Queequeg wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:39 pm
Minobu wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:52 pm
Queequeg wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:12 pm
This is the problem with walling yourself into a Nichiren sandbox - one tends to cut themselves off from the context that Nichiren lived within. You need to study Madhyamaka and Zhiyi to understand why that view is untenable.
Look, with respect, if you want to follow the Nichiren path of faith, then that is what you should stick to. Speculating beyond faith without actually doing the heavy lifting of learning the full context of Lotus Mahayana will lead to this sort of erroneous speculation.
Its basic Mahayana to point out that to assert anything as inherent, even emptiness, precludes change. Emptiness simply is the case; to suggest it is inherent introduces an abstraction that is unfounded and unnecessary.
Lil harsh I'd say.
People can live without understanding emptiness.
Simply true. One does not need to know emptiness to live. However, if one wants to speculate about its significance, it helps to actually understand what it is. I've long criticized Mark about his approach - he undertakes Shakubuku without the necessary learning to inform it. He has a tendency to merely echo critiques from the 13th c. Japan out of context in the present. It simply doesn't work. Its like a telemarketer working off a script trying to talk to a live person. There is no actual interaction - just repetition of what is written down as a response to a person who has been dead for centuries.
Also lets take the time to ask this.
Why did Nichiren leave TenDai?
1. Like others of his time, he estimated that the training required in Tendai is not accessible by most people. He was a creature of the debates of his time which critiqued the institutional Buddhism of his time and sought a popular form that could be accessible by all. The same pressures produced Honen and Shinran and other Pure Land thinkers. Nichiren adopted Honen's rationale but made the Lotus Sutra the focus of his popular teachings and practice.
2. He disagreed with the integration of Vajrayana methods with Tendai theory. But, his critique is more nuanced than a simple rejection. His students continued to study at Mt. Hiei, the center of Japanese Tendai, during and after his lifetime. And his teachings and practice exhibit significant Vajrayana influences.
The culture of controlling the populace.
In Christianity people are told of their reward in heaven . The simplicity of the way to their heaven is ridiculous. It's a weird control thing, when you think the jews actually know we reincarnate. Promise the peasantry a reward of eternal happiness in an afterlife and forgot about the misery placed upon here on earth.
This is what Nichiren was about .
But yeah I don't get the real reasons for leaving TenDai. I think a lot of what Nichiren really knew at the time is lost on people from a lack of the written word. It's 2022 and well, we are free to say what we want. One might be suppressed in certain areas but at least we don't get burned at the stake.
Note - we are coming to Nichiren's 800th birthday on Feb. 16, 2022.
I think you might be too influenced by European history in comparing Tendai to the Roman Catholic Church of the time. If anything, Nichiren's critique of Tendai institutions was that they were not doing enough to help ordinary people and were instead out of touch on the mountain. He was actually a "royalist" in that he favored the order under the Emperor rather than the de facto sovereignty of the Kamakura Shogun.
Nichiren never stated only the most learned could perform the forceful practices. One can perform the forceful practices towards Islam, Christianity and even the MOST learned with a modicum of knowledge. The principle is, one taste of a drop of ocean and one knows the taste of the ocean everywhere. Here is one example why I believe you are wrong about who can perform the forceful practices and a "Gosho" I once wrote utilizing the gentle practices:
A chat with Doctor professor of Buddhism Richard Hayes
Dr Richard Hayes is a Professor of Buddhism at McGill University, expert on the Pali Canon, former Theravadan Buddhist, and currently a Quaker. Dr. Mark Rogow is a layman of the Hokke [Lotus] sect.
Richard: Doctor Rogow writes: "But Dr. Hayes repeatedly disparages the Lotus Sutra."
I doubt that anyone but you cares what Dr Hayes thinks about the Lotus Sutra, Mark. But, as long as you are saying what other people think, there is no harm in being accurate in what you report. First, I do not disparage the Lotus Sutra itself. What I disparage is your interpretation of it. You have taken a beautiful text, full of subtle poetry, and turned it into an ugly travesty by which you go around passing negative judgement on every other Buddhist in the world, except for Nichiren (whom you don't really understand, except that you have a shadowy affinity with him because he apparently shared the same psychotic character disorder that obviously afflicts you). It is what you do with the text that appals me, sir, not the text itself. Give it a rest, eh? Take a holiday from your obsessions. You might enjoy the break.
Mark: Richard, you are breaking another of your precious precepts (not to lie). Fortunately, we have Deja News in which to prove my assertions that you have both disparaged the Lotus Sutra and you are a liar. If you press the issue, I will do a meticulous search and post every last post of yours to prove my point. If you apologize to the Buddha and the Lotus Sutra you will surely spare yourself some future grief.
Richard: The point I have made a few times is that the Lotus is so subtle and symbolic and playful and satirical that it is very difficult to grasp its meaning without first knowing a great deal about the dharma.
Mark: Then you should refrain from commenting on its meaning and you should praise it as have all Buddhas throughout space and time.
Richard: But then if one knows the dharma from other sources, then one doesn't really need the Lotus Sutra, since it has very little of value to add.
Mark: Some proof please? Can you please cite the teachings of Ichinen Sanzen and the Mutual Possession of the Ten Worlds anywhere save for the Lotus Sutra? Can you cite the prediction of Buddhahood for all beings without a single exception anywhere save for the Lotus Sutra? Can you cite the Eternal Life of the Tathagata anywhere save for the Lotus Sutra?
Richard: Because I say things like this, Mark Rogow says that I revile the Lotus Sutra.
Mark: Richard, whatever happened to Right Views and Right Memory? Advocating that we do not need the Lotus Sutra is to not revile it? Telling one's mother we do not need her is not to revile her?
Richard: And of course, following the peculiar logic of the Lotus Sutra itself, Mark is convinced that anyone who reviles the Lotus Sutra also reviles the Buddha and the Dharma.
Mark: Can we believe one who praises his good father while failing to praise his good mother? Can we believe that one heeds a good mother's instructions while reviling her? Scholarly understanding is not a necessary and sufficient condition for the aim of any Buddhist study, which is liberation.
Richard: I quite agree. Scholarly knowledge is not necessary, nor is it automatically sufficient for everyone. If one is really determined to be liberated, then that motivation can be used with any method to make one free.
Mark: Any Method? Even the historical Buddha taught only one method...The Eightfold Path.
Richard: The Buddha himself said that one can be liberated though intellectual work,
Mark: The Buddha's statement should not be taken out of the context of the entire canon. There are intellectuals working on better more efficient cruise missiles.
Richard: or through devotion to the Buddha
Mark: The Lotus Sutra is the mother of all Buddhas.
Richard: or through meditational practice, or through a combination of all three.
Mark: Some people meditate on how to make more money, attract more women, or on the Jesus Prayer. This is hardly what the Buddha had in mind. And if you think that by counting breaths alone, you can experience or attain Supreme Enlightenment, equal to that of the Buddha, you misunderstand the teachings. Yet, surely, one will achieve liberation by devoted practice and study of the Lotus Sutra alone given enough faith, even with only a superficial understanding of the context.
Richard: Right. I think this is much more likely to occur if one focuses on the positive messages of the Lotus Sutra.
Mark: The Lotus Sutra is stark naked reality. It is not a pie in the sky philosophy detatched from this world or a Pure Land beyond one's present situation. Punch a rock and you break your hand; deprecate a handsome person and you will be born ugly; rob a child of its food and one will suffer from hunger. Revile the Lotus Sutra and you become an anencephalic fetus in lifetime after lifetime for kalpas on end or suffer the worst afflictions imaginable, over and over and over, until one has expiated one's sin. Conversely, one who praises the Sutra will quickly attain Buddhood.
Richard: Unfortunately, some people just pick up on the negative tone of some parts of the Sutra, and they spend most of their time condemning other people, calling them dangerous, and saying they are leading billions of others to hell.
Mark: Only a fool would praise one who kills his mother.
Richard: People who are devoid of imagination and incapable of symbolic subtlety are likely to get dragged down into a kind of Lotus Sutra fundamentalism.
Mark: Those who are squinty eyed, bleary eyed, or blind can see little or nothing at all.
Richard: Their ranting then gives the entire sutra a bad reputation among other Buddhists.
Mark: Those who revile the Lotus Sutra are better off than those who have never heard the Sutra because they form a relationship to the Sutra. Those who form a relationship to the Sutra, whether that relationship is positive or negative come to understand the karmic Law of cause and effect.
Richard: I would add to that the importance of living according to the precepts. On a news group, people should give special attention to the four speech precepts: avoiding lying,
Mark: You are turning over a new leaf? Good for you Richard.
Richard: avoiding harsh and divisive speech, avoiding slanderous and libellous speech,
Mark: Then I can count on you to never once again deprecate the Lotus Sutra or its votaries?
Richard: and avoiding idle and pointless speech. (I keep thinking there ought to be a fifth speech precept encouraging being playful as much as possible so that you don't take yourself too damn seriously.
Mark: Isn't there a precept against jocularity Richard? Uhhoh, I caught you breaking the precepts again and in this, the Fearful Age! Thankfully, there are no longer any precepts Richard to be followed except one: Revere the Lotus Sutra and chant Namu Myoho renge kyo.
Richard: I'm sure if the Buddha had had eleven fingers instead of the usual ten, he would have had eleven precepts, making room for this important fifth one that I hanker to add.)
Mark: Richard, you really must go over the 500 precepts for monks. Are you not an extremely evil man for altering the teachings of the Buddha? If even a learned and wise man as yourself can not uphold the precepts, of what use are they for ignorant worldlings such as ourselves?
Richard: By the way, I don't expect that anybody but me reads everything that I write
Mark: I read much of what you write. You are a prolific writer. Why don't you determine to use your talents to praise the Lotus Sutra and bring benefit to the people?
Richard: and pays attention to the flak that I get from various quarters.
Mark: I only fault you for one thing Richard.
Richard: So probably nobody has noticed that Mark Rogow accuses me of hating the Dharma,
Mark: No Richard, I accuse you of praising the dharma but destroying its intent
Richard: Mark Vetanen accuses me of belonging to a dangerous and harmful cult so that I can have a better retirement and more worldly power,
Mark: I find that hard to believe about you.
Richard: and Mark Dunlop accuses me of being a disingenuous liar.
Mark: Don't be too hard on yourself Richard. As I have proven, according to Sutras, in this depraved age, in this degenerate age, there is not one person alive without faults.
Richard: I am plagued by three Marks. I reckon this proves the doctrine of karma. Because I was a Marxist in my youth, I am now a target for all these marksmen.
Mark: Very clever.
Richard: But I also look at the bright side. The Buddha was also bothered by three marks: impermanence, sorrow and non-self.
Mark: And that is why he taught the principles of permanence, joy, and true self.
Richard: And look at where that got him.
Mark: To the other shore
Now here my writing called the Gooseberry Gosho (based on the gentle practices):
The way to evaluate any phenomena, philosophy, or religion is through the Three Proofs. The first proof is documentary proof. The phenomena, philosophy or religion must exist through matter, energy and/or ideas. An example of a phenomena is a rock, an example of a philosophy is the Critique of Pure Reason by Emmanuel Kant, an example of a religion is the religion based on the Lotus Sutra. We know that these phenomena, philosophies and religions exists. It has been documentated that they exist.
Theoretical proof means that the phenomena, philosophy or religion can be evaluated by reasoning or scientific evidence. A rock has a certain weight, composition, structure etc. that can be measured. The Critique of Pure Reason can be evaluated through science and other philosophical works as to its classification(idealism), its structure(epistomology), its development etc.
Actual proof is the function of the rock, that it can be used in weights and measures, used to knock down an attacker, or ground up to become an abrasive. Reguarding religion and philosophy, actual proof is the measure that a philosophy or religion can change the individual or society.
The Chinese Gooseberry is a delectable fruit. It exists in the mid to southern latitudes. Its color varies from lime green to orange-yellow. It has a unique taste with hints of honey, ginger, cinnamon and coriander, strawberry and banana.
Can you imagine how it tastes? Let me give you some more information about this sublime fruit. It has 400 specialized enzymes that convert the nitrates, proteins and fats in the soil into various types of carbohydrates. The Chinese Gooseberry plant also uses photosynthesis to convert water and carbon dioxide into other sugars and carbohydrates that, thanks to this multitude of enzymes, are more varied and complex than in any other plant. The sugars and carbohdrates travel up and down the plants vascular system called the phloem and are concentrated in the fruit. The concentration of the various carbohydrates are 10.000% this and 12.567% that, 9.641% this and 49.210% that, and 1.879 % this… The Chinese Gooseberry is also chock full of phytonutrients and antioxidants like, flavins, tannins, lycopenes, Vit. A, C, and E. The Chinese Gooseberry tastes nothing like, rassberry, strawberry, blueberry, melon, apple, grapefruit, avocado, or the angostora bitter. These fruits too are composed principally of carbohydrates and are full of phytonutrients and vitamins but composed of vastly different types and in vastly different proportions. Can you now tell me how the Chinese Gooseberry tastes?
The Chinese Gooseberry is like the Lotus Sutra (Myoho renge kyo). It exists, this we know. We have abundant documentary proof of this. They both can be analyzed (see above for the Chinese Gooseberry). The Lotus Sutra contains the teachings of the Ten Worlds, Ten Factors, Three Realms, and 3000 Worlds in a Momentary Existence of Life. These teachings can be evaluated through science and through reason just as the gooseberry. Science and reason gives us a great deal of information as to the nature of the Chinese Gooseberry. Its form, it’s composition, its structure. However, as far as its taste, despite knowing all these things, our brains are too small to analyze all the data and experience the taste. Likewise, our brains are too small to analyze the data of 3000 Worlds in a Momentary Existence of Life to know exactly its ability to change the individual (become Buddha) and/or society (Buddha’s Land).
We must taste the Chinese Gooseberry, to know its taste (BTW, the Chinese Gooseberry is the Kiwi fruit). We can only taste the Lotus Sutra by chanting Namu Myoho renge kyo with one’s whole heart. We can only understand Nichiren Lotus Sutra Buddhism by practicing as the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren teach.
Please excuse me being so long winded.
Mark