The acceptability of "Nam"

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby Queequeg » Wed Jun 18, 2014 3:55 am

Masaru wrote:Just as he distinguished the two chants previously in the letter, Nichiren again makes it clear that the daimoku must be read properly using the Nipponized Chinese, emphasizing that to do otherwise is not in the spirit of the Buddhist tradition of "Bodhisattva Vasubandhu and the Great Teacher T'ien-t'ai" or of himself. Here we see that Nichiren is careful, but firm, in correcting a devout follower of some standing. He does not explicitly mention using a mangled form of the daimoku as it was not an issue at the time, but his strict stance of correct enunciation is evident.



You're not serious, are you?
Queequeg
 
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby Queequeg » Wed Jun 18, 2014 6:10 am

Masaru, I love you, but kidding or not, I've got to set this straight because people are going to come along who don't know enough to judge what you wrote.

You do understand, when you write "Nichiren again makes it clear that the daimoku must be read properly using the Nipponized Chinese," that there is no basis for you to make this claim. First, I don't even know what "Nipponized Chinese" is. I don't care, but I would caution that some people might take offense at this. But, to the point, there is no way to know for sure how 南無妙法蓮華経 should be read. You also understand that Zhiyi (Tientai) didn't speak Japanese, let alone a Nipponized Chinese - he spoke Chinese. Japan was barely known to his world, if at all. Vasubandhu spoke some ancient North Indian dialect. China was barely known to his world except as some distant land that merchants traveled to, and I don't think Japan was known at all. Neither Zhiyi nor Vasubandhu recited 南無妙法蓮華経 in Nipponized Chinese. Vasubandhu would have recited it in Sanskrit, if anything - Namas Sadharmapundarikasutra - or something like that. If anything, this whole passage undermines any argument for some orthodox reading of 南無妙法蓮華経.
Queequeg
 
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby Myoho-Nameless » Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:38 am

Masaru wrote:
Myoho-Nameless wrote:French


I looked into it. Apparently it's some kind of Latin based pidgin which still has native speakers in Europe, and, like Basque, in other places where those people have emigrated. It's still a living language (?) and has some historical value.

sacré bleu!

Well, speaking of speaking, for this discussion we should remember that "decay is inherent in all composite things", or otherwise that the nature of all things is change. I have said it already that there might a very real possibility that neither what we pronounce as nam or namu is precisely what the people in 1200s Japan would have spoken. I do not know. Granted perhaps its not "Japanese", the reading of chinese characters this way, or perhaps it is considered Japanese, granted this might be more set in stone than spoken Japanese, but we don't know.

To demonstrate, we will take something more intimate for us all here, or most of us, Before the French speaking Normans came in 1066, and the Vikings in 793, "our" language looked something like this http://ang.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iapan

and sounded something like this



The 1200s were some time ago, who knows how Nichiren chanted daimoku and recited the Sutras?
I seem to have been like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.

- Sir Isaac Newton
User avatar
Myoho-Nameless
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 8:00 am
Location: Cascadia. Washington State, USA.

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby Masaru » Thu Jun 19, 2014 4:40 am

Queequeg wrote:If anything, this whole passage undermines any argument for some orthodox reading of 南無妙法蓮華経.


Oh no, Nichiren knew. He knew who spoke what languages from the extensive study of all of the Buddhist scriptures that he made. While speaking to a layperson, he humored their ignorance and simply insisted upon the correct way of chanting by emphasizing the link to Buddhist masters of the past and making it clear that there exist only one correct way to enunciate the daikoku with a correct spirit. Nichiren even hints at this in the text of the letter by stating that are more complex reasons for the admonishment he has given than what the recipient would understand.

Queequeg wrote:Masaru, I love you, but kidding or not, I've got to set this straight because people are going to come along who don't know enough to judge what you wrote.

You do understand, when you write "Nichiren again makes it clear that the daimoku must be read properly using the Nipponized Chinese," that there is no basis for you to make this claim. First, I don't even know what "Nipponized Chinese" is.


I'm only repeating what Nichiren said; simply delivering the message we were given. I can't be held responsible for the contents of the message, but if I should be pelted with tiles and beaten with staves merely for accurately conveying the instructions of master Nichiren, I guess that it was to be expected. I want to look up and say, "Et tu? Et tu, Queequeg?" But my only concern is delivering the correct message about the central aspect of correct Buddhist practice.

I'm perfectly fine. Don't be concerned with me. No. Worry only for the fate of the poor Buddha "Mu," who has been lopped in half by warped daimoku. He looks up at you with imploring eyes to ask, "When? When will you give me back my legs to walk the Earth and bring the true doctrine to all?" But so many, calloused by the warped obstinacy of heresy turn a blind eye as they run over his legs with racecar daimoku, whirling around the wheel of samsara like demonic Dale Earnhardt Jr.s fueled on by self aggrandizement and cheap lattes.

I state these things not to be some kind of contrarian joy-kill but because good medicine is always bitter to taste! I say them because they are true. And if loving the truth is wrong, I don't wanna be right.

...Of course I mean on-yomi by "Nipponized Chinese."
A certain man said to the priest Shungaku, "The Lotus Sutra Sect's character is not good because it's so fearsome." Shungaku replied, "It is by reason of its fearsome character that it is the Lotus Sutra Sect. If its character were not so, it would be a different sect altogether."
-- The Hagakure

Image
User avatar
Masaru
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 3:10 am

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby Myoho-Nameless » Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:18 am

I am very much tempted to vow to only use "nam" for the rest of my life out of spite for this gross exercise in stupidity....alas, spite is seldom a good frame of mind from which to make decisions.

"Warped Daimoku"?

You do realize that newbies will read this topic right?

To all you scathnams, the Buddha "mu" has not gone anywhere if you pronounce it "nam".
I seem to have been like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.

- Sir Isaac Newton
User avatar
Myoho-Nameless
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 8:00 am
Location: Cascadia. Washington State, USA.

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby Namu Butsu » Thu Jun 19, 2014 11:39 am

I think Nichiren Buddhist sects would be interesting if it were not for all the bickering and fighting. It seems like wherever you find Nichiren Buddhists, they are arguing amongst themselves. I am sure many other sects do it as well, but it seems to be rampant amongst Nichiren Buddhists. Its sad, but it is what it is.
Image
"Just say the nembutsu and be liberated" Shinran Shonin
"However hard it may be to bid farewell to this world, when the conditions that bind us to this saha [samsara] realm run out, we are powerless to do anything as the final hour arrives and we are swept away to that Land." -A Record in Lament of Divergences
User avatar
Namu Butsu
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:30 pm

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby nichirenista » Thu Jun 19, 2014 12:24 pm

Queequeg wrote a while ago that the argumentativeness found among Nichiren Buddhists stems from something in the denomination known as "Shakubuku." It's the practice of trying to win other Buddhists to the Nichiren Buddhist path; something that apparently has not happened with you…. lol
User avatar
nichirenista
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 7:24 am

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby Myoho-Nameless » Thu Jun 19, 2014 6:49 pm

I would rather we bicker than be violent, like other sects have been towards each other.
I seem to have been like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.

- Sir Isaac Newton
User avatar
Myoho-Nameless
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 8:00 am
Location: Cascadia. Washington State, USA.

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby Queequeg » Fri Jun 20, 2014 3:46 am

nichirenista wrote:Queequeg wrote a while ago that the argumentativeness found among Nichiren Buddhists stems from something in the denomination known as "Shakubuku." It's the practice of trying to win other Buddhists to the Nichiren Buddhist path; something that apparently has not happened with you…. lol


Just a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

So, there's an elephant in a room. Three blind people walk in. They each grab onto the first thing they encounter. "Its a wall. There's a wall in the middle of the room." Another says, "No, there's a tree. A tree is growing here." and the third says, "Your both fing nuts. Its just a rope." They then proceed to bicker and then all storm out in different directions.

There is a reason only monk disciples were charged with carrying out shakubuku while unlearned laymen were only asked to support the monks.

'm only repeating what Nichiren said


No. You're not. You're offering the opinion of Masaru.

From this:
Though reciting the words Namu-ichijō-myōten amounts to the same thing, it would be better if you just chanted Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, as Bodhisattva Vasubandhu and the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai did. There are specific reasons why I say this.


You get this:
While speaking to a layperson, he humored their ignorance and simply insisted upon the correct way of chanting by emphasizing the link to Buddhist masters of the past and making it clear that there exist only one correct way to enunciate the daikoku with a correct spirit. Nichiren even hints at this in the text of the letter by stating that are more complex reasons for the admonishment he has given than what the recipient would understand.


"Namu Ichijo Myoten" is not the Daimoku. It is an exclamation of devotion to the one vehicle [of the Lotus Sutra]. The Daimoku is the Daimoku; there is no phonetic notation of the Daimoku. But the point is, the spirit is the same. The words are different. Nonetheless Its better to chant the words 南無妙法蓮華経 as Tientai and Vasubandhu chanted. Which were not in Japanese. So, if pronunciation is so important, how did Tientai and Vasubandhu get it right?

Don't mistake getting pelted with rotten tomatoes for playing a buffoon with getting pelted with tiles for reading the sutra with your body.

For those who want to read the whole letter for themselves, here.
Queequeg
 
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby nichirenista » Fri Jun 20, 2014 7:55 am

Queequeg wrote:
nichirenista wrote:
Just a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

So, there's an elephant in a room. Three blind people walk in. They each grab onto the first thing they encounter. "Its a wall. There's a wall in the middle of the room." Another says, "No, there's a tree. A tree is growing here." and the third says, "Your both fing nuts. Its just a rope." They then proceed to bicker and then all storm out in different directions.

There is a reason only monk disciples were charged with carrying out shakubuku while unlearned laymen were only asked to support the monks.


Interesting. Care to elaborate?
User avatar
nichirenista
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 7:24 am

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby Queequeg » Fri Jun 20, 2014 3:10 pm

One of the first words my son learned was 'cat.' Why? Because we have a cat. For a while, when we saw a dog he'd say 'cat!' When we went to the zoo, the panda was a cat, so was the seal. When he saw the elephant, it was 'wooooooooohhhh! Cat!'

I think anyone who has studied a subject observes a similar tendency in themselves. In the beginning, everything conforms to some basic rules. As time goes on, we learn about exceptions to rules and learn to recognize distinctions with increasing subtlety. Our views become richer and more nuanced. The world is actually more detailed and infused with more meaning.

Its the same thing with Buddha dharma. A lay person doesn't necessarily appreciate the difference in Nagarjuna's sunyata and the tripitaka teaching on Anatman, but a learned Buddhist scholar can recognize the difference (and similarity) and explain it, discuss it, debate it etcetera.

When Nichiren sent his monk disciples out, they were trained in how to engage adherents of other traditions beyond just proclaiming like a parrot "Lotus Sutra is Best! Your teachings are bunk!" Look at his writings and notice the different messages he sent depending on the recipient. Lay persons are encouraged to have unwavering faith, culminating in the example of the Atsuhara farmers. Monk disciples are trained to be extremely circumscribed and disciplined in their engagement with others. There are a few exceptions - Shijo Kingo, a learned lay person, was instructed on how to respond to his lord, but that instruction was limited.

Anyway, whenour knowledge is limited, we ought to be careful concerning our convictions. The Buddha criticized faith that was too biased and marked by attachment to articles that are not based in personal knowledge. Take notice that faith taught in the Lotus Sutra is adhimukti, a very subtle movement in the mind recognizing some dharma but before the mind can form a conception about it. It is open, as compared to faith that is marked by exclusiveness.
Queequeg
 
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby Masaru » Fri Jun 20, 2014 10:54 pm

Queequeg wrote:The Daimoku is the Daimoku; there is no phonetic notation of the Daimoku. But the point is, the spirit is the same. The words are different. Nonetheless Its better to chant the words 南無妙法蓮華経 as Tientai and Vasubandhu chanted. Which were not in Japanese. So, if pronunciation is so important, how did Tientai and Vasubandhu get it right?


Hmm.. By simply enunciating every syllable carefully and accurately.

But I have a question for you. Of course, the Lotus Sutra says "again and again they will be banished," and certainly I have been scorned here by those who do not want their eyes opened to the truth of the incontrovertible facts that I have humbly proffered, repeated practically verbatim from Master Nichiren's own lips... Likely, this is the work of the Devil King...

...

But, consider this. The object of devotion is given the honorific title "Go" in its name, as it is considered to be both venerable and alive, as are Master Nichiren's epistle's, which we refer to as "Go-sho." Even if it is true that Namu Ichiden Myoden is not another reading of the daimoku, as you say, and which makes sense given that he distinguishes the two chants clearly, this only means that Nichiren never addressed the phenomenon of variant enunciation. It is possible that he never encountered the issue, and, given the age in which he lived, it is likely that only the educated were aware of on-yomi and, thus, no variation had developed - if any ever did. But even if the on-yomi readings were less standardized then than now, it is still significant that we are dealing with a venerable title - O-daimoku.

Rory compared the elision to the way we use contractions in English. But in English, "are not" is formal, "aren't" is informal. Why then, when chanting the title of the most venerable and profound teaching in all of the universe, would you use a relaxed form rather than the proper form? If you know something is wrong, why do it anyway? Why, O Queequeg, do we trample the legs of "Mu" like so many supersonic, flesh eating demon piglets that were raised in a spiritual barn racing on a highway to hell?

:pig:

It is as if the firmaments of the various heavens had collapsed, the earth opened up and everyone fallen into the 3 evil paths!
A certain man said to the priest Shungaku, "The Lotus Sutra Sect's character is not good because it's so fearsome." Shungaku replied, "It is by reason of its fearsome character that it is the Lotus Sutra Sect. If its character were not so, it would be a different sect altogether."
-- The Hagakure

Image
User avatar
Masaru
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 3:10 am

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby nichirenista » Sat Jun 21, 2014 12:05 am

Thank you for the response. Just to be clear, I never advocated the use of "Shakubuku." I simply quoted from an earlier post of yours where you attributed the argumentativeness found in Nichiren Buddhism to the practice of Shakubuku.


Queequeg wrote:One of the first words my son learned was 'cat.' Why? Because we have a cat. For a while, when we saw a dog he'd say 'cat!' When we went to the zoo, the panda was a cat, so was the seal. When he saw the elephant, it was 'wooooooooohhhh! Cat!'

I think anyone who has studied a subject observes a similar tendency in themselves. In the beginning, everything conforms to some basic rules. As time goes on, we learn about exceptions to rules and learn to recognize distinctions with increasing subtlety. Our views become richer and more nuanced. The world is actually more detailed and infused with more meaning.

Its the same thing with Buddha dharma. A lay person doesn't necessarily appreciate the difference in Nagarjuna's sunyata and the tripitaka teaching on Anatman, but a learned Buddhist scholar can recognize the difference (and similarity) and explain it, discuss it, debate it etcetera.

When Nichiren sent his monk disciples out, they were trained in how to engage adherents of other traditions beyond just proclaiming like a parrot "Lotus Sutra is Best! Your teachings are bunk!" Look at his writings and notice the different messages he sent depending on the recipient. Lay persons are encouraged to have unwavering faith, culminating in the example of the Atsuhara farmers. Monk disciples are trained to be extremely circumscribed and disciplined in their engagement with others. There are a few exceptions - Shijo Kingo, a learned lay person, was instructed on how to respond to his lord, but that instruction was limited.

Anyway, whenour knowledge is limited, we ought to be careful concerning our convictions. The Buddha criticized faith that was too biased and marked by attachment to articles that are not based in personal knowledge. Take notice that faith taught in the Lotus Sutra is adhimukti, a very subtle movement in the mind recognizing some dharma but before the mind can form a conception about it. It is open, as compared to faith that is marked by exclusiveness.
User avatar
nichirenista
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 7:24 am

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby Queequeg » Sat Jun 21, 2014 6:25 pm

Masaru wrote:
Hmm.. By simply enunciating every syllable carefully and accurately.

But I have a question for you. Of course, the Lotus Sutra says "again and again they will be banished," and certainly I have been scorned here by those who do not want their eyes opened to the truth of the incontrovertible facts that I have humbly proffered, repeated practically verbatim from Master Nichiren's own lips... Likely, this is the work of the Devil King...


The incontrovertible fact here is that you are making assertions far beyond your actual knowledge, and the shame is that you don't seem to know it. This leads you to make buffonish comments about how your treatment here is some noble martyrdom. You're being treated this way because you're accusing people of being wrong when you have no basis to ground such claims aside from your ignorance.

Or you do know and you're a troll.

But, consider this. The object of devotion is given the honorific title "Go" in its name, as it is considered to be both venerable and alive, as are Master Nichiren's epistle's, which we refer to as "Go-sho." Even if it is true that Namu Ichiden Myoden is not another reading of the daimoku, as you say, and which makes sense given that he distinguishes the two chants clearly, this only means that Nichiren never addressed the phenomenon of variant enunciation. It is possible that he never encountered the issue, and, given the age in which he lived, it is likely that only the educated were aware of on-yomi and, thus, no variation had developed - if any ever did. But even if the on-yomi readings were less standardized then than now, it is still significant that we are dealing with a venerable title - O-daimoku.


You read way too much into things you barely understand. That's fine, that's part of the process of learning. However, when you become attached to a little knowledge and declare, "Only this is true, everything else is false," then you fall into what the Buddha called, incorrect faith which is detrimental to you. We don't know how Nichiren chanted the daimoku. That's it. That's as far as it goes. The rest is arguments based on speculation. Some people like yourself elevate opinion to fact and then use that as a basis to criticize others. The pig here is you.

Rory compared the elision to the way we use contractions in English. But in English, "are not" is formal, "aren't" is informal. Why then, when chanting the title of the most venerable and profound teaching in all of the universe, would you use a relaxed form rather than the proper form? If you know something is wrong, why do it anyway? Why, O Queequeg, do we trample the legs of "Mu" like so many supersonic, flesh eating demon piglets that were raised in a spiritual barn racing on a highway to hell?


You're taking grammatical conventions in English and assuming they hold true in Japanese. Do you understand how silly that is? I addressed this in another thread.
Its not informal to contract vowels and syllables in Japanese.
http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=15220#p238075
Queequeg
 
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby Masaru » Sat Jun 21, 2014 10:52 pm

Queequeg wrote:
Masaru wrote:
Hmm.. By simply enunciating every syllable carefully and accurately.

But I have a question for you. Of course, the Lotus Sutra says "again and again they will be banished," and certainly I have been scorned here by those who do not want their eyes opened to the truth of the incontrovertible facts that I have humbly proffered, repeated practically verbatim from Master Nichiren's own lips... Likely, this is the work of the Devil King...


The incontrovertible fact here is that you are making assertions far beyond your actual knowledge, and the shame is that you don't seem to know it. This leads you to make buffonish comments about how your treatment here is some noble martyrdom. You're being treated this way because you're accusing people of being wrong when you have no basis to ground such claims aside from your ignorance.

Or you do know and you're a troll.

But, consider this. The object of devotion is given the honorific title "Go" in its name, as it is considered to be both venerable and alive, as are Master Nichiren's epistle's, which we refer to as "Go-sho." Even if it is true that Namu Ichiden Myoden is not another reading of the daimoku, as you say, and which makes sense given that he distinguishes the two chants clearly, this only means that Nichiren never addressed the phenomenon of variant enunciation. It is possible that he never encountered the issue, and, given the age in which he lived, it is likely that only the educated were aware of on-yomi and, thus, no variation had developed - if any ever did. But even if the on-yomi readings were less standardized then than now, it is still significant that we are dealing with a venerable title - O-daimoku.


You read way too much into things you barely understand. That's fine, that's part of the process of learning. However, when you become attached to a little knowledge and declare, "Only this is true, everything else is false," then you fall into what the Buddha called, incorrect faith which is detrimental to you. We don't know how Nichiren chanted the daimoku. That's it. That's as far as it goes. The rest is arguments based on speculation. Some people like yourself elevate opinion to fact and then use that as a basis to criticize others. The pig here is you.

Rory compared the elision to the way we use contractions in English. But in English, "are not" is formal, "aren't" is informal. Why then, when chanting the title of the most venerable and profound teaching in all of the universe, would you use a relaxed form rather than the proper form? If you know something is wrong, why do it anyway? Why, O Queequeg, do we trample the legs of "Mu" like so many supersonic, flesh eating demon piglets that were raised in a spiritual barn racing on a highway to hell?


You're taking grammatical conventions in English and assuming they hold true in Japanese. Do you understand how silly that is? I addressed this in another thread.


Oh Queequeg! I would not dare to disparage you! You are destined to become a Buddha - despite all of the purely ad hominem responses you give to my simple statement of objective fact as taught by the Buddha and attested to by all of the Buddhas of the 10 directions. I do not hold my overflowing, undulating, emanating sunlike rightness on this matter against you.

Queequeg wrote:Its not informal to contract vowels and syllables in Japanese.


Even so, why then does only SGI/Shoshu teach the elided form of Daimoku, which is read in on-yomi to bring to life each character of kanji as rendered into Chinese by Kumarajiva?
A certain man said to the priest Shungaku, "The Lotus Sutra Sect's character is not good because it's so fearsome." Shungaku replied, "It is by reason of its fearsome character that it is the Lotus Sutra Sect. If its character were not so, it would be a different sect altogether."
-- The Hagakure

Image
User avatar
Masaru
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 3:10 am

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby reciproque » Sat Jun 21, 2014 11:34 pm

Masaru,

There is no exact pronunciation, but there are current usages encouraged by whatever school one adheres to.

You're assertion that Nichiren supports a Nipponized pronunciation of the Chinese is not justified by your references, nor is it logical.

Vasubandhu and T'ien-t'ai would not have recognized a Japanese recitation of the sutra, nor its title. To be sure, there is no such thing as a universal, linguistic expression for the Title of the Sutra. There are no languages or dialects, no sounds or mixes of sounds, which are exclusively an expression of the meaning and intent of the Sutra (Lotus). Apple is a certain fruit in English, what any other language group wants to call it is just fine - as long as it's in reference to exactly the same thing that people have in their mind when using it.

It seems that you may be thinking that a "strict" discipline must be established on these matters in light of what you assume to be Nichiren's position. However, this is one of those issues where the arguments proliferate rapidly and morph into words and actions of abuse. Orthodoxy is a disease which warps the mind and cuts off the spread of Original Buddhism to those who belong to different cultural and linguistic groups. Actual orthodoxy exist only in the unfettered mind of the Buddha. If we claim to have a role in orthodoxy, our actions will become arrogant cutting off all hope for enlightenment.
reciproque
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2014 3:26 pm

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby Masaru » Sun Jun 22, 2014 1:04 am

reciproque wrote:It seems that you may be thinking that a "strict" discipline must be established on these matters in light of what you assume to be Nichiren's position.


Nah. I'm just trollin'/ taking the "Namu only" position as far as I was able to take it. Trolling, because sadly some discussions do get this ridiculous without anyone consciously intending them to. Queequeg is "a gentleman and a scholar" with a thick skin, and I doubt he was offended by being called a supersonic, flesh eating demon piglet that was raised in a barn and racing on a highway to hell. (Psychological projection on my part?) If he was, I would sincerely like to tell him come la caca, which are the sincerest words of deepest heartfelt apology where I come from.

Otherwise, there were good points brought up here about the Gosho "Recitation of the Hoben and Juryo Chapters" you referenced in relation to the Nam/Namu debate we convert Nichirenites sometimes wrangle over. I have actually read that Gosho many times simply assuming (never bothering to check into the details of the chant) that Namu Ichijo Myoden was another reading of the daimoku. I concentrated more on trying to resolve the cognitive dissonance between Nichiren saying that Tientai and Vasubandhu chanted Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo and the importance SGI and others attached to chanting either Nam or Namu only. But knowing Namu Ichijo Myoden is actually a chant of reverence to the one vehicle and that Nichiren says that this and the Lotus daimoku are essentially the same, this really takes the range of what is acceptable practice to Nichiren far beyond the narrow concerns of a vowel that is sometimes unvoiced.
A certain man said to the priest Shungaku, "The Lotus Sutra Sect's character is not good because it's so fearsome." Shungaku replied, "It is by reason of its fearsome character that it is the Lotus Sutra Sect. If its character were not so, it would be a different sect altogether."
-- The Hagakure

Image
User avatar
Masaru
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 3:10 am

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby Queequeg » Sun Jun 22, 2014 3:07 pm

Masaru and I have been discussing and wrangling for years and even know each other in real life. I'm going to venture that our arguments have a sibling quality to them. Its more smoke than fire.

I am calling him out on his sarcasm, because i dont think it serves the discussion. But sometimes its hard to tell.

This bit of performance art does demonstrate how silly this whole subject is.

Masaru, as far as attacking you, I think I was careful to direct it at the logic and your acts and expressions, and not you personally. If I did, it was by mistake and I apologize.
Queequeg
 
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby reciproque » Sun Jun 22, 2014 5:44 pm

Wow! You guys are a polite bunch. Hope this is the norm on this board.
reciproque
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2014 3:26 pm

Re: The acceptability of "Nam"

Postby Queequeg » Tue Jun 24, 2014 4:32 pm

Masaru wrote:Even so, why then does only SGI/Shoshu teach the elided form of Daimoku, which is read in on-yomi to bring to life each character of kanji as rendered into Chinese by Kumarajiva?


http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=16751&p=239909&#p239909

On-yomi because its Chinese, not to effect some mystical conjuration that brings words on a page to life.
Queequeg
 
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Nichiren

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dude, Google [Bot], Kim O'Hara, nichirenista and 2 guests

>