon) of the Origin Gate of the Lotus Sūtra includes representatives of different types of guardian deities. There are the four leaders of the Bodhisattvas of the Earth from chapter fifteen and who are given the specific transmission to spread the Lotus Sūtra in the Latter Age in chapter twenty-one; there are the bodhisattvas who represent the provisional teachings such as Medicine King, Beautiful Lord (S. Mañjuśrī), Universal Good (S. Samantabhadra), and Loving One (S. Maitreya); there are the two Knowledge Kings (S. vidyā-rājas) Immovable Lord (S. Acalanātha, J. Fudō) and Desire King (S. Rāgāraja; J. Aizen); there are the arhats who have received predictions of buddhahood like Śāriputra and Mahākāśyapa; there are the Vedic deities (S. deva) Brahmā, Indra, Sūrya (the sun god), Candra (the moon god), and Aruna (the morning star), and the four heavenly kings who guard the four quarters of the world; and there are even the two major Shintō gods (J. kamo Tenshō Daijiin (aka Amaterasu Ōmikami) and Hachiman (called the “Great Bodhisattva”). In addition, other beings that are not as exalted as celestial bodhisattvas or gods can also be considered guardians. In Kaimoku-shō, Nichiren specifically mentions the ten rākṣasas (vampire like women of Indian mythology) who appear in chapter twenty-six of the Lotus Sūtra. In that chapter, these rākṣasas and their mother, Hāriti (J. Kishimojin) bestow dhārāṇis for the protection of the practitioner of the Lotus Sūtra. On the calligraphic mandala, Nichiren also included the asura (a kind of titan or demon) and nāga (the dragons of Indian mythology) kings who appear in chapter one of the Lotus Sūtra among the congregation gathered to hear the Buddha’s teaching. Traditionally in Buddhism there are eight kinds of supernatural beings that are considered to be disciples of the Buddha and guardians of the Dharma. These eight are devas, nāgas, garudas (giant birds who prey on the nāgas), asuras, yakṣas (nature spirits), gandharvas (anthropomorphic equines), mahorāgas (pythons), and kiṃnaras (anthropomorphic avians). This group of eight is mentioned throughout the Lotus Sūtra. These are the beings that Nichiren is thinking of when he asks why he has not received divine protection.

Nichiren and his contemporaries accepted [the Lotus Sūtra] as a record of actual events in India at Vulture Peak. Today, we might have a little trouble accepting this testimony as valid simply because we do not view the Lotus Sūtra as a historical event or the verbatim record of a talk given by the historical Śākyamuni Buddha. Many people today may not even believe in rebirth, and so the dilemma of the two vehicles who cannot become bodhisattvas because they have cut themselves off from the cycle of birth and death may seem to be an imaginary or at least purely hypothetical problem. So what can we make of all of this if we do not accept these basic assumptions regarding the Mahāyāna sūtras as being the record of actual teachings and events or the metaphysical assumptions involved in the distinctions (or non-distinction) between the two vehicles and the One Vehicle?

I am of the opinion that those who wrote the Lotus Sūtra had themselves awakened to the highest truth that the Buddha had awakened to through their own faith and practice. They were monks (and perhaps nuns) who had awakened to a selfless compassion that went far beyond what they expected. Perhaps they had been striving to become arhats, or perhaps they were Mahāyānists who aspired to attain buddhahood in some distant time and place. In any case, when they attained awakening they realized that it cut through all their dualistic ideas, including the division between Hinayāna and Mahāyāna. They knew for themselves that all the teachings of the Buddha did not lead to lesser goals but to the very same awakening the Buddha had realized. I believe that the Lotus Sūtra is the literary expression of their insight and the supreme joy that they felt in the form of a great drama in which the Buddha reveals the One Vehicle teaching. When the sūtra says that Śāriputra “felt like dancing for joy” or that Śāriputra declares to the Buddha, “Today I have realized that I am your son, that I was born from your mouth, that I was born in [the world of] the Dharma, and that I have obtained the Dharma of the Buddha.” I hear the voice of those anonymous Mahāyāna monks (and perhaps nuns as well) voicing their joyful surprise at how they had awakened to the same truth to which the Buddha had awakened. All of the rhetorical flourishes and fantastic events of the Lotus Sūtra are by way of underscoring how momentous this awakening was, and how, for them, it surpassed any other teaching, whether Hinayāna or Mahāyāna, that they had heard. It does not worry me that the historical Buddha might not have spoken the exact words attributed to him in the Lotus Sūtra, nor do I worry that the Assembly in Space might not have literally occurred. What I think is marvelous is that more than 2,000 years ago the Buddha’s followers realized that all people were capable of attaining perfect and complete awakening of a Buddha and that all who heard the Dharma would embark upon the One Vehicle enabling them to do so. When we read, recite, ponder, and share the Lotus Sūtra I believe that we are reading, reciting, pondering and sharing the testimony of those long ago practitioners who had such a surprising and joyful awakening that surpassed every expectation and who furthermore had the conviction that their awakening was available to all people. More than two thousand years later the Lotus Sūtra enables us to share their faith, hope, and conviction regarding the true meaning of the Buddha’s teachings.

This is clearly the main point of the Trace Gate, or first half of the Lotus Sūtra. In chapter two of the Lotus Sūtra, the Buddha begins the teaching of the One Vehicle. In the very first part of that chapter he speaks of the “ten suchnesses” which are the ten factors” in Zhiyi’s teaching of the “three thousand realms in a single thought-moment.” … [T]hese ten factors show what the ten realms have in common that allows them to contain one another as different states in the ongoing dynamic process of interdependent becoming. Since they contain one another, the realm of buddhahood is embraced by and embraces the other nine realms. This means that buddhahood is an integral part of all and is realizable by all. Knowing this, the Buddha used various skillful means to teach people how to realize the different goals that appealed to them, but his true intention was that all those he taught would realize their own buddhahood. After being requested to do so three times by Śāriputra, the Buddha then clarifies that the three vehicles of the śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas were taught as a form of skillful means and that in fact there is only the One Vehicle that leads all to buddhahood. From chapter two to chapter nine the One Vehicle is expounded in terms of the parable of the burning house, the parable of the wealthy man and his poor son, the simile of the herbs, and others. In chapter seven, the Buddha tells the assembly how he has been teaching them the Lotus Sūtra in his capacity as a bodhisattva as long ago as “three thousand dust mote eons.” In these chapters, the Buddha gave predictions of buddhahood to major śrāvaka disciples such as Śāriputra, Maudgalyāyana, Mahākāśyapa, and many others, including his son Rāhula. In chapter thirteen he predicted buddhahood for his wife Yaśodharā, and his aunt Mahā-Prajāpatī who were also śrāvakas. Many of those the Buddha gave predictions too were arhats, those who had already cut off any ties to the world of birth and death and who therefore were not ever going to be reborn again. Throughout the Trace Gate the Buddha makes it very clear through plain statement, the use of parables, a past life story, and specific prophecies that even those who are following the way of the two vehicles will also attain buddhahood.

Zhiyi taught that the four doctrinal teachings were combined like ingredients into five different flavors of Dharma. The perfect teaching by itself was the best, but other flavors and periods made concessions to those who were not ready for the perfect teaching by combining it with other teachings, or in the case of the Deer Park period excluding it altogether. While Zhiyi believed that the Buddha used these different flavors throughout his fifty years of teaching, he also indicated that certain sūtras exemplified particular flavors. The seventh century Tiantai patriarch and reformer Zhanran later identified these flavors and their corresponding sutras more rigidly with a chronological scheme of the Buddha’s teachings called the five periods. In Treatise on protecting the Nation, Nichiren provides citations from various sūtras to justify this time scheme of the five periods. These five flavors or periods were then made to correspond to certain analogies used in the sūtras. One analogy comes from the Nirvāṇa Sūtra and relates the teachings to milk and its products – cream, curds, butter, and clarified butter. This analogy was Zhiyi’s inspiration for the five flavors. Another analogy relates the teachings to the process by which an estranged son is reconciled with his father and given his birthright as related in the parable of wealthy man and his poor son in the fourth chapter of the Lotus Sūtra. Yet another analogy comes from the Flower Garland Sūtra and relates the teachings to the progression of the sun from dawn to high noon.

1. The Flower Garland – This lasted for the first three weeks after the Buddha’s awakening and as such was not perceived by anyone but the gods and advanced bodhisattvas. This period combines the perfect teaching with the specific teaching. This means that while the Flower Garland Sūtra presents the final goal of Buddhism, many parts are aimed only at the bodhisattvas and so exclude those who do not share their aspirations or insight. This period is compared to fresh milk before it undergoes any further refinement; or to the time when the prodigal son is frightened to death by the magnificent wealth and power of the father whom he has forgotten; or the sun at dawn that illuminates only the highest peaks of the mountains.
2. The Deer Park – for the next twelve years beginning with the Deer Park discourse, the Buddha exclusively taught the tripiṭaka doctrine for the śrāvakas. At this stage the Buddha taught the four noble truths and the twelvefold chain of dependent origination in order to free people from worldly attachments and to overcome self-centeredness. This period is compared to the cream derived from milk; or the time when the father sends servants to employ the son for menial labor and later visits the son dressed as a fellow worker; or the sun when it has risen high enough to illuminate the deepest valleys.
3. The Expanded (Vaipulya) – for the next eight years the Buddha taught preliminary Mahāyāna teachings in order to castigate the śrāvakas for their complacency and to inspire the novice bodhisattvas by teaching the six perfections, the emptiness of all phenomena, and the existence of the buddhas in the pure lands of the ten directions. The Vimalakirti Sūtra, the three Pure Land sūtras, and those pertaining to Consciousness-Only and later the esoteric teachings are all lumped into this catch-all category which contains all four teachings by content that are taught depending on how they correspond to the needs of the audience at any given time and place. This period is compared to the production of curds; or the time when the son and the father develop mutual trust and the son enters his father’s mansion freely on business; or the sun at breakfast time.
4. The Prajña or Perfection of Wisdom (Prajña-pāramitā) – for the next twenty-two years the Buddha taught the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras which included the common, specific and perfect teachings, but not the tripiṭaka teachings. This period emphasized the emptiness of all phenomena and negated all the distinctions and dichotomies set up in the previous teachings so the way would be clear for the Buddha’s ultimate teaching in the following period. This period is compared to the production of butter; or the time when the father entrusts the son with his storehouses of gold, silver, and other treasures; or the sun late in the morning.
5. The Lotus and Nirvāṇa – in the last eight years of the Buddha’s life he taught only the unadulterated pure teaching in the Lotus Sūtra and reiterated it in the Nirvāṇa Sūtra. This was the period which not only comes full circle back to the Buddha’s own point of view but brings along all those who were gradually prepared by the last three periods and who did not understand or felt left out of the sudden teaching of the Flower Garland period. In this teaching the eventual attainment of buddhahood by all beings and the timeless nature of the Buddha’s awakening are affirmed. This period is compared to the production of clarified butter or ghee; the time when the father reveals that he is the son’s true father and bestows all his wealth upon the son; or the sun at high noon.

1. The Sudden Method – the Buddha teaches directly from his own awakening without any preliminaries. This is usually identified with the Flower Garland Sūtra. The Flower Garland Sūtra, however, is more of a presentation of the Buddha’s awakened state than a discursive teaching by the Buddha.
2. The Gradual Method – the Buddha begins at a very basic common-sense level and then gradually cultivates the understanding of his disciples. Beginning with the tripiṭaka teachings, the Buddha gradually introduced Mahāyāna teachings up to and including the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras. In this way, the disciples’ understanding, and aspiration matured until they could appreciate and benefit from the Buddha’s highest teaching in the Lotus Sūtra. The Lotus Sūtra itself is held to transcend any of the four methods because it is the goal of all of them.
3. The Secret Method – the Buddha teaches some people who can benefit by a specific teaching, but others are not aware of this because they are not ready and would misunderstand or even misuse the teaching. For instance, the Buddha might give advanced teachings on emptiness to bodhisattvas unbeknownst to the śrāvakas who might misinterpret it as nihilistic if they were to hear it.
4. The Indeterminate Method – the Buddha teaches one doctrine but the various people who hear it understand it in different ways. For instance, the four noble truths might be taught and understood by śrāvakas as referring to existing states of suffering or liberation that actual beings can reside. Bodhisattvas, however, would understand that the four noble truths lead beyond grasping at existing states and that no actual beings reside anywhere outside of the interdependent flow of causes and conditions.

The Tripitaka Teaching this corresponds to pre-Mahāyāna teachings as found in the Chinese Āgamas or the Pāli Canon and is directed to the śrāvakas (voice-hearers) who strive to become arhats (those who escape from this world of birth and death and do not return). It emphasizes emptiness and approaches it through analysis of the aggregates and the links of dependent origination. In other words, this teaching aims to reveal the emptiness of the self by examining the components of existence such as the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness. It is shown that each of these is impermanent, subject to suffering, and cannot be the basis of an abiding independent self either alone or together. The links of dependent origination reveal the succession of causes and effects that make up existence and likewise reveal that an abiding self cannot be found therein. By doing this, the śrāvakas will realize the contingent nature of the self and thereby extinguish greed for what could satisfy the “self,” anger in regard to what threatens such a “self,” and ignorance regarding the selfless nature of the aggregates. In this way they will realize nirvāṇa and free themselves from birth and death. It might be asked: “What are the aggregates if they are not a self?” Do they somehow exist in their own right in some manner? And who is it that is free of birth and death and who enters nirvāṇa if there is no self? These are questions that are taken up in the following teachings.

The Shared Teaching — this corresponds to the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras and is directed to the more advanced śrāvakas and those just starting out on the bodhisattva path. Because these teachings are directed at both śrāvakas and bodhisattvas it is called the teaching they share in common. This level of discourse approaches emptiness more immediately or intuitively because it does not involve analysis. Rather, one learns not to impute substance or a fixed nature onto things in the first place. It is also more thoroughgoing in its application of emptiness in that it applies it not just to the self but also to all dharmas (phenomena). In answer to the above question, the aggregates not only do not provide a self either together or in part to an individual, but they themselves have no abiding substance or fixed nature. Each aggregate depends upon causes and conditions, which are also dependent on causes and conditions and so on ad infinitum. Emptiness in this teaching is the emptiness of any fixed nature or substance whatsoever. In response to the question as to who is saved, this teaching asserts that the bodhisattvas vow to save all sentient beings but do not cling to the idea that there are beings at all. It is all an empty show, but a show manifesting suffering or liberation depending upon the flow of causes and conditions. The question might then be asked: “How should bodhisattvas deal with causes and conditions if they know that they are all ultimately empty and have no basis, origin, or goal and no real self or entity abides anywhere?”

The Distinct Teaching — this corresponds to the Flower Garland Sūtra that is directed specifically to those who are firmly established bodhisattvas, so it is distinct from the teachings for śrāvakas. At this point, one needs to see that emptiness is not a dead-end but just the beginning. This requires an appreciation for contingent phenomena and thus the truth of provisional existence. While continuing to recognize that all things are empty, the bodhisattvas also see that this emptiness is not a blank void or nothingness. Rather, the lack of a fixed or independent nature is what allows all things to flow and move, change and grow, and ultimately interrelate so thoroughly that all things affect all other things like a web that quivers all at once when any one strand is touched. All things, all beings, are provisional manifestations of this interpenetrating dynamic process. Realizing this, bodhisattvas negate the negation of emptiness. They are free to reengage the world and appreciate all things without clinging or attachment. Gradually they realize the Middle Way that integrates peaceful detachment with compassionate involvement. Zhiyi called the empty, the provisional, and the Middle Way aspects of reality the threefold truth. In this teaching they are approached dialectically. Emptiness is the thesis, provisional existence is the antithesis, and the synthesis is the Middle Way. This is not the final teaching however, because an even greater integration lies ahead. Finally, one might ask: “If the tripiṭaka and shared teachings negate the self and all phenomena, and the distinct teaching negates that negation, is there any explicitly affirmative teaching in Buddhism at all?”

The Perfect Teaching — this corresponds to the Lotus Sūtra and the Nirvāṇa Sūtra and it is considered perfect or well rounded (the Chinese character used for this teaching holds both meanings) because it presents the integration of all three truths — the empty, the provisional, and the Middle Way — into a seamless whole. Each of these, if properly understood, immediately leads to an understanding of the other two in this teaching. For instance, what is empty is provisionally existent and therefore exemplifies the Middle Way. While the earlier teachings negate the world of birth and death through an analytical or intuitive approach to emptiness or negate a one-sided emptiness by affirming the provisional existence of all things; the perfect teaching affirms the total unity of the threefold truth of the empty, the provisional, and the Middle Way. In this teaching, the affirmative aspects of the earlier negations are made explicit. Negative and limiting aspects are emptied, positive and boundless phenomena are provisionally affirmed, and all manifests the liberation of the Middle Way. For instance, previously the vehicles of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas (privately awakened ones) were condemned in favor of the bodhisattva vehicle, but now all the provisional vehicles are shown to be none other than the unfolding of the One Vehicle leading all to buddhahood. In previous teachings the historical Śākyamuni Buddha was shown to be a finite provisional manifestation of the cosmic principle of buddhahood that is sometimes personified as a cosmic buddha named Vairocana who is said to transcend birth or death. The Lotus Sūtra, however, portrays Śākyamuni Buddha himself as the one who reveals the unborn and deathless nature of buddhahood through his timeless spiritual presence and skillful activity. Previous teachings compared and contrasted the empty, the provisional and the Middle Way, but here the intrinsic unity of the freedom of emptiness, the creative responsiveness of the provisional, and the sublimity of the Middle Way is fully revealed.