On Consecrating an Image of ShakyamuniBuddha Made by Shijō Kingo

Chapter1(Those Who Uphold the Lotus Sutra Acqire the Five Types of Vision)

Main Text

IN your daily records you write that you have fashioned a wooden image of Shakyamuni Buddha. With regard to the eye-opening ceremony appropriate for such a statue, the Universal Worthy Sutra states, “This great vehicle sutra¹ is the treasure storehouse of the Buddhas, the eye of the Buddhas of the ten directions and the three existences.” It also says, “This correct and equal sutra² is the eye of the Buddhas. It is through this sutra that the Buddhas are able to acquire the five types of vision.”

Concerning the phrase “acquire the five types of vision” in this sutra, this refers to the physical eyes, the heavenly eye, the wisdom eye, the Dharma eye, and the Buddha eye. These five types of vision are naturally acquired by one who upholds the Lotus Sutra, just as the person who becomes the ruler of a state will naturally be obeyed by all the people of that state, or as the lord of the great ocean will as a matter of course be followed by the fish who dwell there.

The Flower Garland, Āgama, Correct and Equal, Wisdom, and Mahāvairochana sutras may possess the five types of vision in name, but they do not possess them in reality. The Lotus Sutra possesses them in both name and reality. And even if it did not possess them in name, you may be certain that it would possess them in reality.

Notes

1. “This great vehicle sutra” indicates the Lotus Sutra. The Universal Worthy Sutra is regarded as an epilogue to the Lotus Sutra.

2. “This correct and equal sutra” here refers to the Lotus Sutra.

Lecture

This writing is also known by the alternate title “On the Eye-Opening of a Statue of Shakyamuni Buddha.” It is Nichiren Daishonin’s reply, dated the seventh month of Kenji 2 (1276), to Shijō Kingo’s request that he perform the eye-opening ceremony for a wooden image of Shakyamuni Buddha that Kingo had made as a memorial offering for his deceased parents.

At the outset, the letter discusses the merits of creating a Buddha image, the eye-opening rite according to the Lotus Sutra, and the principle of “three thousand realms in a single moment of life.” It then notes that the Shijō family had been offering devotion to the Sun Deity (Dainichi Tennō) over a period of ninety days, explaining that all the functions of the Sun Deity ultimately derive from the power of Buddhism; it also expounds the great importance of filial piety toward one’s parents. The Daishonin praises Kingo’s unwavering loyalty, urges him to repay the kindness of his lord, Ema, and stresses the vital spirit of “knowing and repaying debts of gratitude.”

Finally, he warns Kingo to be especially careful about drinking parties and the like so that no untoward incidents occur. This relates in particular to the fact that, after Kingo remonstrated with his lord Ema in Bun’ei 11 (1274), resentment against him grew stronger among his lord and colleagues. Kingo’s fervent faith in the Daishonin, together with his unchanging attitude of loyalty to his lord, only intensified his colleagues’ jealousy, culminating in Kenji 2 (1276), ninth month, in a punitive demotion and transfer to Echigo.

Thus, waves of serious persecution—slander and denunciations by colleagues—were surging behind Kingo, and he himself was in a very tense situation. Fully aware of these circumstances, the Daishonin strictly yet warmly instructs Kingo—who, under persecution, was inclined to ask leave of his house—to remain with his lord, repay his debts of gratitude, and carry his faith through to the end. Such is the tenor of this letter.

As for the date of composition, some have proposed Bun’ei 11 (1274) or Kenji 3 (1277), but the view that it was written on the fifteenth day of the seventh month of Kenji 2 (1276) seems most reasonable. A few lines in the original hand at the end of the text are preserved at Myōhon-ji in Kamakura.

On the Making of a Statue of Shakyamuni

In Nichiren Daishonin’s Buddhism, the Gohonzon of the Three Great Secret Laws is the fundamental basis of everything. As he states, “ The Buddha’s will is the Lotus Sutra, but the soul of Nichiren is nothing other than Nam-myoho-renge-kyo.” (Reply to Kyō-ō, WND p. 412). The Gohonzon he inscribed is therefore the fundamental object of devotion in faith. To make as one’s honzon, apart from this, a statue of Shakyamuni—or any of various buddhas, bodhisattvas, or deities—is without value; not only does it bring no benefit, it constitutes a deviation from the correct object of devotion.

Yet, as the title indicates, this letter concerns Shijō Kingo’s creation of an image of Shakyamuni and his request that the Daishonin open its eyes. The rationale for creating a Buddha image will be treated under “Eye-Opening” below, but why does the Daishonin accept—and even praise—Kingo’s request?

Nikkō Shōnin (Dayuan?)* and especially Nichikan Shōnin, in Mappō Sōō Shō, first explain why a richly adorned physical image should not be made the honzon, and then set forth in detail why, although it is not the honzon, the act of creating a Shakyamuni image may nonetheless be commended. In brief:

(1) From principle (reason):

• Since the Latter Day is the time of sowing, one should make the Buddha who sows the seed the object of devotion. On the Original Cause and Original Effect says, “The Buddha is the teacher for those to be ‘led out’ (matured and harvested); Nichiren is the leader who sows the seed” (GoshoZenshuu, p.874). Śākyamuni is the teacher for the benefit of “liberation,” while Nichiren Daishonin is the Buddha who sows the seed; therefore one should not establish a physical image as the honzon.

• In the Former and Middle Days, beings had good roots from the past; they had deep karmic ties to the three virtues even through forms. In the Latter Day, beings lack such roots; their karmic connection to the three virtues through a physical Śākyamuni is shallow. As stated in On the Five Guides for Propagation (WND1, p.542), “During the first two periods, the two thousand or more years that make up the Former and Middle Days of the Law, there were still some persons who had received the seed of Buddhahood, such as those who lived during the more than forty years when Shakyamuni preached in the world. But at such a time one must not, without stopping to consider the capacities of the people, thoughtlessly preach the Lotus Sutra, the true sutra.At present, however, we have already entered the third period, the Latter Day of the Law. The persons who formed a relationship with the Buddha during the time he was in the world have little by little diminished in number, and all those who have the capacity to attain Buddhahood through the two categories of provisional and true sutras have disappeared. “Thus the honzon must be that to which we have living ties; in our age, one does not set up a Shakyamuni image as the honzon.

• In physical images, Law and Person are in a superior-inferior relation, with the Law surpassing and the person inferior. But Questions and Answers on the Object of Devotion (WND2, p.788) says “As the object of devotion one should select that which is superior. “; hence a physical image is not adopted as the honzon.

(2) From scriptural proof:

• Words and Phrases (vol. 8): “This sutra is the relics of the Dharma-body; one should not additionally enshrine the relics of the living body.”

• Rituals for the Lotus Samādhi Repentance: “Within the hall, spread a fine high seat and enshrine the whole Lotus Sutra; there is no need to place images, relics, or other scriptures.”

• Matters That the Followers of the Fuji School Should Know (GoshoZenshuu, p.1606, l.2): “In the saint’s established teaching, never take painted or wooden images of buddhas and bodhisattvas as the honzon; solely according to the intent of the writings, make the five characters of Myoho-renge-kyo the honzon—namely, the saint’s own-hand Gohonzon.”

Thus from both reason and scriptural proof it is clear that, in this Latter Day, a Shakyamuni image is not to be made the honzon. Why then did the Daishonin still praise Kingo’s making of a statue?

Because, although not as honzon, there are three considerations:

1. The Daishonin’s era was still the very beginning of propagation; while not his ultimate intent, he permitted it as an expedient appropriate to time and circumstance.

2. Since Japan then universally revered Amida as honzon, rejecting an Amida image and erecting a Shakyamuni image was itself praiseworthy. To establish Shakyamuni is to return to the Lotus; to return to the Lotus in the Latter Day is to take refuge in the Original Buddha, the rebirth of Superior Practices (Jōgyō).

3. From the vantage of the Daishonin’s “observing the mind,” the image of the practicing Shakyamuni reflected, as it were, the Original Buddha of ichinen-sanzen— the Buddha of self-enjoyment.

For similar reasons others—such as the lay nun Nichigan and Toki Jōnin—also made Shakyamuni images (not as the fundamental honzon), each for a specific occasion and connection; they were temporary favors, like a stepchild briefly cherished. And the Great Gohonzon of the High Sanctuary of the Essential Teaching had not yet been established—those images were but like fireflies’ light while awaiting the risen moon.

Now, however, since “At this time the countless Bodhisattvas of the Earth will appear and establish in this country the object of devotion, foremost in Jambudvīpa, that depicts Shakyamuni Buddha of the essential teaching attending [the eternal Buddha]. ” (The Object of Devotion for Observing the Mind Established in the Fifth Five-Hundred-Year Period after the Thus Come One’s , WND1, p.376), over seven hundred years have passed. The Three Great Secret Laws of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo of the Lifespan chapter’s hidden depths are, as stated, “First in all Jambudvīpa”—the one and only honzon for all people of the world. Today, therefore, there is no need to make or praise Shakyamuni images; one should instead regard the Gohonzon of the Three Great Secret Laws as absolute and apply oneself to faith, practice, and study.

On Eye-Opening

“Eye-opening” means installing in a statue the spirit of the Buddha. Before discussing this here, a word on the origin of making Buddha images.

Ekottara Āgama, vol. 28, relates that King Udayana, longing for Śākyamuni who had ascended to the Trāyastriṃśa heaven, carved an image out of ox-head sandalwood; hearing of this, King Prasenajit had a five-foot image cast of polished gold. The sutra says, “At that time, for the first time within Jambudvīpa, there were these two images of the Tathāgata,” indicating the beginning of image-making.

Although translated in 384, the source likely dates from the 2nd–3rd century; the episode probably reflects that period. The earliest images were not made originally for worship, but out of yearning for the Buddha’s form. Generally, for roughly five centuries after the Buddha’s passing, it is thought there was an aniconic period without worship images. As Matsumoto Bunzaburō notes in The Origins of Buddhist Images and Paintings, the absence was not for lack of skill but by deliberate avoidance, since the Buddha, being sublime, was thought inexpressible in form. Hence legends such as the painter unable to behold the Buddha’s brilliance, tracing his reflection upon water.

Thus, in early times, the Buddha was represented indirectly—by footprints, stupas, the vajra-throne beneath the bodhi tree—and these were revered as his symbols. Later, as images spread, rules arose: depict the noble, harmonious, dignified form with the thirty-two major marks and eighty minor characteristics; avoid defective forms as inauspicious; follow specified dimensions and materials. After making an image, one hastened to conduct the eye-opening rite, lest delay bring ill fortune. Rituals varied by school; Ritual Manual for the Samādhi of Enshrining All Tathāgatas says, “Dotting the eyes to make it resemble,” indicating the sculptor opened the eyes. In Japan, at the 752 eye-opening of the Great Buddha of Tōdai-ji, the high priest Bodhisena held the brush.

How, then, does the Daishonin’s eye-opening differ in Kingo’s case?

Opening the Eyes of Wooden and Painted Images states: “Since the Buddha’s passing, two kinds of images, wooden and painted, have been made of him. They possess thirty-one features but lack the pure and far-reaching voice. Therefore, they are not equal to the Buddha. They are also devoid of the spiritual aspect. The Buddha in the flesh is as different from a wooden or painted image as the heavens are from the earth, or clouds from mud. Why, then, does The Epilogue to the Mahāparinirvāna Sutra state that both the living Buddha and a wooden or painted image made of him after his passing bestow equal benefit? Indeed, the Jeweled Necklace Sutra absolutely declares that a wooden or painted image is inferior to the living Buddha.When one places a sutra in front of a wooden or painted image of the Buddha, the image becomes endowed with all thirty-two features.” (WND1, p.85)

That is, wooden or painted images possess thirty-one of the thirty-two marks but lack the Brahma-voice; hence, as mere forms, they cannot function as Buddhas. Of the two dharmas, form and mind, form can be crafted but mind cannot. Therefore, by giving the image the Brahma-voice and the mind-dharm, it becomes a Buddha endowed with the thirty-two marks—this is eye-opening.

When the Sutra is placed before the image, each character becomes the Buddha’s Brahma-voice; thus the thirty-two marks are complete and the image is “opened.” Since the written characters are the mind-dharm manifested as form, placing the Sutra supplies both mind and form.

The crucial question is: which Sutra? “When an Āgama sutra is placed in front of a wooden or painted image, the image becomes equal to a voice-hearer. When one of the common teachings on wisdom, which were preached at the various assemblies held during the Correct and Equal and the Wisdom periods, is placed before it, the image becomes equal to a cause-awakened one. When one of the specific or perfect teachings preached during the Flower Garland, Correct and Equal, or Wisdom period is placed before it, the image becomes equal to a bodhisattva. Yet in none of these cases, either, does it in any way become equal to a Buddha.  Buddha Eye’s mudra and Mahāvairochana’s mantra described in the Mahāvairochana, Diamond Crown, and Susiddhikara sutras are useless, for although their names represent the Buddha eye and the great sun, in reality they do not possess these qualities. Similarly, even the Buddha who appears in the Flower Garland Sutra is not the Buddha of the perfect teaching, though his name [Vairochana] suggests that he is. When the Lotus Sutra is placed before an image possessing thirty-one features, the image never fails to become the Buddha of the pure and perfect teaching.” (Opening the Eyes of Wooden and Painted Images, wND1, p.86)

Because Shingon performed eye-openings with the Mahāvairocana Sutra, true efficacy was lost: “As for the assertion that the eye-opening ceremony for wooden and painted images cannot be carried out without the use of True Word mudras and mantras, this is the sheerest nonsense! Are we to suppose that, before the True Word school appeared on the scene, wooden and painted Buddhist images could not be consecrated? In the period before the appearance of the True Word school, there were wooden and painted images in India, China, and Japan that walked about or preached the teachings or spoke aloud. It would rather appear that, since people have begun to use True Word mudras and mantras in consecrating the Buddha images, the effectiveness of the ceremony has been completely lost.” (The Selection of the Time, WND1, p.572)
And: “Therefore, one should understand that the daimoku of the Lotus Sutra represents the soul of all the sutras; it represents the eye of all the sutras. The Lotus Sutra should by rights be employed in eye-opening ceremonies to ensure their effectiveness. But instead of that, the Mahāvairochana and other sutras are employed in eye-opening ceremonies for all the various wooden or painted images of Buddhas. As a result, none of the Buddha images in the temples and pagodas of Japan, though their forms resemble that of the Buddha, are really Buddhas in mind. Rather they have the minds of ordinary beings who live in the nine worlds. ” (King Rinda, wND1, p.984)

As these passages show, true eye-opening can only be performed by means of the Lotus Sutra. Thus Questions and Answers on the Object of Devotion says, “The eye-opening of wooden and painted images must be solely by the Lotus Sutra” (366:14). On the Object of Devotion for Observing the Mind states, “In the end, unless it is the Buddha-seed of ichinen-sanzen, there can be no enlightenment for sentient beings; a wooden or painted honzon is in name only, without reality” (246:08). And our letter says, “That a spirit, called ‘soul,’ is infused into this painting or wood is due to the power of the Lotus Sutra” (1145:02).

Thus, only when the Three Great Secret Laws—Nam-myoho-renge-kyo—are used for eye-opening does the entire image function as a living Buddha; this is the principle underlying “plants and trees attaining Buddhahood.” In this letter, the eye-opening is performed for a statue of Shakyamuni, teaching that even wooden or painted images after the Buddha’s passing, when opened by the Lotus Sutra, can have benefit—while at the same time refuting reliance on Shakyamuni images and revealing the grand principle of eye-opening through the Three Great Secret Laws, thereby demonstrating the Gohonzon’s sublime power.

Moreover, as the letter says, “Those who uphold the Lotus Sutra naturally possess these five eyes.” Thus there is an issue of “eye-opening” for us ordinary people as well: it is fulfilled by embracing the Gohonzon, that is, by upholding the Lotus Sutra. To bring forth and polish the Buddha-life innate in each person through the Mystic Law, and to grow into the most fully human of human beings—this may be called the eye-opening within the individual.

Further, not shutting oneself up conservatively within the shell of self, but projecting into society—through human revolution wrought by the Mystic Law—one’s transformed life as a dynamic presence, and sublimating the Mystic Law’s philosophy within society: this, in the truest sense, is eye-opening.