The Unanimous Declaration by the Buddhas of the Three Existencesregarding the Classification of the Teachings and Which Are to Be Abandoned and Which Upheld Chapter19

Written by Nichiren

Chapter19(Rebuking the various teachings against the order in which the Buddhas of the three existences put forth their teachings)

The schools that have been established on the basis of the sutras preached in the first forty-two years of the Buddha’s preaching life, sutras that are concerned with the instruction and conversion of others, are the Flower Garland, True Word, Bodhidharma,⁴⁶ Pure Land, Dharma Characteristics, Three Treatises, Precepts, Dharma Analysis Treasury, and Establishment of Truth schools. All of these set forth doctrines that belong to the eight teachings propounded prior to the Lotus Sutra, and all are a form of expedient means. That is, they are expedient means employed to lead and guide others, and fall into the categories of combining, excluding, corresponding, and including.

This is the order in which the Buddhas of the three existences put forth their teachings. One must take cognizance of this order when discussing the doctrinal teachings. Anything that goes contrary to this order is not the teaching of the Buddha.

The Thus Come One Shakyamuni, the lord of teachings, took full cognizance of this order observed by the Buddhas of the three existences in setting forth their teachings, and not a single word of his teaching went contrary to that order. And declaring that he did the same as those Buddhas, the Buddha says in the Lotus Sutra: “Following the same fashion that the Buddhas of the three existences employ in preaching the teachings, I now will do likewise, preaching a Law that is without distinctions.” If one goes contrary to that fashion, then one is turning against the original intent of the Buddhas of the three existences. The founders and teachers who have set up their own various schools and challenge the teachings of the Lotus school are committing the most erroneous of errors, are suffering from the most deluded of delusions.

The “Resolution on Reprimanding Other Schools” (by Sannō-in⁴⁷) contains this passage of refutation: “In general we speak of the eighty thousand Buddhist teachings, but if we make an overall survey of them, we find that there are none that do not belong to one or another of the four teachings, as I have shown at the beginning of this work.

“These four teachings, the Tripitaka teaching, the connecting teaching, the specific teaching, and the perfect teaching, pertain to the vehicles of the voice-hearer, the cause-awakened one, the bodhisattva, and the Buddha respectively. But if we examine the doctrines expounded and the principles underlying them in the True Word, Zen, Flower Garland, Three Treatises, Consciousness-Only,⁴⁸ Precepts, Establishment of Truth, and Dharma Analysis Treasury schools, how do these go beyond what is set forth in the four teachings?

“If one claims that they do go beyond them, then they must be non-Buddhist doctrines or heretical teachings. And if they do not go beyond them, then one must inquire what goal they are intended to achieve. (That is, which of the four vehicles mentioned above does one hope to achieve.) And depending upon how that question is answered, one should then examine their fundamental principles to the fullest and admonish them for their errors. In doing so, one should employ the classification of the four teachings set forth by our own school and base one’s conclusions on this. If the goals that these other schools aim to achieve differ from those set forth in our teachings, one should then take them to task for this.

“Now then, as regards the Flower Garland school, it sets forth its various practices, which act as causes, and the various results or goals that these are intended to achieve, within the framework of the five teachings. These practices fall into different categories such as initial, medial, and later, and are not uniform in nature, with one type of teaching intended to achieve one particular result. But if the causes and results in their scheme do not conform to those outlined in the Tripitaka, connecting, specific, and perfect teachings, then this is not a Buddhist teaching.

“When it comes to the thrice turned wheel of the Law [expounded in the Three Treatises school] or the teachings of the three periods [expounded in the Dharma Characteristics school], one should determine whether such doctrines are sound or not. One should ask what vehicle the practice of such teachings is designed to achieve. If the reply is that they are designed to achieve the vehicle of Buddhahood, then one should point out that they do not include the meditative practice required to achieve Buddhahood.

“If the reply is that they are designed to achieve the vehicle of the bodhisattva, then one should point out that there are two interpretations of the Middle Way, that which sees the three truths that make up the Middle Way as separate entities, and that which sees them as an integral whole, and ask which view is held by the school of the person being questioned. If the answer is that they are regarded as separate, then point out that there is no way that the desired goal can be achieved by such means. If the answer is that they are regarded as an integral whole, then raise the same objection as one did where the goal to be achieved was that of Buddhahood.

“If there are those who mistakenly rely upon the recital of mantras, then point out that unless one has an understanding of the wonderful teaching of the threefold contemplation in a single mind, then one is no different from a follower of the specific teaching and can never gain enlightenment as to the wonderful principle underlying existence.

“In this way one should investigate to the fullest the goals aimed at by these other schools and criticize them on the basis of true principles. (That is, the principles taught by our own school.)

“The principles of logic⁴⁹ are addressed to non-Buddhist believers. Such principles are in most cases associated with the Hinayana or specific teaching doctrines. In comparison to the teachings set forth in the Lotus, Flower Garland, and Nirvana sutras, these are intended to serve as an introduction to those higher teachings. They are designed as temporary measures to fit the particular capacities of the hearers and to lead and guide them. Their ultimate purpose is to enable non-Buddhists and followers of Hinayana teachings to come to an understanding of true principles.

“Therefore, when discoursing on Buddhist teachings, one should keep in mind the goals aimed at by the four ranks of sages and not become unduly concerned with the particular doctrines or principles of logic alone. Also, when assessing the doctrinal tenets of other schools, one should examine them in the light of the tenets of one’s own school and judge their correctness accordingly. But this must not be done in a hard-headed or hostile manner. (On the whole, the other schools in most cases hold doctrines that pertain to the first three of the four teachings and seldom touch upon the principles of the perfect teaching.)”

This, then, is the judgment on these matters passed by the sage of former times, the Great Teacher [Chishō]. It provides a mirror by which one may unfailingly perceive and judge the principles set forth by the various schools. Why then do the scholars of this latter age fail to look into it, but instead rashly presume to judge the doctrinal teachings on their own?