Letter to Shimoyama（3rd of the 5th paragraph）

Main Text

And he, the priest Two Fires, for that reason secretly works to spread slanderous reports about me here and there in an attempt to silence me.

Letter to Shimoyama（3rd of 5th paragraph）

 

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

Shakyamuni Buddha acts not only as a wise father for us, but as an enlightened teacher and a sage sovereign. In his one person he embodies these three virtues [of parent, teacher, and sovereign], and with his Buddha eye he surveys the evil age of the future and describes for us how it will be.

In his passage of description he says, “After I have passed away and countless hundreds of years have gone by . . . ” This refers to the period two thousand years or more after the Buddha’s passing. He says, “The sages of the four stages too will have all passed away.” This refers, does it not, to the twenty-four successors to the Buddha’s teaching? “After the Former Day of the Law has ended” indicates that he is speaking about the Middle and Latter Days of the Law.

“There will be monks who will give the appearance of abiding by the rules of monastic discipline.” Now, in this Latter Day of the Law, to whom can we point in this land of Japan as an example of a monk who gives the appearance of abiding by the precepts, so that the World-Honored One of Great Enlightenment will be proved to be no speaker of untruth? Surely the sutra passage is not referring to men or women lay believers or to nuns, for it speaks only of “monks.” There are countless monks or priests in this land of Japan. But among them those who appear to possess nothing more than the prescribed “three robes and one begging bowl” can be said to “give the appearance” of abiding by the precepts. Thus only priests who are observers of the precepts would seem to fit the description. And among all the observers of the precepts, the passage describes these men as “giving the appearance of abiding by the rules of monastic discipline,” so it must refer to someone of the Precepts school.

It says, “They will scarcely ever read or recite the sutras.” If this does not refer to the priest Ryōkan of Gokuraku-ji temple in Kamakura in the province of Sagami, then who else can we point to to prove the validity of the passage?

The passage goes on to say that these persons “will go about searching for alms like so many huntsmen who, narrowing their eyes, stalk softly. They will be like a cat on the prowl for mice. Outwardly they will seem to be wise and good, but within they will harbor greed and jealousy.” If this is not Ryōkan, the priest Two Fires,20 then who are we to believe the Buddha is speaking about when he talks of a monk with three robes and one begging bowl who stalks like a hunter or a cat?

Alas, the laymen, laywomen, nuns, and patrons of Buddhism in our day are like so many mountain deer or household mice who are deceived and preyed upon by the priest Two Fires, who is like a huntsman or a cat. In our present age these people have been abandoned by the Sun Goddess and Great Bodhisattva Hachiman, the protectors of our nation, and will sink in defeat before the armies of other nations. They will be seized as mice are seized by a cat, and will die by arrows like deer before a huntsman. The laymen and warriors will be pierced with arrows and cut down with swords, and the laywomen will be taken prisoner and dragged off to foreign lands, their fate like that of Wang Chao-chün21 or Yang Kuei-fei. And in their next existence every one of these persons will fall into the great citadel of the hell of incessant suffering.

Because I can see what will happen, I do not hesitate for fear of the great evil that may be done to me by Ryōkan’s patrons, but speak out strongly against him. And he, the priest Two Fires, for that reason secretly works to spread slanderous reports about me here and there in an attempt to silence me.

———————————-～(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

20. In a play on words, the Daishonin changes the name Ryōkan-bō (Priest Ryōkan) to Ryōka-bō, which means Priest Two Fires. In a passage in The Royal Palace, he refers to the two major fires that erupted on the grounds of Ryōkan’s temple, Gokuraku-ji, that inspired this nickname: “A name reveals the essence of a thing. The slanderous sage, Priest Two Fires, is the teacher of people high and low throughout Kamakura. One of the two fires was concentrated on his own grounds, reducing Gokuraku-ji [Paradise Temple] to Jigoku-ji [Hell Temple]. The other fire leaped over to devour the ruler’s palace. . . .” (I, p. 488).

21. A court lady who served Emperor Yüan of the Former Han dynasty. In 33 b.c.e. she was forced for political reasons to marry the leader of the Hsiung-nu, a powerful central Asian tribe, by the Han emperor who feared their invasion.

Home
Copied title and URL