Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby Son of Buddha » Mon Apr 02, 2012 9:43 pm

rory wrote:Dear Son of Buddha;
if you wish to discuss Nichiren, kindly quote the text and list the gosho so we can have a fruitful conversation.

Here is Nichiren on the Lotus Sutra:

"Especially among the twenty-eight chapters the excellent and auspicious ones are the 'Chapter of Expedience' and the 'Chapter of the Measure of the Life Span.' The remaining chapters are branches and leaves. So among your constant works is to read the prose lines of the 'Chapter of Expedience' and the prose lines of the 'Chapter of the Measure of the Life Span'" (Gassui gosho, STN, v. 1, 290) (Eng: Letter on Menstruation)

This is the normal practice: chanting the prose portions of Chapter 2 and Chap 16 +daimoku that most Nichiren sects perform at their altars. We then study the Lotus Sutra.

"Manjushri said, 'in the midst of the sea I have only constantly proclaimed and preached the Sublime Dharma Flower Sutra." Ch 12 Devadatta.
http://www.buddhistdoor.com/oldweb/reso ... otus12.htm

As for your assertion that the entire Lotus Sutra is an expedient, please quote some authority, perhaps Zhiyi, or Dengyo Daishi etc, so it is just not mere opinion.
with gassho
Rory


Hey RORY

MY REPLY:Nichirens goshos
(The object of devotion for observing the mind)

"ALL the teachings other than the "1 chapter and 2 halves" are hinayana in nature and erroneous.not only do they fail to lead to enlightenment,but they also lack the truth.Those who BELIEVE in them are (A BUNCH OF NAME CALLING)(after this nichiren tears into the lotus sutra hardcore)pointing out how you should abandon every chapter other than the "1 chapter and 2 halves)

so Rory do you BELIEVE in what is written in chapter 3 of the lotus sutra???if you do look up my refernece to see what nichiren thinks about you.
do you BELIEVE that you are to get rid of ALL hinayana and ALL proovisional teachings???if so then abandon ALL of the lotus sutra as you have abandoned all the other sutras who are provisional.

nichiren clearly states that ALL the qoutes you posted from the Lotus sutra are not the truth,and are erroneous,and you should NOT BELIEVE in them and you should DISCARD them just like all the other sutras of the Lord Buddha you have already discarded.

so you can see its not my opinion but nichirens opionion.

also why do you mention the Nirvana sutra???have you ever read the nirvana sutra??which proclaims itself 100 million times greater than ALL the sutras before it(their was none behind it to say it is higher than them)
I also thought it strange when nichiren said the lotus sutra is higher than the nirvana sutra and then "made this claim" with a fabricated false made up passage he claimed was in the nirvana sutra(seriously he rewrote the entire sentence and added the words nirvana and lotus sutra)
of course nichiren members wouldnt be the wiser they just accept what he says without looking to see if he lied to you(kinda like guru yoga to the extreme??

also note the nirvana sutra and lotus sutra are equal to me(they say the same thing)
User avatar
Son of Buddha
 
Posts: 882
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby Jikan » Tue Apr 03, 2012 12:44 am

Son of Buddha wrote:of course nichiren members wouldnt be the wiser they just accept what he says without looking to see if he lied to you(kinda like guru yoga to the extreme??

also note the nirvana sutra and lotus sutra are equal to me(they say the same thing)


Hi Son of Buddha,

Question: would you please elaborate on what you mean by guru yoga here? We all have a sense of how guru yoga works in Vajrayana, but I'm trying to understand how you mean it so I can get a handle on your response to rory and your approach to followers of Nichiren generally.

Unrelated to that but apropos of the other comment quoted above: if you haven't already, check out what Chih-i (Zhiyi) had to say about the Lotus Sutra and the Mahaparinirvana Sutra (Nehankyō).
Jikan
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5162
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby rory » Tue Apr 03, 2012 4:28 am

Son of Buddha;
thank you with your posting of the gosho I can explain to you what you misunderstand. Or rather Professor J. Stone of Princeton can, I'm quoting from "Original Enlghtenment and the Transformation of Medieval Japanese Buddhism" p. 24

"The first fourteen chapters called the "trace teaching" (shakumon) present the Buddha as "manifest trace" (suijaku) or historical appearance, while the latter fourteen chapters , called the "origin teaching" (honmon) present him in his original ground (honji) as the Buddha who first attained enlightenment in the inconceivably remote past. "

So what Nichiren is saying is that the previous emphasis by the Chinese T'ien T'ai school on the trace teaching & the historical buddha who became enlightened under the Bo tree is absolutely wrong and all emphasis should be put on the Eternal Buddha, Shakaymuni, who was enlightened in the remote past. This is a normative scholarly understanding of what Nichiren states in Kanjin Honzon Sho.

As for the Nirvana Sutra and the Lotus Sutra, as Jikan so rightly says the great master Zhiyi discussed this!
http://bhoffert.faculty.noctrl.edu/HST3 ... antai.html

Please post the fabricated claim with gosho reference; then we can discuss this. Here are some good free articles by Prof Stone on Nichiren Buddhism and the Lotus Sutra to improve your understanding.
http://www.princeton.edu/~jstone/lotus- ... hiren.html
with gassho
Rory
Dharani of Amoghapasa Avalokitesvara:

Om amogha-padma-pasa-krodhakarsaya praveshaya maha-pashupati-yama-varuna-kuvera
brahma-vesa-dhara padma-kula-samayan hum hum

heart mantra: Om amogha vijaya hum phat
User avatar
rory
 
Posts: 690
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 8:08 am
Location: SouthEast USA

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby Son of Buddha » Wed Apr 04, 2012 7:05 am

Jikan wrote:
Son of Buddha wrote:of course nichiren members wouldnt be the wiser they just accept what he says without looking to see if he lied to you(kinda like guru yoga to the extreme??

also note the nirvana sutra and lotus sutra are equal to me(they say the same thing)


Hi Son of Buddha,

Question: would you please elaborate on what you mean by guru yoga here? We all have a sense of how guru yoga works in Vajrayana, but I'm trying to understand how you mean it so I can get a handle on your response to rory and your approach to followers of Nichiren generally.

Unrelated to that but apropos of the other comment quoted above: if you haven't already, check out what Chih-i (Zhiyi) had to say about the Lotus Sutra and the Mahaparinirvana Sutra (Nehankyō).

Jikan wrote:
Son of Buddha wrote:of course nichiren members wouldnt be the wiser they just accept what he says without looking to see if he lied to you(kinda like guru yoga to the extreme??

also note the nirvana sutra and lotus sutra are equal to me(they say the same thing)


Hi Son of Buddha,

Question: would you please elaborate on what you mean by guru yoga here? We all have a sense of how guru yoga works in Vajrayana, but I'm trying to understand how you mean it so I can get a handle on your response to rory and your approach to followers of Nichiren generally.

Unrelated to that but apropos of the other comment quoted above: if you haven't already, check out what Chih-i (Zhiyi) had to say about the Lotus Sutra and the Mahaparinirvana Sutra (Nehankyō).


HEY JIKAN

the guru yoga nudge was actually to state hypocricy,you see rory(and her friend) claimed that guru yoga was false religion,and many followers were hurt by following the extreme orders of their teachers.
I was simply pointing out that their is no real difference in the extremes they go to defend their teacher and his orders,from the guru yoga they are trying to speak bad about
(follwoing the INFALIBALE word of nichiren is guru yoga if I ever saw it) and passed to the extreme of guru yoga
also note im not a Vajarayana practictioner just showing how you cant say guru yoga is wrong then say nichiren is INFALIABLE and think their is really any difference.

as far as chihi-i and what he said about the lotus sutra and mahaparinirvana sutra I cant find anything on it send me something in my personel box to read on it,I have heard that nichiren is qouteing him with the fake passage from the nirvana sutra if this is true the chihi-i would also be guilty of altering the dharma and taking sentences out of context as nichiren was found of doing.

the FAKE nirvana sutra verses I am talking about is when they say after the Lotus sutra was expounded only the gleanings were left for the nirvana sutra,look up the verse tell me if it even mentions the lotus sutra or the nirvana sutra in it.(hint these words are added to the context not found in the actual nirvana sutra passage)and what is the context?
User avatar
Son of Buddha
 
Posts: 882
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby Son of Buddha » Wed Apr 04, 2012 7:21 am

[quote="rory"]Son of Buddha;
thank you with your posting of the gosho I can explain to you what you misunderstand. Or rather Professor J. Stone of Princeton can, I'm quoting from "Original Enlghtenment and the Transformation of Medieval Japanese Buddhism" p. 24

"The first fourteen chapters called the "trace teaching" (shakumon) present the Buddha as "manifest trace" (suijaku) or historical appearance, while the latter fourteen chapters , called the "origin teaching" (honmon) present him in his original ground (honji) as the Buddha who first attained enlightenment in the inconceivably remote past. "

So what Nichiren is saying is that the previous emphasis by the Chinese T'ien T'ai school on the trace teaching & the historical buddha who became enlightened under the Bo tree is absolutely wrong and all emphasis should be put on the Eternal Buddha, Shakaymuni, who was enlightened in the remote past. This is a normative scholarly understanding of what Nichiren states in Kanjin Honzon Sho.

As for the Nirvana Sutra and the Lotus Sutra, as Jikan so rightly says the great master Zhiyi discussed this!



MY REPLY:Nichirens goshos
(The object of devotion for observing the mind)

"ALL the teachings other than the "1 chapter and 2 halves" are hinayana in nature and erroneous.not only do they fail to lead to enlightenment,but they also lack the truth.Those who BELIEVE in them are (A BUNCH OF NAME CALLING)(after this nichiren tears into the lotus sutra hardcore)pointing out how you should abandon every chapter other than the "1 chapter and 2 halves)

RORY nothing you said refutes this,nichiren is telling you to abandon all the chapters of the Lotus sutra except the 16th chapter and the 2 halves,if you BELEIVE in the other chapters of the lotus sutra nichiren calls you alot of names(not nice ones)

face the truth chapter 3 which you qoute IN NICHIRENS OWN WORDS are hinayana in nature(provisional) erroneous and lack the TRUTH,and you shouldnt BELEIVE in chapter 3 and if you do nichiren says you are *********************************.

so please dont tel others to ABANDON the other sutras cause they are PROVISIONAL when you are not willing to ABANDON the lotus sutra chapters that NICHIREN said are hinayana and to be ABANDONED because they are PROVISIONAL and NOT the TRUTH and you shouldnt BELEIVE in them.

what you sent me had nothing to do with the conversation at all nor does it allow you to ignore nichirens writings and chose to use the writings of some other guy to refute ur teachers own goshos.(nor did thats guys writings do either)PROF STONE is ignoreing commandments from nichiren tgo abandon all the lotus sutra other than the 1 chapter and 2 halves,the truth is plain to see why cant you admit it??

QUESTION FOR YOU(1) DO YOU BELEIVE IN CHAPTER 3 what does nichiren say about this??
(2)second question why abandon the other sutras that are not the truth and Hinayana in nature(PROVISIONAL) yet keep the other parts of the lotus sutra that is PROVISIONAL and intentionally disobey nichiren??
(3)if chapter 3 says to not follow other sutras and nichiren says chapter 3 is not the truth and erroneous and to NOT BELEIVE in it then why are you telling other people to not follow other suras(makes no sense)

sorry I dont have the quote on hand only a faint memory of the writings,although the qoute nichiren uses from the nirvana sutra doesnt exists i will try to look it up when i get the time and show how it is false.
User avatar
Son of Buddha
 
Posts: 882
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby Son of Buddha » Wed Apr 04, 2012 7:31 am

As for the Nirvana Sutra and the Lotus Sutra, as Jikan so rightly says the great master Zhiyi discussed this!
http://bhoffert.faculty.noctrl.edu/HST3 ... antai.html

Please post the fabricated claim with gosho reference; then we can discuss this. Here are some good free articles by Prof Stone on Nichiren Buddhism and the Lotus Sutra to improve your understanding.
http://www.princeton.edu/~jstone/lotus- ... hiren.html
with gassho
Rory[/quote]

MY REPLY this is a continuance on my last message to you,the website you sent me didnt have master zhiyi discusion anything concering the lotus sutra being higher then the mahaparinirvana sutra,again I have only found one qoute used and it has words added to it not the original posting and is out of context please anyone feel welcome to show me what chapter in the nirvana sutra that is says the Lotus sutra is higher thjan it??please track down the passage used by nichiren or master zhiyi and show me where it is in the nirvana sutra and if it even says the same thing that you re qouteing;)
User avatar
Son of Buddha
 
Posts: 882
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby Aemilius » Wed Apr 04, 2012 9:48 am

To Son of Buddha
There is a whole chapter about the qualities of the preacher of the Lotus sutra, Chapter XIII Peaceful Life (in Kern's translation). As we can expect it stresses very much patience on the part of the preacher, and says that he should preach it without expecting anything ( from the listeners presumably). This means that the Sutra itself, or Shakyamuni as its preacher, doesn't allow or encourage any kind of bad behaviour on the part of the preacher of the sutra, but teaches the exact opposite. So You can now drop the use of vulgar expressions about Your friends and comrades in the Dharma of the Buddha. Somewhere in the end part of the Sutra Shakyamuni further says that if people don't want to hear the Lotus, you can then teach them other doctrines! You could apply this principle too, and be a real good follower of the Lotus.

with best wishes!
svaha
User avatar
Aemilius
 
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby Aemilius » Wed Apr 04, 2012 10:01 am

Kern's transalation of Chaper XIII Peaceful Life http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/lotus/lot13.htm
Verse 40. says: "He should never speak a disparaging word of anybody; never engage in a dispute on religious belief; never say to such as are guilty of shortcomings, You will not obtain superior knowledge."
svaha
User avatar
Aemilius
 
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby UniversalWorthy » Wed Apr 04, 2012 1:01 pm

Aemilius, thanks for bringing that point up about Never Disparaging. Please note that certain Nichirenist sectarians will then say "oh, never disparaging is not appropriate for this age" or something to that effect. There will be an answer for everything. They cling to a type of reading of the sutra that is locked into the context of other times and places.
UniversalWorthy
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 5:06 pm

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby rory » Fri Apr 06, 2012 3:48 am

UWorthy, Aemilius; Son of Buddha is I think a Pure Lander, he's not a Nichiren buddhist. I'm glad you liked that thread on Sutras 'must we take them literally' The Lotus Sutra is pretty clear about parables such as the "burning house", "magic city" etc but the Eternal Buddha in chapter 16 isn't presented as a story rather reality. As for Ikeda, well he substitutes his opinions for the Sutra, Nichiren, Zhiyi, Saicho etc...not a good sign, which is why I stick to the classics :smile:


I do agree about politeness and civility. In my school only the priests must do shakubuku. Laypeople like me are supposed to be studious and pious. I try to be both and when in a forum discuss things in a rational and thoughtful and peaceful manner.

Actually I read and take the view too that Never Disparaging did forceful shakubuku as he made people so angry and never stopped! After the 5th person getting furious and physical you know very well you're upsetting people and have the choice to stop or continue. Bodhisattva Fukyo continued. Something to think about.

As for forceful shakubuku there is precedent in the Sutra: From chapter 3 The Parable of the Burning House
If there be those who don�t believe,
And who slander this Sutra,
They thereby sever all
Worldly Buddha seeds.
Or if, with a scowl,
They harbor doubts and delusions
You should listen now,
As I sepak of their offense-retribution:
Whether a Buddha is in the world,
Or has entered into extinction.
If there be those who slander
A Sutra such as this one,
Who, seeing others read or recite it,
Copy it out or uphold it,
Scorn, despise, hate and envy them,
And harbor grudges against them,
As to their offense retribution,
Listen now, once again:
These people at life�s end
Will enter the Avichi hell
For an entire aeon.
At the aeon�s end, born there again,
http://www.buddhistdoor.com/oldweb/reso ... lotus3.htm
as always
big gassho
Rory
Dharani of Amoghapasa Avalokitesvara:

Om amogha-padma-pasa-krodhakarsaya praveshaya maha-pashupati-yama-varuna-kuvera
brahma-vesa-dhara padma-kula-samayan hum hum

heart mantra: Om amogha vijaya hum phat
User avatar
rory
 
Posts: 690
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 8:08 am
Location: SouthEast USA

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby Dechen Norbu » Fri Apr 06, 2012 4:55 pm

To Illaraza
You seem very ill informed about what is and what isn't Guru Yoga.
Such prejudice, and lack of common sense, will not be taken kindly, so I ask you to be more mindful when you post, respecting the fact that you share this board with people who think highly about the Guru Yoga practice. It's not a religion and it can't be seen like that under any light. There's simply no way to put it like that.

Jikan was very polite and soft. I will be more blunt as it seems things are escalating. If I keep seeing the sort of prejudice based on misinformation, personal issues, ill will and what not, that I'm seeing so far, disciplinary action will be taken.
User avatar
Dechen Norbu
 
Posts: 2798
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2011 6:50 pm

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby rory » Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:56 pm

Dechen Norbu;
I read all Illaraza's posts; he's a good dharma friend. He supported all posts with quotes from either Nichiren or the Lotus Sutra, the last sentence he wrote about Guru Yoga, was without accompanying text but Nichiren Daishonin was very harsh about Shingon, Japanese tantra and other sects.
Here are quotes from his authoritative writings gosho

althought nourishing the monks of the various sects of the Tendai, Shingon, and others of the present age outwardly appears, indeed, to be good roots, inwardly it is a great evil surpassing even the Ten Evils and Five Rebellious [Sins] Chie bokoku gosho STN, v. 2 1130

only one should exclude and put away the blasphemous offerings of those of the Shingon, Zen Sect, Nembutsu and so on. For example, they are like adhering to and reverencing the Emperor Shakra while exalting and esteeming the asuras Jomyo Shonin gohenhi, STN v. 2 1300


Jikan isn't a Nichiren Buddhist; he belongs to Tendai. Some Nichiren buddhists practice shakubuku; some don't. It is a long historical part of our tradition. If Illaraza had gone to the Vajrayana boards and posted this I could understand the upset. But it was here & perfectly in accord with Nichiren Daishonin.
with gassho
Rory
Dharani of Amoghapasa Avalokitesvara:

Om amogha-padma-pasa-krodhakarsaya praveshaya maha-pashupati-yama-varuna-kuvera
brahma-vesa-dhara padma-kula-samayan hum hum

heart mantra: Om amogha vijaya hum phat
User avatar
rory
 
Posts: 690
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 8:08 am
Location: SouthEast USA

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby Jikan » Fri Apr 06, 2012 9:30 pm

It's true that Nichiren was critical of the esoteric practices of his time. If he made any particular comments on the Tibetan practice of guru yoga (the object of Illaraza's comments), it's clear that Illaraza isn't aware of them.

The main issue: some modes of discourse that were useful skillful means to Nichiren in his time are not particularly convincing in this venue and may contravene the TOS of this site. I think that's Dechen Norbu's larger point.
Jikan
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5162
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby Aemilius » Thu Apr 12, 2012 10:32 am

I just wanted to correct one little thing, which is: Bodhisattva Never Despise occurs in Chapter 20.
Chapter 13. is about the Preacher of the Lotus Sutra and it is called The Peaceful Life. They are two different things in different chapters of the Lotus.

Thank You!
svaha
User avatar
Aemilius
 
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby rory » Fri Apr 13, 2012 8:12 pm

Jikan; I suggest you read R. Davidson's "Indian Esoteric Buddhism: a social history of the tantric movement" ; we read it in my seminar a while back and you will understand that Tibetan tantra and Japanese tantra spring from the same source in India. Shingon and Tendai esoteric practices are indeed similar to Tibetan ones except Japan doesn't have the highest yoga tantra. And you must obey your sensei in these two sects as a disciple; he/she is not viewed just as a teacher as in most Japanese schools. So let's be clear and use some support; otherwise it's just all opinion and we can go to the Lounge.

To say 'things were different in Nichiren's day' means nothing. Things were different 100 years ago, 50 years ago. For Nichiren Buddhists we'd say; this is still Mappo and nothing has changed; the Dharma is always true.
gassho
Rory
ps please don't speak for what Illaraza means or thinks unless you chat with him and truly know what him. I am his dharma friend and we do correspond regularly.
Dharani of Amoghapasa Avalokitesvara:

Om amogha-padma-pasa-krodhakarsaya praveshaya maha-pashupati-yama-varuna-kuvera
brahma-vesa-dhara padma-kula-samayan hum hum

heart mantra: Om amogha vijaya hum phat
User avatar
rory
 
Posts: 690
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 8:08 am
Location: SouthEast USA

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby UniversalWorthy » Fri Apr 13, 2012 9:26 pm

Rory,

I'm not sure there was any disagreement about whether or not Shingon and Tibetan tantric practices both sprung from the same Vajrayana tradition (including, of course, the Indian tantric practices and guru-yoga, etc...)

Nichiren, in his time, in a country that was considered actively buddhist, was calling out Shingon teachers because many of the teachings were altered (by early Shingon patriarchs) to reflect the inclusion of very specific insights into doctrines where they might not have been originally. So, Nichiren accuses Shingon of stealing the 'ghee' of the Lotus Sutra (ichinen sanzen) for their own 'power/authority.'

As I have stated before, I've never questioned or disrespected the words and actions of Nichiren in his time. It was necessary for him to do so in order to maintain a more truthful connection to the pure practices. However, Japan was full of strife and internal battles (literal battles) between various schools at that time. Surely, Nichiren wasn't writing letters of remonstration and spreading the teachings just because he didn't care for or like other teachings or would have outlawed the practices of other sects or even other faiths if he could. Are you saying that?

If you are saying that, are you saying that we should do that today, outlaw other religions and practices? just because you don't like, understand, or have experienced the common connections between all faiths? Do you speak for Nichiren?

gassho
UniversalWorthy
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 5:06 pm

Re: Nichiren's interpretation of the Pure Land

Postby Jikan » Sat Apr 14, 2012 4:59 pm

rory wrote:Jikan; I suggest you read R. Davidson's "Indian Esoteric Buddhism: a social history of the tantric movement" ; we read it in my seminar a while back and you will understand that Tibetan tantra and Japanese tantra spring from the same source in India. Shingon and Tendai esoteric practices are indeed similar to Tibetan ones except Japan doesn't have the highest yoga tantra. And you must obey your sensei in these two sects as a disciple; he/she is not viewed just as a teacher as in most Japanese schools. So let's be clear and use some support; otherwise it's just all opinion and we can go to the Lounge.

To say 'things were different in Nichiren's day' means nothing. Things were different 100 years ago, 50 years ago. For Nichiren Buddhists we'd say; this is still Mappo and nothing has changed; the Dharma is always true.
gassho
Rory
ps please don't speak for what Illaraza means or thinks unless you chat with him and truly know what him. I am his dharma friend and we do correspond regularly.


Yes, everyone knows that mikkyo and Tibetan Vajrayana spring from the same source in India. That's irrelevant to the point I was making. Are the comments on "guru yoga" in this thread directed toward a contemporary Japanese practice, or a contemporary Tibetan one? In context, it seems to many of us that it's intended to disparage a Tibetan practice. As you say, users (not just Illaraza) are responsible for their own comments, and are free to clarify them. That said, it's a public forum. Comments are subject to interpretation as in any conversation.
Jikan
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5162
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm

Previous

Return to Nichiren

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: markatex and 6 guests

>