I posted this on another forum but didn't really find much out, so I am going to pose this question here as well.

I am trying to wrap my head around the teachings regarding the True Buddha of Cause, the True Buddha of Effect, and how Nichiren Daishonen was the "Original Buddha". Is there anyway that someone could break it down in simple terms? Also, do you know which schools still adhere to this teaching and which don't?

As far as I know, Nichiren Shoshu is the only school that believes that Nichiren is the Original, True, or Eternal Buddha. Soka Gakkai used to share this view, but I get the impression that since they split from Shoshu, some in SGI are re-evaluating it?? Not too sure, though.

I can sort of explain those concepts. The teachings do appear to be unique to Taisekiji. Honmon Shoshu also regards Nichiren as the Buddha, though their concept might be a bit different. Soka Gakkai, meanwhile, presently seems to regard Nichiren as the Buddha of the Latter Day. Some individuals within Soka Gakkai view the impersonal Dharma as the Buddha, and hold that it makes no real difference if the person is Shakyamuni or Nichiren.

The idea of a Buddha of Cause or Sewing, and a separate Buddha of effect or harvest appears to be one of Taisekiji's rationales to accept Nichiren as the Treasure of Buddha and as the Nin-honzon. They also rather clearly believe that the Gosho trumps the Lotus Sutra. Of course, not all Hokkeko / Nichiren Shoshu members believe all of that. As best as I understand it, sewing and harvest relates to the concepts of Source Gate or Honmon 本門 and Trace Gate or Shakumon 迹門; and a derived concept of Source Buddha or Honbtusu 本仏 and Trace Buddhab or Shakubutsu 迹仏. There is a related concept of Innate Awakening or Hongaku 本覚 and Attained or Acquired Awakening or Shikaku 始覚.

The concept of Nichiren as True Buddha appears to have first surfaced at Taisekiji during the time of a Chief Priest named Nichikan {1665?-1727?}. There is some evidence that previous Chief Priests discussed similar ideas in private discourse and correspondence. Nichikan's main rationale appears to be that the Remote Past [kuon jitsujo], when Shakyamuni of the Juryo Chapter first awoke, is a finite time. He proposes an earlier time, the Infinite Past [kuon ganjo], when, says he, Nichiren awoke. Connected is an idea that if Shakyamuni was a Bodhisattva in a past life, then he must have practiced under a Buddha older and greater than himself.

Another rationale is a claim that there must be a separate Buddha for each of the Three stages of a Dharma Dispensation. So they have Shakyamuni as the Buddha of the Former Day, Tendai as the Buddha of the Middle Day, and Nichiren as the Buddha of the Latter Day. This is the one Soka Gakkai appears to stress recently. It works well with the notion that the Impersonal Dharmakaya is the Source Buddha, and how one images the other bodies is arbitrary. Nichiu, the 8th CP of Taisekiji, may have also taught this; he is said to have suggested that worshiping Nichiren was more natural for the Japanese than worshiping a foreign Buddha. This ties in with what Honmon Shoshu is saying.

Finally, Honmon Shoshu seems to stress a medieval kokugaku and hongaku reverse spin on Honji 本地 Suijaku 垂迹. That system, also derived from the concept of Honmon 本門 and Shakumon 迹門, orginally identified the Kami of Japan as trace manifestations or Suijaku 垂迹 of the Origin or Honji 本地 -- the Indic Buddhas, Bodhisattvas, and Devas. Tensho Daijin is identified with Dainichi and/or Shakyamuni; so this also identified the Imperial Lineage descended from her as a sort of trace Dharma Lineage. Later on, the roles were reversed by some, making the kami primary In Hokke Shinto, Tensho Daijin is identified as a manifestation of the Eternal Shakyamuni. Honmon Shoshu further identifies Nichiren as an incarnation of Tensho Daijin. They also reverse the roles, taking Tensho Daijin / Nichiren as the Source or Original, and Shakyamuni as the trace manifestation. They have a doctrine of uniting the Emperor and the Dharma in one person; as a kind of divine ruler.

That is the best I can do at briefly explaining my understanding of the Taisekiji, SGI, and Honmon Shoshu doctrines of Nichiren as a Buddha whose teaching trumps, eclipses, or supersedes the Lotus Sutra. I have refrained from evaluating those doctrines in this post. The best way to approach a discussion might be to look at one rationale at a time. My own take is that Shakyamuni represents the Eternal Buddha in Nichiren Buddhism; while Nichiren can be seen as a trace appearence of his messenger for the Latter Days, loosely identified with上行菩蓮 Jogyo Bosatsu; or Sanskrit: विशिष्टचरित्र Vishishtacharitra.

Jo =上 - Superior, Apex = Vishishta = distinguished, exclusive, excellent
gyo - 行 = journey, action, conduct, behavior = charitra = conduct, practice, life.

gassho

robin

Who is the Eternal Buddha?

Direct from Tientai teaching, he revealed that all those Buddhas introduces in the scriptues are infact provisional (trace) Buddhas .
The true Buddha ( Hon Butsu / root Buddha ; Ji Butsu / real Budda ) is actually the common mortals , who in their correct practice of the Dharma that manifested the three bodies ( trikaya ) of the Buddha. - reference 'Maka Shikan'

The true Buddha hence also refers to Dharmata / Dharma nature / SadDharma / Myoho / Wonderful Law / Nam MyoHo RenGe Kyo

Nichiren demonstrated to us the correct path of how to manifest his innate Buddhahood in thei latter day of Dharma , and fulfilled as a true Buddha accoring to the Lotus teaching.


ASN

I think that Robin has explained this concept pretty well. A lot of this distinction has to do with the Shakumon and Honmon sections of the Lotus Sutra and various, arcane categories.




Yes. Any school that is related to Nichiren Shoshu generally follows the idea that Nichiren is the True Buddha.

All other Nichiren schools do not and never have; these would include Nichiren Shu, Kempon Hokke Shu, Rissho Kosei Kosei etc... As Robby said this doctrine is a later pronouncement from Taisekiji and was never followed by other Nichiren schools as a teaching from Nichiren.

The former refers to the Buddha in terms of the actual physical person - Nirmanakaya
And the latter refers to the Buddha in term of the Law ( Principle ) - Dharmakaya

Since the three truth are actual a single integer truth , all there three Buddha bodies ( trikaya ) refers to a single Buddha.

ASN

Not really. It can get about as complex as one is willing to pursue.

Some Concepts:

Imaging the Buddha

1. Should the impersonal dharma-kaya ever be personified?

2. Does it matter how we image the transpersonal qualities and historical deeds of the Buddha -- as Shakyamuni, Amida, Dainichi, Nichiren, Padma Sambhava, or Abutsubo?

3, Does the Lotus Sutra, and by extension, Nichiren, reduce the Eternal Buddha to an Impersonal Dharmakaya? Put another way, does Nichiren / Hokke Buddhism reject conventional or relative truth {sammutti satya / ketai 假諦} and duality {dvaita; nini 二二}; in favor of absolute truth {paramartha satya / Kutai 空諦} or non-duality {advaita; funi 不二}?

4. What is the rationale for imaging the Eternal Buddha as Shakyamuni? As Nichiren?

Infinity / Eternity

1. Did Nichiren view the Remote Past {kuon jitsujo]} as a finite time and place, or did he view it as a metaphor for constancy {nicca, nitya} -- a timeless infinity?

2. Where does the separate concept of kuon ganjo come from?

3. What do nicca/ nitya; constancy, ajatam; unborn, amatapada; the deathless state, accutapada; the imperishable state. and anatadhatu; the deathless realm or element, mean? Are they definable times occurring at specific places? A separate reality?

The Three Vehicles and the One Vehicle

1. In the narrower specific technical sense of a future samyaksambuddha; does a bodhisatta or bodhisattva practice the Dharma under a Buddha?

2. Is the ekayana or one vehicle separate from the triyana of bodhisattva, pratyeka, and shravaka? Or does it transcend such conventional designations?

3. How does this relate to Source Gate / trace Gate; and Innate Awakening / Acquired Awakening?

4. Does Honji 本地 Suijaku 垂迹 only apply in Japan? Does it even apply at all?

The Three Stages of the Dharma

1. What is the rationale for having a separate samyaksambuddha for each of the three stages of a Dharma Dispensation?

2. Do the three stages even mean anything in context of honmon and absolute truth?

3. Did Nichiren intend to reveal something new; or disclose what he thought had been fairly confidential practices?

4. Did the principles, concepts, and methods taught by the historical Shakyamuni expire at some point? How does that work?

5. Would it be better to say that the Principles remain valid; while some concepts need to be adjusted in light of modern science; and the methods can be adapted to fit changes in lifestyle? Also, perhaps some of the teachings naturally got confused and distorted, due to contextual changes and human fallibility? Would those things not also apply to what Nichiren taught?

food for thought

robin

Is that single buddha some specific person?

The Truth Body: The impersonal Dharma to which the Buddha awoke. Note, that he had no teacher other than the unrevealed Dharma.

The Reward Body: The transpersonal merits, the qualities of the Buddha; like wisdiom and compassion.

The Nirmana-Kaya: The historical deeds of Shakyamuni Buddha.

The Eternal Buddha of One Chapter and Two Halves = the eternally existent and uncreated triple bodies tathagata. The impersonal aspect = inchinen sanzen or Namu Myoho Renge Kyo. The personal attributes = The Eternal Shakyamuni flanked by the 4 attendants.

• 浄行菩蓮 Jyogyo Bosatsu; Jyo = pure gyo= practice. Sanskrit: विशुद्धचरित् Vishudhacaritra; Vi-shuddha {purified, original pure state} caritra {conduct, practice, life, deeds]
• 安立行菩蓮 Anryugyo Bosatsu; anryu = harmoniously standing, firmly established. deeply rooted. Sanskrit: सुप्रतिष्ठितचरित्र Supratishthitacaritra; Supratisthita = well supported, solidly standing.
• 無辺行菩蓮 Muhengyo Bosatsu; mu = no; hen = limit, border, boundary. Sanskrit: अनंतचरित Anantacaritra; an = no anata = end, termination
• 上行菩蓮 Jogyo Bosatsu; Jo - Superior, Apex, Sanskrit: विशिष्टचरित्र Vishishtacharitra; Vishishta = distinguished, exclusive, excellent

.

SGI is not related to Nichiren Shoshu and accepts that Nichiren Daishonin is the Buddha of the Latter Day.

Um, before the split in the 1990's SGI used to be the official lay organization affiliated with Nichiren Shoshu so they are definitely "related".

Err, that's misleading. Used to be related (past tense) does not imply any relationship now (present tense).There's nothing "definately" about it whatsoever. The history - of which we are all aware - has moved on into the present beyond recognition my friend.

Nevertheless, I assume that by omission it was SGI that was originally inferred by saying : "Any school that is related to Nichiren Shoshu..." ?

HHY & all -

Respectfully, I think that in the sense of the discussion so far, it isn't misleading.

SGI's Nichiren doctrine was once the same as Nichiren Shoshu's, until the split in late 1991, and has been slowly changing away from Nichiren Shoshu's doctrine for the last 17 years. I can personally vouch for this up through the 2000-2001 timeframe.

Nowadays, SGI's doctrine differs from Nichiren Shoshu's doctrine, but it differs less from Nichiren Shoshu's doctrine than it does from the doctrines of most other Nichiren groups.

If this is an incorrect statement, I would love to see evidence to the contrary - it would please me greatly to be incorrect on this. One thing that might cause my possible inaccuracy is that I get different versions of what SGI doctrine is today from different SGI folks I discuss this issue with.

Thanks in advance..........

In some respects that's slightly accurate, in others it's not. Without getting into specifics, there's probably more doctrinal differences between SGI and Nichiren Shoshu than there is convergence nowadays.

However, there are reformist priests who support kosen-rufu. So a new relationship with Nichiren Shoshu could be forged in future generations. But as of now...

What is the rationale for having a separate samyaksambuddha for each of the three stages of a Dharma Dispensation? It looks to me like mixing a purely conventional, dualistic concept; with a non-dual hongaku reversal.

robin

Friend Robby, but you are just following the conventional perspective of Pre Lotus Mahayana teaching to separate them and teaches as the three kaya as separate Bodies as conventional purposes.
But in Lotus teaching, Tientai in his MakaShikan clearly differentiate it , that in the complete teaching could correctly preceive that all the three kayas are in act just three different perspective of a single Buddha. This came from the basis of the understanding of unification of the the three truths.

From this perspective, the fact is that the Dharmakaya is refering the essential property ( principle ) of a Buddha , the truth which the Buddha enlightened.
The Sambhogakaya refers to the spirtual property ( wisdom )_ that enables the Buddha to perceive the truth. and the Nirmanakaya is refering to the physical compassionates actions to leads people to the enlightenment.
Thsi is then the correct perspective from the complete teaching, this is then the correct non-daulity concepts of things.

ASN

E , the fact is that each Nichiren group has their doctrine slightly different from each another, else they will be a similar group. So from the SGI standpoint, certainly not equal or the same emphasis to either the Nichiren Shoshu , or Nichiren Shu , or other of the schools. it see them as exterme of different sides of the pole.

ASN

Ansanna & all -

This brings up an interesting point. Is SGI a monolithic entity, which can be referred to (in all of it's varying incarnations) as having a single viewpoint?

Please understand that I do not think that this is a negative thing; I just wonder whether that is what you are intending to say/imply?

Yes; that is correct. I thought that was rather obvious. Below that I wrote:

The Eternal Buddha of One Chapter and Two Halves = the eternally existent and uncreated triple bodies tathagata. The impersonal aspect = inchinen sanzen or Namu Myoho Renge Kyo. The personal attributes = The Eternal Shakyamuni flanked by the 4 attendants.

* 浄行菩蓮 Jyogyo Bosatsu; Jyo = pure gyo= practice. Sanskrit: विशुद्धचरित् Vishudhacaritra; Vi-shuddha {purified, original pure state} caritra {conduct, practice, life, deeds]
* 安立行菩蓮 Anryugyo Bosatsu; anryu = harmoniously standing, firmly established. deeply rooted. Sanskrit: सुप्रतिष्ठितचरित्र Supratishthitacaritra; Supratisthita = well supported, solidly standing.
* 無辺行菩蓮 Muhengyo Bosatsu; mu = no; hen = limit, border, boundary. Sanskrit: अनंतचरित Anantacaritra; an = no anata = end, termination
* 上行菩蓮 Jogyo Bosatsu; Jo - Superior, Apex, Sanskrit: विशिष्टचरित्र Vishishtacharitra; Vishishta = distinguished, exclusive, excellent

Now, I was asking. is the Eternal Shakyamuni Buddha some particular person, or an archetypal trans-personal imaginary being who dwells in our heart-minds?

Do you think it is the historical person Nichiren, as Taisekiji teaches and SGI once taught?

Did Nichiren view the Remote Past {kuon jitsujo]} as a finite time and place, or did he view it as a metaphor for constancy {nicca, nitya} -- a timeless infinity?

Where does the separate concept of kuon ganjo come from?

What do nicca / nitya; constancy, ajatam; unborn, amatapada; the deathless state, accutapada; the imperishable state. and anatadhatu; the deathless realm or element, mean? Are they definable times occurring at specific places? A separate reality?

In the narrower specific technical sense of a future samyaksambuddha; does a bodhisatta or bodhisattva practice the Dharma under a Buddha?

robin

Engyo, it about understanding what is general and what is specific in Buddha Dharma.

Certainly all worthly Buddhist schools would have their own official (specific) view point about their doctrine , else they would not able continue till today ( it will be absorbed into another school ). This is the standard for their Buddhist doctrinal examination.

These does not means as individual practitioners could not hold some other variant of ( general ) views and personal preference of understanding.

Else in will drained down to a general Mahayana without specific lineages, they are flood with all sort of borrowing of views from other schools , mixed and match without continuity , and often conflicting views with each another. That why Nichiren wrote in this age of our , when their Buddhist disciples seeks to clarify their confusing doctrine, those confused teachers only responsed them with the observation of silent.

Respectfully
Ansanna

Hi Friend Robby,

I would understands as from the pespective of the complete teaching, we are looking at the actual propeties and fuction rather than the appearance and metaphorical description,
Since understanding the ten life states/realms of Dharma nature are within ourselve, at any moment we could manifesting the state of Bodhisattvahood or Buddhahood

Kuon Ganjo means beginingless time/ unborn/ dealthless quality , it refers to the property of Buddha-Principle/SadDharma/Dharmata , seeing from the essential property of a Buddha

Actually historically in East Asia, there is no such issue regarding on this matter, since from the time of Tientai , the doctrine of Trace/Provisional Gate ( Shaku Mon )and Source/Root Gate ( Hon Mon ) of the Lotus Sutra already exist and accepted. So Buddhas appearing in the Trace/Provisional Gate( Pre Lotus Sutra and fronts chapters of Lotus Sutra )are known as Trace/Provisional Buddha, whereas Buddha manifested from the Source/Root Gate ( latter chapters of Lotus Sutra ) are known as Source/Real/Actual/True Buddha.

The issue here arised , one of the reason was when Nichiren Shoshu starts to propagate into the western countries , the overly zealous in the English translation selected to word of 'Original' for 'Hon'.
SGI current used the world 'true' for 'Hon' , it matches with original doctrine where Tientai expound about the true Buddha is functioned from phyiscal common mortal.

ASN

Robby, Once they started to teach about Samyaksambuddha as sort of deity that resided in sort of heavenly realm, that is already the evident of the teaching conventional / relative /provisional teachings to preach according the deluted mind of the audiences, speaking from the pespective of non-duality for here is impure/unholy and other place is pure/holy .

ASN

I know what it means, Ansanna. I am saying it is a bogus concept that is not found either in the Lotus Sutra or Gosho. You seem to be completely missing what I am saying. Kuon jitsujo or remote past already means constancy, at least Nichiren Shonin thought so. See The Rooster Diagram of the Five Periods; the WND translation.


"Three bodies first attained by Shakyamuni in India (i.e. the historical Buddha) manifested body (nirmanakaya) - has a beginning, has an end; reward body (sambhogakaya) - has a beginning, has no end; Dharma body (Dharmakaya) - has no beginning, has no end"

"Three bodies attained in the remote past (kuon jitsujo) manifested body, reward body, Dharma body all have no beginning or end." [remote past = eternal, no need to invent kuon ganjo as older than eternity]

"The Thus Come One Shakyamuni is the Buddha who actually carried out practice and achieved enlightenment in the inconceivably remote past (kuon jitsujo)."

"Vairochana of the Flower Garland school, Mahavairochana of the True Word school, and other Buddhas are all followers of this Buddha."




I think "source" is a better translation than "true." Also, I see the concept of a common mortal as Source Buddha as a hongaku reversal; ultimately expressing the middle way. The true source would be the unconditioned noumena; the trace would be the phenomenal human being. Of course, the two are inseparable. However, the flesh is compounded, it comes into being, it is born & dies, the self associated with it is fabricated.

Enlightenment is neither born nor dies. The Buddha said it is

asankhatam; Uncompounded, unconditioned
abhutam: Not originated, un-become
ajatam: unborn
akatam: un-fabricated, not made

From what I have gathered, Chih-I talked about actualizing as opposed to theory. That would be ri 理 and ji 事 I think. However, I think Buddhahood would still "be" even if humanity were extinct, so not a single common mortal actualized it. That is the source, and it is not just a metaphor. There was no revealed Dharma in this world as of the nanosecond before Shakyamuni preached it. However, the Wondrous Dharma itself was present; else how did Shakyamuni awaken to it? The Wondrous Dharma is always, it neither comes nor goes. It is not life, because it is also death.

However; Nichiren, Tendai, Lotus Buddhism seems to reject the idea that the Buddha can be reduced to a mere impersonal truth principle; the personal attributes and deeds are also part of the whole. The Shakyamuni who appears in the Juryo Chapter represents the Unity of the Three Bodies; the Impersonal Dharma, the trans-personal merits, and historical deeds of the Buddha

Now, are you saying this true buddha as a common mortal with all three bodies is some particular individual to the exclusion of others?

Nichiren identified the Uncreated Eternally Existent Triple Bodied Tathagata as Shakyamuni who awoke in the remote past. The Remote Past does not indicate some finite time when the Buddha first awoke, it refers to the unborn and deathless nature of awakening in the moment; which we can experience is a single moment of faith. Of course, this can be expressed or explained other ways; the Lotus Sutra uses visual imagery such as; - 'The Buddha of the Juryo Chapter is always in the Saha World, preaching the Dharma.' That is metaphor; but I do not think it refers to a specific historical personality. We should refer to the Eternal Buddha as Shakyamuni because he is the Samyaksambuddha of this time and place, he appeared as THE BUDDHA in our world when there was no extant revealed Dharma. That is my take.

gassho / good night

robin

I suspect proposing separate Buddhas for each stage does that; speaks to the deluded mind. Besides, it has absolutely no source other than Nichiren Shoshu. The Buddha did teach about heavenly realms, btw. Was he deluded? The conventional teaching is that Maitreya awaits in Tushita, and shall be the next samyaksambuddha.


Lifted from Ernesto's post at SFI:

From "Nyonin Gosho." == Nichiren Shu:

"Your late husband in the Pure Land of Mt. Sacred Eagle must be looking at
you day and night, but you and your children, who have only human eyes, cannot
see him. Nevertheless, you must believe that you will meet him someday in the
Pure Land of Mt. Sacred Eagle... When your husband was alive, he was in a
state of Buddhahood. Now he is dead, and he is still in a state of Buddhahood.
A person able to uphold the Lotus Sutra is a Buddha whether he is dead or
alive." P 44 & 46.

"...as he believed in Sakyamuni Buddha and the Lotus Sutra, his last moment
must have been peaceful. His spirit will go to the Pure Land of the Mt. Sacred
Eagle, where his father is, and he will be happy to see his father face to
face and be hand in hand with him. How wonderful it is!" P 248.

"The late Goro believed in this inestimable Lotus Sutra. Since this is the
49th day after his becoming a Buddha, all Buddhas must have gathered in the
Pure Land of Mt. Sacred Eagle to give him a helping hand, pat him on the head,
embrace him and be pleased to see him as if gazing at the moon rising or
flower beginning to bloom." P 262.

"Counting the days since he passed away, it has been two years, sixteen
months or more than 400 days. Being Goro's mother, you must have gotten messages
from him. Please let me know how he is... I feel that I will not live long and
will soon meet your son, Goro. If I see him before you, I will tell him of
your deep sorrow." P 296 & 298.

The beginless time would means the Musa Sanshin / Uncreated Triple Bodies of the Buddha , this has been the Lotus doctrine all the while , it is inside Tientai/Tendai doctrine , that Nichiren inherited .
The unification of three truths, three bodies of the Buddha.



You are using the Nikaya teaching to measure a higher teaching, it will not work this way round.
In Nikaya , certainly the Buddha is preaching according to the deluted mind of the people at his time , most of them just want to attain sort of self enlightenment , so he preached those way, but he reverted his teaching once his preaching entered a higher level.

Writing of Nichiren used Pure Land of Mt. Sacred Eagle is certainly using metaphorical description of conventional usage to suit his audience, he even said they could see his face/ or their passed relative on the surface of the moon. Much like he borrow the folks tale of dragon gate of China to encourage his disciples.

To cling to that, that why we see that NichirenShu and some other Nichiren schools still mixed with certain degree of provisional teachings to aid their teaching, that why fox deities and shinto deities are at time seen some schools.

ASN

Robby:



In the minimum counts , didn't Tientai and Nichiren did the same thing ? they too functioned to lead the living being back to the ultimate teaching as revealed in Lotus Sutra. And there are certainly much more person achieved that .

They teaches about how to reveal Buddhahood as a common mortal , certainly they are leading by example by their actual physical body .


This would be still like an artistic metaphorical way for the Lotus context of the noble attributes of full enlightenment. ( and not as a real person who attained it )

But as in Nichiren writing , the provisional teaching expounded the Buddha principle ( 理 ) and methods (事 ) , but did not show any actual example of one attaining the Buddhahood ( or not reveal explicitly what is actual Buddhahood is about )
Whereas in the complete teaching, besides revealing the Buddha principle, methods , most importanly they provide the real example as proofs.

ASN

Mitta Ansanna,

No example? What was Shakyamuni? He is a good enough example for me. No one is saying Tientai and Nichiren did not attain Enlightenment. What we are saying is that attaining Enlightenment does not make one a samkaksambuddha. It does not really matter. because samyaksambuddha is a conventional designation. The Enlightenment of the Pratyekbuddha and Shravakabuddha is exactly the same as a Sam yak sam Buddha. There is only vehicle; not three. There is one vehicle in noumena, three in phenomena.

You are not President of the SGI. There is only one President. Maybe you can say the general members are true presidents of the latter day; but do not try to sleep in his bed or ride in his car. In the Provisional Mahayana Sutras, the Shravaka disciples lament because they heard the Dharma taught by Shakyamuni. Therefore, they can not ever be a Buddha. This is a kind of humor or joke, a literary device to make us think about what is Enlightenment.. The story conflates Enlightenment with the samyaksambuddha vehicle. In reality, the Enlightenment of the shravaka and bodhisattva vehicles are the same.

You can not ride to a big meeting in President Ikeda's limousine. However, even if you ride in a Yugo or on a bicycle, you still get to the same meeting. In the story above, the Shravakas were sad because they can not ride in the Limousine and the be the Big Man. They confused the vehicle with the destination.

In the Lotus Sutra, Shariputra sees the Dragon King's daughter turn into a man and become a Samyaksambuddha. However, the others saw her awaken in her own female body. So Shariputra was confused, He thought to be a Buddha; one must be a samyakam buddha. He was not satisfied with being a shravakabuddha. He missed the point. Again, that is only a metaphor. The real historical Shariputra was not confused.

Nichiren did not enter the Dharma Stream by his own Dharma Dispensation. He did so by hearing the Dharma revealed in this world by Shakyamuni Buddha. Ultimately, he and you and everyone awake by the same uncreated Dharma as Shakyamuni. We call this Namu Myoho Renge Kyo. Jofukyo called it something else. The Buddha called it the unconditioned, the unbecome, the inborn, the unfabricated. He also called it the deathless. It is still the same Dharma, the same One Vehicle.

Can you hear me now?

robin

I take the pali canon to be the most authentic source of what the Buddha actually taught. I also think every principle of the Lotus Sutra can be found in the pali canon. However, I read the pali suttas in light of the Lotus Sutra.

Some see the negations in the Pali Canon as pointing to nihilistic emptiness. I think the unconditioned, unbecome, unborn, and unfabricated points to somrthing; something noumenal not phenomenal; qualities; not anything concrete or quantifiable.

The Buddha said that the conditioned is not wholesome, not blissful, inconstanst, & inauthentic {in terms of self}. The Mahayana Nirvana Sutra gives 4 innate virtues -- wholesomeness, bliss, constancy, and authenticity of self. I think they are saying the same thing in different ways.

The Four Misconceptions / Derangements {Vipallasa / viparyasa}

Perceiving subha {wholesomeness, purity, attractiveness, desirability}; in that which is asubha {impure, unwholesome}

Seeking piti / priti {pleasure, joy} or sukha {bliss}; in that which is dukkha {unsatisfying}

Searching for or expecting nicca / niyta {constancy, continuity, eternity}; in that which is anicca / anitya {inconstant, temporal}

Identifying atta / atman {an abiding self]; in that which is anatta / anatma {fabricated ego}.

四徳 Shitoku: Four [Inherent] Virtues; Four Unconditioned Attributes -- of Nirvana

浄 {jo} or 淸淨 {shojo} or 遍淨 {henjo} Subha: Wholesome purity, innocence; actual desirability, appeal, attractiveness.

樂 Sukha: Bliss, spontaneous joy, independent of circumstances.

常住 {joju} Nitya: Actual perception of constancy, continuity, permanence, timelessness, eternity, infinitude.

我 Atman: Authentic identity; which is a selfless, higher self.

i) No I means example if those who attain Buddhahood according to the various methods introduced in the provisional sutra.

Also In all the pre-Lotus scriptures, none of them the Buddha reveal explicitly how and when ( the true cause ) that leads to his actual enlightenment.

ii) In the Lotus Sutra the Buddha clearly declared in front of all the audiences of Buddha, Bodhisattvas and the holy masses , that those who read, recite , uphold and copy this sutra , will certainly attains samkaksambuddha just like him does.

iii) This is only your personal view , that The Enlightenment of the Pratyekbuddha and Shravakabuddha is exactly the same as a SamyaksamBuddha. No Nikaya or Mahayana teachers or scriptures supported these.

The three vehicles refers to the teachings expounded for voice-hearers, for cause-awakened ones , and for bodhisattvas , from the SadDharma perspective , they are expedient means that eventually would lead them to the one vehicle teaching of the Lotus Sutra, there they will understands on the unification of three truths , non-duality, impartial equality compassion, uncreated triple bodies , ichinen sansen.
By their own doctrine only , there are no evident they could realised and actualized these stage.

ASN

Then the Buddha was mistaken, if he meant that in the sense of conventional truth. I take it to mean in the nondual sense. I do not accept that the Lotus Sutra overturns the conventional truth concerning the three kinds of Buddhas. So, do you think in a future life we will all be a Trace Buuddha who starts a Dharma Dispensation in a world where there is no revealed Dharma? That makes no sense. The imaginary Buddha in the Lotus Sutra has to be talking about Enlightenment itself. He can not be talking about the specific attained awakenings of the three vehicles; but rather the general innate awakening that is the same for all beings. I think you, like Shariputra in the Lotus Sutra, are missing the point of the difference between the specific and general.



I have never heard of anyone say the quality of the enlightenment is different. The difference has to with earned merits; which is a conventional truth. Actually, I am definitely giving my view. That is the only view I can give. I have no sectarian position to defend. It is rather easy. Ask someone what is the difference in the Awakening of a Sammasambuddha. My understanding is that the Sammasambuddha has no teacher other than the impersonal dharma. In the Nikayas, the real Buddha who walked on the soil said that his teacher was the Wondrous Dharma. Before becoming the Sammasambuddha, he was a Bodhisatta. That infers that the bodhisattva vehicle is the future Samyaksambuddha. So Mettaya would be a bodhisatta, by inference, if we accept that.

The bodhisatta in that sense has no person as a teacher. He enters the dhamma stream and becomes an arahant all on his own. He also works for not only his own salvation, but for that of all beings. Therefore, he earns the merit of preaching the Dhamma. He is born at a time and place when and where there is no Buddha Dhamma or other Arahants. That is called sammasambuddha.

The pacceka is just like bodhisatta; except he only works for his own salvation. He also becomes an arahant, but does not earn the conventional merit of preaching the Dhamma. Once he becomes an arahant, he is also called paccekabuddha. Finally, the sharavaka enters the stream after hearing the preaching of a sama sam buddha. Once they become an arahant; they can be called Sharavakabuddha or Anubuddha. In all three cases, they attain the same stage of arhat, the same nirvana, the same parinirvana.

I think all that is true. However, the Mahayana goes beyond. In the Vimalakirti Sutra, Shariputra and the others weep and lament because they entered the dharma stream under a samyaksambuddha. So they are are thinking arhat is a lesser attainment. They seem to forget the Buddha was also an arhat. They are envious of what is only a conventional distinction, a Trace distinction. The Lotus Sutra topples that misconception; with the One Buddha Vehicle. My understanding is that the conventional distinction remains true. However, no matter how we get there, saved is saved.






It is the same in unconditioned noumena, different in conditioned phenomena. Since Enlightenment is unconditioned, it is the exact same Enlightenment.

I hope that clears up what I am saying. You are free to argue with something I am not saying. I would just be repeating myself. If you think we are going to be literal sammasambuddhas, that is fine with me. I just do not. After thinking about it for a long time, with no opinion, I do not take that literally, right now.

gassho

robin

Hi good friend Robin,

I preceive the issue of your came from that you are using a Nikaya 'dictionary' to measure a higher teaching of SadDhamra, hence you are trapped in their definition.


In the Lotus context, the Buddha used the term Anuttara-Samyak-Sambodhi (阿耨多羅三藐三菩提・無上正等正覚 ) for his highest enlightenment, and expounded that he want the other to attain the same supreme life condition just like him ( aquired the Body of a Buddha ) without any distinction.

" Anuttara-Samyak-Sambodhi is translated as Supreme Perfect Enlightenment or the Unsurpassed Enlightenment of a Buddha.
Anuttara means supreme, highest, incomparable, unsurpassed, or peerless.
Samyak means right, correct, true, accurate, complete, or perfect,
Sambodhi means enlightenment.
The expression Samyak-Sam-Bodhi by itself is also used to mean Perfect Enlightenment.
Bodhi and Sambodhi also mean Wisdom or Perfect Wisdom.
In this sense, Anuttara-Samyak-Sambodhi means Supreme Perfect Wisdom. " ( ref. SGI Buddhist Dictionary )

In short , just as Tientai had explianed it is this (Superme Perfect) Wisdom to preceive the Truth Principle of SadDharma, to see the true aspect of Reality .
Tientai had already pointed out it is the wisdom the preceive the truth principle, the enlightening actions to bring forth the truth to the others, Since Buddhahood is a dynamic lifestate of ours , there is no so much as entity as Bodhissttva, or a Buddha ( check on the context of wisdom sutras ) , but the Attributes of them that we need to aquire and bring forth ( ten worlds /realms , ten factors, ichinen sanzen )

From the context of Lotus Sutra, there is totally no such limited explanation of " each time there is only one Sammasambuddha, enlightened without teacher etc " as some of the Nikaya expounded, they are a simplified version to understanding the profound complexity of the truth. Infact from the context of Lotus Sutra, the Buddha wanted as many as possible to the living beings to attain this supreme life condition as he does. And Many Treasure Buddha and the Buddha attained by the naga princess there already break thes " only a single Buddha " concept. And in LS the Buddha did revealed he had many various teachers in his past lifes.

I would see that Lotus Sutra is emphasising on the actual noble qualities of Buddhahood of each individual , rather than locked into the metaphorical / rigid surfacing definition of a Buddha given by the ( yet fully awaken) people.

I understands that is your good intention to bridge the Nikaya and SadDharma teachings. But your emphaiss need to came from basis of SadDharma towards the Nikaya , rather the from the basis of Nikaya towards the SadDharma.
So that As Nichiren wrote once you understands SadDharma you could preceive clearly the significance of other teachings.

That's why in the context of Shariputra jumping into joy when he had his realisation during the Lotus teaching, refers to his realization that he infact is a Bodhisattva but took the reborn together with Buddha , took the temporary role as his voice-hearer disciple and arahant. he would rotates his differents role among the three vehicles in others of his reborns with only one objective is to progressively lead the living being up their spirtual path.
In this way , we would not fall into the selective reading of Lotus Sutra, The one vehice meaning is that it is a continue process by the collective efforts of many enlightened beings that drive the living beings up to their ultimate spirtual path. There is no mistake about it, all of us are doing this in our differnt role, regardlessly we aware it or not. The Buddha just doing the sowing and the final harvesting job.


Respectfully
Ansanan

Hey Friend Robin , you have a email from yor teacher Nichiren.

Forwarded mail:




Respectfully
ASN

The thing is, Buddhist words mean things. If we claim that pratyekas, shravakas, all women, and all laity can not attain Enlightenment in Hinayana (小乗教) teachings; then what on earth are we talking about? The only teaching I know of that does that is the Vimalakirti Sutra; and I think that Sutra is pretty much satire. I see it as 権経 ; a provisional teaching. It is addressing the audience's preconception that conflated buddha in the general sense, with being a Samyamsambuddha.

It could be that other Mahayana Sutras claim that pratyekas, shravakas, all women, and all laity can not attain Enlightenment. However, the Nikayas certainly do not teach such a thing. The only way to assert such a thing is to claim that the nibbana, and parinibbana do not mean Enlightenment. The Theravada does teach that there are three vehicles, but they all lead to the same states of arahant, nibbana, and parinibbana. Now, it appears to me that you want to use Mahayana re-definitions of arhat, nirvana, and parinirvana to assert that those fall short of full enlightenment. Actually. I am using Mahayana teachings to cast light on the Nikayas. I doubt that most Theravadins would agree with my approach. It might be interesting to know.

I am saying that the designations of Anubuddha, Paccekabuddha, and Sammasambuddha refer to Shikaku 始覚, meaning attained or acquired awakening. These also have have to with individual and specific 別 attainments.I think the satge of Arahant is also Shikaku 始覚, however it refers to a general 総 attainment that persons of all three vehicles reach; and it is certainly can be and has been attained by women and lay persons.

Now, I do not see nibbana and parinibbana as attainments at all, not in the sense of Shikaku 始覚. Rather, I see nibbana as referring to Hongaku 本覚; meaning the original, source. or innate awakening. This is certainly the same for everyone; so in that sense it is a general 総 non-attainment. I do not think most Theravadins would agree with me here, and a lot of Mahayanists would also differ. Some would reject hongaku altogether, I think.

The Nikaya description of nibbana, is, in my view, limited. though I do think there are allusions to the 4 innate virtues and Buddha nature in the Nikayas. I have pointed some of those out. Again. my impression is that most Theravadins, nearly all, would disagree with my interpretations of those. Also, I think, if I understand correctly, many Mahayanists would see Buddha Nature and the 4 virtues as being acquired; not innate.

One thing, Buddhism appears to use the same word, puna 徳 {toku} for innate virtue and earned merit. The word 功徳 {kudoku] might refer to attained merits? I do not know if there is a compound pali word ___-puna to indicate earned merit, as opposed to unearned. The Abhisila {higher ethic} in the Nikayas also might infer innate virtue, as opposed to sila 戒 {kai} based on following vinaya 律 {ritsu}.

Finally, I think the Lotus and Nirvana Sutras go beyond the three vehicles to more clearly elucidating the nature of Innate Awakening; which is the One Vehicle. The Lotus Sutra seems to use a lot of visual imagery to dramatize the concepts of Inherent Buddha Nature and Innate Virtues. From what little I have read, the Nirvana Sutra appears to give the concepts.

The main thing; I am convinced that chanting Namu Myoho Renge Kyo; while visualizing the Gohonzon{s} designed by Nichiren is an effective way to reconnect with our inherent Buddha Nature and bring our 4 innate virtues to the surface. Anyone can do that, without understanding a single other word I just typed. Calm, objective discussions of doctrine can help. I think emotional sectarian turf defending severely impedes the process. I also think that the process points us to acquired merits and skills we need to work on. It is a shame to see folks going outside the rich traditions of Buddhism, to New Age or even Christianity, to find methods to cultivate those merits and skills.

gassho

robin

"Neither nonBuddhists nor the enemies of Buddhism can destroy the correct teaching of the Thus Come One, but the Buddha’s disciples definitely can. As a sutra says, only worms born of the lion’s body feed on the lion." -- Nichiren

"All disciples and lay supporters of Nichiren should chant Namu-myoho-renge-kyo with the spirit of many in body but one in mind, transcending all differences among themselves10 to become as inseparable as fish and the water in which they swim."
-- attributed to Nichiren

JoeKraut,

A couple things.

You are mostly correct on the Three Bodies, nut there is a a sort of proto teaching on that in the4 Nikayas.

The idea of Buddhas before and after Shakyamuni is straight from the Nikayas. It is not a Mahayana innovation at all. Mettaya {Maiitreya} is mentioned in the Pali Suttas as the next {Sammasam} Buddha. Of course, many people attain enlightenment in between. No school I knowc of teaches that there can be only one Enlightened being at a time.

SGI does have a relationship with Nichiren Shoshu and it is a negative one. SGI members continue to harass Nichiren Shoshu members and temples.

Hey Friend ansanna , you have a email from Nichiren's teacher, Shakyamuni.



Forwarded mail:

Joekraut and all,

Please remember that when you are posting essays, excerpts, or any other quoted material to cite your sources. This is a requirement listed in the Terms of Service in regards to posting material from other sources.

Thank You
Shikimyo

Hi friend Robby, this I could agreed to see a new light from these perspective

1) acquired awakening. (Shikaku , 始覚) and
2) innate awakening ( Hongaku 本覚 ) - basically it derived from tathāgata-garbha doctrine , also known as Buddha-(realm) nature or Buddha realm principle/matrix .

The former is about setting the goal
The latter is about how the actual principle for attaining of Buddhahood

Respectfully
Ansanna

No this is not true, after the last count peaceful settlement of the split in Japan,
Sort of :
both parties have signed on sort of mutual agreement , will not further putting negative argruement with each other , put down all those emotion debates on the media.
SGI will continue to pursue it's kosenrufu in international level and Buddhism humanism. While Shoshu will focus in it's traditional holding in mainly parts of Japan and some regional areas .

The key point is their scale of kosen rufu now is different

ASN

Please keep in mind that this thread is to discuss the OP's question. Do not engage in sectarian conflicts or bashing. Please stay on topic and focus on the questions at hand in this thread. Impertinent comments will be removed.

Thanks
Shikimyo

About what?

Joekraut , it not difficult, as Tientai said in studying Buddha Dharma , one need to understand what is General and what is Specific .

So in General Buddhism context, Shakyamuni Buddha is the certainly the founder, the teacher of teaching ( exoteric ) , the Buddha of our saha world.

For the Specific lineage ( example Nichiren Buddhism ) , Nichiren is the founder , he has two identity , the Buddha of the latter age of Dharma and Bodhisattva Jogyo the leader of the Bodhisattva of the earth.

ASN