Very sloppy question here…. Sorry. Sort of embarrassed to ask, but….
To back up a bit, I first became aware of Buddhism in the late 90s as a result of pop culture. Specifically, as embarrassing as it is to admit, because of the movie 7 Years in Tibet. I saw the movie with a friend. One of the things that struck me most about the movie was the chanting. I remember telling a friend that I found it "scary." I later became interested in Tibetan Buddhism, even volunteering for a local group. Inevitably, I learned a bit about the religion. One of the main things I learned was the importance of the "Mandala."
I became aware of Nichiren Buddhism only a few years ago. The first thing I learned was the chanting, of course. Then, the importance of the Gohonzon -- which, I learned, is sometimes referred to as the "Mandala Gohonzon." The first thing I thought about both of these aspects of Nichiren Buddhism was that they seemed similar to what is found in Tibetan Buddhism.
So, I've since done a bit of reading.… I've read that Nichiren Buddhism originated in Shingon Buddhism; one author even suggested that Nichiren Buddhism is basically the same thing as Shingon. And I recently read that Shingon is basically the Japanese branch of Tibetan Buddhism.
Thanks. I don't remember exactly where I read that Shingon is the Japanese branch of Tibetan Buddhism, but I just read in the "Complete Illustrated Encyclopedia of Buddhism" that followers of Shingon study the Vajrayana scriptures -- and to my knowledge, said scriptures are the basis of Tibetan Buddhism.
In the relatively old book (1968) "Conversations: Christian and Buddhist, Encounters in Japan" by Dom Graham, Rev. Kaneko of Jodo Shinshu says there are three types of Buddhism in Japan: Pure Land; Zen; Shingon -- and he says Shingon includes "the so-called Nichiren schools."
Nichiren was trained as a Tendai-shu priest. The influence of the Tendai tradition on his teaching is marked and profound--particularly the influence of Tendai Daishi (Zhiyi, Chi-i) in his presentation of the Lotus Sutra.
Meanwhile, the kinds of esoteric practices that you find in Shingon-shu, mikkyo, are also found in Tendai-shu. Nichiren, to the best of my understanding, reacted strongly against these practices. Yes, if you have much familiarity with Tendai esoteric practices, you'll see that the historical connection to the Tibetan schools is obvious; they clearly come from a common ancestor, and share much in common. (Hint: in Japan it's goma, in Tibet it's homa.)
I'm ignorant of how the gohonzon is described in any Nichiren school, but I'm interested in learning how that works. I have read but I can't remember the source now that Nichiren did envision it as a kind of mandala. This may or may not indicate a link back to his esoteric training on Hiei-san.
Anyway, I think if you want to understand Nichiren in historical context, you're better off looking to the Tendai-shu of his day rather than Shingon-shu. This is because Tendai was the dominant power of the time, but not only for that reason. Nichiren was unlikely to be influenced directly by Shingon thinking and practice.
Hi Jikan,
Nichiren's views on esoteric Buddhism are subtle (in my view, not so much in other people's). I don't think he had a problem with Vajrayana theory and practice per se, but with the centrality of Mahavairocana over Shakyamuni and the denigration of the Lotus Sutra in favor of other texts such as the Dainichi-kyo. He makes reference to Amoghavajra, iirc, and how he was spared the full brunt of his karmic retribution for slandering the Lotus because near the end of his life he admitted the significance of the Lotus Sutra and completed his Honzon by enshrining the Lotus Sutra between the Womb and Diamond World mandalas.
Nichiren calls his honzon a mandala and describes its imagery in a few extant writings. Basically, it is a depiction of the ceremony in the air described in the second half of the Lotus Sutra. If you understand that a mandala is nothing more than a visual depiction of an event described in a sutra its not hard to understand this.
There are two documents that have thrown Nichiren scholars and Buddhists for a loop - they are two ink drawings of Fudo Myoo and Aizen Myoo and their inscriptions claim that he was visited by the deities and recognized as the lineage holder of the Diamond and Womb worlds.
There is also at least one Gohonzon with Dainichi Siddha above the Daimoku.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Queequeg wrote:Hi Jikan,
Nichiren's views on esoteric Buddhism are subtle (in my view, not so much in other people's). I don't think he had a problem with Vajrayana theory and practice per se, but with the centrality of Mahavairocana over Shakyamuni and the denigration of the Lotus Sutra in favor of other texts such as the Dainichi-kyo.:
If so, then that confirms the thought in me that Nichiren's intervention into Japanese Buddhism is, at least in large part, a response to a Tendai Problem--at least since Ryogen's rebuilding & restructuring of Tendai-shu (emphasising the esoteric, to overgeneralize). Basically, in Tendai you have ways of articulating the absolute; the Lotus Sutra is one of them, the Mahavairocana, the other. It's possible to see these views as always-already in harmony, as part of an integral whole, or instead as always necessarily in tension with each other. If you're right, then Nichiren seems to have seen them in tension--mostly--at least at the level of practice he saw on Mt Hiei.
Ghid wrote:A mandala or a gohonzon for Buddhists must be like an icon or a pieta for Catholics?
Yep, same general idea.
Focus for 'faith'.
Some Buddhist paths reckon that there's some sort of 'magic woo' attached to mandalas / gohonzon.
you tend not to get that with the Catholic or Orthodox these days but, in the past and in a very few 'superstitious-type' communities 'miracle working' icons are still venerated.
markatex wrote:I've always been curious about this. Didn't Nichiren speak favorably of Shingon in his early writings?
I don't know. I have never seen a passage saying that, but my knowledge is limited. I do know that he said Shingon most closely resembles his own teaching, and is actually worse than the other sects because it makes it even harder to distinguish truth from error.
Ghid wrote:A mandala or a gohonzon for Buddhists must be like an icon or a pieta for Catholics?
Yep, same general idea.
Focus for 'faith'.
Some Buddhist paths reckon that there's some sort of 'magic woo' attached to mandalas / gohonzon.
you tend not to get that with the Catholic or Orthodox these days but, in the past and in a very few 'superstitious-type' communities 'miracle working' icons are still venerated.
I will celebrate this knew knowledge with a haiku.
Mandalas, honzons
Like icons and rosaries,
They have no power?
Ghid wrote:A mandala or a gohonzon for Buddhists must be like an icon or a pieta for Catholics?
Yep, same general idea.
Focus for 'faith'.
Some Buddhist paths reckon that there's some sort of 'magic woo' attached to mandalas / gohonzon.
you tend not to get that with the Catholic or Orthodox these days but, in the past and in a very few 'superstitious-type' communities 'miracle working' icons are still venerated.
I will celebrate this knew knowledge with a haiku.
Mandalas, honzons
Like icons and rosaries,
They have no power?
Power well-defined
Is work divided by time
No work? No honzon.
本尊 (honzon in Japanese pronunciation) is the Chinese word for Iṣṭha-deva, or Tibetan yidam. In modern Chinese translations of Tibetan materials, it is still the word used to translate Yidam and was used in Tang Dynasty translations of tantric texts.
Of course I'm not sure how much knowledge of tantric practice influenced the Nichiren concept of the Honzon.
Jikan wrote:
If so, then that confirms the thought in me that Nichiren's intervention into Japanese Buddhism is, at least in large part, a response to a Tendai Problem--at least since Ryogen's rebuilding & restructuring of Tendai-shu (emphasising the esoteric, to overgeneralize). Basically, in Tendai you have ways of articulating the absolute; the Lotus Sutra is one of them, the Mahavairocana, the other. It's possible to see these views as always-already in harmony, as part of an integral whole, or instead as always necessarily in tension with each other. If you're right, then Nichiren seems to have seen them in tension--mostly--at least at the level of practice he saw on Mt Hiei.
I'm not familiar with what was happening on Hieizan in the 13th century, but that would be interesting to learn about. Any resources to recommend?
IIRC correctly, in Nichiren's view, Gishin was the last acceptable abbot of Enryaku-ji. Nichiren was very critical of what he saw as the complete sell out and betrayal of Saicho by the folks who elevated esoteric doctrines above traditional Tendai/Tientai teachings. I've heard it suggested that Nichiren saw himself as a Tendai reformer, but I am not convinced. He wrote critically of the emphasis on Esoteric teachings in the Tendai-shu, but I think he was mostly dismissive of what was happening at Hiei, and the capitol in general - I think its fair to say he shared the opinions of Kamakura warriors who saw the denizens of the capitol as effete and out of touch. Like the other Kamakura Buddhism founders, he left Hiei and hardly looked back, more concerned with universal salvation of ordinary people than the business of exclusive esoteric clubs.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Sherlock wrote:本尊 (honzon in Japanese pronunciation) is the Chinese word for Iṣṭha-deva, or Tibetan yidam. In modern Chinese translations of Tibetan materials, it is still the word used to translate Yidam and was used in Tang Dynasty translations of tantric texts.
Of course I'm not sure how much knowledge of tantric practice influenced the Nichiren concept of the Honzon.
Interesting, Sherlock. Never looked into the etymology of the word before. In Japan, honzon refers generically to the central devotional object enshrined in a place of Buddhist practice. A mandala is a kind of honzon.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
markatex wrote:I've always been curious about this. Didn't Nichiren speak favorably of Shingon in his early writings?
I don't know. I have never seen a passage saying that, but my knowledge is limited. I do know that he said Shingon most closely resembles his own teaching, and is actually worse than the other sects because it makes it even harder to distinguish truth from error.
AFAIK, never favorably. I think he was neutral except when critiquing the claims of various True Word patriarchs who asserted Esoteric teachings were superior to the teachings of the Lotus Sutra.
Push-ups are a part of many different work out regimens, but that doesn't mean a cross-fit fanatic who incorporates push-ups into their workout is going to approve of Jack Lalanne's regimen which also incorporates push-ups. That's not to say that Nichiren incorporated esoteric practices into his teachings except in arguably novel and innovative ways - he wasn't content with making mudras with his hands in connection with an imaginative interaction with the mandala, but rather, Nichiren sought to read the Lotus Sutra with his life in the world itself.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Thank you everyone who has commented on this thread.
On another thread on the board ( http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=17045" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ), we began to compare and contrast Nichiren Buddhism with Tibetan Buddhism. I noted how interesting it is that the figureheads of the respective movements are in polar opposite societal positions in their societies: the Dalai Lama lives as a king, whereas Nichiren Daishonin was endlessly persecuted by the rulers of Japan.
I'd also be interested if anyone here has any information on why it became mandatory in Japan for males to be allowed to be monks only after the age of 16. Do I have the age correct? Thank you.
Although a few years late (kkkk) I will try to put some observations on the subject.
Tendaishu and Shingonshu are the two Vajrayana schools in Japan. Although we normally conceive of Tendai as a Japanese version of the Chinese Tiantai school, it is not quite like that.
Tendaishu is only built on a Tiantai base. This means that the essential points of doctrine and philosophy start from the conception established by Chi-i: The Lotus Sutra as an essential teaching (doctrine) and the Madhyamaka-Yogacara synthesis as a philosophical conception.
However, when Dengyo Daishi was in China he received not only the teachings of the Tiantai school, but also the teachings of the Chinese Shingon school, as well as instructions from Zen and the tradition of the Pure Land.
The main practice of the Tiantai school was the Chi-i Shikan method, which had four practices in order to achieve enlightenment, are the four portals of samadhi. These practices (with the exception of the fourth) required that it be carried out in seclusion for a certain period of uninterrupted time (90 days), and once it was carried out, there would be no more reason for its execution.
This practice was taken to Japan, but not only were they, which consist of very harsh ascetic practices, they were taken together with the other practices.
After Dengyo's death, the essential practice of the Tendai school became initiation into Mikkyo and the realization of esoteric practices, so that almost all Tendai monks also ended up going to Mount Koya to receive initiations and perform esoteric practices. from Shingon school.
The only effective difference between Shingon and Tendai at that time was no longer doctrinal / religious, but mainly philosophical. Shingon interpreted the philosophy of dharmas from the Yogacara point of view, which is striking in the Sino-Japanese tradition, while Tendai interpreted from the point of view of the Madhyamaka-yogacara synthesis, which has subtle distinctions between them.
Nichiren had this structure as his background. As an ordained monk in the Tendai tradition, his philosophical basis is that of this school, however, in addition to being a Tendai monk he also received initiations at the Shingon school on Mount Koya, practiced the school's esotericism and even had achievements from Shingon's vajrayana practices
One of Nichiren's early writings, which does not belong to the tradition of "nichiren Buddhism" is entitled "kaitai sokushin jobutsu gi", which is made on the work of Kobo Daishi [Kukai] entitled "Sokushin jobutsu gi".
In my reading of this work by Kukai, although it is all based on verses from the Shingon School's fundamental Sutras and Treaties, such as Dainichikyo, it depends on certain insights from the Lotus Sutra.
Another of Nichiren's works that does not belong to the tradition of “Nichiren Buddhism” is Fudou Aizen Kankeki ”(which appears in the collection of works compiled by Nichirenshu - Showa Teihon Nichiren Shonin Ibun [p. 16]) in which Nichiren narrates the realization of samadhi and declares himself as “23rd successor to the Dharma transmitted by the Mahavairocana Buddha”.
Aizen and Fudou are two divinities that are well referenced in Mikkyo, and even, even though they do not appear in the Lotus Sutra, they are inscribed in the Gohonzon, since their first forms that consisted only of O-daimoku being flanked by the Shakyamuni and Taho Buddhas, guarded precisely by Fudo and Aizen's bija-mantra.
If we compare the structure of the practice of Nichiren Buddhism with the structure of the main practices of Tendai and Shingon, Nichiren's teaching is closer to what Shingon is than what Tendai is, although with regard to the philosophical basis it is the opposite.
The Shingon practice is to receive a mandala, a mudra and a mantra, and to practice it. Nichiren practice in the same way is to receive a mandala (gohonzon), a mudra (gassho) and a mantra (daimoku), and to practice it. In Kaimoku sho, even, Nichiren reports that originated Daimoku from the esoteric mantra of the Lotus Sutra by Shan Wu Wei:
Namah Samantha Buddhanam
Om A A Am Ah
Sarva buddha Jna Sakshebhyah
Gagana Sambhavalakshani Saddharma Pundarika Sutram
Jah Hum Bam Hoh Vajrarakshaman
Hum Svaha
Although, it is more likely that Shan Wu Wei composed the mantra from an earlier Tibetan tradition as Chi-i had already inscribed the invocation Namo Miaofa Lian-hua Jing in his works.
I love how this thread started off with me asking a history question, and ended up in poem writing!
Nichiren was very critical of what he saw as the complete sell out and betrayal of Saicho by the folks who elevated esoteric doctrines above traditional Tendai/Tientai teachings. I've heard it suggested that Nichiren saw himself as a Tendai reformer, but I am not convinced. He wrote critically of the emphasis on Esoteric teachings in the Tendai-shu, but I think he was mostly dismissive of what was happening at Hiei, and the capitol in general - I think its fair to say he shared the opinions of Kamakura warriors who saw the denizens of the capitol as effete and out of touch. Like the other Kamakura Buddhism founders, he left Hiei and hardly looked back, more concerned with universal salvation of ordinary people than the business of exclusive esoteric clubs.