How did Nichiren view the Dhammapada?
How did Nichiren view the Dhammapada?
And can one practice according to Nichiren and yet also follow the Dhammapada?
In his writing, Hokkemongu (Words and Phrases of the Lotus Sutra), The Great Master Nichiren said, “If the practitioners of the Lotus Sutra wholeheartedly devote their life to the Lotus Sutra and practice according to its golden words, it is certainly needless to say that not only in the next life, but also in this lifetime they will overcome severe difficulty, prolong their life, receive the great, good fortune of unsurpassed enlightenment, and accomplish the great vow of the widespread, propagation of True Buddhism.”
- Johnny Dangerous
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 17092
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
- Location: Olympia WA
- Contact:
Re: How did Nichiren view the Dhammapada?
One would have to first ask how familiar Nichiren even was with Pali Material, I would think. The Dhammapada gives quite basic advice though, I can't recall offhand where it would conflict with the Mahayana, though it is just generally somewhat "fire and brimstone" in Buddhist terms.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared
-Khunu Lama
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared
-Khunu Lama
Re: How did Nichiren view the Dhammapada?
Nichiren would’ve been familiar with the Agamas (I’m not sure if 13th century Japanese Buddhists would’ve even known of the existence of the Pali Nikayas) and I’m not sure if there’s an equivalent to the Dhammapada there. At any rate, he would’ve considered it a provisional teaching; a teaching of the Buddha, to be sure, but one of comparatively little importance when placed next to pre-Lotus Mahayana sutras, to say nothing of the Lotus Sutra itself.
I would say that having an understanding of those early sutras is definitely helpful, but they’re ultimately provisional and should be understood as such.
I would say that having an understanding of those early sutras is definitely helpful, but they’re ultimately provisional and should be understood as such.
Re: How did Nichiren view the Dhammapada?
Regarding Nichiren and the Dhammapada, Nichiren teaches (from the Dhammapada)"THERE were two brothers named Chūdapanthaka. When the name Chūdapanthaka was called, either would answer." He also relates the Dhammapada story in another Gosho (which I can't find right now) that the younger brother was so dull-witted that he couldn't remember any of the teachings of the Buddha. The Buddha realized this and gave him but one verse to memorize and he became an Arhat. From the viewpoint of the "absolute myo", Nichiren teaches, that we can open up the "rough" teachings and merge them in the wonderful teaching of the Lotus Sutra. However, from the viewpoint of the "comparative myo", he teaches, that the Lotus Sutra refutes the rough teachings and reveals the wonderful teaching. Nichiren utilized "all" the teachings of the Buddha to exalt the Lotus Sutra but when confusion arose about the profundity and ability to enlighten of the various sutras, he would refute them in light of the Lotus Sutra.
M
Re: How did Nichiren view the Dhammapada?
In the Chinese/Japanese Tripitaka there is Udanavarga which has 1100 verses and it corresponds to the somewhat shorter work called Dhammapada. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Udanavargamarkatex wrote: ↑Mon Nov 15, 2021 12:58 am Nichiren would’ve been familiar with the Agamas (I’m not sure if 13th century Japanese Buddhists would’ve even known of the existence of the Pali Nikayas) and I’m not sure if there’s an equivalent to the Dhammapada there. At any rate, he would’ve considered it a provisional teaching; a teaching of the Buddha, to be sure, but one of comparatively little importance when placed next to pre-Lotus Mahayana sutras, to say nothing of the Lotus Sutra itself.
I would say that having an understanding of those early sutras is definitely helpful, but they’re ultimately provisional and should be understood as such.
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2021 11:26 pm
Re: How did Nichiren view the Dhammapada?
The Dhammapada is part and parcel of the Theravada tradition. Initially, the teachings of the Buddha were in a deplorable state when they arrived in China over a span of many years. It was like getting the contents of a huge library with none of the books being catalogued and most with pages missing. Over time, Chinese scholars, many of them well known today, put their minds to examining these texts in a rigorous manner. Having done that, they could now address the question as to what united these teachings and what was ultimately their intended purpose. It was then that divisions between Theravada and Mahayana were established. It appears that there was general agreement that the important teachings came towards the end of the Buddha's life and, more specifically, the Lotus Sutra being preeminent among them.
If Nichiren made some glancing references to the Dhammapada, it was never because he considered it to have some importance in the same way as he did the Lotus Sutra, but rather as part of the cultural soup that many of his contemporaries were aware of and thus some aspect from it could be used when making a point. The fact that he did this on very rare occasions alludes to its low status.
If Nichiren made some glancing references to the Dhammapada, it was never because he considered it to have some importance in the same way as he did the Lotus Sutra, but rather as part of the cultural soup that many of his contemporaries were aware of and thus some aspect from it could be used when making a point. The fact that he did this on very rare occasions alludes to its low status.
- Kim O'Hara
- Former staff member
- Posts: 7065
- Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 1:09 am
- Location: North Queensland, Australia
Re: How did Nichiren view the Dhammapada?
We discussed these parallels here a few weeks ago, too, although I can't remember just where.Aemilius wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 10:06 amIn the Chinese/Japanese Tripitaka there is Udanavarga which has 1100 verses and it corresponds to the somewhat shorter work called Dhammapada. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Udanavargamarkatex wrote: ↑Mon Nov 15, 2021 12:58 am Nichiren would’ve been familiar with the Agamas (I’m not sure if 13th century Japanese Buddhists would’ve even known of the existence of the Pali Nikayas) and I’m not sure if there’s an equivalent to the Dhammapada there. At any rate, he would’ve considered it a provisional teaching; a teaching of the Buddha, to be sure, but one of comparatively little importance when placed next to pre-Lotus Mahayana sutras, to say nothing of the Lotus Sutra itself.
I would say that having an understanding of those early sutras is definitely helpful, but they’re ultimately provisional and should be understood as such.
Kim
Re: How did Nichiren view the Dhammapada?
"Although the Pāli edition is the best-known, a number of other versions are known:
Gāndhārī Dharmapada – a version possibly of Dharmaguptaka or Kāśyapīya origin in Gāndhārī written in Kharosthi script
Patna Dharmapada – a version in Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, most likely Sammatiya (school of Buddhism)
Udānavarga – a seemingly related Mula-Sarvastivada or Sarvastivada text in 3 Sanskrit versions
a Tibetan translation (of Udanavarga), which is popular in traditional Tibetan Buddhism
Mahāvastu – a Lokottaravāda text with parallels to verses in the Pāli Dhammapada's Sahassa Vagga and Bhikkhu Vagga.
FaJuJing 法句经" – 4 Chinese works; one of these appears to be an expanded translation of the Pali version; this has not traditionally been very popular.
Comparing the Pali Dhammapada, the Gandhari Dharmapada and the Udanavarga, Brough (2001) identifies that the texts have in common 330 to 340 verses, 16 chapter headings and an underlying structure. He suggests that the three texts have a 'common ancestor' but underlines that there is no evidence that any one of these three texts might have been the "primitive Dharmapada" from which the other two evolved.
The Dhammapada is considered one of the most popular pieces of Theravada literature. A critical edition of the Dhammapada was produced by Danish scholar Viggo Fausbøll in 1855, becoming the first Pali text to receive this kind of examination by the European academic community."
(Wikipedia)
"Fausbøll, Viggo (1900), The Dhammapada: being a collection of moral verses in Pali / edited a second time with a literal Latin translation and notes, London."
Gāndhārī Dharmapada – a version possibly of Dharmaguptaka or Kāśyapīya origin in Gāndhārī written in Kharosthi script
Patna Dharmapada – a version in Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, most likely Sammatiya (school of Buddhism)
Udānavarga – a seemingly related Mula-Sarvastivada or Sarvastivada text in 3 Sanskrit versions
a Tibetan translation (of Udanavarga), which is popular in traditional Tibetan Buddhism
Mahāvastu – a Lokottaravāda text with parallels to verses in the Pāli Dhammapada's Sahassa Vagga and Bhikkhu Vagga.
FaJuJing 法句经" – 4 Chinese works; one of these appears to be an expanded translation of the Pali version; this has not traditionally been very popular.
Comparing the Pali Dhammapada, the Gandhari Dharmapada and the Udanavarga, Brough (2001) identifies that the texts have in common 330 to 340 verses, 16 chapter headings and an underlying structure. He suggests that the three texts have a 'common ancestor' but underlines that there is no evidence that any one of these three texts might have been the "primitive Dharmapada" from which the other two evolved.
The Dhammapada is considered one of the most popular pieces of Theravada literature. A critical edition of the Dhammapada was produced by Danish scholar Viggo Fausbøll in 1855, becoming the first Pali text to receive this kind of examination by the European academic community."
(Wikipedia)
"Fausbøll, Viggo (1900), The Dhammapada: being a collection of moral verses in Pali / edited a second time with a literal Latin translation and notes, London."
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
-
- Posts: 170
- Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2019 2:52 am
Re: How did Nichiren view the Dhammapada?
The Chinese canon has four versions of the dharmapada (Fajujing). The first is the translation of the Upasaka Zhi Qian, part of the early Buddhist translations in China. The other versions are more recent products, made from the 10th century onwards, so the sutra's popularity is not as great in the Mahayana community as it is in the Theravada community.
Nichiren obviously had knowledge of the Agamas, which I believe are essential to Buddhist learning. There are many stories that Nichiren reproduces that are based on the narratives found in these texts, and as the Fajujiung is a compilation of Buddhist teachings that often appear in the other Agamas texts, it is not possible to say with certainty whether Nichiren was aware of the text.
But essentially the perspective of the Dhammapada is that of the Tripitaka Teaching, and it is only consistent with the Mahayana as a shared and common teaching, but in soteriological terms it does not follow the same structure.
Nichiren obviously had knowledge of the Agamas, which I believe are essential to Buddhist learning. There are many stories that Nichiren reproduces that are based on the narratives found in these texts, and as the Fajujiung is a compilation of Buddhist teachings that often appear in the other Agamas texts, it is not possible to say with certainty whether Nichiren was aware of the text.
But essentially the perspective of the Dhammapada is that of the Tripitaka Teaching, and it is only consistent with the Mahayana as a shared and common teaching, but in soteriological terms it does not follow the same structure.