The Selection of the Time

2025.06.09

The Selection of the Time

Nichiren, disciple of Shakyamuni Buddha

Background

This treatise, counted among Nichiren Daishonin’s five major writings, was written at Minobu in the first year of Kenji (1275) and was entrusted to a believer named Yui who lived in Nishiyama of Suruga Province. As with a number of his other important works, it is written in the form of a dialogue between the Daishonin and a hypothetical questioner.

The Daishonin had met and remonstrated with Hei no Saemon, who represented the regent Hōjō Tokimune, in the fourth month of 1274, after returning from his exile to Sado. When this, his third and last admonition to the government, went unheeded, the Daishonin left to live in the forest of Mount Minobu. In the tenth month of 1274, Mongol forces launched an invasion of Japan just as the Daishonin had predicted to Hei no Saemon during their meeting. News of the invasion, the first in Japan’s history, came as a profound shock. Though the invasion ultimately failed, people were terrified that the Mongols would seize the next opportunity to launch a second attack. It was amid this uneasy situation that the Daishonin wrote The Selection of the Time.

“Time” in the title, The Selection of the Time, refers to the Latter Day of the Law, when the “pure Law” of Shakyamuni’s teaching was to become obscured and lost and the “great pure Law” of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo was to be spread.

Nichiren Daishonin set forth elsewhere five guides or criteria for the propagation of Buddhism: namely, a correct understanding of (1) the teaching, (2) the people’s capacity, (3) the time, (4) the country, and (5) the sequence of propagation. The Selection of the Time places the greatest emphasis upon the factor of the time.

In this writing, the Daishonin refers to the five five-hundred-year periods described in the Great Collection Sutra to outline the events of Buddhism over the first twenty-five hundred years following Shakyamuni’s passing. (1) In the first five hundred years of the Former Day of the Law, Mahākāshyapa, Ānanda, and others propagated the Hinayana teachings in India. (2) The second five hundred years of the Former Day saw the advent of Nāgārjuna, Vasubandhu, and others, who propagated the provisional Mahayana teachings. (3) In the first five hundred years of the Middle Day of the Law, the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai appeared in China and propagated the theoretical teaching of the Lotus Sutra. (4) The second five hundred years of the Middle Day saw the Great Teacher Dengyō propagate the theoretical teaching in Japan and establish the ordination platform for administering Mahayana precepts. (5) The first five hundred years of the Latter Day is the time when, according to the Great Collection Sutra, “the pure Law will become obscured and lost.” Nichiren Daishonin proclaims that during this period the great pure Law will be spread far and wide throughout the entire world.

Nichiren Daishonin then states that one who spreads the teachings of the Lotus Sutra in the Latter Day of the Law is the votary of the Lotus Sutra who possesses the three virtues of sovereign, teacher, and parent.

The Daishonin describes the Law that will spread in the Latter Day as follows: “Unbelievable as it may seem, there clearly appears in the text of the Lotus Sutra a correct Law that is supremely profound and secret, one that, though expounded in full by the Buddha, in the time since his passing has never yet been propagated by Mahākāshyapa, Ānanda, Ashvaghosha, Nāgārjuna, Asanga, or Vasubandhu, nor even by T’ien-t’ai or Dengyō” .

The latter half of the treatise exposes the errors of the Nembutsu, Zen, and True Word schools, pointing out these mistakes as the root causes of the calamities besetting Japan at that time. In On Establishing the Correct Teaching for the Peace of the Land, the Daishonin focused his criticism on the Nembutsu doctrine as a primary source of disaster. In The Selection of the Time, he reveals, among others, the fallacies of the True Word school whose leading priests had by this time won the confidence of the ruling class, who in turn relied on the school to offer prayers for subduing enemies. The Daishonin points out the futility of such prayers by referring to the Mongol expeditionary force that had attacked Japan in 1274 and to the Jōkyū Disturbance of 1221, when the imperial court placed its faith in the True Word prayer rituals and was nonetheless defeated by the Kamakura government.

The Daishonin points out the doctrinal error of the True Word school. True Word patriarchs incorporated T’ien-t’ai’s doctrine of three thousand realms in a single moment of life into their own teaching and then asserted that it is to be found in the Mahāvairochana Sutra, the basic scripture of their own school. They even went so far as to accuse T’ien-t’ai of stealing the supreme doctrine of the True Word. They asserted the superiority of the Mahāvairochana Sutra over the Lotus Sutra, and of Mahāvairochana Buddha, who appears in that sutra but is not an actual historical figure, over Shakyamuni Buddha.

Then he declares, “In China and Japan in the past, sages of outstanding wisdom and ability have from time to time appeared. But none, as an ally of the Lotus Sutra, has faced such powerful enemies within his country as have I, Nichiren. From the facts present before your very eyes, it should be apparent that Nichiren is the foremost person in the entire land of Jambudvīpa” .

The Daishonin next attributes the underlying cause of calamities to failure of the nation’s ruler to honor the Lotus Sutra and its votary.

The Buddhist and non-Buddhist texts say that a sage is one who knows the future. By this account, the Daishonin is a great sage, because, as he says, “Three times now I have gained distinction by having such knowledge” . The predictions he made on the three occasions he remonstrated with the authorities all came true. In his third remonstration, he said to Hei no Saemon, “Even if it seems that, because I was born in the ruler’s domain, I follow him in my actions, I will never follow him in my heart” . This can be taken as a bold expression of freedom of thought and belief, a rare statement in thirteenth-century Japan.

He further says that although he is a mere common mortal, because he is the votary of the Lotus Sutra, he deserves to be called the foremost Great Man in Japan. “Great Man” is one of the titles of a Buddha.

In response to this statement, the questioner in this writing criticizes him, saying that his arrogance is beyond measure. The Daishonin replies, in effect, that what seems like arrogance on his part is actually sublime conviction in the superiority of the Law that he embraces. Then he turns to his followers: “Therefore, I say to you, my disciples, try practicing as the Lotus Sutra teaches, exerting yourselves without begrudging your lives! Test the truth of Buddhism now” .

In conclusion, the Daishonin declares that he himself has lived up to the passage in the “Encouraging Devotion” chapter of the Lotus Sutra: “We care nothing for our bodies or lives but are anxious only for the unsurpassed way.” That is, in order to reveal the correct teaching, he has struggled continually without begrudging his life in the face of persecution by the three powerful enemies—especially those of the third group, respected priests who induce secular authorities to persecute the votaries of the Lotus Sutra.

Chapter1（Explaining that time is the key)

WHEN it comes to studying the teachings of Buddhism, one must first learn to understand the time. In the past, when the Buddha Great Universal Wisdom Excellence appeared in the world, he remained for a period of ten small kalpas without preaching a single sutra. Thus the Lotus Sutra says, “Having taken his seat, ten small kalpas pass.”1 And later, “The Buddha knew that the time had not yet come, and though they entreated, he sat in silence.”2

Likewise Shakyamuni, the lord of teachings in the present world, spent the first forty and more years of his preaching life without expounding the Lotus Sutra, because, as the sutra says, “the time to preach so had not yet come.”3

Lao Tzu remained in his mother’s womb for eighty years, waiting to be born,4 and Bodhisattva Maitreya abides in the inner court of the Tushita heaven for a period of 5,670 million years, awaiting the time for his advent in the world. The cuckoo sings when spring is waning, the cock waits until the break of day to crow. If even these lowly creatures have such an understanding of time, then how can a person who wishes to practice the teachings of Buddhism fail to make certain what time it is?

Notes

1. Lotus Sutra, chap. 7.

2. Ibid.

3. Ibid., chap. 2.

4. The Sutra of the Conversion of Barbarians by Lao Tzu states that Lao Tzu was white-haired at birth and had the appearance of an old man.

Chapter2(Buddhism is time-dependent)

When Shakyamuni Buddha prepared to preach at the place where he had gained enlightenment, the various Buddhas made their appearance in the ten directions, and all the great bodhisattvas gathered around. Brahmā, Shakra, and the four heavenly kings came with their robes fluttering. The dragon deities and the eight kinds of nonhuman beings pressed their palms together, the ordinary people of superior capacity bent their ears to listen, and the bodhisattvas who in their present bodies have attained the stage where they perceive the non-birth and non-extinction of the phenomenal world, along with Bodhisattva Moon of Deliverance, all begged the Buddha to preach. But the World-Honored One did not reveal a single word concerning the doctrines that hold that persons of the two vehicles can attain Buddhahood, or that he himself had attained enlightenment countless kalpas in the past, nor did he set forth the most vital teachings of all, those concerning a single moment of life encompassing the three thousand realms and the fact that one can attain Buddhahood in one’s present form. There was only one reason for this: the fact that, although his listeners possessed the capacity to understand such doctrines, the proper time had not yet come. Or, as the Lotus Sutra says, “[The reason . . . was that] the time to preach so had not yet come.”5

But when Shakyamuni Buddha preached the Lotus Sutra to the gathering on Eagle Peak, the great king Ajātashatru, who had been the most unfilial person in the entire land of Jambudvīpa, was allowed to sit among the listeners. Devadatta, who had spent his whole life slandering the Law, was told that in the future he would become the Thus Come One Heavenly King, and the dragon king’s daughter, though impeded by the five obstacles, became a Buddha without changing her reptilian form. Those predestined for the realms of voice-hearers and cause-awakened ones were told that they would in fact become Buddhas, like scorched seeds that unexpectedly sprout and put forth flowers and fruit. The Buddha revealed that he had attained enlightenment countless kalpas in the past, which puzzled his listeners as greatly as if he had asserted that an old man of a hundred was the son of a man of twenty-five.6 And he also expounded the doctrine of three thousand realms in a single moment of life, explaining that the nine worlds have the potential for Buddhahood and that Buddhahood retains the nine worlds.

Thus a single word of this Lotus Sutra is as precious as a wish-granting jewel, and a single phrase is the seed of all Buddhas. We may leave aside the question of whether Shakyamuni’s listeners at that point possessed the capacity to understand such doctrines or not. The fact is that the time had come for him to preach them. As the sutra says, “Now is the very time when I must decisively preach the great vehicle.”7

Notes

5. Lotus Sutra, chap. 2.

6. A reference to chapter 15 of the Lotus Sutra. Seeing the Bodhisattvas of the Earth, Maitreya and others in the assembly wonder how, in the mere forty years since his enlightenment under the bodhi tree, the Buddha has contrived to teach and train so many majestic and noble bodhisattvas. It is, Maitreya says, as though a youth of twenty-five were to point to a hundred-year-old man and say, “This is my son.”

7. Lotus Sutra, chap. 2.

Chapter3(Responding to the challenge of conflicting issues between the capacity and the teaching)

Question: If one preaches the great Law to people who do not have the capacity to understand it, then the foolish ones among them will surely slander it and will fall into the evil paths of existence. Is the person who does the preaching not to blame for this?

Answer: If a man builds a road for others and someone loses his way on it, is that the fault of the road-builder? If a skilled physician gives medicine to a sick person but the sick person, repelled by the medicine, refuses to take it and dies, should one blame the physician?

Question: The second volume of the Lotus Sutra says, “Do not preach this sutra to persons who are without wisdom.”8 The fourth volume says, “It must not be distributed or recklessly transmitted to others.”9 And the fifth volume states, “This Lotus Sutra is the secret storehouse of the Buddhas, the Thus Come Ones. Among the sutras, it holds the highest place. Through the long night I have guarded and protected it and have never recklessly propagated it.”10 These passages from the sutra would seem to indicate that one should not expound the Law to those who do not have the capacity to understand it.

Answer: I refer you to the passage in the “Never Disparaging” chapter that states, “He would say to people, ‘I have profound reverence for you.’ . . . Among the four kinds of believers there were those who gave way to anger, their minds lacking in purity, and they spoke ill of him and cursed him, saying, ‘This ignorant monk.’” The chapter also says, “Some among the group would take sticks of wood or tiles and stones and beat and pelt him.” And in the “Encouraging Devotion” chapter it says, “There will be many ignorant people who will curse and speak ill of us and will attack us with swords and staves.” These passages imply that one should preach the Law even though one may be reviled and cursed and even beaten for it. Since the sutra so teaches, is the one who preaches to blame?

Question: Now these two views appear to be as incompatible as fire and water. May I ask how one is to resolve this dilemma?

Answer: T’ien-t’ai says, “The method chosen should be that which accords with the time.”11 Chang-an says, “You should let your choices be fitting and never adhere solely to one or the other.”12 What these remarks mean is that, at times, the Buddha’s teaching will be met with slander and one therefore refrains from expounding it for the present, and that, at other times, even though one encounters slander, one nevertheless makes a point of preaching anyway. There are times when, although a few persons may have the capacity to believe, the great majority will only slander the Buddha’s teaching, and one therefore refrains from expounding it for the present. And there are other times when, although the great majority of people are bound to slander the Buddha’s teaching, one nevertheless makes a point of preaching anyway.

When Shakyamuni Buddha first attained enlightenment and prepared to preach, the great bodhisattvas Dharma Wisdom, Forest of Merits, Diamond Banner, Diamond Storehouse, Manjushrī, Universal Worthy, Maitreya, and Moon of Deliverance, as well as the heavenly lords Brahmā and Shakra, the four heavenly kings, and countless numbers of ordinary people of superior capacity, came to hear him.13 When he preached at Deer Park, Ājnāta Kaundinya and the others of the five ascetics, along with Mahākāshyapa and his two hundred fifty followers, Shāriputra and his two hundred fifty followers, and eighty thousand heavenly beings all gathered to listen.14

At the ceremony of the great assembly for the Correct and Equal sutras, the World-Honored One’s father, King Shuddhodana, displayed a sincere desire for the Buddha’s teachings, and the Buddha therefore entered the palace and preached the Meditation on the Buddha Sutra for him. And for the sake of his deceased mother, Lady Māyā, he secluded himself in the heaven of the thirty-three gods for a period of ninety days and there preached the Māyā Sutra. Where his father and mother were concerned, one would think he could not possibly withhold even the most secret teaching of the Law. And yet he did not preach the Lotus Sutra for them. In the final analysis, the Buddha’s preaching of the Lotus Sutra has nothing to do with the capacities of his listeners. As long as the proper time had not yet come, he would on no account expound it.

Notes

8. Lotus Sutra, chap. 3.

9. Ibid., chap. 10.

10. Ibid., chap. 14.

11. The Words and Phrases of the Lotus Sutra.

12. The Annotations on the Nirvana Sutra.

13. To these people Shakyamuni Buddha preached the teachings of the Flower Garland Sutra immediately after his enlightenment.

14. At Deer Park (Skt Mrigadava) in Vārānasī, present-day Benares, Shakyamuni preached the teachings that became the Āgama sutras.

Chapter4(Explaining the propagation of Buddhism after the Buddha’s passing, divided into the periods of the Former and Middle Days of the Law and the Latter Days of the Law respectively)

Question: When is the time for the preaching of the Hinayana sutras and the provisional sutras, and when is the time for the preaching of the Lotus Sutra?

Answer: Even bodhisattvas, from those at the ten stages of faith to great bodhisattvas on the level of near-perfect enlightenment, find it difficult to judge matters concerning time and capacity. How then can ordinary beings such as ourselves be able to judge such matters?

Question: Is there no way to determine them?

Answer: Let us borrow the eye of the Buddha15 to consider this question of time and capacity. Let us use the sun of the Buddha16 to illuminate the nation.

Question: What do you mean by that?

Answer: In the Great Collection Sutra, Shakyamuni Buddha, the World-Honored One of Great Enlightenment, addresses Bodhisattva Moon Storehouse and predicts the future. Thus he says that the first five hundred years after his passing will be the age of attaining liberation,17 and the next five hundred years, the age of meditation18 (making one thousand years). The next five hundred years will be the age of reading, reciting, and listening,19 and the next five hundred years, the age of building temples and stupas20 (making two thousand years). In the next five hundred years,21 “quarrels and disputes will arise among the adherents to my teachings, and the pure Law will become obscured and lost.”

These five five-hundred-year periods, which total twenty-five hundred years, are delineated in different ways by different people. The Meditation Master Tao-ch’o of China declares that during the first four of the five five-hundred-year periods, which constitute the Former and Middle Days of the Law, the pure Law of the Hinayana and Mahayana teachings will flourish, but that after the beginning of the Latter Day of the Law these teachings will all perish. At that time, only those who practice the Pure Land teaching, the pure Law of the Nembutsu, will be able to escape the sufferings of birth and death.22

The Japanese priest Hōnen defines the situation in this way.23 According to him, the Lotus, Flower Garland, Mahāvairochana, and various Hinayana sutras that have spread in Japan, along with the teachings of the Tendai, True Word, Precepts, and other schools, constitute the pure Law of the two thousand years of the Former and Middle Days of the Law referred to in the passage from the Great Collection Sutra cited above. But once the world enters the Latter Day of the Law, all these teachings will be completely obliterated. Even though people should continue to practice such teachings, not a single one of them will succeed in escaping from the sufferings of birth and death. Thus The Commentary on the Ten Stages Sutra and the priest T’an-luan refer to such teachings as the “difficult-to-practice way”; Tao-ch’o declares that “not a single person has ever attained Buddhahood”24 through them; and Shan-tao says that “not even one person in a thousand”25 can be saved by them. After the pure Law of these teachings has become obscured and lost, then the great pure Law—namely, the three Pure Land sutras and the single practice of calling upon the name of Amida Buddha—will make its appearance, and when people devote themselves to this practice, even though they may be evil or ignorant, “ten persons out of ten and a hundred persons out of a hundred will be reborn in the Pure Land.”26 This is the meaning of the passage: “Only this doctrine of the Pure Land offers a road by which one can gain admittance.”27

Hōnen therefore declares that, if people desire happiness in the next life, they should withdraw their support from Mount Hiei, Tō-ji, Onjō-ji, and the seven major temples of Nara, as well as from all the various temples and monasteries throughout the land of Japan, and should seize all the fields and landholdings that have been donated to these temples and devote these resources to the building of Nembutsu halls. If they do so, they will be certain to be reborn in the Pure Land. Thus he urges them to recite the words Namu-Amida-butsu.

It has now been more than fifty years since these teachings spread throughout our country. My refutation of these evil doctrines is now a thing of the past. There is no doubt that our present age corresponds to the fifth five-hundred-year period described in the Great Collection Sutra, when “the pure Law will become obscured and lost.” But after the pure Law is obscured and lost, the great pure Law of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, the heart and core of the Lotus Sutra, will surely spread and be widely declared throughout the land of Jambudvīpa—with its eighty thousand kingdoms, their eighty thousand rulers, and the ministers and people in the domain of each ruler—just as the name of Amida is now chanted by the mouths of the priests, nuns, laymen, and laywomen in Japan.

Notes

15. One of the five types of vision—the physical eyes, the heavenly eye, the wisdom eye, the Dharma eye, and the Buddha eye. The “eye of the Buddha” here means the sutras that consist of Shakyamuni’s teachings.

16. The Buddha is often likened to the sun because he dispels the ignorance of the people.

17. The period when people are sure to attain enlightenment by practicing the Buddha’s teachings.

18. The period in which people will practice meditation in order to perceive the truth.

19. The period when people will concentrate on studying and reciting the sutras and listening to lectures on them.

20. The period when numerous temples and stupas are built.

21. This period refers to the beginning of the Latter Day of the Law. The last of the five five-hundred-year periods, which is called the age of conflict.

22. These remarks are found in Tao-ch’o’s Collected Essays on the World of Peace and Delight.

23. This explanation appears in Hōnen’s work The Nembutsu Chosen above All.

24. On the World of Peace and Delight.

25. Praising Rebirth in the Pure Land.

26. Ibid.

27. On the World of Peace and Delight.

Chapter5(Citing passages as proof)

Question: What passages can you cite to prove this?

Answer: The seventh volume of the Lotus Sutra says, “After I have passed into extinction, in the last five-hundred-year period you must spread it abroad widely throughout Jambudvīpa and never allow it to be cut off.”28 This indicates that to “spread it abroad widely” will be accomplished in the time after “the pure Law becomes obscured and lost,” as the Great Collection Sutra puts it.

Again, the sixth volume states, “In the evil age of the Latter Day of the Law if there is someone who can uphold this sutra . . .”29 The fifth volume states, “In the latter age hereafter, when the Law is about to perish . . .”30 The fourth volume states, “Since hatred and jealousy toward this sutra abound even when the Thus Come One is in the world, how much more will this be so after his passing?”31 The fifth volume says, “It will face much hostility in the world and be difficult to believe.”32 And the seventh volume, speaking of the fifth five-hundred-year period, which is the age of quarrels and disputes, says that evil devils, the devils’ people, heavenly beings, dragons, yakshas, and kumbhānda demons will seize the advantage.33

The Great Collection Sutra says, “Quarrels and disputes will arise among the adherents to my teachings.” The fifth volume of the Lotus Sutra similarly says, “In that evil age there will be monks,” “Or there will be forest-dwelling monks,” and “Evil demons will take possession of others.”34

These passages describe the following situation. During the fifth five-hundred-year period, eminent priests who are possessed by evil demons will be found everywhere throughout the country. At that time, a single wise man will appear. The eminent priests who are possessed by evil demons will deceive the ruler, his ministers, and the common people into slandering and abusing this man, attacking him with sticks, staves, shards, and rubble, and condemning him to exile or death. At that time, Shakyamuni, Many Treasures, and the Buddhas of the ten directions will speak to the great bodhisattvas who sprang up from the earth, and the great bodhisattvas will in turn report to Brahmā, Shakra, the gods of the sun and moon, and the four heavenly kings. As a result, strange occurrences and unusual disturbances will appear in abundance in the heavens and on earth.

If there are countries whose rulers fail to heed this warning, then the Buddhas and the great bodhisattvas will order neighboring countries to attack the evil rulers and evil priests of those countries. Then great struggles and disputes such as have never been known in the past will break out in Jambudvīpa.

At that time, all the people living in the land illuminated by the sun and moon, fearing the destruction of their nation or the loss of their lives, will pray to the Buddhas and bodhisattvas for help. And if there is no sign that their prayers will be answered, they will put their faith in this single humble priest whom they earlier hated. Then all the countless eminent priests, the great rulers of the eighty thousand countries, and the numberless common people will all bow their heads to the ground, press their palms together, and in one voice will chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. It will be like that occasion during the Buddha’s demonstration of his ten supernatural powers, described in the “Supernatural Powers” chapter of the Lotus Sutra, when all the beings in the worlds of the ten directions, without a single exception, turned toward the sahā world and cried out together in a loud voice, “Hail, Shakyamuni Buddha! Hail, Shakyamuni Buddha! Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, Nam-myoho-renge-kyo!”35

Notes

28. Lotus Sutra, chap. 23.

29. Ibid., chap. 17.

30. Ibid., chap. 14.

31. Ibid., chap. 10.

32. Ibid., chap. 14.

33. Ibid., chap. 23.

34. All three of these quotations appear in a verse in chapter 13 of the Lotus Sutra, which details the three powerful enemies who will attack the votaries of the Lotus Sutra in the evil latter age.

35. According to chapter 21 of the Lotus Sutra, the heavenly beings cried out in the midst of the sky that in the sahā world a Buddha named Shakyamuni was preaching the Lotus Sutra of the Wonderful Law, the sutra kept in mind by the Buddhas, encouraging all to offer obeisance and alms to Shakyamuni Buddha. Then all the various beings spoke these words, “Hail, Shakyamuni Buddha! Hail, Shakyamuni Buddha!” Because the essence of the Lotus Sutra is the Law of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo that enabled all the Buddhas to become Buddhas, Nichiren Daishonin states that all the various beings in the worlds of the ten directions cried out, “Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, Nam-myoho-renge-kyo.”

Chapter6(Citing the commentaries as proof)

Question: The sutra passages you have cited clearly prove your point. But are there any prophecies in the writings of T’ien-t’ai, Miao-lo, or Dengyō that would support your argument?

Answer: Your process of questioning is backwards. If I had cited passages from the commentaries of men such as T’ien-t’ai and the others and you had then asked whether there were passages from the sutras and treatises to support them, that I could understand. But since I have already cited sutra passages that clearly prove the argument, it is hardly necessary to ask if there are similar passages in the commentaries. If by chance you found that the sutras and the commentaries disagreed, would you then discard the sutras and follow the commentaries?

Question: What you say is perfectly true. Nevertheless, we ordinary people have only a very remote idea of what the sutras mean, while the commentaries are more accessible and easier to understand. If there are clear passages of proof in such relatively understandable commentaries, then citing them might help us have greater faith in your argument.

Answer: I can see that you are very sincere and earnest in your questioning, so I will cite a few passages from the commentaries. The Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai states, “In the last five-hundred-year period, the mystic way will spread and benefit humankind far into the future.”36 The Great Teacher Miao-lo says, “The beginning of the Latter Day of the Law will not be without inconspicuous benefit.”37

The Great Teacher Dengyō declares: “The Former and Middle Days are almost over, and the Latter Day is near at hand. Now indeed is the time when the one vehicle of the Lotus Sutra will prove how perfectly it fits the capacities of all people. How do we know this is true? Because the ‘Peaceful Practices’ chapter of the Lotus Sutra states, ‘In the latter age hereafter, when the Law is about to perish, [accept and embrace the Lotus Sutra].’”38 And Dengyō further states: “Speaking of the age, [the propagation of the true teaching will begin] in the age when the Middle Day of the Law ends and the Latter Day opens. Regarding the land, it will begin in a land to the east of T’ang and to the west of Katsu.39 As for the people, it will spread among people stained by the five impurities who live in a time of conflict. The sutra says, ‘Since hatred and jealousy toward this sutra abound even when the Thus Come One is in the world, how much more will this be so after his passing?’ There is good reason for this statement.”40

Shakyamuni Buddha was born in the kalpa of continuance, in the ninth period of decrease, when the span of human life was diminishing and measured a hundred years. The period when the span of human life diminishes from a hundred years to ten years accordingly falls within the period represented by the fifty years of the Buddha’s preaching life, the two thousand years of the Former and Middle Days of the Law that follow his passing, and the ten thousand years of the Latter Day of the Law that follow that. During this period, the Lotus Sutra was destined to be propagated and spread widely on two occasions. The first was the last eight years of the Buddha’s life [when he preached the Lotus Sutra], and the second is the five hundred years at the beginning of the Latter Day of the Law.

T’ien-t’ai, Miao-lo, and Dengyō were not born early enough to be present when the Buddha was in the world and preached the Lotus Sutra, nor were they born late enough to be present in the Latter Day of the Law. To their regret, they were born in the interval between these two times, and it is clear from their writings that they looked forward with longing to the beginning of the Latter Day of the Law.

Theirs was like the case of the seer Asita who, when he viewed the newborn Prince Siddhārtha [the future Shakyamuni Buddha], remarked in sorrow: “I am already over ninety, so I will not live to see this prince attain enlightenment. After my death, I will be reborn in the world of formlessness, so I cannot be present during the fifty years when he preaches his teachings, nor can I be reborn in this world during the Former, Middle, or Latter Day of the Law!”41 Such was his lament.

All those who are determined to attain the way should take note of these examples and rejoice. Those concerned about their next life would do better to be common people in this, the Latter Day of the Law, than be mighty rulers during the two thousand years of the Former and Middle Days of the Law. Why won’t people believe this? Rather than be the chief priest of the Tendai school, it is better to be a leper who chants Nam-myoho-renge-kyo! As Emperor Wu of the Liang dynasty said in his vow,42 “I would rather be Devadatta and sink into the hell of incessant suffering than be the non-Buddhist sage Udraka Rāmaputra.”

Notes

36. Words and Phrases.

37. The Annotations on “The Words and Phrases of the Lotus Sutra.”

38. An Essay on the Protection of the Nation.

39. Katsu refers to an ancient kingdom extending from Manchuria to northern Korea. According to old maps, “a land to the east of T’ang and to the west of Katsu” would indicate Japan.

40. The Outstanding Principles of the Lotus Sutra.

41. This story appears in the Causality of Past and Present Sutra.

42. Reference is to a document in which Emperor Wu (464–549), the first ruler of the Liang dynasty, pledged not to follow the way of Taoism. It actually says that he would rather sink into the evil paths for a long period of time for going against Buddhism (yet nevertheless forming a bond with it) than be reborn in heaven by embracing the non-Buddhist teachings. This story appears in The Annotations on “Great Concentration and Insight.” Udraka Rāmaputra was a hermit and master of yogic meditation, the second teacher under whom Shakyamuni practiced. He is said to have been reborn in the highest of the four realms in the world of formlessness.

Chapter7(The Propagation of first five hundred years in the Former Day of the Law)

Question: Do the scholars Nāgārjuna and Vasubandhu say anything about this principle [of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo]?

Answer: Nāgārjuna and Vasubandhu knew about it in their hearts, but they did not expound it in words.

Question: Why did they not expound it?

Answer: There are many reasons. For one, the people of their day did not have the capacity to understand it. Second, it was not the proper time. Third, these men were bodhisattvas taught by the Buddha in his transient status and hence had not been entrusted with the task of expounding it.

Question: Could you explain the matter in greater detail?

Answer: The Former Day of the Law began on the sixteenth day of the second month, the day after the Buddha’s passing. The Venerable Mahākāshyapa received the transmission of the Buddha’s teachings and propagated them for the first twenty years. For the next twenty years, this task fell to the Venerable Ānanda, for the next twenty years to Shānavāsa, for the next twenty years to Upagupta, and for the next twenty years to Dhritaka. By that time a hundred years had passed. But the only teachings that were spread widely during this period were those of the Hinayana sutras. Even the titles of the Mahayana sutras failed to receive mention, so the Lotus Sutra, needless to say, was not propagated at this time.

Men such as Mikkaka, Buddhananda, Buddhamitra, Pārshva, and Punyayashas then inherited the teachings, and during the remainder of the first five hundred years after the Buddha’s passing, the doctrines of the Mahayana sutras began little by little to come to light, although no particular effort was made to propagate them. Attention was concentrated on the Hinayana sutras alone. All this transpired during the period mentioned in the Great Collection Sutra as the first five hundred years, which constitute the age of attaining liberation.

Chapter8(The propagation during the latter part of the Former Day of the Law)

During the latter part of the Former Day of the Law, six hundred to a thousand years after the Buddha’s passing, there appeared such men as Bodhisattva Ashvaghosha, the Venerable Kapimala, Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna, Bodhisattva Āryadeva, the Venerable Rāhulatā, Samghanandi, Samghayashas, Kumārata, Jayata, Vasubandhu, Manorhita, Haklenayashas, and Āryasimha.43 These more than ten teachers started out as adherents of non-Buddhist doctrines. Following that, they made a thorough study of the Hinayana sutras, and still later they turned to the Mahayana sutras and used them to disprove and demolish the doctrines of the Hinayana sutras.

But although these great men used the Mahayana sutras to refute the Hinayana, they did not fully clarify the superiority of the Lotus Sutra in comparison to the other Mahayana sutras. Even though they did touch somewhat on this question, they did not make clear such vitally important doctrines as the ten mystic principles of the theoretical teaching and of the essential teaching, the fact that persons of the two vehicles can attain Buddhahood, the fact that the Buddha attained enlightenment countless kalpas in the past, the fact that the Lotus Sutra is the foremost in all the sutras preached in the past, present, or future, or the doctrines of the hundred worlds and thousand factors and of three thousand realms in a single moment of life.

They did no more than point a finger at the moon, as it were, or touch on some parts of the Lotus Sutra. But they said nothing at all about whether or not the process of instruction is revealed from beginning to end, whether or not the original relationship between teacher and disciple is clarified, or which teachings would lead to enlightenment and which would not.44 Such, then, were the developments in the latter five hundred years of the Former Day of the Law, the time noted in the Great Collection Sutra as the age of meditation.

Notes

43. All the men in this and the two preceding paragraphs comprise the twenty-four successors who are said to have inherited Shakyamuni’s lineage.

44. This passage refers to the “three standards of comparison” enumerated by p.589T’ien-t’ai to assert the superiority of the Lotus Sutra over other sutras. “Whether or not the process of instruction is revealed from beginning to end” corresponds to the second standard; “whether or not the original relationship between teacher [the Buddha] and disciple is clarified” corresponds to the third standard; and “which teachings would lead to enlightenment and which would not” corresponds to the first standard.

 Chapter9(The propagation in the first five hundred years of the Middle Day of the Law)

By some time after the thousand years of the Former Day of the Law, Buddhist teachings had spread throughout the entire land of India. But in many cases, Hinayana doctrines prevailed over those of the Mahayana, or provisional sutras were permitted to overshadow and efface the sutra of the true teaching. In a number of respects, Buddhism was in a chaotic condition. Gradually, the number of persons attaining enlightenment declined, while countless others, though adhering to Buddhist doctrines, fell into the evil paths.

Fifteen years after the beginning of the Middle Day of the Law,45 which followed the thousand years of the Former Day, Buddhism spread eastward and was introduced into the land of China. During the first hundred years or more of the first half of the Middle Day of the Law, the Buddhist doctrines introduced from India were vigorously disputed by the Taoist teachers of China, and neither side could win a clear victory. Though it appeared at times as though the issue had been decided, those who embraced Buddhism were as yet lacking in deep faith. Therefore, if it had become apparent that the sacred teachings of Buddhism were not a unified doctrine but were divided into Hinayana and Mahayana, provisional and true, and exoteric and esoteric teachings,46 then some of the believers might have had doubts and turned instead to the non-Buddhist teachings. It was perhaps because the Buddhist monks Kāshyapa Mātanga and Chu Fa-lan feared such a result that they made no mention of such divisions as Mahayana and Hinayana or provisional and true teachings when they brought Buddhism to China, though they were perfectly aware of them.

During the five dynasties that followed, the Wei, Chin, Sung, Ch’i, and Liang, disputes took place within Buddhism over the differences between the Mahayana and Hinayana, provisional and true, and exoteric and esoteric teachings, and it was impossible to determine which was correct. As a result, from the ruler on down to the common people, there were many who had doubts about the doctrine.

Buddhism thus became split into ten different schools: the three schools of the south and seven schools of the north. In the south there were the schools that divided the Buddha’s teachings into three periods, into four periods, and into five periods, while in the north there were the five period school, the school that recognized incomplete word and complete word teachings, the four doctrine school, five doctrine school, six doctrine school, the two Mahayana doctrine school, and the one voice school.47

Each of these schools clung fiercely to its own doctrines and clashed with the others like fire encountering water. Yet in general they shared a common view. Namely, among the various sutras preached during the Buddha’s lifetime, they put the Flower Garland Sutra in first place, the Nirvana Sutra in second place, and the Lotus Sutra in third place. They admitted that, in comparison to such sutras as the Āgama, Wisdom, Vimalakīrti, and Brahmā Excellent Thought, the Lotus Sutra represents the truth, and that it is a complete and final sutra, and sets forth correct views. But they held that, in comparison to the Nirvana Sutra, it represents a doctrine of non-eternity, a sutra that is neither complete nor final, and a sutra that puts forth erroneous views.

From the end of the fourth through the beginning of the fifth hundred years following the introduction of Buddhism in the Later Han dynasty, in the time of the Ch’en and Sui dynasties, there lived a humble priest named Chih-i, the man who would later be known as the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai Chih-che. He refuted the mistaken doctrines of the northern and southern schools and declared that among the teachings of the Buddha’s lifetime the Lotus Sutra ranks first, the Nirvana Sutra second, and the Flower Garland Sutra third. This is what occurred in the first five hundred years of the Middle Day of the Law, the period corresponding to that described in the Great Collection Sutra as the age of reading, reciting, and listening.

Notes

45. That is, the year c.e. 67, the traditional date for the introduction of Buddhism to China during the reign of Emperor Ming of the Later Han dynasty.

46. Here, “exoteric and esoteric teachings” refers to a classification of Shakyamuni’s teachings according to the manner in which they were expounded: secret and otherwise. The secret teaching is here termed “esoteric,” while the others correspond to “exoteric.”

47. A designation by T’ien-t’ai of the different systems of classification used by different schools during the Northern and Southern Dynasties period.

Chapter10(The propagation during the latter five hundred years of the Middle Day of the Law)

During the latter five hundred years of the Middle Day of the Law, in the reign of Emperor T’ai-tsung at the beginning of the T’ang dynasty, the Tripitaka Master Hsüan-tsang journeyed to India, spending nineteen years visiting temples and stupas in the 130 states of India and meeting with numerous Buddhist scholars. He investigated all the profound doctrines contained in the twelve divisions of the scriptures and the eighty thousand sacred teachings of Buddhism and encountered therein the two schools of the Dharma Characteristics and the Three Treatises.

Of these two, the Mahayana Dharma Characteristics doctrine was said to have been taught long ago by Maitreya and Asanga and in more recent times by the Scholar Shīlabhadra. Shīlabhadra transmitted it to Hsüan-tsang, who brought it to China and taught it to Emperor T’ai-tsung.

The heart of the Dharma Characteristics doctrine lies in its assertion that Buddhist teachings should accord with the capacities of the listeners. If people have the capacity to understand the doctrine of the one vehicle, then the doctrine of the three vehicles can be no more than an expedient to instruct them, and the doctrine of the one vehicle, the only true way of enlightening them. For people such as these, the Lotus Sutra should be taught. On the other hand, if they have the capacity to understand the three vehicles, then the one vehicle can be no more than an expedient to instruct them, and the three vehicles, the only true way of enlightening them. For people such as these, the Profound Secrets and Shrīmālā sutras should be taught. This, say the proponents of the Dharma Characteristics school, is a principle that T’ien-t’ai Chih-che failed to understand.

Emperor T’ai-tsung was a worthy ruler whose name was known throughout the world and who was said to have surpassed in virtue the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors of antiquity. He not only reigned over the entire land of China, but also extended his influence to more than eighteen hundred foreign countries ranging from Kao-ch’ang48 in the west to Koguryŏ in the east. He was regarded as a ruler who had mastered both Buddhist and non-Buddhist teachings. And since Hsüan-tsang was first in the favor and devotion of this worthy ruler, there was none among the leaders of the T’ien-t’ai school who ventured to risk losing his head by challenging him, and the true teachings of the Lotus Sutra were neglected and forgotten throughout the country.

During the reigns of T’ai-tsung’s heir, Emperor Kao-tsung, and Kao-tsung’s stepmother, Empress Wu, there lived a priest called Fa-tsang. He observed that the T’ien-t’ai school was under attack from the Dharma Characteristics school and took this opportunity to champion the Flower Garland Sutra, which T’ien-t’ai had relegated to a lower place, declaring that the Flower Garland Sutra should rank first, the Lotus Sutra second, and the Nirvana Sutra third among the sutras preached during the Buddha’s lifetime.

In the reign of Emperor Hsüan-tsung, the fourth ruler following T’ai-tsung, in the fourth year of the K’ai-yüan era (716), the Tripitaka Master Shan-wu-wei came to China from the western land of India, and in the eighth year of the same era, the Tripitaka masters Chin-kang-chih and Pu-k’ung also came to China from India. These men brought with them the Mahāvairochana, Diamond Crown, and Susiddhikara sutras and founded the True Word school. This school declares that there are two types of Buddhist teachings: the exoteric teachings of Shakyamuni Buddha, which are expounded in the Flower Garland, Lotus, and similar sutras, and the esoteric teachings of Mahāvairochana Buddha, which are expounded in the Mahāvairochana and similar sutras. The Lotus Sutra holds first place among the exoteric teachings. But although its fundamental principles somewhat resemble those of the esoteric teachings expounded by Mahāvairochana Buddha, it contains no description whatsoever of the mudras and mantras to be used in religious rituals. It fails to include any reference to the three mysteries of body, mouth, and mind, and hence is to be regarded as a sutra that is neither complete nor final.

Thus all of these three schools mentioned above, the Dharma Characteristics, Flower Garland, and True Word, attacked the T’ien-t’ai school, which was based on the teachings of the Lotus Sutra. Perhaps because none of the members of the T’ien-t’ai school could measure up to the stature of the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai, though they were aware of the falsity of these other teachings, they did not attempt to speak out against them in public as T’ien-t’ai had. As a result, everyone throughout the country, from the ruler and high ministers on down to the common people, was led astray from the true teachings of Buddhism, and no one any longer came to gain the Buddha way. Such were the events of the first two hundred or more years of the latter five-hundred-year period of the Middle Day of the Law.

Notes

48. A kingdom located in the southern foothills of the T’ien-shan Mountains. In 640 it was conquered by Emperor T’ai-tsung.

Chapter11(The Six Schools of Buddhism were introduced to Japan)

Some four hundred years after the beginning of the Middle Day of the Law,49 the sacred scriptures of Buddhism were brought to Japan from the kingdom of Paekche, along with a wooden statue of the Buddha Shakyamuni, and also priests and nuns. At this time the Liang dynasty in China was coming to an end, to be replaced by the Ch’en dynasty, while in Japan, Emperor Kimmei, the thirtieth sovereign50 since Emperor Jimmu, was on the throne.

Kimmei’s son, Emperor Yōmei, had a son named Prince Jōgū who not only worked to spread the teachings of Buddhism but also designated the Lotus Sutra, Vimalakīrti Sutra, and Shrīmālā Sutra as texts that would insure the protection of the nation.

Later, in the time of the thirty-seventh sovereign, Emperor Kōtoku (r. 645–654), the teachings of the Three Treatises and Establishment of Truth schools were introduced to Japan by the Administrator of Priests Kanroku from Paekche. During the same period, the priest Dōshō, who had been to China, introduced the teachings of the Dharma Characteristics and Dharma Analysis Treasury schools.

In the reign of Empress Genshō (r. 715–724), the forty-fourth sovereign, a monk from India called the Tripitaka Master Shan-wu-wei brought the Mahāvairochana Sutra to Japan, but he returned to China, where he had been residing, without spreading its teachings abroad in Japan.51

In the reign of Emperor Shōmu (r. 724–749), the forty-fifth sovereign, the Flower Garland school was introduced from the kingdom of Silla by a priest of that state called the Preceptor Shinjō. The Administrator of Priests Rōben inherited its teachings and in turn introduced them to Emperor Shōmu. He also helped construct the great image of the Buddha at Tōdai-ji.

During the time of the same emperor, the Reverend Ganjin came from China, bringing with him the teachings of the T’ien-t’ai and Precepts schools. But although he spread the Precepts teachings and built a Hinayana ordination platform at Tōdai-ji, he died without even so much as mentioning the name of the Lotus school.

Notes

49. The traditional date for the introduction of Buddhism to Japan is in the thirteenth year of the reign of Emperor Kimmei (552).

50. Emperor Kimmei is now regarded as the twenty-ninth emperor, because the administration of the fifteenth ruler Empress Jingū is no longer considered a formal reign. In Nichiren Daishonin’s time, however, she was included in the lineage, so Emperor Kimmei was counted as the thirtieth sovereign.

51. Mention of Shan-wu-wei’s stay in Japan appears in A Brief History of Japan by the priest Kōen (twelfth century) of Mount Hiei, and The Genkō Era Biographies of Eminent Priests by the Zen priest Kokan Shiren (1278–1346). Though no conclusive proof exists that Shan-wu-wei actually journeyed to Japan, this tradition is thought to have been widely accepted in the Daishonin’s time.

Chapter12(The propagation of Tendai school)

Eight hundred years after the beginning of the Middle Day of the Law, in the reign of the fiftieth sovereign, Emperor Kammu (r. 781–806), there appeared a young priest without reputation named Saichō, who was later to be known as the Great Teacher Dengyō. At first he studied the doctrines of the six schools—Three Treatises, Dharma Characteristics, Flower Garland, Dharma Analysis Treasury, Establishment of Truth, and Precepts—as well as the Zen teaching, under the Administrator of Priests Gyōhyō and others. Later he founded a temple called Kokushō-ji, which in time came to be known as Mount Hiei. There he pored over the sutras and treatises of the six schools, as well as the commentaries written by their leaders. But he found that these commentaries often contradicted the sutras and treatises upon which these schools relied and were replete with one-sided opinions. It became apparent to him that if people were to accept such teachings they would all fall into the evil paths of existence. In addition, though the leaders of each of the different schools proclaimed that they had understood the true meaning of the Lotus Sutra and praised their own particular interpretation, none of them had in fact understood its teachings correctly. Saichō felt that if he were to state this opinion openly it would surely lead to quarrels and disputes. But if he remained silent, he would be going against the spirit of the Buddha’s vow.52 He agonized over what course to take, but in the end, fearful of violating the Buddha’s admonition, made known his views to Emperor Kammu.

Emperor Kammu, startled at his declaration, summoned the leading authorities of the six schools to engage in debate.53 At first these scholars in their pride were similar to banners raised aloft like mountains, and their evil minds worked like poisonous snakes, but in the end they were forced to bow in defeat in the presence of the ruler, and each and every person of the six schools and the seven major temples of Nara acknowledged himself a disciple of Saichō.

It was like that earlier occasion when the Buddhist scholars of northern and southern China gathered in the palace of the Ch’en dynasty and, having been bested in debate by the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai, became his disciples. But [of the three types of learning] T’ien-t’ai had employed only perfect meditation and perfect wisdom.54 The Great Teacher Dengyō, by contrast, attacked the Hinayana specific ordination for administering the precepts, which T’ien-t’ai had failed to controvert, and administered the Mahayana specific ordination55 described in the Brahmā Net Sutra to eight eminent priests of the six schools. In addition, he established on Mount Hiei a specific ordination platform for administering the precepts of the perfect and immediate enlightenment of the Lotus Sutra. Thus the specific ordination in the precepts of perfect and immediate enlightenment at Enryaku-ji on Mount Hiei was not only the foremost ordination ceremony in Japan, but a great ordination in the precepts of Eagle Peak such as had never been known either in India or China or anywhere else in Jambudvīpa during the eighteen hundred or more years since the Buddha’s passing. This ceremony of ordination had its beginning in Japan.

If we examine the merit achieved by the Great Teacher Dengyō, we would have to say that he is a sage who surpasses Nāgārjuna and Vasubandhu and who excels both T’ien-t’ai and Miao-lo. If so, then what priest in Japan today could turn his back on the perfect precepts of the Great Teacher Dengyō, whether he belongs to Tō-ji, Onjō-ji, or the seven major temples of Nara, or whether he is a follower of one of the eight schools or of the Pure Land, Zen, or Precepts school in whatever corner of the land? The priests of the nine regions of China became the disciples of the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai with respect to the perfect meditation and perfect wisdom that he taught. But since no ordination platform for universally administering the precepts of perfect and immediate enlightenment was ever established in China, some of them might not have become his disciples with regard to the precepts. In Japan, however, [because Dengyō in fact established such an ordination platform] any priests who fail to become disciples of the Great Teacher Dengyō can only be regarded as non-Buddhists and men of evil.

As to the question of which of the two newer schools brought from China is superior, the Tendai or the True Word, the Great Teacher Dengyō was perfectly clear in his mind. But he did not demonstrate which was superior in public debate, as he had done previously with regard to the relative merit of the Tendai school in comparison to the six older schools. Perhaps on that account, after the passing of the Great Teacher Dengyō, Tō-ji, the seven major temples of Nara, Onjō-ji, and other temples throughout the provinces of Japan all began proclaiming that the True Word school is superior to the Tendai school, until everyone from the ruler on down to the common people believed that such was the case.

Thus the true spirit of the Tendai Lotus school really flourished only during the lifetime of the Great Teacher Dengyō. Dengyō lived at the end of the Middle Day of the Law, during the period described in the Great Collection Sutra as the age of building temples and stupas. The time had not yet arrived when, as the Great Collection Sutra says, “Quarrels and disputes will arise among the adherents to my teachings, and the pure Law will become obscured and lost.”

Notes

52. The vow is to spread the correct teaching of Buddhism and lead the people to enlightenment.

53. This debate was held at Takaosan-ji temple in Kyoto in 802.

54. With “perfect meditation” and “perfect wisdom,” the Daishonin refers to the three types of learning: precepts, meditation, and wisdom. T’ien-t’ai devoted himself to meditation and wisdom based on the Lotus Sutra, yet continued to employ the Hinayana precepts.

55. The ordination ceremony in which one receives the ten major precepts and forty-eight minor precepts, as set forth in the Brahmā Net Sutra. This ordination ceremony was held at Takaosan-ji temple in 805 for eight priests including Dōshō and Shuen.

Chapter13(Revealing the inevitability of the spread of the Mystic Law)

Now more than two hundred years have passed since we entered the Latter Day of the Law, a time of which, as the Great Collection Sutra records, the Buddha predicted that “quarrels and disputes will arise among the adherents to my teachings, and the pure Law will become obscured and lost.” If these words of the Buddha are true, it is a time when the whole land of Jambudvīpa will without doubt be embroiled in quarrels and disputes.

Reports reaching us say that the entire land of China, with its 360 states and 260 or more provinces, has already been conquered by the kingdom of the Mongols. The Chinese capital was conquered some time ago, and the two rulers Emperor Hui-tsung and Emperor Ch’in-tsung56 were taken captive by the northern barbarians and ended their days in the region of Tartary. Meanwhile, Hui-tsung’s grandson, Emperor Kao-tsung,57 driven out of the capital K’ai-feng, established his residence in the countryside at the temporary palace at Lin-an, and for many years he did not see the capital.

In addition, the six hundred or more states of Koryŏ and the states of Silla and Paekche have all been conquered by the great kingdom of the Mongols, and in like manner the Mongols have even attacked the Japanese territories of Iki, Tsushima, and Kyushu.58 Thus the Buddha’s prediction concerning the occurrence of quarrels and disputes has proved anything but false. It is like the tides of the ocean that never fail to come when the time arrives.

In view of the accuracy of his prediction, can there be any doubt that, after this period described in the Great Collection Sutra when “the pure Law will become obscured and lost,” the great pure Law of the Lotus Sutra will be spread far and wide throughout Japan and all the other countries of Jambudvīpa?

Among the Buddha’s various teachings, the Great Collection Sutra represents no more than an exposition of provisional Mahayana doctrine. In terms of teaching the way to escape from the sufferings of birth and death, it belongs to the period when the Buddha had “not yet revealed the truth,”59 and so cannot lead to enlightenment those who have not yet formed any connection with the Lotus Sutra. And yet in what it states concerning the six paths, the four forms of birth, and the three existences of life, it does not display the slightest error.

How, then, could there be any error in the Lotus Sutra, of which Shakyamuni Buddha said that he “now must reveal the truth”?60 Many Treasures Buddha likewise testified to its truth, and the Buddhas of the ten directions put forth their long broad tongues until they reached the Brahmā heaven as a sign of testimony. Shakyamuni Buddha also extended his tongue, which is incapable of telling falsehoods, until it reached the highest heaven in the world of form, saying that in the last five-hundred-year period after his passing, when the entire body of Buddhist doctrine would be about to disappear, Bodhisattva Superior Practices would come forward with the five characters of Myoho-renge-kyo and administer them as good medicine to those afflicted with white leprosy—that is, persons of incorrigible disbelief and those who slander the Law. And he charged Brahmā, Shakra, the gods of the sun and moon, the four heavenly kings, and the dragon deities to act as that bodhisattva’s protectors. How could these golden words of his be false? Even if the great earth were to turn upside down, a high mountain crumble and fall, summer not follow spring, the sun move eastward, or the moon fall to earth, this prediction could never fail to come true!

Notes

56. Hui-tsung (1082–1135) and Ch’in-tsung (1100–1161) were the eighth and ninth emperors of the Northern Sung dynasty. The “northern barbarians” were Jurchen, a nomadic people of Manchuria, who established the Chin dynasty in northern China. They captured the Sung capital of K’ai-feng in 1126.

57. Kao-tsung (1107–1187) was the first emperor of the Southern Sung dynasty. Lin-an is the present-day city of Hangzhou.

58. This refers to the Mongol invasion of 1274.

59. Immeasurable Meanings Sutra.

60. Lotus Sutra, chap. 2.

Chapter14(A person who spreads the Lotus Sutra is father and mother to all the living beings)

If that is so, then, in this time of “quarrels and disputes,” how can the ruler, the ministers, and the common people of Japan hope to escape harm when they vilify and abuse the envoy of the Buddha who is attempting to spread the Law of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, send him into exile, and attack and beat him, or inflict all kinds of trouble upon his disciples and followers? Ignorant people must surely think when I say this that I am merely calling down curses upon the people.

A person who spreads the Lotus Sutra is father and mother to all the living beings in Japan. For, as the Great Teacher Chang-an says, “One who rids the offender of evil is acting as his parent.”61 If so, then I, Nichiren, am the father and mother of the present emperor of Japan, and the teacher and lord of the Nembutsu believers, the Zen followers, and the True Word priests.

And yet, from the ruler on down to the common people, all treat me with enmity. How, then, can the gods of the sun and moon go on shining down on their heads, and how can the gods of the earth continue to support their feet? When Devadatta attacked the Buddha, the earth shook and trembled, and flames shot out of it. When King Dammira cut off the head of the Venerable Āryasimha, his own right arm that held the sword dropped off and fell to the ground.62 Emperor Hui-tsung branded the face of the priest Fa-tao and exiled him south of the Yangtze, but before half a year had passed, the emperor was taken prisoner and carried off by the barbarians.63 And these attacks of the Mongols on Japan are occurring for the same reason. Though one were to gather together as many soldiers as there are in the five regions of India and surround this country with the Iron Encircling Mountains,64 it will do no good. The people of Japan are certain to encounter the calamity of war.

From this situation one should understand that I am in fact the votary of the Lotus Sutra. Shakyamuni Buddha, the lord of teachings, stated that, if anyone should abuse or curse someone who is spreading the Lotus Sutra in the evil world of the latter age, that person would be guilty of an offense that is a hundred, thousand, ten thousand, million times greater than if he had been an enemy of the Buddha for the space of an entire kalpa. And yet nowadays the ruler and the people of Japan, following their personal whims, seem to hate me even more intensely than they would an enemy of their own parents or one who had been a foe from their previous lifetime, or upbraid me even more severely than they would a traitor or a murderer. I wonder that the earth does not open up and swallow them alive, or that thunder does not come down from heaven and tear them apart!

Or am I perhaps not the votary of the Lotus Sutra after all? If not, then I am wretched indeed! What a miserable fate, in this present life to be hounded by everyone and never know so much as a moment of peace, and in the next life to fall into the evil paths of existence! If in fact I am not the votary of the Lotus Sutra, then who will uphold the one vehicle, the teaching of the Lotus Sutra?

Hōnen urged people to discard the Lotus Sutra, Shan-tao said that “not even one person in a thousand” can reach enlightenment through its teachings, and Tao-ch’o said that “not a single person has ever attained Buddhahood” through that sutra. Are these men, then, the votaries of the Lotus Sutra? The Great Teacher Kōbō said that one who practices the Lotus Sutra is following “a childish theory.”65 Is he perhaps the votary of the Lotus Sutra?

The Lotus Sutra speaks of a person who “can uphold this sutra”66 or who “can preach this sutra.”67 What does it mean when it speaks of someone who “can preach” this sutra? Does it not mean someone who will proclaim, in the words of the Lotus Sutra itself, that “among the sutras, it holds the highest place,”68 and who will maintain its superiority over the Mahāvairochana, Flower Garland, Nirvana, Wisdom, and other sutras? Is this not the kind of person the sutra means when it speaks of the votary of the Lotus Sutra? If these passages from the sutra are to be believed, then in the seven hundred years and more since Buddhism was introduced to Japan, there has never been a single votary of the Lotus Sutra other than the Great Teacher Dengyō and I, Nichiren.

Again and again I wonder that the persons who attack me do not, as the Lotus Sutra says, suffer the punishment of having their “heads split into seven pieces”69 or their “mouths closed and stopped up,”70 but I realize there are reasons. Such punishments are no more than trivial penalties fit to be inflicted where there are only one or two offenders. But I, Nichiren, am the foremost votary of the Lotus Sutra in the entire land of Jambudvīpa. Therefore, people who ally themselves with those who slander me or treat me with malice deserve to meet with the greatest difficulties in Jambudvīpa, such as the immense earthquake that rocked Japan in the Shōka era, or the huge comet that appeared as a punishment upon the entire land in the Bun’ei era.71 Just look at these happenings! Though in the centuries since the Buddha’s passing there have been other practitioners of Buddhism who were treated with malice, great disasters such as these have never been known before. That is because there has never before been anyone who taught the people at large to chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo! With respect to this virtue, is there anyone in the whole world who dares to face me and say he is my equal, anyone within the four seas who dares to claim he can stand side by side with me?

Notes

61. On the Nirvana Sutra.

62. Dammira (Sanskrit unknown) was a king of Kashmir in India who destroyed the Buddhist temples and stupas in his kingdom. It is said that, when he killed the Buddhist teacher Āryasimha, he lost his right arm and died seven days later.

63. Fa-tao (1086–1147) was a priest of Sung China. When Emperor Hui-tsung, a Taoist follower, acted to suppress Buddhism, Fa-tao remonstrated with him but was branded on the face and exiled to Tao-chou. He was later pardoned, but Hui-tsung was captured by the invading Chin forces and taken to Manchuria, where he lived until his death in 1135.

64. The outermost of eight concentric circular mountain ranges said to surround Mount Sumeru. Here it is mentioned to suggest impregnability.

65. The Precious Key to the Secret Treasury.

66. Lotus Sutra, chap. 17.

67. Ibid., chap. 11.

68. Ibid., chap. 14.

69. Ibid., chap. 26.

70. Ibid., chap. 14.

71. The earthquake refers to that of the twenty-third day of the eighth month in 1257, and the comet, to a comet that appeared on the fifth day of the seventh month in 1264.

Chapter15(Summarizing the questions and answers briefly)

Question: During the Former Day of the Law, the capacities of the people may have been somewhat inferior to those of the people who lived when the Buddha was in the world. And yet they were surely much superior to those of the people in the Middle and Latter Days of the Law. How then can you say that in the early years of the Former Day of the Law the Lotus Sutra was ignored? It was during the thousand years of the Former Day of the Law that such men as Ashvaghosha, Nāgārjuna, Āryadeva, and Asanga appeared. Bodhisattva Vasubandhu, who is known as the scholar of a thousand works, wrote The Treatise on the Lotus Sutra, in which he declared that the Lotus is first among all the sutras. The Tripitaka Master Paramārtha, in describing the transmission of the Lotus Sutra, says that in India there were more than fifty scholars who spread the teachings of the Lotus Sutra, and that Vasubandhu was one of them. Such was the situation in the Former Day of the Law.

Turning to the Middle Day of the Law that followed, we find that the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai appeared in China around the middle of the period and completed The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra, The Words and Phrases of the Lotus Sutra, and Great Concentration and Insight in thirty volumes, in which he explored all the depths of meaning in the Lotus Sutra. At the end of the Middle Day of the Law, the Great Teacher Dengyō appeared in Japan. He not only transmitted to our country the two doctrines of perfect wisdom and perfect meditation expounded by the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai, but also established a great ordination platform of the perfect and immediate enlightenment on Mount Hiei. Thus the perfect precepts were acknowledged throughout Japan, and everyone from the ruler on down to the common people looked up to Enryaku-ji temple on Mount Hiei as their guide and teacher. How then can you say that in the Middle Day of the Law the teachings of the Lotus Sutra were not widely disseminated and spread abroad?

Answer: It is a commonly accepted assertion among the scholars of our times that the Thus Come One invariably preached his teachings in accordance with the capacities of his listeners. But in fact this is not how the Buddha truly taught. If it were true that the greatest doctrines were always preached for the persons with the most superior capacities and understanding, then why, when the Buddha first achieved enlightenment, did he not preach the Lotus Sutra? Why, during the first five hundred years of the Former Day of the Law, were the teachings of the Mahayana sutras not spread abroad? And if it were true that the finest doctrines are revealed to those who have a particular connection with the Buddha, then why did Shakyamuni Buddha preach the Meditation on the Buddha Sutra for his father, King Shuddhodana, and the Māyā Sutra for his mother, Lady Māyā [rather than the Lotus Sutra]? And if the reverse were true, namely, that secret doctrines should never be revealed to evil people having no connection with the Buddha or to slanderers of Buddhism, then why did the monk Realization of Virtue teach the Nirvana Sutra to all the countless monks who were guilty of breaking the precepts? Or why did Bodhisattva Never Disparaging address the four kinds of believers, who were slanderers of the Law, and propagate to them the teachings of the Lotus Sutra?

Thus we can see that it is a great mistake to assert that the teachings are invariably expounded according to the listeners’ capacities.

Chapter16(The propagation of Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna)

Question: Do you mean to say that Nāgārjuna, Vasubandhu, and the others did not teach the true meaning of the Lotus Sutra?

Answer: That is correct. They did not teach it.

Question: Then what doctrines did they teach?

Answer: They taught the doctrines of provisional Mahayana, the various exoteric and esoteric teachings such as the Flower Garland, Correct and Equal, Wisdom, and Mahāvairochana sutras, but they did not teach the doctrines of the Lotus Sutra.

Question: How do you know that this is so?

Answer: The treatises written by Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna run to some three hundred thousand verses. Not all of them have been transmitted to China and Japan, so it is difficult to make statements about their true nature. However, examining the ones that have been transmitted to China such as Commentary on the Ten Stages Sutra, The Treatise on the Middle Way, and The Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom, we may surmise that the treatises remaining in India are of a similar nature.

Question: Among the treatises remaining in India, are there any that are superior to the ones transmitted to China?

Answer: There is no need for me to make pronouncements of my own on the subject of Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna. For the Buddha himself predicted that after he had passed away a man called Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna would appear in southern India, and that his most important teachings would be found in a work called Treatise on the Middle Way.72

Such was the Buddha’s prediction. Accordingly, we find that there were seventy scholars in India who followed in the wake of Nāgārjuna, all of them major scholars. And all of these seventy scholars took Treatise on the Middle Way as the basis of their teachings. Treatise on the Middle Way is a work in four volumes and twenty-seven chapters, and the core of its teachings is expressed in a four-phrase verse73 that describes the nature of phenomena arising from dependent origination. This four-phrase verse sums up the four teachings and three truths contained in the Flower Garland, Wisdom, and other sutras. It does not express the three truths as revealed and unified in the Lotus Sutra.

Question: Is there anyone else who thinks the way you do in this matter?

Answer: T’ien-t’ai says, “Do not presume to compare Treatise on the Middle Way [to the teachings of the Lotus Sutra].”74 And elsewhere he says, “Vasubandhu and Nāgārjuna clearly perceived the truth in their hearts, but they did not teach it. Instead, they employed the provisional Mahayana teachings, which were suited to the times.”75 Miao-lo remarks, “For demolishing false opinions and establishing the truth, nothing can compare to the Lotus Sutra.”76 And Ts’ung-i states, “Nāgārjuna and Vasubandhu cannot compare with T’ien-t’ai.”77

Question: In the latter part of the T’ang dynasty, the Tripitaka Master Pu-k’ung introduced to China a treatise in one volume entitled The Treatise on the Mind Aspiring for Enlightenment, whose authorship he ascribed to Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna. The Great Teacher Kōbō says of it, “This treatise represents the heart and core of all the thousand treatises of Nāgārjuna.”78 What is your opinion on this?

Answer: This treatise consists of seven leaves. There are numerous places in it that could not be the words of Nāgārjuna. Therefore, in the catalog of Buddhist texts it is sometimes listed as a work of Nāgārjuna and sometimes as a work of Pu-k’ung. The matter of its authorship has never been resolved. In addition, it is not a summation of the lifetime teachings of the Buddha and contains many loose statements. To begin with, a vital passage, the one asserting that “only in the True Word teachings [can one attain Buddhahood in one’s present form],” is in error, since it denies the fact that the Lotus Sutra enables one to attain Buddhahood in one’s present form, a fact well attested by both scriptural passages and actual events.79 Instead it asserts that the True Word sutras enable one to attain Buddhahood in one’s present form, an assertion for which there is not the slightest proof in scriptural passages or actual events. That one word “only” in the assertion that “only in the True Word teachings [can one attain Buddhahood in one’s present form]” is the greatest error of all.

In view of the facts, it seems likely that the work was written by Pu-k’ung himself who, in order to ensure that the people of the time would regard it with sufficient gravity, attributed it to Nāgārjuna.

Pu-k’ung makes a number of other errors as well. Thus, in his translation The Rules of Rituals Based on the Lotus Sutra, which deals with the Lotus Sutra, he defines the Buddha of the “Life Span” chapter as the Buddha Amida, an obvious and glaring mistake. He also claims that the “Dhāranī” chapter of the Lotus Sutra should follow immediately after the “Supernatural Powers” chapter and that the “Entrustment” chapter should come at the very end, views that are not even worth discussing.

That is not all. He stole the Mahayana precepts from the T’ien-t’ai school and, obtaining support in the form of a command from Emperor Tai-tsung, established them in the five temples on Mount Wu-t’ai. And he decreed that the classification of doctrinal tenets used by the T’ien-t’ai school should be adopted for the True Word school as well. On the whole, he did many things to confuse and mislead the world. It is acceptable to use translations of sacred texts by other persons, but translations of sutras or treatises from the hand of Pu-k’ung are not to be trusted.

When both old and new translations80 are taken into consideration, we find that there are 186 persons who have brought sutras and treatises from India and introduced them to China in translation. With the exception of one man, the Tripitaka Master Kumārajīva, all of these translators have made errors of some kind. But among them, Pu-k’ung is remarkable for the large number of his errors. It is clear that he deliberately set out to confuse and mislead others.

Question: How do you know that the translators other than Kumārajīva made errors? Do you mean not only to destroy the Zen, Nembutsu, True Word, and the others of the seven major schools, but to discredit all the works of the translators that have been introduced to China and Japan?

Answer: This is a highly confidential matter, and I should discuss it in detail only when I am face to face with the inquirer. However, I will make a few comments here. Kumārajīva himself said: “When I examine the various sutras in use in China, I find that all of them differ from the Sanskrit originals. How can I make people understand this? I have only one great wish. My body is unclean, for I have taken a wife. But my tongue alone is pure and could never speak false words concerning the teachings of Buddhism. After I die, make certain that I am cremated. If at that time my tongue is consumed by the flames, then you may discard all the sutras that I have translated.” Such were the words that he spoke again and again from his lecture platform. As a result, everyone from the ruler on down to the common people hoped they would not die before Kumārajīva [so that they might see what happened].

Eventually Kumārajīva died and was cremated, and his impure body was completely reduced to ashes. Only his tongue remained, resting atop a blue lotus that had sprung up in the midst of the flames. It sent out shining rays of five-colored light that made the night as bright as day and in the daytime outshone the rays of the sun. This, then, is why the sutras translated by all the other scholars came to be held in little esteem, while those translated by Kumārajīva, particularly his translation of the Lotus Sutra, spread rapidly throughout China.81

Notes

72. The appearance of Nāgārjuna after Shakyamuni’s death is predicted in the Māyā Sutra and the Lankāvatāra Sutra.

73. The four-phrase verse referred to is: “We speak of all things as ‘empty’ / which are dependent in origination. / They are no more than ‘existence in name only.’/ This is the Middle Way.”

74. The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra.

75. Great Concentration and Insight.

76. The Annotations on “The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra.”

77. A passage to this effect appears in The Supplement to T’ien-t’ai’s Three Major Works by a Sung T’ien-t’ai scholar Ts’ung-i, though the exact quotation has not been found.

78. A Comparison of Exoteric and Esoteric Buddhism.

79. “Actual events” refers to events mentioned in the Lotus Sutra. For example, in chapter 3, the Buddha predicted that Shāriputra would in the future attain enlightenment as a Buddha called Flower Glow. Chapter 12 depicts the attainment of Buddhahood by the dragon king’s daughter and predicts the future enlightenment of an evil person, Devadatta.

80. The translations made before Hsüan-tsang (602–664) are called “old translations.” His and subsequent translations are known as “new translations.”

81. The Liang Dynasty Biographies of Eminent Priests.

Home
Copied title and URL