In clarifying the essential method of repaying debts of gratitude (hōon no yōjutsu), this section points out the confusion and delusion of the various Buddhist schools.

Nikkō Shōnin poses the question:

“Question: What is meant by the essential method of repaying debts of gratitude?”

He then explains as follows:

“Answer: To ‘not begrudge one’s life’ is called the essential method. That is, by not sparing one’s life, one refutes erroneous doctrines and propagates the correct Law; thus there remains no debt of gratitude that is not thereby repaid.”

As already mentioned in the previous section, to refute erroneous doctrines and to propagate the correct teaching is itself the act of repaying debts of gratitude. Therefore, the most crucial point is to distinguish which teaching is heretical and which is correct.

However, as the text itself says, “The scholars in the world think…,” the scholars of the world at large suppose that all sects and all scriptures have their own merits. But we must understand that, in philosophy, ethics, and religion, there are always distinctions of superior and inferior, shallow and profound, right and wrong. We must therefore seek that which is superior, profound, and correct.

Before setting out the principles by which such criticism is to be made, the discussion turns to Western philosophy, and so we shall briefly consider what is meant by philosophy, ethics, and religion.

Philosophy, Ethics, and Religion

Philosophy (philosophia) in ancient Greece generally meant the love of knowledge and the pursuit of culture, and in a broad sense referred to learning in general.
As learning became differentiated into various disciplines, the natural sciences, psychology, aesthetics, ethics, and so on separated from philosophy and became independent. Today, philosophy generally refers to disciplines such as metaphysics and epistemology, and also includes logic, philosophy of history, and related fields.

Ethics is the normative standard of what ought to be in regard to human volitional actions. It is broader in scope than what is commonly called morality or self-cultivation.

What is commonly called morality or “修身” (shūshin, cultivation of character) still contains relatively narrow and feudal elements.

The character 「宗」 in “religion” (shūkyō) means “fundamental.” Therefore, religion is that which clarifies the fundamental source of the activity of life and the basic principle underlying all phenomena of the universe. It is nothing other than the manifestation, in concrete form, of this fundamental theory as a way of life. Thus, religion must invariably have an object of devotion (honzon), and there must be a mutual response of benefit (kannō-riyaku) between that object of devotion and human beings.

If, however, philosophy, ethics, and religion are inferior, shallow, or erroneous, unhappiness is unavoidable.

The Five Periods and Eight Teachings

Now, the classification of the Buddha’s lifetime teachings is made in terms of the Five Periods and Eight Teachings.
The Five Periods are: Flower Garland (Kegon), Āgama (Agon), Correct and Equal (Hōdō), Wisdom (Hannya), and Lotus (Hokke).
Their teachings are expounded as provisional devices, inducements, rebukes, purifications, and final integrations, all in accord with the Buddha’s skillful means.

The Eight Teachings consist of:

• Four teachings in terms of method of instruction (kegi) – sudden, gradual, secret, and indeterminate;

• Four teachings in terms of content (kebō) – Tripiṭaka, shared, distinct, and perfect.

These, too, were expounded according to the time and the capacities of the people to be taught.

The various Buddhist schools base themselves on these numerous sutras, both Mahayana and Hinayana, provisional and true, exoteric and esoteric.
Therefore, it is not the case that “any religion will do,” nor that “because all derive from Śākyamuni’s teaching, any sect is equally valid.” The Law itself contains distinctions; in its philosophical principles there are higher and lower, and differences as great as between heaven and earth.

Moreover, as this treatise points out with respect to the ten schools, even if one uses their original sutras exactly as they are, those sutras are already useless and harmful in the Latter Day of the Law.
In the Latter Day, people have no karmic connection with Śākyamuni’s Buddhism. Nonetheless, the founders of these schools disparaged the Lotus Sutra, which is the true purpose of Śākyamuni’s appearance in the world, and established their own sects. Furthermore, after the appearance of Nichiren Daishonin, the Original Buddha of the Latter Day, they slandered his Three Great Secret Laws. As a result, they have all become slanderers of the Law destined for the Avīci hell.

Whether one becomes a person who knows and repays debts of gratitude, or one who does not know them and forgets them and thus falls into hell, depends first of all on recognizing whether one’s religion is the correct Law or an erroneous law, and then striving in practice accordingly.

The Criteria for Judging Right and Wrong in Religion

Concerning the criteria for determining whether a religion is right or wrong, the writing　Three Tripitaka Masters Pray for Rain states:

In judging the relative merit of Buddhist doctrines, I, Nichiren, believe that the best standards are those of reason and documentary proof. And even more valuable than reason and documentary proof is the proof of actual fact. (WND1, P.599)

In other words, a correct religion must first have an accurate scriptural basis; moreover, its doctrine must accord with reason; and when it is practiced, actual proof appears exactly as taught. Conversely, a heretical religion lacks reason, documentary proof, and actual proof.

In President Toda’s Lecture on “On Establishing the Correct Teaching for the Peace of the Land”, he states:

“First, documentary proof (bunshō) means to seek the textual evidence.
When a religion A exists, we must first determine what scripture that religion bases itself on.
If it is a religion other than Buddhism, then we must compare and examine its scripture against the Buddhist sutras.
A religion that has no doctrine cannot be called a religion.
If it is a teaching within Buddhism, we must, through the five levels of comparison and so on, judge the relative superiority, depth or shallowness, and correctness or falsity of its sutras.

Second, theoretical proof (rishō) means that, even if there is documentary proof, we must examine whether that proof accords with philosophy when studied, whether it agrees with modern science, and whether, as a theory, it can convince and be affirmed by cultured people.
However splendid a sutra passage may seem, if it has no philosophical value, it must be discarded.
Philosophy is thinking, but no matter how splendidly something is thought out, it must still be scientific.
That is, it must possess universal validity; the same cause must produce the same effect irrespective of time and place.
Moreover, it must lead to a conclusion that brings about the highest value—namely, a theory that proves and guarantees happiness.
That happiness must be eternal, unchanging through all ages; it must not be a kind of happiness that can be shattered by various events.

Third, actual proof (genshō) is that which is verified in the realities of daily life.
The supreme religion fundamentally consists in human revolution and the breaking of one’s karmic destiny; therefore, unless it can explain this principle completely as a science, it cannot be called the supreme religion.
Actual proof is the experimental verification of what kind of concrete results appear in one’s life when one practices that religion; it is the most important.
However, today many heretical religions misuse this, saying, for example, that bubbles appeared in a glass and that this is ‘actual proof’—this is a grave mistake.
The correct view of actual proof is that it must be experienced in real life exactly in accordance with the documentary and theoretical proofs.”

When we criticize each religion on the basis of such principles of religious criticism, its truth or falsity, correctness or heresy, becomes completely clear.

In conclusion, now, more than 700 years after the passing of Nichiren Daishonin, the Original Buddha of the Latter Day of the Law, the only religion that meets all three standards—reason, documentary proof, and actual proof—is, in the final analysis, Soka Gakkai alone.
From the standpoint of the five nets of religion, the five levels of comparison, and every principle of religious criticism, this conclusion is absolutely free of error.

The Three Hinayana Schools and the Seven Mahayana Schools

The phrase, “However, we may set aside for now the three Hinayana schools ” expresses the standpoint of “discarding the small and adopting the great”—that is, the relative comparison of Hinayana and Mahayana.

By way of comparison, Hinayana is like a private letter about a commoner’s affairs, while Mahayana is like an official notice bearing the seal of the sovereign.
Also, Hinayana is a small boat, and Mahayana is a great ship: if one wishes truly to cross the great ocean and reach the other shore, one must choose the proper vessel.

Next, from the phrase “I found that each of the seven Mahayana schools sings its own praises, saying,…” the text exposes the confusion of the seven schools.
In short, if a master believes in and spreads a heretical doctrine, then all his disciples and lay supporters likewise become followers of a heretical school.
If the master falls into hell, his disciples and lay followers all fall into hell as well.

In those days, among the seven or ten great schools, there were some that, to a certain degree, were like private letters, and others that were like official notices bearing the ruler’s seal.
But since then the age has become ever more defiled and evil; and in recent times, heretical religions such as Tenrikyō and Risshō Kōseikai, which can be said to be neither Buddhism nor non-Buddhist, have flourished.
All of this, however, can be regarded as an auspicious sign foretelling the wide propagation of the Three Great Secret Laws.

Teacher–Disciple Relationships in Western Philosophy

Next, we must confirm that in philosophy and religion alike, everything is ultimately decided by teacher–disciple relationships, and that people’s happiness or unhappiness is determined by the kind of leaders they follow.
Regarding Buddhist philosophy, we have already discussed this; but in the so-called field of Western philosophy as well, the same principle holds.

For example, Nishida Kitarō became famous with his An Inquiry into the Good and is regarded as the founder of the so-called Kyoto School of philosophy, having a tremendous impact as a modern Japanese philosopher.
He attempted to unify modern Western philosophy with Buddhist philosophical thought, such as the experience of Zen and Nembutsu.

Born into a Jōdo Shin (True Pure Land) family and having a mother who was a Shin believer, he himself claimed not to be a Shin adherent. Nonetheless, he was unconsciously influenced and deeply moved by Shinran and the Tannishō.
Thus, in the end, the basis of Nishida’s philosophy inevitably took the form of a fusion between so-called Christian philosophy and the philosophy of “good” and Nembutsu.

Nishida had such disciples as Tanabe Hajime and Miki Kiyoshi.
According to his own confession, Tanabe’s philosophy, in its religious direction, was influenced by Nishida’s Zen intuition, and he also received a strong impact from Koeber’s Christian philosophy and Hatano Seiichi’s lectures on early Christianity.
Furthermore, he says he was led by Shinran in the shift from self-power (jiriki) to other-power (tariki), but ultimately returned to Christianity.
In the end, Tanabe, like Nishida, merely expounded a philosophy that confused Christian, Zen, and Shin religious philosophies.
This was nothing other than the influence of his teachers—Nishida, Koeber, and others.

Miki Kiyoshi states in his A History of My Reading that he repeatedly read the Bible and was impressed each time,
that he memorized and recited Pure Land texts such as the Shōshin-ge and the Letters of Shinran, and that ultimately he was deeply moved by the Tannishō.
Under such a background, Miki also came to study under Nishida Kitarō.

These are examples showing that philosophy, too, is determined by teacher–disciple relationships.
We can say that the tragedy of Japanese philosophy lies in the fact that Japan’s leading philosophers, almost without exception, became enamored with Christianity, Zen, and Nembutsu.

Western philosophy, when studied historically, is likewise to be discussed in terms of teacher–disciple relations.
The philosophy of Marx and Engels, for instance, arose merely through the influence of Hegel’s dialectic, the materialism of the Hegelian leftist Feuerbach, and the utopian socialism of their time.

“If the source is turbid, the stream cannot be clear.”
Unless one bases oneself on the true essence of Eastern Buddhism—the great life-philosophy of the non-duality of body and mind taught by the great sage Nichiren—religion, ethics, and philosophy cannot truly make humankind happy. This is what we assert.

The Philosophy of Leaders and the Fate of Peoples

Looking at the modern world’s leaders—Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, and, in Japan, Tōjō—because they all based themselves on erroneous philosophies, they led the masses into misery.
Was there any concept of repaying debts of gratitude, as we have discussed, in their philosophies or guiding principles? No.
What they possessed was nothing more than power and a mistaken, low-level philosophy.
What is truly terrifying is the content of the philosophy held by the leadership class.

If we probe this matter thoroughly, we find that ethics, too, when its fundamental premise is questioned, inevitably becomes religious philosophy.
In the Hellenistic period of the third century B.C., the Stoics and Epicureans, and in the Middle Ages the Scholastics, all took the form of ethical systems, but at root they were religious philosophies.
And whenever religion is at issue in Western philosophy, it is always Christianity that is meant.

Thus, whether in modern existentialism, positivistic philosophy, or anything else, the central question in Western philosophy is always how Christianity and God are to be understood.
Here again, philosophy and ethics must be examined by the same principles of religious criticism, so that their relative superiority or inferiority, depth or shallowness, and correctness or heresy may be judged.