How Those Initially Aspiring to the Way Can Attain Buddhahood through the Lotus Sutra

Chapter5(Refuting the Claim That the Lotus Sutra Is Only for Persons of the Two Vehicles)

Play
Question: In a commentary by T’ien-t’ai, it is stated that the bodhisattvas had already gained entrance [to enlightenment] through the various sutras. From this it must follow that the Lotus Sutra was preached merely for the sake of persons of the two vehicles and not for bodhisattvas, since the bodhisattvas had already gained enlightenment by the earlier sutras. If so, then one should understand that the words of the Buddha, “I have not yet revealed the truth,” “Honestly discarding expedient means,” and all the pronouncements found in the eight volumes of the Lotus Sutra, must have been spoken entirely for persons of the two vehicles and are not relevant to even a single bodhisattva. Is this correct?

Answer: The doctrine that the Lotus Sutra was preached solely for persons of the two vehicles and not for bodhisattvas was expounded in China before the time of T’ien-t’ai by the ten leading scholars representing the three schools of the south and seven schools of the north. But T’ien-t’ai refuted this doctrine and put an end to it, so that it is no longer propagated today. If you say that there are no bodhisattvas who profit from the Lotus Sutra, then how do you account for the passage that says, “When the bodhisattvas hear this Law, they will be released from all entanglements of doubt”? In view of this, can you possibly say that bodhisattvas derive no benefit from the sutra?

Or perhaps you will argue that the Lotus Sutra can benefit the bodhisattvas of dull faculties, as it does persons of the two vehicles, but that the bodhisattvas of keen faculties have already received sufficient benefit from the earlier sutras. If so, then how do you account for the passage in the sutra that says, “Those of keen capacity, of dull capacity—I cause the Dharma rain to rain on all equally,” or the passage that says, “All bodhisattvas who attain supreme perfect enlightenment in all cases do so through this sutra”? The meaning of these passages is that, regardless of whether their faculties are keen or dull, whether they abide by the precepts or break them, whether they are of exalted birth or humble, all bodhisattvas, all ordinary people, and all persons of the two vehicles shall become Buddhas and achieve the way through the Lotus Sutra.

If you say that those bodhisattvas who have received benefit from the Lotus Sutra are all persons of dull faculties, are you then prepared to say that Universal Worthy, Manjushrī, Maitreya, Medicine King, and all the others of the eighty thousand bodhisattvas are of dull faculties? And if you maintain that the bodhisattvas of keen faculties had already attained the way through the sutras preached prior to the Lotus Sutra, then just who are those bodhisattvas?

Moreover, this enlightenment attained by bodhisattvas through the earlier sutras—is it the same as the enlightenment described in the Lotus Sutra? If so, then it is in fact the enlightenment of the Lotus Sutra and not the result of the earlier sutras. And if it is an enlightenment other than that of the Lotus Sutra, then in which of the sutras that the Buddha “has preached, now preaches, and will preach” is it contained? In any event, if it is not the enlightenment of the Lotus Sutra, then it can only be a partial enlightenment and not true enlightenment.

Therefore, the Immeasurable Meanings Sutra states, “Therefore the way living beings gained was not uniform but differed in different cases.” It also says, “[As for those living beings who are unable to hear this sutra . . . ] they will in the end fail to gain unsurpassed enlightenment.” In these passages the Buddha is saying that the people attained different degrees of enlightenment through the sutras expounded prior to the Lotus Sutra, but in the end they did not attain the way of supreme enlightenment of the Lotus Sutra itself.

Notes

27. This statement actually appears in Miao-lo’s Annotations on “The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra.”

28. Lotus Sutra, chap. 2.

29. Ibid., chap. 5.

30. Ibid., chap. 10.

Lecture

Here, the Daishonin cites the view that the Lotus Sutra is solely for persons of the two vehicles and not for bodhisattvas, and that bodhisattvas attained the way through the pre-Lotus Sutra teachings, refuting the error of this claim.

One of the points in which the Lotus Sutra differs from the pre-Lotus Sutra teachings is that it expounds the attainment of Buddhahood by persons of the two vehicles. In the pre-Lotus Sutra teachings, persons of the two vehicles—voice-hearers and cause-awakened ones—were rebuked as being forever unable to attain Buddhahood. However, upon arriving at the Lotus Sutra, for the very first time, prophecies of future Buddhahood are bestowed upon all voice-hearers, beginning with Shariputra, as well as Maudgalyayana, Katyayana, Mahakashyapa, and Subhuti—known as the four great voice-hearers (written as bodhisattvas in the text) of medium capacity—and others such as Ananda.

It is likely from this that the idea arose that the Lotus Sutra is meant for persons of the two vehicles, whereas bodhisattvas attained the way through the pre-Lotus Sutra teachings.

As the basis for this claim, the passage stating that “bodhisattvas gain entrance at various places” is cited. This passage—”Persons of the two vehicles gain entrance only in the Lotus Sutra, while bodhisattvas are able to gain entrance at various places”—appears in the Great Teacher Miaole’s Hokke Gengi Shakusen (Annotations on “The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra”), which is a commentary on the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai’s Hokke Gengi (The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra), and was likely attributed here to the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai.

The question is raised as to whether this passage stating that bodhisattvas attained the way at various places means that they attained the way through the various pre-Lotus Sutra teachings; and if so, whether one should conclude that the passage “In these more than forty years, I have not yet revealed the truth” in the Immeasurable Meanings Sutra (Muryogi Sutra) and the passage “Honestly discarding expedient means, I will preach only the unsurpassed way” in the “Expedient Means” chapter of the Lotus Sutra were also meant entirely for persons of the two vehicles, and that not a single bodhisattva attains the way through the Lotus Sutra.

In response, the Daishonin points out that the view that the Lotus Sutra is solely for persons of the two vehicles and not for bodhisattvas was advocated by scholars prior to the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai known as the “three schools of the south and seven schools of the north” (nansan-hokushichi), and because the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai had already thoroughly refuted this erroneous doctrine, such a view is no longer widespread at present.

The “three schools of the south and seven schools of the north” refer to the various schools concerning the comparative classification of Buddhist teachings (kyoso hanjaku) that flourished during the Northern and Southern Dynasties period in China. In The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra (Hokke Gengi), the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai classified and organized them into three teachers of the south and seven teachers of the north; they were also called the ten teachers or ten streams of the south and north.

Establishing the classification of the five periods and eight teachings (goji-hakkyo), the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai refuted the doctrinal classifications of the three schools of the south and seven schools of the north, and proclaimed that the Lotus Sutra is foremost among all the sacred teachings of the Buddha’s lifetime.

Furthermore, the Daishonin states that since the “Expedient Means” (second) chapter of the Lotus Sutra declares, “The bodhisattvas, hearing this Law, have all already been freed from the meshes of doubt”—indicating that upon hearing the preaching of the Lotus Sutra, the bodhisattvas had all their various doubts resolved and were able to fathom the Buddha’s teaching—how could anyone claim that there is no benefit for bodhisattvas in the Lotus Sutra?

Moreover, against the view that among bodhisattvas, those of inferior or dull capacity attained the way through the Lotus Sutra along with persons of the two vehicles, whereas bodhisattvas of sharp capacity gained benefit through the pre-Lotus Sutra teachings, the Daishonin counters by citing the passage from the “Parable of the Medicinal Herbs” (fifth) chapter, “On those of sharp capacity and dull capacity alike, I rain down the rain of the Law equally, tirelessly and without cease,” and the passage from the “Teacher of the Law” (tenth) chapter, “The anuttara-samyak-sambodhi [unsurpassed, correct, and equal enlightenment] of all the bodhisattvas belongs in every case to this sutra. This sutra opens the door of expedient means and shows the true aspect of reality,” asking how one is to interpret these passages.

The passage from the “Parable of the Medicinal Herbs” chapter indicates that just as superior herbs and medium herbs, large trees and small trees all equally receive the blessing of the falling rain, so too do those of sharp capacity and dull capacity, those who uphold the precepts and those who break the precepts—all bodhisattvas, persons of the two vehicles, and ordinary people—all equally bathe in the benefit of the Lotus Sutra.

The passage from the “Teacher of the Law” chapter states that the anuttara-samyak-sambodhi—that is, the enlightenment of Buddhahood—of all bodhisattvas belongs entirely to the Lotus Sutra.

Incidentally, when the Daishonin elaborates on the meaning of the phrase “on those of sharp capacity and dull capacity alike” by saying “whether they uphold the precepts or break the precepts, whether they are noble or humble,” he is speaking on the basis of the words immediately preceding that phrase in the sutra: “whether noble or humble, superior or inferior, those who uphold the precepts or those who violate the precepts, those who are endowed with proper demeanor and those who are not, those of correct views and those of erroneous views.”

Furthermore, the Daishonin asks: If the bodhisattvas who gain benefit in the Lotus Sutra are limited to those of dull capacity, then can one call the eighty thousand bodhisattvas who attended the assembly of the Lotus Sutra—such as Universal Worthy (Fugen), Manjushri (Monju), Maitreya (Miroku), and Medicine King (Yakuo)—bodhisattvas of dull capacity?

Bodhisattva Maitreya is Shakyamuni’s successor-designate, and Universal Worthy and Manjushri are Shakyamuni’s flanking attendants; all of them are bodhisattvas of profound understanding and could not possibly be of dull capacity. The Daishonin counters that if these bodhisattvas are considered to be of dull capacity, then where are the bodhisattvas of sharp capacity to be found? Incidentally, although Bodhisattva Universal Worthy arrived only in the “Encouragements of the Bodhisattva Universal Worthy” (twenty-eighth) chapter, the Daishonin includes him among the eighty thousand bodhisattvas assembled in the “Introduction” (first) chapter presumably because Universal Worthy is one of Shakyamuni’s flanking attendants and a leader among the bodhisattvas taught by the Buddha in his transient status (shakke).

In the first place, attaining the way outside of the Lotus Sutra is a provisional or partial attainment matching one’s stage, not true attainment of the way. Within the enlightenment of the two vehicles and among bodhisattvas, there are various stages and states of life; even if one achieves such partial attainments stage by stage, it is not the true enlightenment of three thousand realms in a single moment of life (ichinen sanzen).

Concerning this, the Immeasurable Meanings Sutra (Muryogi Sutra) states: “I made use of the power of expedient means to preach the Law in various ways. In these more than forty years, I have not yet revealed the truth. Therefore, the enlightenment attained by living beings differs according to the individual, and they are unable to quickly accomplish unsurpassed enlightenment (bodhi).”

In other words, the enlightenment attained in the pre-Lotus Sutra teachings differs from person to person, meaning that it is not unsurpassed enlightenment.

As the Daishonin states in The Object of Devotion for Observing the Mind Established in the Fifth Five-Hundred-Year Period after the Thus Come One’s Passing (Kanjin no Honzon Sho): ” Even before the advent of the Buddha, some Brahmans in India realized the correct view of life through the four Vedas. In China before the arrival of Buddhism, some realized the correct view through Taoism and Confucianism. Many bodhisattvas and ordinary people, endowed with keen faculties, perceived [even before they heard the Lotus Sutra] that Shakyamuni had planted the seeds of Buddhahood within them in the days of the Buddha Great Universal Wisdom Excellence or in the far more distant past [when he attained his original enlightenment]. They understood this by hearing the Mahayana sutras of the Flower Garland, Correct and Equal, and Wisdom periods. They were like the pratyekabuddhas [who could perceive the impermanence of life] at the sight of scattering blossoms or falling leaves. These, then, are the type of people who gained the way through teachings other than the Lotus Sutra.” (WND-1, p. 359). Thus, attaining the way in the pre-Lotus Sutra teachings means that those whose capacities were formed by hearing the Lotus Sutra in the remote past are able to awaken to the Law of the Lotus Sutra by taking the pre-Lotus Sutra teachings as an external cause; enlightenment does not reside within the pre-Lotus Sutra teachings themselves.

In this way, all bodhisattvas as well can achieve true attainment of the way only through the Lotus Sutra, and the claim that attaining the way through the Lotus Sutra is limited to persons of the two vehicles is a grave error.