Letter to Shōmitsu-bō

Revere the Correct Law

The Mahavairocana Sutra cannot compare. It steals the heart of the Lotus Sutra. The Lotus Sutra alone reveals the truth. Do not be deceived by false teachings. I revere the correct Law.

The Single Vow

The Lyrics of this song

Through the shifting mists of Akashi Bay, Old illusions fade away. The secret forms and words we keep Cannot fathom truth so deep. Not the transient dew at dawn, Not the floating weed withdrawn. Only the root beneath the sea, Awakens all eternity. Stand upon the single vow, Truth revealed here and now. Beyond the shadow, clear and strong, Here the endless realms belong. I revere the correct Law! Ink upon the weathered scroll, Written to protect the soul. Do not waver, do not yield, On this open battlefield. Stand upon the single vow, Truth revealed here and now. Beyond the shadow, clear and strong, Here the endless realms belong. I revere the correct Law! Hold the light against the cold. The sacred truth untold.

Chapter6(Demonstrating that the Lotus Sutra Is the Teaching of the Buddha’s True Intent)

Play
Question: Why do you alone spew forth such evil words about other people?

Answer: I, Nichiren, am not condemning others. I am only pointing out the questionable places in their doctrines. If they want to get angry at me, then let them!

Long ago, the non-Buddhist doctrines spread throughout the five regions of India and prevailed there for eight hundred or a thousand years, so that everyone, from the wheel-turning kings on down to the common people, bowed their heads in reverence. And yet all its ninety-five schools were from first to last refuted by the Buddha. [In China,] the fallacious doctrines of the priests of the Summary of the Mahayana school flourished for more than a hundred years, but were later defeated; and the mistaken opinions of the Buddhist leaders of the north and the south, after being accepted for more than three hundred years, were likewise refuted. In Japan, the doctrines of the six schools of Nara were overturned after thriving for more than two hundred and sixty years. In fact, the Great Teacher Dengyō refutes them in some of his writings.

In Japan, there are five schools that belong to Mahayana Buddhism, namely, the Dharma Characteristics, Three Treatises, Flower Garland, True Word, and Tendai schools. There are three Hinayana schools, the Dharma Analysis Treasury, Establishment of Truth, and Precepts schools. Next, though the True Word, Flower Garland, Three Treatises, and Dharma Characteristics schools derive from Mahayana Buddhism, if one examines them closely, one will find that in fact they all belong to the Hinayana.

A school may be defined as something that encompasses all of the three types of learning, namely, precepts, meditation, and wisdom. Leaving aside meditation and wisdom, we should note that, by means of the precepts they uphold, the various schools can be clearly divided into those of Mahayana and of Hinayana. Neither the Tō-ji branch of the True Word school nor the Dharma Characteristics, Three Treatises, or Flower Garland school has its own ordination platform for administering the precepts, and therefore they must use the platform at Tōdai-ji temple. This means that they are binding themselves to the precepts put forth by the Precepts school, a Hinayana school, which are no better than donkey’s milk or stinking excrement. In terms of the precepts that they observe, therefore, all these schools are to be classified as Hinayana.

The Great Teacher Dengyō received instruction in the teachings of the two schools of T’ien-t’ai and True Word in China and brought them back to Enryaku-ji on Mount Hiei. But in urging the establishment of an ordination platform for administering the precepts, Dengyō referred to the perfect meditation, perfect wisdom, and perfect precepts of the perfect and immediate enlightenment of the T’ien-t’ai, or Tendai, school. So it appears that he did not think it proper to use the term “True Word school” alongside the name “Tendai school.” In the memorial that he submitted to the imperial court, he refers to the concentration and insight and the Vairochana discipline practices of the Tendai Lotus school. And the oath concerning the precepts that Dengyō handed down to his disciple Jikaku in fact speaks of “the concentration and insight and the Vairochana discipline practices of the Tendai Lotus school,” with the term “True Word school” clearly omitted.

The Tendai Lotus school is known as the Buddha-founded school, having been established by Shakyamuni Buddha himself. The True Word school was the invention of ordinary persons, and its scholars and teachers of later times were the ones who began to use the term school to describe themselves. However, they ascribed the founding of their school to the Thus Come One Mahāvairochana and Bodhisattva Maitreya. Nevertheless, only the single school devoted to the Lotus Sutra conforms to the true intent of Shakyamuni Buddha.

The Hinayana teachings are divided into two schools, eighteen schools, or even twenty schools, but in essence they all expound a single principle, namely, the impermanence of all phenomena.

The Dharma Characteristics school teaches that all phenomena arise from the mind alone and have actual existence. There are countless different schools belonging to the Mahayana teachings, but insofar as they subscribe to this view—that the mind alone produces all phenomena, and that phenomena have actual existence—then they may be regarded as constituting a single school. The Three Treatises school teaches that all phenomena arise from the mind alone and are without real existence. Again, there are countless different Mahayana schools, but insofar as they subscribe to this view—that the mind alone produces all phenomena, and that phenomena have no real existence—then they may be regarded as constituting a single school. So all these schools stress one or the other of two partial truths of the Mahayana: that phenomena have actual existence, and that they are non-substantial in nature.

As for the Flower Garland and True Word schools, if we were to speak generously of them, we could say that they represent the doctrine of the Middle Way that is independent of non-substantiality and temporary existence, while if we were to speak strictly of them, we would have to say that they are on a level with the two above-mentioned Mahayana views of phenomena. In terms of their content, the Mahāvairochana Sutra cannot compare even with the Flower Garland or Wisdom sutras. But because so many distinguished persons still put their faith in the Mahāvairochana Sutra, the situation is rather like that of a king who bestows his love on a woman of humble station. The Mahāvairochana Sutra is like a woman of humble station because its principles do not go beyond the doctrine of the Middle Way that is independent of non-substantiality and temporary existence. And the scholars and teachers who have upheld the Mahāvairochana Sutra are comparable to a king because they command respect and influence among the people.

Since we are now living in the latter age when people are shallow in wisdom and puffed up with pride, it is unlikely that anyone will heed the points I have made in the discussion above. But when a sage or worthy appears, then the full truth of the matter will no doubt become clear. Because I care about you, I have written this letter as a guide. I hope you will study it when you have time.

The points I have touched on here are very important matters of doctrine. When paying respect to Bodhisattva Space Treasury, you should make a regular practice of reading this aloud.

Sent to Shōmitsu-bō.

Nichiren

Notes

15. The Summary of the Mahayana school was one of the thirteen major schools of Buddhism in China. It is based on Asanga’s Summary of the Mahayana, which expounds the Consciousness-Only doctrine. Summary of the Mahayana was translated into Chinese by Paramārtha and propagated by his followers, and this school was formed as a result. In the early T’ang dynasty, however, Hsüan-tsang made a new translation of Summary of the Mahayana, and his disciple Tz’u-en founded the Dharma Characteristics school, which also expounded the Consciousness-Only doctrine. As a p.871result, the Summary of the Mahayana school gradually declined.

16. Dengyō refuted the doctrines of the six schools of Nara in several writings including A Clarification of the Schools Based on T’ien-t’ai’s Doctrine and The Outstanding Principles of the Lotus Sutra.

17. Tōdai-ji is the head temple of the Flower Garland school. Ganjin established a Hinayana ordination platform at Tōdai-ji in 754.

18. In The Regulations for Students of the Mountain School, Dengyō specifies the regulations for those students who were annually appointed by the court to study the Tendai teachings on Mount Hiei, and sets forth the Mahayana precepts into which they were to be initiated when they were ordained. He says that, after their ordination, the students shall remain on Mount Hiei for twelve years and carry out two types of practice, the “concentration and insight” and the “Vairochana discipline.”

19. The first schism in the Buddhist Order took place about one hundred years after Shakyamuni’s death because of a dispute over five new interpretations of doctrine advanced by a monk called Mahādeva. As a result, the community split into the conservative Theravada school and the more liberal Mahāsamghika school. These two schools later split into ten and eight schools, respectively. The twenty schools refer to the Theravada and Mahāsamghika schools and their eighteen derivative branches.

20. That is, among the three truths, they emphasize either the truth of temporary existence or the truth of non-substantiality. The former position is represented by the Dharma Characteristics school, which maintains that all phenomena arise solely from the ālaya-consciousness but possess a temporary reality. The latter position is represented by the Three Treatises school, which stresses that because all things arise through dependent origination their existence is in itself non-substantial. These teachings both correspond to the connecting teaching, or introductory Mahayana, which does not yet reveal the truth of the Middle Way.

21. This indicates the doctrine of the specific teaching, a higher level of Mahayana addressed specifically to bodhisattvas. The teachings of this category reveal the three truths of the Middle Way, non-substantiality, and temporary existence, but show them as separate from and independent of one another.

22. Bodhisattva Space Treasury was the original object of devotion at Seichō-ji temple—where Nichiren Daishonin studied Buddhism in his boyhood—from the time of the priest Fushigi, who in 771 carved an image of the bodhisattva and enshrined it there.

Lecture

This chapter clarifies that the six schools of Nanto (Nara) were all refuted by the Great Teacher Dengyo, and that Dengyo treated the True Word (Shingon) teachings merely as a branch of the Lotus (Tendai Hokke) school. It emphasizes that the Buddha’s true intent is confined solely to the single school of the Lotus Sutra, and that the Mahavairocana Sutra, embodying only the distinct, step-by-step principle of the specific teaching, cannot compare to the perfectly harmonized principle of the Lotus Sutra. The treatise concludes by urging Shomitsu-bo to study these points thoroughly.

At the outset, addressing the question of whether the Daishonin is the only one who makes statements refuting other Buddhist schools, he cites several historical precedents: Shakyamuni refuted all ninety-five non-Buddhist Brahmanical schools in India; Tripitaka Master Xuanzang of the Tang dynasty refuted the Shelun (Shoron) school transmitted by Tripitaka Master Paramartha of the Liang dynasty; and the Great Teacher Tiantai refuted the erroneous assertions of the three schools of the south and seven schools of the north. Pointing out that the refutation of Shingon had already been accomplished by the Great Teacher Dengyo in a certain work, the Daishonin demonstrates that it is entirely natural to overthrow the false doctrines of Shingon on the basis of the correct teaching.

The Great Teacher Dengyo’s Refutation of the True Word School

Regarding the passage, “This matter has been refuted in a certain writing of the Great Teacher Dengyo,” it is understood to refer to a description in the Ehyo-shu (A Collection of Authoritative Texts), as the Daishonin states in On Repaying Debts of Gratitude (Hoon Sho):

“In China there were various theories concerning the relative superiority of these two teachings—concentration and insight and the True Word. Moreover, Meaning of the Mahāvairochana Sutra claims that, though they are equal in terms of principle, the True Word is superior in terms of practice.

The Great Teacher Dengyō, however, realized that this was an error on the part of the Tripitaka Master Shan-wu-wei and understood that the Mahāvairochana Sutra is inferior to the Lotus Sutra. Therefore, he did not establish the True Word teachings as an eighth school, but instead incorporated them into the teachings of the seventh school, the Lotus school, after removing from them the label “True Word school.” He declared that the Mahāvairochana Sutra is to be regarded as a supplementary sutra of the Lotus Tendai school and ranked it along with the Flower Garland, Larger Wisdom, and Nirvana sutras. However, at the time there was much dispute over whether or not a vitally important Mahayana specific ordination platform of perfect and immediate enlightenment should be established in Japan. Perhaps because of the trouble that arose on this account, it seems that the Great Teacher Dengyō did not give his disciples clear instructions concerning the relative superiority of the True Word and Tendai teachings.

In a work called A Clarification of the Schools Based on T’ien-t’ai’s Doctrine, however, he clearly states that the True Word school stole the correct doctrines of the Lotus Tendai school and incorporated them into its interpretation of the Mahāvairochana Sutra, thereafter declaring that the two schools were equal in terms of principle. Thus the True Word school had in effect surrendered to the Tendai school.” (WND-1, p. 704)

The Ehyo-shu composed by the Great Teacher Dengyo—formally titled Ehyo Tendai-shu (Relying upon the Tendai School)—opens with the preface stating that “the transmission of the Tendai school serves as a clear mirror for all schools,” clarifying that each Buddhist tradition established its school and formulated its doctrines by relying upon Tendai. Within it, he writes: “The newly arrived True Word practitioners obliterate the transmission received directly through writing, and the long-established Flower Garland practitioners conceal the overarching influence [of the Tendai school].” The phrase “obliterate the transmission received directly through writing” means that although Acarya Yi-xing’s Commentary on the Mahavairocana Sutra originally interpreted the sutra from the standpoint of the Tendai Lotus school (as Yi-xing was originally a Tendai monk), Kukai, while relying on that commentary, subordinated the Lotus Sutra below the three esoteric sutras of Mahavairocana, thereby disregarding Yi-xing’s lineage. In this way, Dengyo pointed out and refuted the error of the True Word school in surreptitiously incorporating Tendai doctrines and claiming that the Mahavairocana Sutra was superior.

Next, examining the matter from the standpoint of the precepts, the Daishonin declares that although the True Word, Hosso, Sanron, and Kegon schools claim to be Mahayana in name, because they rely on the Hinayana ordination platform at Todai-ji and maintain Hinayana precepts, “if judged in terms of the precepts, these schools must be considered Hinayana schools,” concluding that Shingon is likewise a Hinayana school.

A passage expressing the same intent is found in On the Proper Way to Preach the Doctrine (Homon Mosarubeki Yo no Koto):

“The Dharma Characteristics, Three Treatises, and Flower Garland schools, and the True Word school based at Tō-ji temple all belong to the category of Mahayana. But although in their practice of meditation and wisdom they follow Mahayana principles, they observe the Hinayana precepts administered by Tōdai-ji temple. Thus in the matter of precepts they belong to the Hinayana.” (WND-1, p. 345)

Furthermore, although the Great Teacher Dengyo traveled to Tang China to study and transmit the teachings of both the Tendai and True Word schools, he resolved to erect an ordination platform for the perfect and immediate precepts based on the theoretical teaching of the Lotus Sutra on Mount Hiei. Deciding that the name of the True Word school should not exist apart from the Tendai Lotus school, he struck out the school’s independent title and designated its standing as “the concentration and insight (shikan) and True Word (shingon) of the Tendai Lotus school,” defining Shingon as a secondary supporting scripture.

According to On Repaying Debts of Gratitude, the points on which Dengyo refuted the True Word school include:

1. Not establishing an independent school named True Word, but calling it the Tendai Lotus school;
2. Classifying the Mahavairocana Sutra as a secondary supporting sutra in his Shugo Kokkai Sho (A Treatise on the Protection of the Nation);
3. Directly refuting True Word in the Ehyo-shu;
4. Referring to Amoghavajra (Bukū), a patriarch of Shingon, as an ignorant “dullard” (ro-nin);
5. Recording the narrative of Hanguang (Ganko) that supports this assessment.

Thus, the true intention of the Great Teacher Dengyo was that “the ultimate intent known to the Buddha is solely the single school of the Lotus Sutra,” and he regarded the Tendai Lotus school as the very “school established by the Buddha” (Butsuritsu-shu).

Concluding his refutation of Shingon, the Daishonin evaluates the doctrinal content, stating: “If given their highest evaluation, the Flower Garland and True Word schools merely reach the ‘isolated middle’; if taken at their lowest, they fall into the Mahayana concepts of emptiness and existence.” He points out that the reason the True Word school—whose doctrinal principles are low and fail to reach even the Flower Garland and Wisdom sutras, let alone the Lotus Sutra—came to be so widely revered and propagated is because “many who appeared to be people of distinction believed in it.” As the Daishonin observes, “Treatise masters and scriptural teachers are like kings; because people love and admire them, they come to hold sovereign sway.” In other words, its spread was driven by teachers and scholars who appeared admirable and impressive, such as Shan-wu-wei, who traveled from India to China, and Kukai, who studied in Tang China and was patronized by the imperial court.

Ultimately, Buddhism must be judged by the depth of the doctrine itself, in accordance with the golden rule: “Rely on the Law and not upon persons.” Even if evaluated generously, the principle expounded in True Word is merely the “isolated middle” (tan-chu)—a middle truth posited by denying the truths of emptiness and provisional existence—falling far short of the perfectly harmonized three truths taught in the Lotus Sutra. Evaluated strictly, it is nothing more than the shallow principles of emptiness and existence found in the connecting teaching (tsugyo), differing little from the doctrines of the Sanron and Hosso schools. To claim that such a teaching is “equal in principle” to the Lotus Sutra is the height of presumption.

The fact that the Daishonin consistently refutes the heretical doctrine of “equal in principle, superior in practice” among the various errors of Shingon throughout this letter is likely out of consideration for the fact that Seicho-ji was an esoteric Tendai (Taimitsu) temple, and that Shomitsu-bo had long been steeped in these erroneous doctrines. From the phrase, “Because I felt deep pity for you, I have written down this summary outline,” one can sense the Daishonin’s profound compassion to dispel the slander of the Law residing within the disciple’s heart.

Finally, the Daishonin’s instruction at the close of this treatise—“This is a profound and vital doctrine; you should go before Bodhisattva Space Treasury and constantly read it”—reflects his heartfelt desire to have it read before the assembly of Seicho-ji, echoing his words to the monks of Seicho-ji: “This letter is to be read aloud by the priest Sado and Āchārya Suke before the statue of Bodhisattva Space Treasury for all the priests of Seichō-ji to hear.” (WND-1, p. 652), so that all might awaken to the truth.