Quotes

A True Understanding of Dependent Origination

Life is influenced by all kinds of natural and scientific laws – physical, mathematical, chemical, physiological, psychological, economic, political, legal, ethical, and aesthetic. All of these standards and principles constantly intermingle and interact with one another and with karma in the complex mixture of objective and subjective phenomena that constitutes life. Under these circumstances, totally explaining dependent origination as it operates in life would involve the impossible task of mastering all fields of modern science, scholarship, and art. From the religious viewpoint, however, it is enough to try to understand how things are and to strive to determine how they should be. These are the purposes of a true understanding of dependent origination.
Basic Buddhist Concepts

The Core Message of the Lotus

For me the core message of the Lotus is the affirmation that a highest Dharma does exist and that it manifests to those who seek it or who need it according to their ability to understand and respond. According to Tiantai Zhiyi (538-597) this was expressed by the phrase gan-ying daojiao, meaning the communication of the eternal buddha-dharma in response to a person’s need and request. Even though a person may not understand life or the Dharma, the Lotus gives the assurance that true reality (= the Eternal Buddha) is responsive to one’s needs and assists a person and others to grow (as the rain assists different plants in chapter 5). This responsiveness becomes personified in chapters 24 and 25 by the diverse appearances of the Bodhisattvas Gadgadasvara and Guanyin, who are ready to meet the needs of believers. Since we have both faulty perception and a mistaken understanding about life, the responses of true reality to our needs sometimes take unusual forms, namely, well-intentioned and wise deception. For example, the promise of future pleasures may be needed to get little children out of a burning house (chapter 3), or the shock tactics of grief over the apparent death of their father may be needed to get irresponsible sons of a doctor to take their medicine (chapter 16); whereas for others a long period of preparation may be contrived before they are able to hear and respond (the poor son in chapter 4), and periodic rest and recreation may be needed for others before the journey is complete (the magic city, chapter 7).
A Buddhist Kaleidoscope; David W. Chappell, Organic Truth: Personal Reflections on the Lotus Sutra Page 63-64

The World of Ichinen Sanzen of Ji

That Śākyamuni Buddha is in us also means we are In Śākyamuni Buddha. In other words, we are living in the Buddha’s life. These phrases show us the meaning that the Buddha and we are united and seen from the Buddha’s perspective, we are also one with him.

Nichiren Shōnin stated in the Kanjin Honzon Shō,

“Śākyamuni Buddha, the Lord-preacher of this Pure Land, has never died in the past, nor will He be born in the future. He exists forever throughout the past, present, and future. All those who receive His guidance are one with this Eternal Buddha. It is because each of our minds is equipped with the ‘3,000 modes of existence’ and the ‘Three Factors,’ namely, all living beings, the land in which they live, and the five elements of living beings.”
(WNS2, page 148)

In summary, according to the doctrine of Hon-In Hon-Ga (true cause and true effect) and Ichinen Sanzen of Ji, a master (the Buddha) and his disciples (beings of nine realms, especially followers of the Lotus Sūtra) are beginningless and endless and one with the Buddha. This is the world of Ichinen Sanzen of Ji.

Buddha Seed: Understanding the Odaimoku

A Lotus Sutra Preached To Each of Us Individually

In spite of the absence of a Lotus sermon, the Lotus Sutra continually leads the reader into an expectation that a sermon will be preached, and buddhas and bodhisattvas gather from the far corners of the universe in expectation to “hear what has never been heard before.” One way to handle this dilemma is to suggest that the sermon will be preached to each of us individually if and when we approach the Lotus Sutra in devotion and trust and supplication. Because the Dharma is responsive and conforms to the needs of the listener, the Lotus sermon cannot be something that is given as an objective entity once and for all, and open to the scrutiny of all.

If one really wants to hear the Lotus sermon for oneself, then one must invoke the eternal Dharma, or the sutra, or the Buddha, and like Śāriputra ask for it to be preached to you. Based on the sutra, practitioners are invited to appeal to a variety of different figures, such as Guanyin (Skt., Avalokiteśvara), Mañjuśrī, Śākyamuni, the Eternal Buddha, the text itself, the eternal Dharma, and so on. I have not noticed any Zen-like emphasis on experiencing a “formless self” or “pure experience” or “emptiness” in the text. Rather, the text seems to delight in the diversity of the world in all its variety and transitoriness. Accordingly, practitioners are shown that many different figures may be vehicles for the Dharma or manifestations of the Dharma. Practitioners are invited to bring their particular needs, and to choose a particular form of the Dharma, of a buddha, bodhisattva, or text to petition, and to expect a concrete response in a mode that will be meaningful to the practitioner.
A Buddhist Kaleidoscope; David W. Chappell, Organic Truth: Personal Reflections on the Lotus Sutra Page 57-58

Learning Experiences

When I was training to become a priest, I was at an advanced age. There were many potential places where I could have failed, and some folks were always eager to point out that I might not make it. In my mind and even on occasion I said, “there is no wasted effort in Buddhism.” If you think about this, no matter had I succeeded or not I would have learned and experienced more even in failure than I would have not trying.

Lotus Path: Practicing the Lotus Sutra Volume 1

“Innumerable Meanings” of the Lotus Sutra

The Lotus Sutra can be understood in many ways, or, to put it another way, the teachings of the Lotus Sutra are varied and multivalent. Actually, one of the most important of these many meanings of the Lotus Sutra is its very vagueness and that it presents itself as of “innumerable meanings.” This potential — latent in its self-proclaimed “innumerable meanings” — provides the possibility for the Lotus Sutra to have meaning, not just in the past, but also specifically for the modern age.

Allow me to illustrate. In the introductory chapter we find Śākyamuni entering “the samādhi of the abode of immeasurable meanings.” As if to put the electronic lasers and pyrotechnics of Disneyland to shame, flowers rain down from heaven and the Buddha emits a ray of light that illuminates uncountable universes. Then the Bodhisattva Mañjuśrī announces that the Buddha is about to preach the Lotus Sutra. However, the Buddha never does get around to preaching it. In short, an extravagant show is made to prepare for a sermon whose content is never exactly delineated.

What is this “Lotus Sutra” that is never preached? The content of the Lotus Sutra from chapter 2 on consists not so much in the Lotus Sutra itself, as in various praises for and instructions concerning the Lotus Sutra. The reason is that, in a broad sense, all of the Buddha-dharma is the Lotus Sutra, preached by the Buddha from the beginningless past. And if, in the words of the Ta Chih tu lun (Treatise on the Sutra of the Perfection of Wisdom), the Buddha-dharma is not limited to the words of the sutras, but all good and beautiful words are the Buddha-dharma, then the same can be said of the Lotus Sutra.

The Lotus Sutra is of immeasurable meanings because it is equivalent to the Buddha-dharma. …

This does not mean that the Lotus Sutra can mean anything we want it to, or that we can arbitrarily interpret it to our own liking. “Immeasurable” does not mean “anything” or “everything.” It is important to know what the “Lotus Sutra” (in the limited, textual sense) says (and does not say), what it has meant (or not meant) to people in the past, how it has inspired (or not inspired) people, and what kinds of religious or other experiences it has led to.

On that basis we can more accurately and critically conclude what meaning the Lotus Sutra can have for our modern world. This is the duty of all religionists, whether Buddhist, Christian, or Muslim — to discover the meaning of their faith in their own social, historical, and cultural situation. For the Lotus Sutra adherent, it means the obligation to seek the meaning of the Lotus Sutra that is alive and meaningful for today. And precisely because the Lotus Sutra is of immeasurable meanings, it has the potential for providing meaning in our day.
A Buddhist Kaleidoscope; Paul L. Swanson, The Innumerable Meanings of the Lotus Sutra, Page 51-52

Saichō’s Ideal Tendai Practitioner

Kimura Shōshū has argued that Gyōgi provided Saichō with a model of the ideal Tendai practitioner, the bosatsusō or bodhisattva monk. Saichō planned to train Tendai monks so that they would be able to both preach to the populace and supervise construction projects which would help the common people. These were the same types of activities in which Gyōgi and his followers engaged. Gyōgi was often called a bodhisattva during his lifetime; after his death people believed he was a manifestation of Mañjuśrī. Since Saichō had proposed that Mañjuśrī be installed as elder (jōza) in the dining hall on Mount Hiei, Saichō might have regarded Gyōgi as a model of the ideal monk as manifested by Mañjuśrī. Saichō’s proposal that his monks be called ‘bodhisattva monks’ might have reflected the influence of figures such as as Gyōgi who had been called bodhisattvas by the populace. In the Nihon ryōiki, Gyōgi was described in the following way: “On the outside he had the form of a monk, but within were hidden the deeds of a bodhisattva.” This description was derived from the Lotus Sūtra. Saichō cited the same passage from the Lotus Sūtra in his last instructions to his disciples.

Saichō: The Establishment of the Japanese Tendai School, p240

The Writings of Chan-Jan’s Disciple Ming-Kuang

A position similar to that of Saichō finally emerged in the writings of Chan-jan’s disciple Ming-kuang. …

While earlier T’ien-t’ai masters had formulated a single interpretation to explain the observance of the Fan wang precepts for those who followed the Unique and Perfect teachings, Ming-kuang advanced separate interpretations of the Fan wang precepts, distinguishing between the precepts practiced by followers of the Unique teaching and those practiced by followers of the Perfect teaching. Ming-kuang based his new interpretations of the Fan wang precepts on Chih-i’s distinction between bodhisattvas who followed gradual practices and bodhisattvas who followed Sudden practices. The follower of the Unique teaching gradually practiced and mastered the various sets of precepts, including the Hinayāna precepts. In contrast, the follower of the Perfect teaching mastered all the precepts in an instant. Thus he did not necessarily have to master the Hinayāna precepts before progressing to the Fan wang precepts. Ming-kuang’s analysis effectively purged the Fan wang precepts of any onus resulting from the association of the Fan wang Ching with the Hua yen Ching. The idea of a Sudden realization of the precepts was fundamental to Saichō’s identification of the Perfect precepts with the direct path to enlightenment. …

Ming-kuang provided Saichō with much of the doctrinal justification for his proposals. In the process of remedying inadequacies which he perceived in the commentary on the Fan wang Ching attributed to Chih-i, Ming-kuang freed the Fan wang Ching from the onus of being closely associated with the Hua yen Ching. He insisted that the Fan wang precepts could be considered as solely Perfect (jun’en) precepts, not merely as precepts reflecting a mixture of Unique and Perfect teachings. At the same time, he also argued that the Perfect precepts were separate and distinct from the Hinayāna precepts, a position which Saichō later adopted in the Shijōshiki. Ming-kuang was probably the first Chinese monk to formulate a position on the precepts which developed the full implications of the Ying lo ching’s exclusion of the Hinayāna precepts from the sanjujōkai formula. In addition, Mingkuang’s discussions of the ‘Sudden’ acquisition of the Perfect precepts and his development of the doctrines concerning the (sanju jōkai) provided a rationale for elevating the precepts from being used as a stepping stone to the more advanced practices of meditation or wisdom, to a practice equal to, and essentially identical with, meditation and wisdom.

Saichō: The Establishment of the Japanese Tendai School, p230-235

After Chih-i’s Death

After Chih-i’s death, the T’ien-t’ai School went through a period during which it was eclipsed by such new schools as the Hua-yen and Fa-hsiang. Chan-jan (711—782) revived the T’ien-t’ai School during the eighth century. Traditional biographies state that Chan-jan had thoroughly studied the Ssufen lü and was ordained by the Ssufen lü master T’an-i (692—771).

Among Chan-jan’s numerous works are commentaries on Chih-i’s three major works. His treatment of the Perfect precepts in these commentaries is much like that of Chih-i with one important change in emphasis. While Chih-i stressed the abstract, formless qualities of the absolute precepts (rikai), Chan-jan argued that the rikai were only complete when they had actual rules (jikai) as their contents. Moreover, Chan-jan maintained that if the absolute, formless quality of the rikai were overemphasized, monks would be more apt to violate the precepts. Chan-jan argued that the Fan wang precepts could be considered the contents of the Perfect precepts. In doing so, he gave the Fan wang precepts a greater practical role than Chih-i had given them in his three major works.

Saichō: The Establishment of the Japanese Tendai School, p228

Chih-i’s Contribution to Saichō’s Precepts

Chih-i’s writings contributed two important elements to Saichō’s thought on the precepts. First, Chih-i’s concept of a bodhisattva who performed Sudden practices was a forerunner of Saichō’s association of the Fan wang precepts with the Direct Path (jikidō) to enlightenment. Secondly, Chih-i’s use of the term ‘Perfect precepts’ (enkai) suggested that certain precepts were suited for those who followed the Perfect teachings of the Lotus Sūtra and that those precepts might be distinct from the Hinayāna precepts.

Chih-i’s position on the precepts differed from that of Saichō in several ways. First, Chih-i advocated the harmonious combination of the Hinayāna and Mahāyāna precepts. Even when the precepts were realized through Sudden practices, they still encompassed the Hinayāna precepts. Secondly, Chih-i’s concept of the Perfect precepts was abstract. He did not identify the Perfect precepts with a specific set of rules. The Fan wang precepts represented a mixture of Unique and Perfect teachings, not solely Perfect (jun’en) teachings. The purely Perfect precepts could only be observed by the Buddha. Before the doctrinal foundation for Saichō’s proposals would be complete, the Perfect precepts would have to be identified with the Fan wang precepts and freed of the onus of incorporating Hinayāna or Unique teachings.

Saichō: The Establishment of the Japanese Tendai School, p227-228