Gosho: The Selection of the Time

The Selection of the Time

Nichiren, disciple of Shakyamuni Buddha

One who wishes to study the teachings of Buddhism must first learn to understand the time. In the past, when the Buddha Daitsuchisho appeared in the world, he remained for a period of ten small kalpas without preaching a single sutra. Thus the Lotus Sutra says, "He sat for ten small kalpas."¹ And later, "Because the Buddha knew that the time had not yet come, though entreated by others, he sat in silence."²

Likewise Lord Shakyamuni of the present world spent the first forty years and more of his preaching life without expounding the Lotus Sutra, because, as the sutra says, ". . . the time to expound it had not yet come."³

Lao Tzu remained in his mother’s womb for eighty years, waiting to be born,⁴ and Bodhisattva Miroku abides in the inner court of the Tushita Heaven⁵ for a period of 5,670 million years, awaiting the time for his advent in the world. The cuckoo sings when spring is waning, the cock waits until the break of day to crow. If even these lowly creatures have such an understanding of time, then how can a person who wishes to practice the teachings of Buddhism fail to make certain what time it is?

When Shakyamuni Buddha prepared to preach at the place where he had gained enlightenment, the various Buddhas made their appearance in the ten directions and all the great bodhisattvas gathered around. Bonten, Taishaku and the Four Heavenly Kings came with their robes fluttering. The dragons and others of the eight kinds of lowly beings⁶ pressed their palms together, the common mortals of superior capacity bent their ears to listen, and the bodhisattvas who in their present bodies have attained the stage where they perceive the non-birth and non-extinction of the phenomenal world, along with Bodhisattva Gedatsugatsu, all begged the Buddha to preach. But the World-Honored One did not reveal a single word concerning the doctrines that persons in the two realms of shomon and engaku can attain Buddhahood, or that he himself had attained enlightenment countless ages in the past, nor did he set forth the most vital teachings of all, those concerning ichinen sanzen and the fact that one can attain Buddhahood in his present form. There was only one reason for this: the fact that, although his listeners possessed the capacity to understand such doctrines, the proper time had not yet come. Or, as the Lotus Sutra says, ". . . because the time to expound it had not yet come."

But when Shakyamuni Buddha preached the Lotus Sutra to the gathering on Eagle Peak, the great king Ajatashatru, the most unfilial person in the entire world, was allowed to sit among the listeners. Devadatta, who had spent his whole life slandering the Law, was told that in the future he would become a Buddha called Heavenly King, and the dragon king’s daughter, though impeded by the five obstacles,⁷ became a Buddha without changing her dragon form. Those predestined for the realms of shomon and engaku were told that they would in fact become Buddhas, like scorched seeds that unexpectedly sprout and put forth flowers and fruit.⁸ The Buddha revealed that he had attained enlightenment countless ages in the past, which puzzled his listeners as greatly as if he had asserted that an old man of a hundred was the son of a man of twenty-five.⁹ And he also expounded the doctrine of ichinen sanzen, explaining that the nine worlds have the potential for Buddhahood, and that Buddhahood retains the nine worlds.

Thus a single word of this Lotus Sutra that he preached is as precious as a wish-granting jewel,¹⁰ and a single phrase is the seed of all Buddhas. We may leave aside the question of whether Shakyamuni’s listeners at that point possessed the capacity to understand such doctrines or not. The fact is that the time had come for him to preach them. As the Lotus Sutra says, "Now this is the very time when I must decisively preach the teaching of the great vehicle."¹¹

Question: If one preaches the great Law to persons who do not have the capacity to understand it, then the foolish ones among them will surely slander it and will fall into the evil paths of existence. Is the person who does the preaching not to blame for this?

Answer: If a man builds a road for others and someone loses his way on it, is that the fault of the road-builder? If a skilled physician gives medicine to a sick person but the sick person repelled by the medicine, refuses to take it and dies, should one blame the physician?

Question: The second volume of the Lotus Sutra says, "When you are among ignorant men, do not preach this sutra!"¹² The fourth volume says, "[This scripture] must not be distributed or recklessly transmitted to others."¹³ And the fifth volume states, "This Lotus Sutra is the secret storehouse of Buddhas. Among the sutras, it holds the highest place. It should be guarded through the long night and never recklessly expounded."¹⁴ These passages from the sutra would seem to indicate that one should not expound the Law to those who do not have the capacity to understand it.

Answer: I refer you to the passage in the Fukyo chapter that states, "He would say to people, ‘I deeply respect you.’" The chapter also says, "But among the four kinds of people¹⁵ he addressed, there were some who flared up in anger, whose minds were possessed by foul thoughts, and they cursed and abused him, saying, ‘This stupid monk!’" It also says, "Some among the people would beat him with sticks and staves, and stone him with rocks and tiles." And in the Kanji chapter it says, ‘There will be many ignorant people who will curse and speak ill of us, and will attack us with swords and staves." These passages imply that one should preach the Law even though he may be reviled and cursed and even beaten for it. Since the sutra so teaches, is the one who preaches to blame?

Question: Now these two views appear to be as incompatible as fire and water. May I ask how one is to resolve this dilemma?

Answer: T’ien-t’ai says that one should use whatever method "accords with the time."¹⁶ And Chang-an says, "You should distinguish between the shoju and shakubuku methods and never adhere solely to one or the other."¹⁷ What these remarks mean is that at times, the Buddha’s teaching will be met with slander and one therefore refrains from expounding it for the present, and at other times, even though one encounters slander, one nevertheless makes a point of preaching anyway. There are times when, although a few persons may have the capacity to believe, the great majority will only slander the Buddha’s teaching, and one therefore refrains from expounding it for the present. And there are other times when, although the great majority of persons are bound to slander the Buddha’s teaching, one nevertheless makes a point of preaching anyway.

When Shakyamuni Buddha first attained enlightenment and prepared to preach, the great bodhisattvas Hoe, Kudokurin, Kongodo, Kongozo, Monju, Fugen, Miroku and Gedatsugatsu, as well as Bonten, Taishaku, the Four Heavenly Kings, and countless numbers of common mortals of superior capacity came to hear him.¹⁸ When he preached at the Deer Park,¹⁹ Ajnata Kaundinya and the others of the five ascetics,²⁰ along with Mahakashyapa and his two hundred fifty followers, Shariputra and his two hundred fifty followers, and eighty thousand heavenly beings all gathered to listen.

At the ceremony of the great assembly for the Hodo sutras,²¹ Shakyamuni’s father, King Shuddhodana, displayed a sincere desire for Buddhism, and Shakyamuni therefore entered the palace and preached the Kambutsu Zammai Sutra for him. And for the sake of his deceased mother, Queen Maya, he secluded himself in the Trayastrimsha Heaven²² for a period of ninety days and there preached the Maya Sutra. Where his father and mother were concerned, one would think he could not possibly withhold even the most secret teaching of the Law. And yet he did not preach the Lotus Sutra for them. In the final analysis, the Buddha’s preaching of the Lotus Sutra has nothing to do with the capacities of his listeners. As long as the proper time had not yet come, he would on no account expound it.

Question: When is the time for the preaching of the Hinayana sutras and the provisional sutras, and when is the time for the preaching of the Lotus Sutra?

Answer: Even bodhisattvas, from those in the ten stages of faith²³ to those on the verge of full enlightenment,²⁴ find itdifficult to judge matters concerning time and capacity. How then can ordinary beings such as ourselves be able to judge such matters?

Question: Is there no way to determine them?

Answer: Let us borrow the eye of the Buddha²⁵ to consider this question of time and capacity. Let us use the sun of the Buddha²⁶ to illuminate the nation.

Question: What do you mean by that?

Answer: In the Daijuku Sutra, Shakyamuni Buddha, the World-Honored One, addresses Bodhisattva Gatsuzo and predicts the future. Thus he says that the first five hundred years after his passing will be the age of enlightenment,²⁷ and the next five hundred years, the age of meditation²⁸ (making one thousand years). The next five hundred years will be the age of reading, reciting and listening,²⁹ and the next five hundred years, the age of building temples and stupas³⁰ (making two thousand years). Concerning the next five hundred years³¹ after that, he says, "Quarrels and disputes will arise among the adherents to my teachings, and the Pure Law will become obscured and lost."

These five five-hundred-year periods, which total twenty-five hundred years, are delineated in different ways by different people. The Meditation Master Tao-ch’o of China declares that during the first four of the five five-hundred-year periods, which constitute the Former and Middle Days of the Law, the Pure Law of the Hinayana and Mahayana teachings will flourish, but that after the beginning of the Latter Day of the Law, these teachings will all perish. At that time, only those who practice the Pure Land teaching, the Pure Law of the Nembutsu, will be able to escape the sufferings of birth and death.³²

The Japanese priest Honen defines the situation in this way.³³ According to him, the Lotus, Kegon, Dainichi and various Hinayana sutras which have spread in Japan, along with the teachings of the Tendai, Shingon, Ritsu and other sects, constitute the Pure Law of the two thousand years of the Former and Middle Days of the Law referred to in the passage from the Daijuku Sutra cited above. But once the world enters the Latter Day of the Law, all these teachings will be completely obliterated. Even though men should continue to practice such teachings, not a single one of them will succeed in escaping from the sufferings of birth and death. Thus Nagarjuna in his Jujubibasha Ron and the priest T’an-luan refer to such teachings as the "difficult-to-practice way";³⁴ Tao-ch’o declares that not a single person has ever attained enlightenment through them;³⁵ and Shan-tao says that not one person in a thousand can be saved by them.³⁶ After the Pure Law of these teachings has become obscured and lost, then the Great Pure Law -- namely, the three Pure Land sutras³⁷ and the single practice of calling upon the name of Amida Buddha -- will make its appearance, and when people devote themselves to this practice, even though they may be evil or ignorant persons, "If there are ten of them, then all ten will be reborn in the Pure Land, and if there are a hundred of them, then all hundred will be reborn there."³⁸ This is the meaning of the passage: "Only the single doctrine of the Pure Land constitutes the road that leads to salvation."³⁹

Honen therefore declares that if men desire happiness in the next life, they should withdraw their support from Mount Hiei, To-ji, Onjo-ji and the seven major temples of Nara,⁴⁰ as well as from all the various temples and monasteries throughout the islands of Japan, and should seize all the fields and land holdings that have been donated to these temples and devote these resources to the building of Nembutsu halls. If they do so, they will be certain to be reborn in the Pure Land. Thus he urges them to recite the words Namu Amida Butsu.

It has now been more than fifty years since these teachings spread throughout our country. My refutation of these evil doctrines is now a thing of the past. There is no doubt that our present age corresponds to the fifth five-hundred-year period described in the Daijuku Sutra, when "the Pure Law will become obscured and lost." But that which is to come after "the Pure Law has become obscured and lost" is the Great Pure Law of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, the heart and core of the Lotus Sutra. This is what should be propagated and spread throughout the continent of Jambudvipa -- with its eighty thousand kingdoms, their eighty thousand rulers, and the ministers and countless subjects in the domain of each ruler -- so that it may be chanted by all persons, just as the name of Amida is now chanted by the mouths of the monks, nuns, laymen and laywomen throughout Japan.

Question: What passages can you cite to prove this?

Answer: The seventh volume of the Lotus Sutra says, "In the fifth five hundred years after my death, accomplish worldwide kosen-rufu and never allow its flow to cease."⁴¹ This indicates that "worldwide kosen-rufu" will be accomplished in the time after "the Pure Law becomes obscured and lost," as the Daijuku Sutra puts it.

Again, the sixth volume speaks of "one who is able to uphold this sutra in the evil age of the Latter Day of the Law,"⁴² and the fifth volume talks of "the latter age when the Law is on the point of disappearing."⁴³ The fourth volume states, "Since hatred and jealousy toward this sutra abound even during the lifetime of the Buddha, how much worse will it be in the world after his passing?"⁴⁴ And the fifth volume says, "The people will be full of hostility, and it will be extremely difficult to believe."⁴⁵ And the seventh volume, speaking of the fifth five-hundred-year period which is the age of conflict, says, "Do not allow the devil, the devil’s people, or the deities, dragons, yakshas, kumbhandas⁴⁶ or their kind to seize the advantage."⁴⁷

The Daijuku Sutra says, "Quarrels and disputes will arise among the adherents to my teachings." And the fifth volume of the Lotus Sutra similarly says, "There will be monks in that evil age...," "Or there will be forest-dwelling monks...," and, "Demons will take possession of others..."⁴⁸

These passages describe the following situation. During the fifth five-hundred-year period, eminent priests who are possessed by demons will be found everywhere throughout the country. At that time, a single wise man⁴⁹ will appear. The eminent priests who are possessed by demons⁵⁰ will deceive the ruler, his ministers and the common people into slandering and abusing this man, attacking him with sticks, staves, tiles and stones, and condemning him to exile or death. At that time, Shakyamuni, Taho and the Buddhas of the ten directions will speak to the great bodhisattvas who sprang up from the earth, and the great bodhisattvas will in turn report to Bonten Taishaku, the gods of the sun and moon, and the Four Heavenly Kings. As a result, strange occurrences and omens will appear in abundance in the heavens and on earth.

If the rulers of the various countries fail to heed this warning, then the Buddhas and the great bodhisattvas will order neighboring countries to censure those evil rulers and the evil priests of their countries. Then great struggles and disputes such as have never been known in the past will break out in the world.

At that time, all the people living in the four continents illuminated by the sun and moon, fearing the destruction of their nation or the loss of their lives, will pray to the Buddhas and bodhisattvas for help. And if there is no sign that their prayers will be answered, they will put their faith in this single humble priest whom they earlier despised. Then all the countless eminent priests, the great rulers of the eighty thousand countries and the numberless common people will all bow their heads to the ground, press their palms together, and in one voice will chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. It will be like that occasion during the Buddha’s demonstration of his ten mystic powers,⁵¹ described in the Jinriki chapter of the Lotus Sutra, when all the beings in the worlds of the ten directions, without a single exception, turned toward the saha world and cried out together in a loud voice, Namu Shakyamuni Buddha, Namu Shakyamuni Buddha, Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, Nam-myoho-renge-kyo!⁵²

Question: The sutra passages you have cited clearly prove your point. But are there any prophecies in the writings of T’ien-t’ai, Miao-lo or Dengyo that would support your argument?

Answer: Your process of questioning is backwards! If I had cited passages from the commentaries of men such as T’ien-t’ai and the others and you had then asked whether there were sutra passages to support them, that I could understand. But since I have already cited passages from the sutras that clearly prove the argument, it is hardly necessary to ask if there are similar passages in the commentaries. If by chance you found that the sutras and the commentaries disagreed, would you then discard the sutras and follow the commentaries?

Question: What you say is perfectly true. Nevertheless, we ordinary persons have only a very remote idea of what the sutras mean, while the commentaries are more accessible and easier to understand. If there are clear passages of proof in such relatively understandable commentaries, then citing them might help us have greater faith in your argument.

Answer: I can see that you are very sincere and earnest in your questioning, so I will cite a few passages from the commentaries. The Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai states, "In the fifth five hundred years, the Mystic Way shall spread and benefit mankind far into the future."⁵³ The Great Teacher Miao-lo says, "The beginning of the Latter Day of the Law will not be without inconspicuous benefit."⁵⁴

The Great Teacher Dengyo declares, "The Former and Middle Days are almost over, and the Latter Day is near at hand. Now indeed is the time when the One Vehicle expounded in the Lotus Sutra will prove how perfectly it fits the capacities of all people. How do we know this is true? Because the Anrakugyo chapter of the Lotus Sutra states, ‘In the latter age when the Law is on the point of disappearing, [the Lotus Sutra will be expounded far and wide].’"⁵⁵ And Dengyo further states, "The propagation of the true teaching will begin in the age when the Middle Day of the Law ends and the Latter Day opens, in a land to the east of T’ang and to the west of Katsu,⁵⁶ among people stained by the five impurities⁵⁷ who live in a time of conflict. The sutra says, ‘Since hatred and jealousy toward this sutra abound even during the lifetime of the Buddha, how much worse will it be in the world after his passing?’ There is good reason for this statement."⁵⁸

Shakyamuni Buddha was born in the Kalpa of Continuance,⁵⁹ in the ninth kalpa of decrease, when the span of human life was diminishing and measured a hundred years. The period when the span of human life diminishes from a hundred years to ten years accordingly falls within the period represented by the fifty years of the Buddha’s preaching life, the two thousand years of the Former and Middle Days of the Law that follow his passing, and the ten thousand years of the Latter Day of the Law that follow that. During this period, the Lotus Sutra was destined to be propagated and spread widely on two occasions. The first was the last eight years of the Buddha’s life [when he preached the Lotus Sutra], and the second is the five hundred years at the beginning of the Latter Day of the Law.

T’ien-t’ai, Miao-lo and Dengyo were not born early enough to be present when the Buddha was in the world and preached the Lotus Sutra, nor were they born late enough to be present in the Latter Day of the Law. To their regret, they were born in the interval between these two times, and it is clear from their writings that they looked forward with longing to the beginning of the Latter Day of the Law. Theirs was like the case of the hermit-sage Asita who, when he viewed the newborn Prince Siddhartha, the future Shakyamuni Buddha, remarked in sorrow, "I am already over ninety, so I will not live to see this prince attain enlightenment. After my death, I will be reborn in the world of formlessness,⁶⁰ so I cannot be present during the fifty years when he preaches the Law, nor can I be reborn in this world during the Former, Middle or Latter Day of the Law!" Such was his lament.

All those who are determined to attain the Way should take note of these examples and rejoice! Those concerned about their next life would do better to be common people in this, the Latter Day of the Law, than be mighty rulers during the two thousand years of the Former and Middle Days of the Law. Why won’t people believe this? Rather than be the chief priest of the Tendai sect, it is better to be a leper who chants Nam-myoho-renge-kyo! As Emperor Wu⁶¹ of the Liang dynasty said in his vow,⁶² "I would rather be Devadatta and sink into the hell of incessant suffering than be the non-Buddhist sage Udraka Ramaputra!"⁶³

Question: Do the scholars Nagarjuna and Vasubandhu say anything about the Great Pure Law of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo?

Answer: Nagarjuna and Vasubandhu knew about it in their hearts, but they did not expound it in words.

Question: Why did they not expound it?

Answer: There are many reasons. For one, the people of their day did not have the capacity to understand it. Second, it was not the proper time. Third, these men were bodhisattvas of the theoretical teaching⁶⁴ and hence had not been entrusted with the task of expounding it.

Question: Could you explain the matter in greater detail?

Answer: The Former Day of the Law began on the sixteenth day of the second month, the day after the Buddha’s passing. The Venerable Mahakashyapa received the transmission of the Buddha’s teachings and propagated them for the first twenty years. For the next twenty years, this task fell to the Venerable Ananda, for the next twenty years to Shanavasa, for the next twenty years to Upagupta, and for the next twenty years to Dhritaka. By that time a hundred years had passed. But the only teachings that were spread abroad during this period were those of the Hinayana sutras. Even the titles of the Mahayana sutras failed to receive mention, so the Lotus Sutra, needless to say, was not propagated at this time.

Men such as Mikkaka, Buddhananda, Buddhamitra, Parshva and Punyayashas then inherited the teachings, and, during the remainder of the first five hundred years after the Buddha’s passing, the doctrines of the Mahayana sutras began little by little to come to light, although no particular effort was made to propagate them. Attention was concentrated on the Hinayana sutras alone. All this transpired during the period mentioned in the Daijuku Sutra as the first five hundred years, which constitute the age of enlightenment.

During the latter part of the Former Day of the Law, six hundred to a thousand years after the Buddha’s passing, there appeared such men as Ashvaghosha, Kapimala, Nagarjuna, Aryadeva, Rahulata, Samghanandi, Samghayashas, Kumarata, Jayata, Vasubandhu, Manorhita, Haklena and Aryasimha. These ten or more teachers started out as adherents of non-Buddhist doctrines. Following that, they made a thorough study of the Hinayana sutras, and still later, they turned to the Mahayana sutras and used them to disprove and demolish the doctrines of the Hinayana sutras.

But although these great men used the Mahayana sutras to refute the Hinayana, they did not fully clarify the superiority of the Lotus Sutra in comparison to the other Mahayana sutras. Even though they did touch somewhat on this question, they did not make clear such vitally important doctrines as the ten mystic principles⁶⁵ of the theoretical and the essential teachings, the fact that persons in the two realms of shomon and engaku can attain Buddhahood, the fact that the Buddha attained enlightenment countless aeons in the past, the fact that the Lotus Sutra is the most difficult of all the sutras preached in the past, present or future, or the doctrines of the hundred worlds and thousand factors and of ichinen sanzen.

They did no more than point a finger at the moon, as it were, or touch on some parts of the Lotus Sutra. But they said nothing at all about whether or not the process of instruction is revealed from beginning to end, whether or not the original relationship between master and disciple is clarified, or which teachings would lead to enlightenment and which would not.⁶⁶ Such, then, were the developments in the latter five hundred years of the Former Day of the Law, the time noted in the Daijuku Sutra as the age of meditation.

By some time after the thousand years of the Former Day of the Law, Buddhist teachings had spread throughout the entire land of India. But in many cases, Hinayana doctrines prevailed over those of the Mahayana, or provisional sutras were permitted to overshadow and efface the sutra of the true teaching. In a number of respects, Buddhism was in a chaotic condition. Gradually, the number of persons attaining enlightenment declined, while countless others, though adhering to Buddhist doctrines, fell into the evil paths of existence.

Fifteen years after the beginning of the Middle Day of the Law which followed the thousand years of the Former Day Buddhism⁶⁷ spread eastward and was introduced into the land of China. During the first hundred years or more of the first half of the Middle Day of the Law, the Buddhist doctrines introduced from India were vigorously disputed by the Taoist teachers of China, and neither side could win a clear victory. Though it appeared at times as though the issue had been decided, those who embraced Buddhism were as yet lacking in deep faith. Therefore, if it had become apparent that the sacred teachings of Buddhism were not a unified doctrine but were divided into Hinayana and Mahayana, provisional and true, and exoteric and esoteric teachings,⁶⁸ then some of the believers might have had doubts and turned instead to the non-Buddhist teachings. It was perhaps because the Buddhist monks Kashyapa Matanga and Chu-fa-lan⁶⁹ feared such a result that they made no mention of such divisions as Mahayana and Hinayana or provisional and true teachings when they brought Buddhism to China, though they were perfectly aware of them.

During the five dynasties that followed, the Wei, Chin, Sung, Ch’i and Liang, disputes took place within Buddhism over the differences between the Mahayana and Hinayana, provisional and true, and exoteric and esoteric teachings, and it was impossible to determine which was correct. As a result, from the ruler on down to the common people, there were many people who had doubts about the doctrine.

Buddhism thus became split into ten different schools, the three schools of southern China and seven schools of northern China. In the south there were the schools that divided the Buddha’s teachings into three periods, into four periods, and into five periods, while in the north there were the five-period school, the school that recognized incomplete-word and complete-word teachings, the four-doctrine school, five-doctrine school, six-doctrine school, the two-Mahayana-doctrine school and the "one-voice" school.

Each of these schools clung fiercely to its own doctrines and clashed with the others like fire encountering water. Yet in general they shared a common view. Namely, among the various sutras preached during the Buddha’s lifetime, they put the Kegon Sutra in first place, the Nirvana Sutra in second place, and the Lotus Sutra in third place. They admitted that, in comparison to such sutras as the Agon, Hannya, Vimalakirti and Shiyaku, the Lotus Sutra represents the truth, a "complete teaching" sutra that sets forth correct views. But they held that, in comparison to the Nirvana Sutra, it represents a doctrine of non-eternity, an "incomplete-teaching" sutra that puts forth heretical views.

From the end of the fourth through the beginning of the fifth hundred years following the introduction of Buddhism in the Later Han dynasty,⁷⁰ in the time of the Ch’en and Sui dynasties, there lived a humble priest named Chih-i, the man who would later be known as the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai Chih-che.⁷¹ He refuted the mistaken doctrines of the northern and southern schools and declared that among the teachings of the Buddha’s lifetime, the Lotus Sutra ranks first, the Nirvana Sutra second, and the Kegon Sutra third. This is what occurred in the first five hundred years of the Middle Day of the Law, the period corresponding to that described in the Daijuku Sutra as the age of reading, reciting and listening.

During the latter five hundred years of the Middle Day of the Law, in the reign of Emperor T’ai-tsung⁷² at the beginning of the T’ang dynasty, the Learned Doctor Hsuan-tsang journeyed to India, spending nineteen years visiting temples and pagodas in the one hundred and thirty states of India and meeting with numerous Buddhist scholars. He investigated all the profound doctrines contained in the twelve divisions of the scriptures⁷³ and the eighty thousand sacred teachings of Buddhism and encountered therein the two schools of the Hosso and the Sanron.

Of these two, the Mahayana Hosso doctrine was said to have been taught long ago by Miroku and Asanga and in more recent times by the scholar Shilabhadra. The latter transmitted it to Hsuan-tsang, who brought it to China and taught it to Emperor T’ai-tsung.

The heart of the Hosso doctrine lies in its assertion that Buddhist teachings should accord with the capacities of the listeners. If people have the capacity to understand the doctrine of the one vehicle, then the doctrine of the three vehicles can be no more than an expedient to instruct them, and the doctrine of the one vehicle, the only true way of enlightening them. For people such as these, the Lotus Sutra should be taught. On the other hand, if they have the capacity to understand the three vehicles, then the one vehicle can be no more than an expedient to instruct them, and the three vehicles, the only true way of enlightening them. For people such as these, the Jimmitsu and Shrimala sutras should be taught. This, say the proponents of the Hosso school, is a principle that T’ien-t’ai failed to understand.

Emperor T’ai-tsung was a very wise ruler whose name was known throughout the world and who was said to have surpassed in virtue the Three Rulers⁷⁴ and Five Emperors⁷⁵ of antiquity. He not only reigned over the entire land of China, but also extended his influence to more than eighteen hundred foreign countries ranging from Kao-ch’ang⁷⁶ in the west to Koguryo⁷⁷ in the east. He was regarded as a ruler who had mastered both Buddhist and non-Buddhist teachings. And since Hsuan-tsang was first in the favor and devotion of this wise ruler, there was none among the leaders of the Tendai school who ventured to risk losing his head by challenging him, and the true teachings of the Lotus Sutra were neglected and forgotten throughout the country.

During the reigns of T’ai-tsung’s heir, Emperor Kao-tsung, and Kao-tsung’s stepmother, Empress Wu, there lived a priest called Fa-tsang.⁷⁸ He observed that the Tendai school was under attack from the Hosso school and took this opportunity to champion the Kegon Sutra, which T’ien-t’ai had relegated to a lower place, declaring that the Kegon Sutra should rank first, the Lotus Sutra second, and the Nirvana Sutra third among the sutras preached during the Buddha’s lifetime.

In the reign of Emperor Hsuan-tsung, the fourth ruler following T’ai-tsung, in the fourth year of the K’ai-yuan era (716), the Learned Doctor Shan-wu-wei came to China from the western land of India, and in the eighth year of the same era (720), the learned doctors Chin-kang-chih and Pu-k’ung also came to China from India. These men brought with them the Dainichi, Kongocho and Soshitsuji sutras and founded the Shingon school. This school declares that there are two types of Buddhist teachings: the exoteric teachings of Shakyamuni Buddha, which are expounded in the Kegon, Lotus and similar sutras, and the esoteric teachings of Dainichi or Mahavairochana, Buddha, which are expounded in the Dainichi and similar sutras. The Lotus Sutra holds first place among the exoteric teachings. But although its fundamental principles somewhat resemble those of the esoteric teachings expounded by Dainichi Buddha, it contains no description whatsoever of the mudras and mantras⁷⁹ to be used in religious rituals. It fails to include any reference to the three mysteries of body, mouth and mind⁸⁰ and hence is to be regarded as an "incomplete teaching."

Thus all of these three schools mentioned above, the Hosso, Kegon and Shingon, attacked the Tendai school and the teachings of the Lotus Sutra. Perhaps because none of the members of the Tendai school could measure up to the stature of the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai, though they were aware of the falsity of these other teachings, they did not attempt to speak out against them in public as T’ien-t’ai had. As a result, everyone throughout the country, from the ruler and high ministers on down to the common people, was led astray from the true teachings of Buddhism, and no one any longer came to attain enlightenment. Such were the events of the first two hundred years or more of the latter five-hundred-year period of the Middle Day of the Law.

Some four hundred years or more after the beginning of the Middle Day of the Law,⁸¹ the sacred scriptures of Buddhism were brought to Japan from the kingdom of Paekche in Korea, along with a wooden statue of the Buddha Shakyamuni, and also priests and nuns. At this time the Liang dynasty in China was coming to an end, to be replaced by the Ch’en dynasty, while in Japan, Emperor Kimmei, the thirtieth sovereign since Emperor Jimmu, was on the throne.

Emperor Kimmei’s son, Emperor Yomei, had a son named Prince Jogu who not only worked to spread the teachings of Buddhism but also designated the Lotus Sutra, Vimalakirti Sutra and Shrimala Sutra as texts that would insure the protection of the nation.

Later, in the time of the thirty-seventh sovereign, Emperor Kotoku, the teachings of the Sanron and Jojitsu schools were introduced to Japan by Kanroku, a priest from Paekche. During the same period, the priest Dosho, who had been to China, introduced the teachings of the Hosso and Kusha schools.

In the reign of Empress Gensho, the forty-fourth sovereign, a monk from India named Shan-wu-wei, already mentioned earlier, brought the Dainichi Sutra to Japan, but he returned to China, where he had been residing, without spreading its teachings abroad in Japan.

In the reign of Emperor Shomu, the forty-fifth sovereign, the Kegon school was introduced from the Korean kingdom of Silla by a priest of that state called the Preceptor Shinjo. The Administrator of Monks Roben inherited its teachings and in turn introduced them to Emperor Shomu. He also helped to construct the great image of the Buddha at Todai-ji temple.

During the time of the same emperor, the priest Ganjin came from China, bringing with him the teachings of the Tendai and Ritsu schools. But although he spread the Ritsu teachings and built a Hinayana ordination platform at Todai-ji he died without even so much as mentioning the name of the Hokke school.

Eight hundred years after the beginning of the Middle Day of the Law, in the reign of the fiftieth sovereign, Emperor Kammu, there appeared a young priest without reputation named Saicho, who was later to be known as the Great Teacher Dengyo. At first he studied the doctrines of the six sects -- Sanron, Hosso, Kegon, Kusha, Jojitsu and Ritsu -- as well as the Zen teaching, under the Administrator of Monks Gyohyo and others. Later he founded a temple called Kokusho-ji, which in time came to be known as Hiei-zan or Mount Hiei. There he pored over the sutras and treatises of the six sects, as well as the commentaries written by their leaders. But he found that these commentaries often contradicted the sutras and treatises upon which these sects relied and were replete with one-sided opinions. It became apparent to him that if people were to accept such teachings, they would all fall into the evil paths of existence. In addition, though the leaders of each of the different sect proclaimed that they had understood the true meaning of the Lotus Sutra and praised their own particular interpretation, none of them had in fact understood its teachings correctly. Saicho felt that, if he were to state this opinion openly, it would surely lead to quarrels and disputes. But if he remained silent, he would be going against the spirit of the Buddha’s vow. He agonized over what course to take, but in the end, fearful of violating the Buddha’s admonition, made known his views to Emperor Kammu.

Emperor Kammu, startled at his declaration, summoned the leading authorities of the six sects to engage in debate. At first these scholars in their pride were similar to banners raised aloft like mountains, and their evil minds worked like poisonous snakes, but in the end they were forced to bow in defeat in the presence of the ruler, and each and every person of the six sects and the seven major temples of Nara acknowledged himself a disciple of Saicho.

It was like that earlier occasion when the Buddhist scholars of northern and southern China gathered in the palace of the Ch’en dynasty and, having been bested in debate by the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai, became his disciples. But [of the three types of learning] T’ien-t’ai had employed only perfect meditation and perfect wisdom. The Great Teacher Dengyo, by contrast, attacked the Hinayana specific ordination for administering the precepts, which T’ien-t’ai had failed to controvert, and administered the Mahayana specific ordination described in the Bommo Sutra to eight eminent priests of the six sects. In addition, he established on Mount Hiei a specific ordination platform for administering the precepts of the perfect and immediate enlightenment of the Lotus Sutra. Thus the specific ordination in the precepts of perfect and immediate enlightenment at Enryaku-ji on Mount Hiei was not only the foremost ordination ceremony in Japan, but a great ordination in the precepts of Eagle Peak such as had never been known either in India or China or anywhere else in the world during the eighteen hundred or more years since the Buddha’s passing. This ceremony of ordination had its beginning in Japan.

If we examine the merit achieved by the Great Teacher Dengyo, we would have to say that he is a sage who surpasses Nagarjuna and Vasubandhu and who excels both T’ien-t’ai and Miao-lo. If so, then what priest in Japan today could turn his back on the perfect precepts of the Great Teacher Dengyo, whether he belongs to To-ji, Onjo-ji, or the seven major temples of Nara, whether he is a follower of one of the eight sects or of the Jodo, Zen or Ritsu sect in whatever corner of the land? The priests of the nine regions of China became the disciples of the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai with respect to the perfect meditation and perfect wisdom that he taught. But since no ordination platform for universally administering the precepts of perfect and immediate enlightenment was ever established in China, some of them might not have become his disciples with regard to the precepts. In Japan, however, [because Dengyo in fact established such an ordination platform] any priests who fail to become disciples of the Great Teacher Dengyo can only be regarded as heretics and men of evil.

As to the question of which of the two newer sects brought from China is superior, the Tendai or the Shingon, the Great Teacher Dengyo was perfectly clear in his mind. But he did not demonstrate which was superior in public debate, as he had done previously with regard to the relative merit of the Tendai sect in comparison to the six older sects. Perhaps on that account, after the death of Dengyo, Toji, the seven major temples of Nara, Onjo-ji and other temples throughout the provinces of Japan all began proclaiming that the Shingon sect is superior to the Tendai sect, until everyone from the ruler on down to the common people believed that such was the case.

Thus the true spirit of the Tendai-Hokke sect really flourished only during the lifetime of the Great Teacher Dengyo. Dengyo lived at the end of the Middle Day of the Law, during the period described in the Daijuku Sutra as the age of building temples and stupas. The time had not yet arrived when, as the Daijuku Sutra says, "Quarrels and disputes will arise among the adherents to my teachings, and the Pure Law will become obscured and lost."

Now more than two hundred years have passed since we entered the Latter Day of the Law, a time of which, as the Daijuku Sutra records, the Buddha predicted that "quarrels and disputes will arise among the adherents to my teachings, and the Pure Law will become obscured and lost." If these words of the Buddha are true, it is a time when the whole world will without doubt be embroiled in quarrels and disputes.

Reports reaching us say that the entire land of China, with its 360 states and 200 or more provinces, has already been conquered by the kingdom of the Mongols. The Chinese capital was conquered some time ago, and the two rulers Emperor Hui-tsung and Emperor Ch’in-tsung were taken captive by the northern barbarians and ended their days in the region of Tartary. Meanwhile, Hui-tsung’s grandson, Emperor Kao-tsung, driven out of the northern capital, established his residence in the countryside at the temporary palace at Lin-an, and for many years now he has not seen the capital.

In addition, the six hundred or more states of Koryo and the states of Silla and Paekche on the Korean Peninsula have all been conquered by the great kingdom of the Mongols, and in like manner the Mongols have even attacked the Japanese territories of Iki, Tsushima and Kyushu. Thus the Buddha’s prediction concerning the occurrence of quarrels and disputes has proved anything but false. It is like the tides of the ocean that never fail to come when the time arrives.

In view of the accuracy of his prediction, can there be any doubt that, after this period described in the Daijuku Sutra when "the Pure Law will become obscured and lost," the Great Pure Law of the Lotus Sutra will be spread far and wide throughout Japan and all the other countries of the world?

Among the Buddha’s various teachings, the Daijuku Sutra represents no more than an exposition of provisional Mahayana doctrine. In terms of teaching the way to escape from the sufferings of birth and death, it belongs to the period when the Buddha had "not yet revealed the truth," and so cannot lead to enlightenment those who have not yet formed any connection with the Lotus Sutra. And yet in what it states concerning the six paths, the four forms of birth, and the three existences of life, it does not display the slightest error.

How, then, could there be any error in the Lotus Sutra, of which the Buddha said that he "now must reveal the truth"? Taho Buddha likewise testified to its truth, and the Buddhas from the ten directions put forth their long broad tongues until they reached the Brahma Heaven as a sign of testimony. And Shakyamuni Buddha also extended his tongue, which is incapable of telling falsehoods, until it reached the Akanishtha Heaven, saying that in the fifth five-hundred-year period after his passing, when the entire body of Buddhist doctrine would be about to disappear, Bodhisattva Jogyo would come forward with the five characters of Myoho-renge-kyo and administer them as good medicine to those afflicted with white leprosy -- those persons of incorrigible disbelief and those who slander the Law. And he charged Bonten, Taishaku, the gods of the sun and moon, the Four Heavenly Kings and the dragon deities to act as that bodhisattva’s protectors. How could these golden words of his be false? Even if the great earth were to turn upside down, a high mountain crumble and fall, summer not follow spring, the sun move eastward, or the moon fall to earth, this prediction could never fail to come true!

If that is so, then, in this time of "quarrels and disputes," how can the ruler, the ministers and the common people of Japan hope to escape harm when they vilify and abuse the envoy of the Buddha who is attempting to spread the teaching of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, send him into exile and attack and beat him, or inflict all kinds of trouble upon his disciples and followers? And stupid and ignorant persons must surely think when I say this that I am merely calling down curses upon the people.

A person who spreads the teaching of the Lotus Sutra is father and mother to all the living beings in Japan. For, as the Great Teacher Chang-an says, "He makes it possible for the offender to rid himself of evil, and thus he acts like a parent to the offender." If so, then I, Nichiren, am the father and mother of the present emperor of Japan, and the teacher and lord of the Nembutsu believers, the Zen followers and the Shingon priests.

And yet, from the ruler on down to the common people, all treat me with enmity. How, then, can the sun and moon go on shining down on their heads, and how can the gods of the earth continue to bear up their feet? When Devadatta attacked the Buddha, the earth shook and trembled and flames shot out of it. When King Dammira cut off the head of the Venerable Aryasimha, his own right hand that held the sword dropped off and fell to the ground. Emperor Hui-tsung branded the face of the priest Fa-tao and exiled him south of the Yangtze, but before half a year had passed, the emperor was taken prisoner and carried off by the barbarians. And these attacks of the Mongols are occurring for the same reason. Though one may gather together as many soldiers as there are in the five regions of India and build one’s fortress in the Iron-wheel Mountain, it will do no good. The people of Japan are certain to encounter the calamity of war.

From this situation one should understand that I am in fact the votary of the Lotus Sutra. Shakyamuni Buddha stated that, if anyone should abuse or curse someone who is spreading the teaching of the Lotus Sutra in the evil times of the later age that person would be guilty of a crime that is a hundred a thousand, ten thousand, a hundred thousand times greater than if he had been an enemy of the Buddha for the space of an entire kalpa. And yet nowadays the ruler and the people of Japan, following their personal whims, seem to hate me even more intensely than they would an enemy of their own parents or one who had been a foe from their previous lifetime or upbraid me even more severely than they would a traitor or a murderer. I wonder that the earth does not open up and swallow them alive, or that thunder does not come down from heaven and tear them apart!

Or am I perhaps not the votary of the Lotus Sutra after all? If not, then I am wretched indeed! What a miserable fate, in this present life to be hounded by everyone and never know so much as a moment of peace, and in the next life to fall into the evil paths of existence! If in fact I am not the votary of the Lotus Sutra, then who will uphold the one vehicle, the teaching of the Lotus Sutra?

Honen ordered people to discard the Lotus Sutra, Shan-tao said, "Not one person in a thousand can reach enlightenment through its teachings!" and Tao-ch’o said, "Not a single person has ever attained Buddhahood through that sutra!" Are these men, then, the votaries of the Lotus Sutra? Kobo Daishi said that one who practices the teaching of the Lotus Sutra is following "a childish theory." Is he perhaps the votary of the Lotus Sutra?

The Lotus Sutra speaks of a person who "is able to uphold this sutra’’ or who "is able to preach this sutra. What does it mean when it speaks of someone who "is able to preach" this sutra? Does it not mean someone who will proclaim, in the words of the Lotus Sutra itself, that "among the sutras, it holds the highest place," and who will maintain its superiority over the Dainichi Kegon, Nirvana, Hannya and other sutras? Is this not the kind of person the sutra means when it speaks of "the votary of the Lotus Sutra"? If these passages from the sutra are to be believed, then in the seven hundred years and more since Buddhism was introduced to Japan, there has never been a single votary of the Lotus Sutra other than the Great Teacher Dengyo and I, Nichiren.

Again and again I wonder that the persons who attack me do not, as the Lotus Sutra says, suffer the punishment of having their "heads split into seven pieces’’ or their "mouths closed and stopped up," but I realize there are reasons. Such punishments are no more than trivial penalties fit to be inflicted where there are only one or two offenders. But I, Nichiren, am the foremost votary of the Lotus Sutra for the entire world. Therefore, people who ally themselves with those who slander me or treat me with malice deserve to meet with the greatest difficulties in the world, such as the great earthquake that rocked Japan in the Shoka era, or the great comet that appeared as a punishment upon the entire world in the Bun’ei era. Just look at these happenings! Though in the centuries since the Buddha’s passing there have been other practitioners of Buddhism who were treated with malice, great disasters such as these have never been known before. That is because there has never before been anyone who taught the people at large to chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo! With respect to this virtue, is there anyone in the whole world who dares to face me and say he is my equal, anyone within the four seas who dares to claim he can stand side by side with me?

Question: During the Former Day of the Law, the capacities of the people may have been somewhat inferior to those of the people who lived when the Buddha was in the world. And yet they were surely much superior to those of the people in the Middle and Latter Days of the Law. How then can you say that in the early years of the Former Day of the Law, the Lotus Sutra was ignored? It was during the thousand years of the Former Day of the Law that such men as Ashvaghosha, Nagarjuna, Aryadeva and Asanga appeared. Bodhisattva Vasubandhu, who is known as the "scholar of a thousand works," wrote the Hokke Ron or Treatise on the Lotus Sutra, in which he declared that the Lotus is first among all the sutras. The Learned Doctor Paramartha, in describing the transmission of the Lotus Sutra, says that in India there were more than fifty scholars who spread the teachings of the Lotus Sutra and that Vasubandhu was one of them. Such was the situation in the Former Day of the Law.

Turning to the Middle Day of the Law that followed, we find that the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai appeared in China around the middle of the period and wrote the Hokke Gengi, Hokke Mongu and Maka Shikan in thirty volumes, in which he explored all the depths of meaning in the Lotus Sutra. At the end of the Middle Day of the Law, the Great Teacher Dengyo appeared in Japan. He not only transmitted to our country the two doctrines of perfect wisdom and perfect meditation expounded by the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai, but also established a great ordination platform of the perfect and immediate enlightenment on Mount Hiei. Thus the perfect precepts were acknowledged throughout Japan, and everyone from the ruler on down to the common people looked up to Enryaku-ji temple on Mount Hiei as his guide and teacher. How then can you say that in the Middle Day of the Law, the teachings of the Lotus Sutra were not widely disseminated and spread abroad?

Answer: It is a commonly accepted assertion among the scholars of our times that the Buddha’s teachings are invariably fitted to the capacities of his listeners. But in fact this is not what the Buddha truly teaches. If it were true that the greatest doctrines were always preached for the persons with the most superior capacities and understanding, then why, when the Buddha first achieved enlightenment, did he not preach the Lotus Sutra? Why, during the first five hundred years of the Former Day of the Law, were the teachings of the Mahayana sutras not spread abroad? And if it were true that the finest doctrines are revealed to those who have a particular connection with the Buddha, then why did Shakyamuni Buddha preach the Kambutsu Zammai Sutra for his father, King Shuddhodana, and the Maya Sutra for his mother, Queen Maya, [rather than the Lotus Sutra]? And if the reverse were true, namely, that secret doctrines should never be revealed to evil persons having no connection with the Buddha nor to slanderers of Buddhism, then why did the monk Kakutoku teach the Nirvana Sutra to all the countless monks who were guilty of breaking the precepts? Or why did Bodhisattva Fukyo address the four kinds of people, who were slanderers of the Law, and propagate to them the teachings of the Lotus Sutra?

Thus we can see that it is a great mistake to assert that the teachings are invariably expounded according to the listeners’ capacities.

Question: Do you mean to say that Nagarjuna, Vasubandhu and the others did not teach the true doctrines of the Lotus Sutra?

Answer: That is correct. They did not teach them.

Question: Then what doctrines did they teach?

Answer: They taught the doctrines of provisional Mahayana, the various exoteric and esoteric teachings such as the Kegon, Hodo, Hannya, Dainichi and other sutras, but they did not teach the doctrines of the Lotus Sutra.

Question: How do you know that this is so?

Answer: The treatises written by Bodhisattva Nagarjuna run to some three hundred thousand verses. Not all of them have been transmitted to China and Japan, so it is difficult to make statements about their true nature. However, examining the ones that have been transmitted to China such as the Jujubibasha Ron, Chu Ron and Daichido Ron, we may surmise that the treatises remaining in India are of a similar nature.

Question: Among the treatises remaining in India, are there any that are superior to the ones transmitted to China?

Answer: There is no need for me to make pronouncements of my own on the subject of Bodhisattva Nagarjuna. For the Buddha himself predicted that after he had passed away, a man called Bodhisattva Nagarjuna would appear in southern India, and that his most important teachings would be found in a treatise called the Chu Ron.

Such was the Buddha’s prediction. And accordingly we find that there were some seventy scholars in India who followed in the wake of Nagarjuna, all of them major scholars. And all of these seventy scholars took the Chu Ron as the basis of their teachings. The Chu Ron is a work in four volumes and twenty-seven chapters, and the core of its teachings is expressed in a four-phrase verse that describes the nature of phenomena arising from dependent origination. This four-phrase verse sums up the four teachings and three truths contained in the Kegon, Hannya and other sutras. It does not express the three truths as revealed and unified in the Lotus Sutra.

Question: Is there anyone else who thinks the way you do in this matter?

Answer: The Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai says, "Do not presume to compare the Chu Ron [to the teachings of the Lotus Sutra]." And elsewhere he says, "Vasubandhu and Nagarjuna clearly perceived the truth in their hearts, but they did not teach it. Instead, they preached the provisional Mahayana teachings, which were suited to their times." Miao-lo remarks, "For demolishing false opinions and establishing the truth, nothing can compare to the Lotus Sutra." And Ts’ung-i states, "Nagarjuna and Vasubandhu cannot compare with T’ien-t’ai."

Question: In the latter part of the T’ang dynasty, the Learned Doctor Pu-k’ung introduced to China a treatise in one volume entitled Bodaishin Ron, whose authorship he ascribed to Bodhisattva Nagarjuna. Kobo Daishi says of it, "This treatise represents the heart and core of all the one thousand treatises of Nagarjuna.’’ What is your opinion on this?

Answer: This treatise consists of seven leaves. There are numerous places in it that could not be the words of Nagarjuna. Therefore in the catalogues of Buddhist texts it is sometimes listed as a work of Nagarjuna and sometimes as a work of Pu-k’ung. The matter of its authorship has never been resolved. In addition, it is not a summation of the lifetime teachings of the Buddha, and contains many loose statements. To begin with, a vital passage, the one asserting that the Shingon teachings constitute the only way to Buddhahood, is in error, since it denies the fact that the Lotus Sutra enables one to attain Buddhahood in one’s present form, a fact well attested by both scriptural passages and actual events. Instead it asserts that the Shingon sutras enable one to attain Buddhahood in one’s present form, an assertion for which there is not the slightest proof in scriptural passages or actual events. And that one word "only" in the assertion that the Shingon teachings constitute the only way to Buddhahood is the greatest error of all.

In view of the facts, it seems likely that the work was written by Pu-k’ung himself who, in order to ensure that the people of the time would regard it with sufficient gravity, attributed it to Nagarjuna.

Pu-k’ung makes a number of other errors as well. Thus, in his translation Kanchi Giki, which deals with the Lotus Sutra he defines the Buddha of the Juryo chapter as the Buddha Amida, an obvious and glaring mistake. He also claims that the Dharani chapter of the Lotus Sutra should follow immediately after the Jinriki chapter and that the Zokurui chapter should come at the very end, views that are not even worth discussing.

And that is not all. He stole the Mahayana precepts from the Tendai school and, obtaining support in the form of a command from Emperor T’ai-tsung, established them in the five temples on Mount Wu-t’ai. And he decreed that the classification of doctrinal tenets used by the Tendai school should be adopted for the Shingon school as well. On the whole, he did many things to confuse and mislead the world. It is acceptable to use translations of sacred texts by other persons, but translations of sutras or treatises from the hand of Pu-k’ung are not to be trusted.

When both old and new translations are taken into consideration, we find that there are 186 persons who have brought sutras and treatises from India and introduced them to China in translation. With the exception of one man, the Learned Doctor Kumarajiva, all of these translators have made errors of some kind. But among them, Pu-k’ung is remarkable for the large number of his errors. It is clear that he deliberately set out to confuse and mislead others.

Question: How do you know that the translators other than Kumarajiva made errors? Do you mean not only to destroy the Zen, Nembutsu, Shingon and the others of the seven major sects, but to discredit all the works of the translators that have been introduced to China and Japan?

Answer: This is a highly confidential matter and I should discuss it in detail only when I am face to face with the inquirer. However, I will make a few comments here. Kumarajiva himself said, "When I examine the various sutras in use in China I find that all of them differ from the Sanskrit originals. How can I make people understand this? I have only one great wish. My body is unclean, for I have taken a wife. But my tongue alone is pure and could never speak false words concerning the teachings of Buddhism. After I die, make certain that I am cremated. If at that time my tongue is consumed by the flames then you may discard all the sutras that I have translated." Such were the words that he spoke again and again from his lecture platform. As a result, everyone from the ruler on down to the common people hoped they would not die before Kumarajiva, so that they might see what happened.

Eventually Kumarajiva died and was cremated, and his impure body was completely reduced to ashes. Only his tongue remained, resting atop a blue lotus that had sprung up in the midst of the flames. It sent out shining rays of five-colored light that made the night as bright as day and in the daytime outshone the rays of the sun. This, then, is why the sutras translated by all the other scholars came to be held in little esteem, while those translated by Kumarajiva, particularly his translation of the Lotus Sutra, spread rapidly throughout China.

Question: That tells us about the translators who lived at the time of Kumarajiva or before. But what about later translators such as Shan-wu-wei or Pu-k’ung?

Answer: Even in the case of translators who lived after Kumarajiva, if their tongues burned up when they were cremated, it means that there are errors in their work. The Hosso sect in earlier times enjoyed great popularity in Japan. But the Great Teacher Dengyo attacked it, pointing out that, though the tongue of Kumarajiva was not consumed by the flames, those of Hsuan-tsang and Tz’u-en burned along with their bodies. Emperor Kammu, impressed by his argument, transferred his allegiance to the Tendai-Hokke sect.

In the third and ninth volumes of the Nirvana Sutra, we find the Buddha predicting that, when his teachings were transmitted from India to other countries, many errors would be introduced into them, and the chances for people to gain enlightenment through them would be reduced. Therefore the Great Teacher Miao-lo remarks, "Whether or not the teachings are grasped correctly depends upon the persons who transmit them. It is not determined by the sage’s original pronouncements."

He is saying that, no matter how the people of today may follow the teachings of the sutras in hopes of a better life in the hereafter, if the sutras they follow are in error, then they can never attain enlightenment. But that is not to be attributed to any fault of the Buddha.

In studying the teachings of Buddhism, apart from the distinctions between Hinayana and Mahayana, provisional and true, and exoteric and esoteric teachings, this question of the reliability of the sutra translation is the most important of all.

Question: You say that during the thousand years of the Former Day of the Law, scholars knew in their hearts that the truth of the Lotus Sutra far surpassed the teachings of the other exoteric and esoteric sutras, but that they did not proclaim this fact to others, merely teaching the doctrines of the provisional Mahayana. I find it difficult to agree with you, but I think I understand what you are saying.

Around the middle of the thousand years of the Middle Day of the Law, the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai Chih-che appeared. In the ten volumes or thousand leaves of his Hokke Gengi he discussed in detail the meaning of the five characters composing the title of the Lotus Sutra, Myoho-renge-kyo. In the ten volumes of his Hokke Mongu, he discussed each word and phrase of the sutra, from the opening words, "Thus I heard," through the very last words, "...they bowed and departed." He interpreted them in the light of four guidelines, namely, causes and circumstances, correlated teachings, the theoretical and essential teachings, and the observation of the mind, once more devoting a thousand leaves to the discussion.

In the twenty volumes composing these two works, the Hokke Gengi and Hokke Mongu, he likened the teachings of all the other sutras to streams and rivers and the Lotus Sutra to the great ocean. He demonstrated that the waters that make up the Buddhist teachings of all the worlds of the ten directions flow, without the loss of a single drop, into that great ocean of the Myoho-renge-kyo. In addition, he examined all the doctrines of the great scholars of India, not overlooking a single point, as well as the doctrines of the ten teachers of northern and southern China, refuting those that deserved to be refuted and adopting those that were worthy of acceptance. In addition to the works just mentioned, he also expounded the Maka Shikan in ten volumes, in which he summed up the Buddha’s lifetime teachings on meditation in the concept of ichinen, and encompassed all the living entities and their environments of the Ten Worlds in the concept of sanzen.

The pronouncements found in this work of T’ien-t’ai surpass those of all the scholars who lived in India during the thousand years of the Former Day of the Law, and are superior to the commentaries of the teachers who lived in China during the five hundred years preceding T’ien-t’ai. Therefore the Great Teacher Chi-tsang of the Sanron school wrote a letter urging a hundred or more of the leaders and elders of the schools of northern and southern China to attend the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai’s lectures on the sutras. "That which happens only once in a thousand years, that which takes place only once in five hundred years, has happened today," he wrote. "Nan-yueh with his superior sageness, T’ien-t’ai with his clear wisdom -- long ago they received and upheld the Lotus Sutra with body, mouth and mind, and now they have appeared once again as these two honored teachers. Not only have they caused the sweet dew of amrita to fall in the land of China, but indeed, they have made the drums of the Law thunder even as far away as India. They possess the mystic enlightenment that comes with inborn understanding, and their expositions of the sacred texts truly are unparalleled since the time of the Wei and Chin dynasties. Therefore I wish to go with a hundred or more priests of the meditational practice and beg to receive the lectures of the Great Teacher Chih-che."

The Discipline Master Tao-hsuan of Mount Chung-nan praised the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai by saying, "His thorough understanding of the Lotus Sutra is like the noonday sun shining down into the darkest valley; his exposition of the Mahayana teachings is like a powerful wind roaring at will through the great sky. Though the teachers of words and phrases might gather by the thousands and attempt to inquire into his wondrous arguments, they could never understand them all. . . . His teachings are as clear as a finger pointing at the moon, . . . and their essence returns to the ultimate truth."

The Dharma Master Fa-tsang of the Kegon school praised T’ien-t’ai in these words: "Men like Nan-yueh and T’ien-t’ai can understand the truth through intuition, and in practice have already ascended to the first stage of security. They recall the teachings of the Law as they heard them on Eagle Peak and present them that way today."

There is an account of how Pu-k’ung of the Shingon school and his disciple Han-kuang both abandoned the Shingon school and became followers of the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai. "The Koso Den or Biographies of Eminent Priests states, ‘When Han-kuang together with Pu-k’ung was traveling in India, a monk said to him, "In the land of China there are the teachings of T’ien-t’ai, which are most suitable in helping to distinguish truth from falsehood and illuminating what is partial and what is perfect. Would it not be well to translate these writings and bring them here to this country?"’"

This story was related by Han-kuang to the Great Teacher Miao-lo. When he heard the story, Miao-lo exclaimed, "Does this not mean that Buddhism has been lost in India, the country of its origin, and must now be sought in the surrounding regions? But even in China there are few people who recognize the greatness of T’ien-t’ai’s teachings. They are like the people of Lu."

Now if there had been any major treatises in India that could compare to these three works in thirty volumes by T’ien-t’ai, then why would the Indian monk have asked that T’ien-t’ai’s commentaries be brought from China? In view of all this, how can you deny that during the Middle Day of the Law, the true meaning of the Lotus Sutra was made clear and that the widespread proclamation and propagation of its teachings (kosen-rufu) was accomplished throughout the entire world?

Answer: The Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai preached and spread throughout China a perfect meditation and perfect wisdom surpassing the lifetime teachings of the Buddha that had never been preached previously by any of the scholars in the fourteen hundred or more years since the Buddha’s death, that is, in the thousand years of the Former Day of the Law and the first four hundred years of the Middle Day. His fame even reached as far as India. This would seem to resemble the widespread proclaiming and propagating of the Lotus Sutra that we have talked about earlier. But at this time an ordination platform of the perfect and immediate enlightenment had not yet been established. Instead, men followed the Hinayana precepts, which were grafted onto the perfect wisdom and perfect meditation -- a rather ineffectual combination. It was like the sun in eclipse or the moon when it is less than full.

Whatever you may say, the time of the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai corresponds to the period described in the Daijuku Sutra as the age of reading, reciting and listening. The time had not yet come for kosen-rufu, or broadly proclaiming and propagating the Lotus Sutra.

Question: The Great Teacher Dengyo was born in Japan in the time of Emperor Kammu. He refuted the mistaken beliefs that had held sway in Japan for the two hundred or more years since the time of Emperor Kimmei and declared his support for the perfect wisdom and perfect meditation taught by the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai. In addition, he repudiated as invalid the ordination platforms that had been established at three places in Japan to confer the Hinayana precepts brought over by the priest Ganjin and instead set up a Mahayana specific ordination platform of the perfect and immediate enlightenment on Mount Hiei. This was the most momentous event that had ever taken place in India, China, Japan, or anywhere else in the world during the eighteen hundred years following the Buddha’s death.

I do not know whether the Great Teacher Dengyo’s inner enlightenment was inferior or equal to that of Nagarjuna and T’ien-t’ai, but I am convinced that in calling upon all Buddhist believers to adhere to a single doctrine, he showed himself to be superior to Nagarjuna and Vasubandhu and surpassed even Nan-yueh and T’ien-t’ai.

In general, we may say that during the eighteen hundred years following the death of the Buddha, these two men, T’ien-t’ai and Dengyo, were the true votaries of the Lotus Sutra. Thus Dengyo writes in his work Hokke Shuku: "The Lotus Sutra says, ‘To seize Mount Sumeru and fling it far off to the measureless Buddha lands -- that is not difficult . . . But in the evil times after the Buddha’s passing to be able to preach this sutra -- that is difficult indeed!’ In commenting on this passage, I have this to say: Shakyamuni taught that the shallow is easy to embrace, but the profound is difficult. To discard the shallow and seek the profound requires courage. The Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai trusted and obeyed Shakyamuni Buddha and worked to uphold the Hokke school, spreading its teachings throughout China. We of Mount Hiei inherited the doctrine from T’ien-t’ai and work to uphold the Hokke school and to disseminate its teachings throughout Japan."

The meaning of this passage of commentary is as follows: From the time of the Buddha’s advent in the Wise Kalpa in the ninth kalpa of decrease, when the human life span was diminishing and had shrunk to a hundred years, through the fifty years of his preaching life as well as during the eighteen hundred or more years after his death, there might actually have been a small person only five feet in height who could nevertheless lift a gold mountain 168,000 yojana or 6,620,000 ri in height and hurl it over the Iron-wheel Mountain faster than a sparrow flies, just as he might take a one- or two-inch tile and toss it a distance of one or two cho. But even if there should have been such a person, it would be rarer still for someone to appear in the Latter Day of the Law who could expound the Lotus Sutra as the Buddha did. Yet the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai and the Great Teacher Dengyo were just such persons, able to teach it in a manner similar to the Buddha.

The scholars in India never attained the truth of the Lotus Sutra. In China in the period before T’ien-t’ai, some of the teachers realized the truth but did not go so far as to announce that it is revealed in the Lotus Sutra, and others did not even realize it. As for later men such as Tz’u-en, Fa-tsang or Shan-wu-wei, they were the kind who say that east is west or declare that heaven is earth. And these are not opinions that the Great Teacher Dengyo put forward merely to enhance his own worth.

On the nineteenth day of the first month of the twenty-first year of the Enryaku era (802), Emperor Kammu paid a visit to the temple at Mount Takao. He summoned more than ten eminent priests from the six sects and seven major temples of Nara, including Zengi, Shoyu, Hoki, Chonin, Kengyoku, Ampuku, Gonso, Shuen, Jiko, Gen’yo, Saiko, Dosho, Kosho and Kambin, to come to the temple to debate with the Dharma Master Saicho. But they became tongue-tied after their first words and could not speak a second or third time. Instead, all bowed their heads as one and pressed their palms together in a gesture of awe. The Sanron teachings concerning the two types of teachings, the teachings of the three periods, and the thrice-turned wheel of the Law the Hosso doctrines concerning the teachings of the three periods and the five natures; and the Kegon doctrines of the four teachings, the five teachings, the root teaching and the branch teachings, the six forms and the ten mysteries -- all their frameworks were utterly refuted. It was as though the beams and rafters of a great edifice had broken and collapsed, and the ten and more eminent priests were like once-proud banners dipped in token of defeat.

At that time the emperor was greatly amazed at the proceedings, and on the twenty-ninth day of the same month he dispatched Wake no Hiroyo and Otomo no Kunimichi as imperial envoys to question the men of the seven temples and six sects at greater length. All of them in turn submitted a memorial acknowledging that they had been defeated in the debate and won over by Dengyo’s arguments. "When we privately examine the Hokke Gengi and other commentaries by T’ien-t’ai, we find that they sum up all the teachings expounded by Shakyamuni Buddha in his lifetime. The full purport of the Buddha’s doctrines is made clear, without a single point being left unexplained. The Tendai sect surpasses all other sects, and is unique in pointing out the single way for all to follow. The doctrines that it expounds represent the most profound mystic truth and are something that we, students of the seven major temples and six sects, have never before heard of, and never before seen. Now at last the dispute that has continued so long between the Sanron and Hosso sects has been resolved as dramatically as though ice had melted. The truth has been made abundantly clear, as though clouds and mist had parted to reveal the light of the sun, moon and stars. In the two hundred or more years since Crown Prince Shotoku spread the Buddhist teachings in this country, a great many sutras and treatises have been lectured upon and their principles have been widely argued, but until now, many doubts still remained to be settled. Moreover, the lofty and perfect doctrine of the Lotus Sutra had not yet been properly explained and made known. Was it that the persons who lived during this period were not yet qualified to taste its perfect flavor?

"In our humble view, the ruler of our sacred dynasty has received the charge given long ago by Shakyamuni Buddha and has undergone profound instruction in the pure and perfect teaching of the Lotus Sutra, so that the doctrines of the unique and wonderful truth that it expounds have for the first time been explained and made clear. Thus we, the scholars of the six sects, have for the first time understood the ultimate truth. From now on, all the beings in this world who are endowed with life will be able to embark in the ship of the wonderful and perfect truth and quickly reach the opposite shore. Zengi and the others of our group have met with great good fortune because of karmic bonds and have been privileged to hear these extraordinary words. Were it not for some profound karmic tie, how could we have been born in this sacred age?"

In China in past times Chia-hsiang assembled some hundred other priests and, together with them, acknowledged the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai to be a true sage. And later in Japan, the two hundred or more priests of the seven temples of Nara proclaimed the Great Teacher Dengyo to be worthy of the title of sage. Thus, during the two thousand years and more after the passing of the Buddha, these two sages appeared in the two countries of China and Japan respectively. In addition, the Great Teacher Dengyo established on Mount Hiei an ordination platform for conferring the great precepts of perfect and immediate enlightenment, precepts which even the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai had never propagated. How then can you deny that in the latter part of the Middle Day of the Law, the "wide proclamation and propagation" (kosen-rufu) of the Lotus Sutra was achieved?

Answer: As I have explained in my earlier discussion, a great truth that was not spread abroad by Mahakashyapa or Ananda was in time propagated by Ashvaghosha, Nagarjuna, Aryadeva and Vasubandhu. And as I have also explained in my discussion there was a great truth that was not fully made known by Nagarjuna, Vasubandhu and the others but was propagated by the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai. And, as I have further explained it remained for the Great Teacher Dengyo to establish an ordination platform of the great precepts of perfect and immediate enlightenment which were not spread abroad by the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai Chih-che.

And, unbelievable as it may seem, there clearly appears in the text of the Lotus Sutra a True Law that is supremely profound and secret, one which, though expounded in full by the Buddha, in the time since his passing has never yet been propagated by Mahakashyapa, Ananda, Ashvaghosha, Nagarjuna, Asanga or Vasubandhu, nor even by T’ien-t’ai or Dengyo. And the most difficult and perplexing question is whether or not this profound Law can be broadly proclaimed and propagated throughout the world now at the beginning of the Latter Day of the Law, the fifth of the five five-hundred-year periods following the Buddha’s death.

Question: What is this secret Law? First, tell me its name and then I want to hear its meaning. If what you say is true then perhaps Shakyamuni Buddha will appear in the world once more, or Bodhisattva Jogyo will once again emerge from the earth. Speak quickly, for pity’s sake!

They say that the Learned Doctor Hsuan-tsang, after dying and being reborn six times, was finally able to reach India, where he spent nineteen years. But he claimed that the one vehicle doctrine of the Lotus Sutra was a mere "expedient teaching" and that the Agon sutras of Hinayana Buddhism represent the true doctrine. And the Learned Doctor Pu-k’ung, when he paid a return visit to India, his homeland, announced that the Buddha of the Juryo chapter of the Lotus Sutra is Amida! This is like saying that east is west or calling the sun the moon. They drove their bodies in vain, and exerted their minds to no avail.

But we have been fortunate enough to be born in the Latter Day of the Law and can advance in our faith without making a single false step. We need not spend three asogi kalpas in practice or feed our heads to tigresses in order to obtain the invisible crown of the Buddha’s head.

Answer: This Law is revealed in the text of the Lotus Sutra, so it is an easy matter for me to explain it to you. But first, before clarifying this Law, there are three important concerns that I must mention. It is said that, no matter how vast the ocean, it will not hold within it the body of a dead person, and no matter how thick the crust of the earth, it will not support one who is undutiful to his parents. According to the Buddhist teaching, however, even those who commit the five cardinal sins may be saved, and even those who are unfilial may gain salvation. It is only the icchantika or men of incorrigible disbelief, those who slander the Law and those who pretend to uphold the precepts, ranking themselves above all others, who cannot be forgiven.

The three sources of difficulty mentioned above are the Nembutsu sect, the Zen sect and the Shingon sect. The first, the Nembutsu sect, has spread throughout Japan, and the Nembutsu is on the lips of the four kinds of people [namely, monks, nuns, laymen and laywomen]. The second, the Zen sect, has produced arrogant monks who talk of their "three robes and one begging bowl" and who fill the area within the four seas, regarding themselves as the enlightened leaders of the whole world. The third, the Shingon sect, is in a class by itself. It receives support from Mount Hiei, Toji, the seven temples of Nara and Onjo-ji as well as from the high priestly officials including the chief priest of Mount Hiei, Omuro, the chief official of Onjo-ji, and supervisors of the various temples and shrines. Since the sacred mirror kept in the imperial palace was destroyed by fire, the precious mudra of the Shingon Buddha Dainichi has been regarded as a mirror of the Buddha to take its place; and since the precious sword was lost in the western sea, the five great deities of Shingon have been looked upon as capable of cutting down the enemies of the Japanese nation. So firmly entrenched are these beliefs that, though the stone that marks the duration of a kalpa might be worn completely away, it would seem that they would never be overthrown, and though the great earth itself might turn upside down, people would never question them.

When the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai defeated in debate the leaders of the other schools of northern and southern China the Shingon teachings had not yet been introduced to that country, and when the Great Teacher Dengyo won victory over the six sects of Japan, the Shingon doctrines escaped refutation. On several occasions they have managed to evade their powerful enemies, and on the contrary have succeeded in overshadowing and imperiling the great Law of the Lotus Sutra. In addition, Jikaku Daishi, who was a disciple of the Great Teacher Dengyo, went so far as to adopt the doctrines of the Shingon sect and introduce them to Mount Hiei, the headquarters of the Tendai sect, thus obscuring Tendai doctrines and turning the entire sect into a sphere of Shingon influence. But who could effectively oppose a person of such authority as Jikaku?

Thus, helped on by prejudiced views, the false doctrines of Kobo Daishi continued to escape condemnation. It is true that the priest Annen did voice a certain opposition to Kobo.

But all he did was to demote the Kegon Sutra from second place and substitute the Lotus Sutra for it, he still ranked the Lotus Sutra as inferior to the Dainichi Sutra. He was nothing more than an arranger of worldly compromises.

Question: In what way are these three sects in error?

Answer: Let us first consider the Jodo or Nembutsu sect. In China in the time of the Ch’i dynasty there was a priest named T’an-luan. He was originally a follower of the Sanron school, but when he read the treatise by Nagarjuna entitled Jujubibasha Ron, he espoused the two categories of the difficult-to-practice way and the easy-to-practice way. Later there was a man called the Meditation Master Tao-ch’o, who lived during the T’ang dynasty. Originally he had given lectures on the Nirvana Sutra, but when he read T’an-luan’s account of his conversion to faith in the Jodo or Pure Land teachings, Tao-ch’o abandoned the Nirvana Sutra and likewise changed over to the Pure Land faith, establishing the two categories of the Sacred Way teachings and the Pure Land teachings. In addition, Tao-ch’o had a disciple named Shan-tao who posited two types of religious practice which he called incorrect practices and correct practices.

In Japan some two hundred years after the beginning of the Latter Day of the Law, in the reign of Emperor Gotoba, there lived a man named Honen. Addressing his words to all priests and lay believers, he stated: "Buddhist teachings are based upon the capacities of the people of the period. The Lotus Sutra and the Dainichi Sutra, the doctrines of the eight or nine sects including the Tendai and Shingon, the teachings of the Buddha’s life time -- the Mahayana and Hinayana, the exoteric and esoteric, provisional and true teachings -- as well as the sects based on them, were all intended for people of superior capacities and superior wisdom who lived during the two thousand years of the Former and Middle Days of the Law. Now that we have entered the Latter Day of the Law, no matter how diligently one may practice such teachings, they will bring no benefit. Moreover, if one mixes such practices with the practice of the Nembutsu addressed to the Buddha Amida, then the Nembutsu will be rendered ineffective and will not lead the believer to rebirth in the Pure Land.

"This is not something that I have taken it upon myself to declare. Bodhisattva Nagarjuna and the Dharma Master T’an-luan both designate such practices as the difficult-to-practice way. Tao-ch’o says that not a single person ever attained enlightenment through them, and Shan-tao affirms that not one person in a thousand can be saved by them.

"These persons whom I have quoted were all leaders of the Jodo sect, and so you may be inclined to question their word. But there is the late eminent priest Eshin, unsurpassed by any wise priests of the Tendai or Shingon sect in the Latter Day of the Law. He stated in his work entitled Ojo Yoshu that the doctrines of exoteric and esoteric Buddhism are not the kind of Law that can free us from the sufferings of birth and death. Moreover, the work entitled Ojo Juin by Yokan of the Sanron sect states the same opinion. Therefore, if people will abandon the Lotus Sutra, Shingon, and other teachings, and devote themselves entirely to the Nembutsu, then ten persons out of ten and a hundred persons out of a hundred will be reborn in the Pure Land."

These pronouncements of Honen precipitated debates and disputes with the priests of Mount Hiei, To-ji, Onjo-ji and the seven major temples of Nara. But Eshin’s words in the preface to his Ojo Yoshu appeared to be so compelling that in the end Kenshin, the chief priest of the temple on Mount Hiei, surrendered to the Nembutsu doctrine and became a disciple of Honen.

In addition to that, even persons who were not disciples of Honen began to recite the Nembutsu to Amida Buddha far more often than they paid reverence to any other Buddha, their mouths continually murmuring it, their minds constantly occupied with it, until it seemed that everyone throughout the country of Japan had become a follower of Honen.

In the past fifty years, every person within the four borders of the nation has become a follower of Honen. And if everyone has become a follower of Honen, then every person in the country of Japan is a slanderer of the Law. Now, if a thousand sons or daughters should band together to murder one parent, then all one thousand of them would be guilty of committing one of the five cardinal sins. And if one of them as a result should fall into the shell of incessant suffering, then how could the others escape the same fate?

In the end, it would seem as though Honen, angry at having been condemned to exile, turned into an evil spirit and took possession of the ruler and the priests of Mount Hiei and Onjo-ji who had earlier persecuted him and his followers, causing these persons to plot rebellion or to commit other evil acts. As a result, they were almost all destroyed by the Kamakura authorities in eastern Japan. The few priests of Mount Hiei or To-ji who managed to survive are treated with contempt by ordinary men and women. They are like performing monkeys that are laughed at by the crowd or subjugated barbarians who are despised even by children.

The men of the Zen sect, taking advantage of this situation, pronounced themselves "observers of the precepts," deceiving the eyes of the people and putting on such lofty airs that, no matter what false doctrines they presumed in their madness to put forward, these doctrines were not recognized as erroneous.

This sect called Zen claims to represent a "special transmission outside the sutras," which was not revealed by the Buddha in the numerous sutras preached during his lifetime but was whispered in secret to the Venerable Mahakashyapa. Thus the proponents of this sect maintain that, if one studies the various sutras without understanding the teachings of the Zen sect, he will be like a dog trying to bite at a clap of thunder or a monkey trying to grasp the moon’s reflection in the water.

Zen is a false doctrine that appeals to the kind of persons in Japan who have been abandoned by their fathers and mothers because of their lack of filial devotion or dismissed from service by their lords and masters because of their outrageous conduct, to young priests who are too lazy to apply themselves to their studies, and to the disreputable nature of prostitutes. Even though its followers have all embraced the precepts, they are no more than swarming locusts feeding upon the people of the nation. That is why Heaven glares down in anger and the gods of the earth shudder.

The Shingon sect is a far greater source of trouble than the other two sects I have discussed above, a major form of heresy, and I would therefore like to discuss it in outline here.

In the reign of Emperor Hsuan-tsung of the T’ang dynasty, Shan-wu-wei, Chin-kang-chih and Pu-k’ung brought the Dainichi, Kongocho and Soshitsuji sutras from India and introduced them to China. The teachings of these three sutras are very clearly set forth. If we look for the basic principle, we find that it consists in unifying the two vehicles of Learning and Realization in the one vehicle of Bodhisattva and repudiating the two vehicles to reveal the one vehicle. As far as practices go, the sect employs mudras and mantras.

Such a doctrine cannot compare even with the one vehicle of Buddhahood which is one as opposed to three, as set forth in the Kegon and Hannya sutras, nor is it even as profound as the specific teaching or the perfect teaching that preceded the Lotus Sutra, as clarified by the Tendai sect. In its basic meaning at least, it corresponds merely to the two lower types of teachings, the Tripitaka teaching and the connecting teaching.

Shan-wu-wei no doubt realized that, if he were to expound the teachings set forth in these sutras, he would be ridiculed by the men of the Kegon and Hosso sects and laughed at by those of the Tendai sect. And yet, since he had gone to all the trouble of bringing these works from India, probably he did not feel inclined simply to remain silent on the matter.

At this time there was a priest of the Tendai school called the Meditation Master I-hsing, a perverse man. Shan-wu-wei went to him and questioned him on the Buddhist doctrines taught in China. The Acharya I-hsing, deceived as to his motives, not only revealed to Shan-wu-wei the main principles of the Sanron, Hosso and Kegon doctrines, but even explained the teachings of the Tendai school to him.

Shan-wu-wei realized that the Tendai teachings were even finer than he had supposed when he had heard of them in India, and that the doctrines of the three sutras he had brought could never compete with them. But he set about to deceive I-hsing, saying, "My good priest, you are one of the cleverest men of China, and the Tendai school has a truly profound and wonderful teaching. But the Shingon school whose teachings I have brought to China excels it in the fact that it employs mudras and mantras."

I-hsing appeared to find this reasonable, and Shan-wu-wei then said to him, "Just as the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai wrote commentaries on the Lotus Sutra, so I would like to compose a commentary on the Dainichi Sutra in order to propagate the Shingon teachings. Could you write it down for me?" I-hsing replied, "That would be easy enough."

But in what way should I-hsing write? The Tendai school was unassailable, and though each of the other sects of Buddhism had competed in trying to refute its doctrines, none had gained the slightest success because of a single point. That point was the fact that in the Muryogi Sutra, an introductory teaching to the Lotus Sutra, the Buddha had declared that in the various sutras that he had preached during the previous forty years or more, he had not yet revealed the truth, thus invalidating the doctrines based upon those various sutras. And in the Hosshi and Jinriki chapters of the Lotus Sutra, the Buddha stated that no sutras that would be preached in later times could ever equal the Lotus Sutra. In the passage of the Hosshi chapter concerning the comparison of the Lotus Sutra and others preached at the same time, he also made clear the superiority of the Lotus Sutra. Therefore I-hsing asked Shan-wu-wei to which of these three categories -- the sutras preached before the Lotus Sutra, those preached contemporaneously with it, or those preached later -- the Dainichi Sutra should be assigned.

At that point, Shan-wu-wei hit upon an exceedingly cunning idea. "The Dainichi Sutra," he explained to I-hsing, "begins with a chapter called the Jushin chapter. Just as in the case of the Muryogi Sutra, which refutes all the sutras that had been preached in the previous forty or more years, this Jushin chapter invalidates all other sutras. The remaining chapters of the Dainichi Sutra, from the Nyumandara chapter through the end, became known in China in two versions, the Lotus Sutra and the Dainichi Sutra, though in India they constituted a single sutra. Shakyamuni Buddha, addressing Shariputra and Miroku, preached the Dainichi Sutra, which he called the Lotus Sutra, but he omitted the explanations of the mudras and mantras and expounded only the doctrines. This is the work that Kumarajiva introduced to China and which the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai employed. At the same time, however, Mahavairochana or Dainichi Buddha, addressing Vajrasattva or Kongosatta, preached the Lotus Sutra, which he called the Dainichi Sutra. This is the work now called the Dainichi Sutra, a work that I often saw when I was in India. Therefore I want you to explain that the Dainichi Sutra and Lotus Sutra are to be savored as works that are essentially the same in flavor, like water and milk. If you do so, then the Dainichi Sutra can stand superior to all the other sutras preached in the past present and future in the same way that the Lotus Sutra does.

"As to the mudras and mantras, if they are used to adorn the doctrine of the mind which is expressed in the term ichinen sanzen, this will constitute a secret teaching in which the three mysteries are provided. And with this doctrine containing the three mysteries, the Shingon will prove superior to the Tendai school, which speaks only of the mystery of the mind. Shingon is like a general of the first rank who dons armor slings his bow and arrows over his shoulder, and fastens a sword at his waist. But the Tendai school, with nothing but the mystery of the mind, is like a general of the first rank who is stark naked."

The Acharya I-hsing wrote all this down just as Shan-wu-wei dictated it.

Throughout the 360 states of China, there was no one who knew about this ruse. At first there were some disputes over the relative merits of the Tendai and Shingon teachings. But Shan-wu-wei was the kind of person who was able to command a great deal of respect, whereas the men of the Tendai school were regarded lightly. Moreover, at this time there were no men of wisdom such as the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai had been. Thus day by day the Tendai school lost more ground to the Shingon, and finally all debate ceased.

As more and more years have gone by, these fraudulent beginnings of the Shingon school have become completely obscured and forgotten. When the Great Teacher Dengyo of Japan went to China and returned with the teachings of the Tendai school, he also brought back the Shingon teachings. The Tendai school he recommended to the emperor of Japan but the Shingon teachings he turned over to the eminent priests of the six sects to study. Dengyo had already established the superiority of the Tendai teachings over those of the six sects before he went to China. After he came back from China he attempted to establish an ordination platform for conferring the precepts of perfect and immediate enlightenment, but this involved him in a great deal of controversy. He had many enemies and probably felt that establishing the ordination platform would be difficult enough to accomplish even if he devoted all his efforts to it. Or perhaps he felt that the refutation of the Shingon teachings should be left until the Latter Day of the Law. In any event, he did not discuss the Shingon teachings in the presence of the emperor, nor make any clear pronouncement on the matter to his disciples. However, he did leave a one-volume secret work entitled Ebyo Shu in which he describes how various priests of the seven sects were won over to the Tendai teachings. In the preface to that work, he mentions the fraudulence of the Shingon teachings.

Kobo Daishi went to China during the Enryaku era, when the Great Teacher Dengyo went. There he studied the teachings of the Shingon school under Hui-kuo of the temple called Ch’ing-lung-ssu. After returning to Japan, he pronounced judgment on the relative merits of the doctrines preached by Shakyamuni in the course of his life, declaring that the Shingon teachings ranked first, the Kegon second, and those of the Lotus Sutra third.

Kobo Daishi enjoys a quite unusual amount of respect among the people of our time. However, although I hesitate to touch on such matters, in questions of the Buddhist teaching, he committed a rather unusual number of errors. If we stop to consider the matter in general, it would appear that when he went to China, he merely learned the ritual mudras and mantras that are used by the Shingon school and introduced these to Japan. But he does not seem to have delved into the doctrines of the school to any great extent. After he returned to Japan and observed the situation at the time, he saw that the Tendai sect was flourishing to an unusual degree, and he concluded that it would be difficult to propagate the Shingon doctrines that he himself adhered to. Therefore, he adopted the viewpoint of the Kegon sect, whose doctrines he had studied earlier in Japan, declaring [as the Kegon sect does of its own teachings] that the Shingon doctrines were superior to the Lotus Sutra. But he realized that if he simply asserted the supremacy of his own sect’s teachings over the Lotus Sutra in the same manner as the Kegon sect, people would not be likely to pay much heed to his words. He consequently gave a new twist to the Kegon doctrine, declaring that his argument represented the true intent of the Dainichi Sutra, the Bodaishin Ron by Bodhisattva Nagarjuna, and the Shingon authority Shan-wu-wei, thus bolstering his position with absurd falsehoods. And yet the followers of the Tendai sect failed to speak out strongly against him.

Question: In his Jujushin Ron, Hizo Hoyaku and Ben Kemmitsu Nikyo Ron, Kobo Daishi makes such statements as: "Each vehicle that is put forward is claimed to be the true vehicle, but when examined from a later stage, they are all seen to be mere childish theory"; "[Shakyamuni Buddha] is in the region of darkness, not in the position of enlightenment"; "[The various exoteric Mahayana sutras such as the Lotus Sutra] are comparable to the fourth flavor, that of butter"; and, "The Buddhist scholars of China have vied with one another to steal the ghee of the Shingon and claim that it is the possession of their own sect." What are we to make of such statements put forth in these commentaries?

Answer: I have been greatly astonished at the statements in these commentaries and have accordingly searched through the various sutras, including the three attributed to the Buddha Dainichi. But I do not find a single word or phrase in the sutras to indicate that, in comparison to the Kegon and Dainichi sutras the Lotus Sutra is "mere childish theory," that with regard to the Rokuharamitsu Sutra T’ien-t’ai acted as a thief, or that the Shugo Sutra describes Shakyamuni Buddha as being "in the region of darkness." These are all utterly ridiculous assertions. And yet for the past three or four hundred years, a sufficiently large number of intelligent persons in Japan accepted them, so that they have now come to be looked upon as perfectly reasonable and well founded. I would like for a moment therefore to discuss some of the more patently false opinions put forth by Kobo and point out other absurdities in his thinking.

It was during the period of the Ch’en and Sui dynasties that the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai likened the Lotus Sutra to ghee the finest of the five flavors. It was some two centuries later, in the middle years of the T’ang dynasty, that the Learned Doctor Prajna translated the Rokuharamitsu Sutra and introduced it to China. Only if the Rokuharamitsu Sutra -- which places the dharani teachings in the fifth or highest category, comparing them to ghee -- had existed in China during the Ch’en and Sui dynasties would it make any sense to claim that the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai "stole the ghee of the Shingon."

A similar example exists in the case of the priest Tokuichi of Japan. He bitterly criticized the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai for rejecting the doctrine of the teachings of the three periods that is set forth in the Jimmitsu Sutra, declaring that T’ien-t’ai had used his three-inch tongue to destroy the Buddha’s five-foot body. The Great Teacher Dengyo in turn attacked Tokuichi, pointing out that the Jimmitsu Sutra was first introduced to China by Hsuan-tsang in the early decades of the T’ang dynasty. In other words, it was brought to the country a number of years after T’ien-t’ai, who lived during the Ch’en and Sui, had already passed away. How then could he have rejected a doctrine that was not introduced to China until the period after his death? Faced with such an argument, Tokuichi was not only reduced to silence, but his tongue broke into eight pieces, and he died.

But this is nothing compared to the evil accusations made by Kobo. In his writings he labels as thieves Fa-tsang of the Kegon school, Chia-hsiang of the Sanron, Hsuan-tsang of the Hosso, and T’ien-t’ai, as well as other various Buddhist leaders of northern and southern China, and in fact all the learned doctors and teachers who have lived since the time when Buddhism was first introduced to China in the Later Han.

In addition, it should be noted that likening the Lotus Sutra to ghee was by no means a comparison invented by T’ien-t’ai on his own initiative. The Buddha himself said in the Nirvana Sutra that the Lotus Sutra was like ghee, and later Bodhisattva Vasubandhu wrote that the Lotus Sutra and Nirvana Sutra were comparable to ghee. And Bodhisattva Nagarjuna terms the Lotus Sutra a "wonderful medicine." If anyone who compares the Lotus Sutra to ghee is to be labeled a thief, then are Shakyamuni, Taho and the other Buddhas of the ten directions, along with Bodhisattvas Nagarjuna and Vasubandhu, all to be branded as thieves?

Though Kobo’s disciples and the Shingon priests of To-ji temple in Japan may be so poor-sighted that they cannot distinguish black from white with their own eyes, they should trust the sight of others and recognize the misfortunes invited by their own faults! Moreover, where are the precise passages in the Dainichi and Kongocho sutras that refer to the Lotus Sutra as a "childish theory"? Let them produce them! Even if these sutras should perhaps refer to the Lotus Sutra in those terms, it may quite possibly be an error in translation. Such matters should be examined with great care and attention before they are put forward.

We are told that Confucius thought nine times before saying one word, and that Tan, the Duke of Chou, would bind up his hair three times in the course of washing it and spit out his food three times in the course of a meal in order not to keep callers waiting. Thus we see that even among the men depicted in the non-Buddhist writings who study ephemeral worldly affairs, those who are wise proceed with great caution. How then can men like Kobo be so careless and shallow in judgment in matters pertaining to the Law?

Such erroneous views of Kobo’s were handed down until they reached Shokaku-bo, the founder of the temple called Dembo-in, who stated in his Shariko Shiki: "The figure worthy of true respect is the Buddha of the Nondual Mahayana. The three-bodied donkey- or ox-Buddha is not even fit to draw his carriage. The truly profound doctrines are the teachings of the twofold mandala. The teachers of the four doctrines of the exoteric vehicles are not worthy even to tend the shoes of those who teach the mandala!"

By the teachers of the "four doctrines of the exoteric vehicles," he means those who teach the Hosso, Sanron, Kegon and Lotus Sutra doctrines, and by the "three-bodied donkey or ox Buddha," he means the Buddha of the four sutras of the Lotus, Kegon, Hannya and Jimmitsu. He is saying that this Buddha and these monks are not even worthy to act as ox-drivers or sandal-bearers for the teachers of Shingon doctrine such as Kobo or Shokaku-bo himself.

There was a man in India known as the Great Arrogant Brahman who was born with innate wisdom and was widely read. Both the exoteric and the esoteric teachings of Buddhism were stored up in his breast, and he had both the Buddhist and the non-Buddhist writings in the palm of his hand. Even the king and his ministers bowed their heads before him, and the common people looked up to him as a teacher and guide. But in the excess of his arrogance, he went so far as to make himself a dais supported by four legs representing the deities Maheshvara, Vishnu and Narayana, along with Shakyamuni Buddha, four sages whom the world holds in great honor, seating himself on it when he expounded his doctrines. He was like the Shingon priests of our time when they spread their mandala with its representations of Shakyamuni and the other various Buddhas and perform their ceremony of anointment, or like the Zen priests when they declare that the teachings of their sect represent a great Law that steps upon the head of the Buddha.

At this time there was a humble monk called the scholar Bhadraruchi who declared that the Brahman should be corrected, but neither the ruler and high ministers nor the common people would listen to such a suggestion. In the end, the Brahman charged his disciples and lay followers to go about spreading countless falsehoods and abusing and beating Bhadraruchi. But Bhadraruchi, disregarding the danger to his life, continued to denounce the Brahman until the ruler, coming to hate Bhadraruchi, arranged for him to debate with the Brahman in hopes of silencing him. Contrary to his expectations, however, the Brahman was the one defeated in the debate.

The king looked up to heaven, then threw himself upon the ground lamenting, and said, "I have been privileged to hear your words on this matter firsthand and to free myself from my erroneous views. But my father, the former king, was completely deceived by this man and by now has probably fallen into the hell of incessant suffering!" So saying, he clung to the knees of the scholar Bhadraruchi and wept in sorrow.

At Bhadraruchi’s suggestion, the Brahman was placed on the back of a donkey so that he might be led in disgrace throughout the five regions of India and shown to all. But the evil in his heart only grew stronger than ever, and in his living form he fell into the hell of incessant suffering. Was he any different from the men of the Shingon and Zen sects in the world today?

The Chinese Meditation Master San-chieh stated that the Lotus Sutra, which represents the teachings of the Buddha Shakyamuni, is a doctrine suited for the first and second stages of Buddhism, which correspond to the Former and Middle Days of the Law. For the Latter Day of the Law, however, he asserted that one should adopt the "universal teaching" that he himself had set forth. He declared that if one should try to practice the Lotus Sutra in these present times of the Latter Day of the Law, he would surely fall into the great Avichi Hell of the ten directions, because its teachings do not accord with the nature and capabilities of the people of the Latter Day.

He carried out prostration’s and penance’s at the proper hours six times each day and observed the four daily meditation periods, conducting himself like a living Buddha. Many people paid him honor and his disciples numbered more than ten thousand. But one young woman dared to recite the Lotus Sutra and to censure him for his doctrines. As a result, he lost his voice on the spot and was reborn as a huge snake that devoured a number of his disciples and lay supporters, as well as girls and young women. And now Shan-tao and Honen, with their pernicious doctrine that not one person in a thousand can be saved by the Lotus Sutra, are just like this man San-chieh.

Many years have passed now since these great sources of trouble, the Nembutsu, Zen and Shingon teachings, came into existence, and one should not underestimate their influence. But I feel that if I speak out against them in this way, there will perhaps be those who will heed my words.

And yet there is something that is more evil than these three teachings, so evil that it is countless times more difficult to believe. Though Jikaku Daishi was the third disciple of the Great Teacher Dengyo, everyone from the ruler on down to the common people believed him to be a more outstanding person than Dengyo himself. He made an exhaustive study of the teachings of the Shingon sect and of the Hokke sect, and stated in his writings that the Shingon teachings are superior to those of the Lotus Sutra. As a result, the community of priests on Mount Hiei, which numbered three thousand, as well as the Buddhist scholars in every province throughout Japan, all came to accept his opinion on this matter.

The followers of Kobo had thought that, although he was their teacher, he had perhaps gone too far when he declared the Lotus Sutra inferior to the Kegon Sutra. But when they saw that Jikaku Daishi put forth a similar opinion in his exegetical writings, they took it as an accepted fact that the Shingon teachings were indeed superior to the Lotus Sutra.

Mount Hiei, the headquarters of the Tendai sect, ought to have been the staunchest opponent to this opinion established in Japan that the Shingon teachings are superior to the Lotus Sutra. Yet Jikaku silenced the mouths of the three thousand priests of Mount Hiei and prevented them from speaking out, and as a result, the Shingon sect was able to have its way. In effect, Jikaku Daishi was the foremost ally of To-ji, the leading Shingon temple in the Kyoto area!

Though the Jodo and Zen sects may have flourished in other countries, they would never have been able to spread throughout Japan in countless kalpas if Enryaku-ji temple on Mount Hiei had not given its assent. But the priest Annen, known as the first worthy of Mount Hiei, wrote a work called the Kyojijo Ron in which he ranked the nine sects of Buddhism in the order of their superiority, placing the Shingon sect in the first place, the Zen sect in the second, the Tendai-Hokke sect in the third, the Kegon sect in the fourth, etc. Because of this egregious error in interpretation, the Zen sect has been able to spread its teachings throughout Japan, bringing the country to the brink of ruin. And Honen was able to propagate the teachings of the Jodo or Nembutsu sect and similarly imperil the nation as a result of the opinions first put forth by Eshin in the preface to his Ojo Yoshu. The Buddha tells us that the lion’s flesh will be consumed by worms within the body of the lion himself. How true are those words!

The Great Teacher Dengyo spent a period of fifteen years in Japan studying the Tendai and Shingon doctrines on his own. He was endowed by nature with a wonderful degree of understanding, and without the aid of a teacher realized the truth. But in order to dispel the doubts of the world, he journeyed to China, where he received instruction in the teachings of the Tendai and Shingon schools. The scholars in China held various opinions, but Dengyo believed in his heart that the Lotus Sutra was superior to the Shingon teachings. Therefore he did not use the word "sect" when referring to the teachings of Shingon, but simply spoke of the Shikan and Shingon practices of the Tendai sect. He decreed that two monks should be ordained each year and should spend a period of twelve years in study on Mount Hiei. In addition, he received an imperial edict designating the Lotus, Konkomyo and Ninno sutras as the three scriptures for the protection of the nation and decreeing that they be read and recited in the Shikan-in. It went on to liken these three sutras to the three treasures of the imperial household, the eternal and foremost treasures of the Japanese nation, which are the sacred jewel, the sacred sword and sacred mirror. After Dengyo’s death, the first chief priest of the Tendai sect on Mount Hiei, the priest Gishin, and the second chief priest, the Great Teacher Encho, carried on Dengyo’s intentions without any deviation.

The third chief priest, Jikaku Daishi, also went to China where he spent ten years studying the relative merits of the exoteric and esoteric teachings under eight distinguished priests. He also studied under priests of the Tendai school such as Kuang-hsiu and Wei-chuan. But in his heart he believed that the Shingon school was superior to the Tendai school. He felt that his teacher, the Great Teacher Dengyo had not gone into the matter in sufficient detail, that he had not remained for an extended period in China and hence