Letter to Shimoyama（3rd of 8th paragraph）

Main Text

The Great Teacher Jikaku placed his commentaries before the image of the Buddha and prayed that he might be informed whether or not they conformed to the Buddha’s will. He then dreamed that he shot an arrow that struck the sun.

Letter to Shimoyama（3rd of 8th paragraph）

—————————-～（ continued from the previous section)～————————-

Despite this fact, the men who carried on the teaching line of their original teacher, Dengyō, on Mount Hiei should have asserted that there were only seven schools. Among these were two men, however, who journeyed to China, the Great Teacher Jikaku, third disciple of the Great Teacher Dengyō, and the Great Teacher Chishō, a latter disciple of the Reverend Gishin, the first chief priest of Mount Hiei. At that time the question of the relative worth of the T’ien-t’ai, or Tendai, and True Word teachings was a prime subject of controversy and debate in Japan, and therefore whenever these men met with outstanding T’ien-t’ai or True Word leaders in China, they invariably questioned them as to the relative superiority and profundity of the two teachings.

But among the renowned masters of the time there were some who declared the True Word teachings to be superior, others who favored the T’ien-t’ai teachings, some who held the two teachings to be equal in value, and some who asserted they were alike in terms of principle but different in practice. None, however, could produce clear passages of scripture to support their contentions. Whichever teaching they favored, they were speaking out of mere conjecture.

The Great Teacher Jikaku returned to Japan without pursuing his studies thoroughly, and after his return wrote some fourteen volumes of commentary on the scriptures. These consisted of a seven-volume commentary on the Diamond Crown Sutra and a seven-volume commentary on the Susiddhikara Sutra. In essence these commentaries assert that the Lotus Sutra and the three True Word sutras, the Mahāvairochana [Diamond Crown, and Susiddhikara], are alike in terms of principle but differ in practice.40

In these commentaries, Jikaku based his writings on the fundamental ideas put forth in The Annotations on the Mahāvairochana Sutra and The Commentary on the Meaning of the Mahāvairochana Sutra. But he was not entirely certain of the correctness of his writings. Therefore, it is said, he placed his commentaries before the image of the Buddha and prayed that he might be informed whether or not they conformed to the Buddha’s will. He then dreamed that he shot an arrow that struck the sun. Awaking with a start, he took the dream to be an auspicious omen and declared that there was now no longer any doubt about the superiority of the True Word teachings. He requested that the emperor issue an edict to this effect.41

Jikaku was waiting for the edict to be circulated throughout Japan when he suddenly fell victim to the plague, and within the space of four months his earthly existence came to an end.

———————————-～(to be continued to the next section)～————————

Background

One of Nichiren Daishonin’s ten major writings, Letter to Shimoyama is a petition to Shimoyama Hyōgo Gorō Mitsumoto, the steward of the district of Shimoyama near Mount Minobu in the province of Kai. The Daishonin wrote it on behalf of a priest named Inaba-bō Nichiei in the sixth month of 1277, while residing at Mount Minobu.

Inaba-bō Nichiei had been converted by Nikkō to the Daishonin’s teachings, and tried to convert Shimoyama Mitsumoto, who was Inaba-bō’s father (or, according to another account, his lord in the feudal system of the time). But Shimoyama, who was a believer in the Nembutsu, or Pure Land, teachings, furiously opposed the priest’s new-found faith. Hearing this, the Daishonin wrote a petition on behalf of Inaba-bō to persuade Shimoyama to discard the Pure Land teachings and take faith in the Lotus Sutra.

The petition explains the superiority of the Lotus Sutra to the Pure Land doctrines, and states that Inaba-bō’s conversion to the Lotus Sutra constitutes a distinguished act of loyalty to Shimoyama. Later, Shimoyama in fact gave up the Nembutsu and became a follower of the Daishonin’s teachings.

In the beginning paragraphs, the voice is that of Inaba-bō addressing his angry father or lord, Shimoyama. Inaba-bō explains that he has ceased reciting the Amida Sutra and instead taken up recitation of the Lotus Sutra because of an encounter with the Sage Nichiren. He says he went to Mount Minobu to listen to a lecture by the sage without the intention of taking faith. He writes very briefly of what he felt about the lecture.

The letter then outlines the Daishonin’s lecture from a third-party viewpoint. The lecture first introduces the five guides of propagation, the teaching, the time, the people’s capacity, the country, and the proper sequence of propagation. Then it describes the history of the spread of Buddhism in Japan. This begins with the Chinese priest Chien-chen (known in Japan as Ganjin), who brought the Hinayana precepts and T’ien-t’ai’s teachings to Japan but propagated only the former, which he thought were appropriate to the time. Later Dengyō appeared and studied T’ien-t’ai’s teachings and investigated thoroughly the doctrines of the six schools of Nara, demonstrating the superiority of the former over the latter. Dengyō also asserted that the Hinayana precepts should be abolished and replaced with the Mahayana precepts.

Next, the Daishonin describes the spread of Buddhism during the Former, Middle, and Latter Days of the Law. The Buddhist leaders in the first two periods knew the great Law of the Lotus Sutra but did not expound it because the time had not yet come for its propagation. As the Daishonin points out, the Latter Day is the time for the advent of Bodhisattva Superior Practices, who will spread the essence of the Lotus Sutra, which is Nam-myoho-renge-kyo.

Then the Daishonin refutes the views of Ryōkan, who attempted to restore the Hinayana precepts and who urged the shogunate to put to death his rival, Nichiren Daishonin. Basing his view on the Lotus Sutra, the Daishonin regards Ryōkan as the third of the three powerful enemies and himself as the votary of the sutra. He also describes the other persecutions he experienced.

He points out the errors of the shogunate and the Buddhist schools it supported, the Pure Land, True Word, and Zen schools. Moreover, he describes how Dengyō’s teachings were distorted by his successors, Jikaku and Chishō, who incorporated True Word teachings into the Tendai school. In addition, he asserts that the Pure Land and Zen schools have turned the people away from the Lotus Sutra. As a result of these errors, the three calamities and seven disasters have occurred.

The Daishonin explains that he submitted his work On Establishing the Correct Teaching for the Peace of the Land to Hōjō Tokiyori, the retired regent and de facto leader of the shogunate, to identify the basic cause for these calamities. Not only was his advice unheeded, however, but he was subjected to various persecutions. Finally, without carrying out a full investigation, the shogunate exiled him to Sado Island. Because the internal strife he had predicted took place, he was pardoned from exile and summoned to an interview with Hei no Saemon, a powerful official of the shogunate. Hei no Saemon asked him when the Mongols would attack Japan, referring to another of the Daishonin’s prophecies. The Daishonin replied that it would occur within the year and warned Hei no Saemon that mistaken Buddhist teachings should not be relied on for prayers to protect the nation. When his admonitions went unheeded, he retired to Mount Minobu. Thus at this time the country appeared to be on the verge of ruin.

At the end of the letter, the voice returns to that of Inaba-bō Nichiei. He says that the Sage Nichiren regretted the turn events had taken, expressing great pity for the people. He says he himself has written down here only a part of the lecture, and urges Shimoyama to take faith in the sage’s teachings. He expresses his conviction that, in discarding the Nembutsu and embracing the Lotus Sutra, he had the happiness of his parents in mind, and is therefore exercising the highest form of filial piety.

 

Notes

40. According to this interpretation, both the Mahāvairochana Sutra and the Lotus Sutra reveal the doctrine of three thousand realms in a single moment of life, and therefore these two sutras are equal in terms of principle; however, because the Mahāvairochana Sutra contains descriptions of mudras (hand gestures) and mantras (mystic formulas), it is superior to the Lotus Sutra in terms of practice.

41. For further details regarding this story, see The Selection of the Time (I, p. 571).

Home
Copied title and URL