The Bodies and Minds of Ordinary Beings
The sutras preached before the Lotus Sutra deal with the bodies and minds of
ordinary beings. The Buddha preached them in terms that would be accessible
to the minds of ordinary persons, and therefore, though they represent the preaching's
of the Buddha, they do not go beyond the scope of the minds of ordinary persons.
Hence they are called zuitai sutras, or sutras that were preached in accordance
with the minds of others.
To illustrate, suppose that there are parents who do not care for sake themselves
but who have a beloved son who is extremely fond of it. Feeling tenderly toward
their son and desiring to win his affection, they urge him to have some sake
and in so doing pretend that they themselves like it, too. The foolish son thereupon
concludes that his father and mother in fact like sake.
The Trapusha Sutra deals with the realms of human and heavenly beings. The Agon
sutras deal with persons of the two vehicles. The Kegon Sutra deals with bodhisattvas.
The Hodo and Hannya sutras in some respects resemble the Agon and Trapusha sutras,
and in others, the Kegon Sutra.
When common mortals in this latter age read these various sutras, they suppose
that these sutras accord with the mind of the Buddha. But if we ponder the matter
closely, we will see that in fact they are only reading what reflects their
own minds. And since their own minds have from the outset been uncultivated,
there is little merit to be gained thereby.
The Lotus Sutra, on the other hand, is known as a zuijii sutra, one that was
preached in accordance with the Buddha's own mind. Because the Buddha's mind
is a superior mind, persons who read this sutra, even though they may not understand
it's meaning, will gain inestimable benefit.
Mugwort that grows in the midst of hemp or a snake inside a tube [will as a
matter of course become straight], and those who associate with people of good
character, though they themselves may have no particular virtue, will consequently
become upright in heart, deed and word. The Lotus Sutra exerts a similar influence.
Though one may not be outstanding in other ways, if he puts faith in this sutra,
the Buddha will look upon him as a good person.
Concerning the Lotus Sutra, however, the form of its teaching will vary depending
upon the people's capacity, the time, the country and the individuals who propagate
it. Yet it seems that even bodhisattvas who have reached the stage of togaku
do not understand these relationships. How much less can common mortals in the
latter age ever fathom them!
In general, there are three kinds of messengers. The first kind is extremely
clever. The second is not particularly clever but is not stupid, either. The
third is the kind who is extremely stupid but nevertheless reliable.
Of these three types, the first will commit no error [in transmitting his message].
The second, being somewhat clever but not quite as clever as the first type,
will add his own words to his lord's message. Thus he is the worst possible
type of messenger. The third type, being extremely stupid, will not presume
to interpolate his own words, and, being honest, will relay his lord's message
without deviating from it. Thus he is in effect a better messenger than the
second type, and occasionally may be even better than the first.
The first type of messenger may be likened to the four ranks of saints in India.
The second type corresponds to the teachers in China. And the third type may
be likened to the stupid but honest persons among the common mortals of this
latter age.
I will set aside here the period when the Buddha lived in this world. The period
of a thousand years that followed from the day after his passing is known as
the Former Day of the Law. This thousand-year period of the Former Day is divided
into two. During the first five hundred years, the teachings of the Hinayana
sutras spread. The persons who propagated them were Mahakashyapa, Ánanda,
and others like them. In the second five hundred years Ashvaghosha, Nargarjuna,
Asanga, Vasubandhu and others spread the teachings of the provisional Mahayana
sutras. Some among these scholars wrote about partial aspects of the Lotus Sutra,
and others made no mention of it whatsoever. Of the scholars who appeared after
this thousand-year period of the Former Day, their interpretations in a few
cases resembled the Buddha's own teaching, but for the most part they fell into
error. Of those who [appeared during the period of the Former Day and] were
not in error but whose explanations were insufficient, we may name Mahakashyapa,
Ánanda, Ashvaghosha, Nargarjuna, Asanga, and Vasubandhu.
In the thousand-year period of the Middle Day of the Law, Buddhism was introduced
to China. But at first, because of controversy with the Confucians, there was
apparently no time to go into the internal divisions of Buddhism, such as the
distinction between Mahayana and Hinayana and between provisional and true teachings.
As the Buddhist teachings spread more widely and one doctrine after another
was introduced from India, some persons who had earlier seemed discerning now
appeared, in the light of more recently introduced sutras and treatises, to
have been foolish. There were also some who had earlier been thought foolish
but who were now seen to have been discerning. In the end, ten different schools
developed, and a thousand or ten thousand different interpretations were propounded.
Ignorant people did not know which to adhere to, while those who were thought
to be wise each grew boundlessly attached to their own biased views.
In the end, however, there was one opinion that all agreed upon. They agreed,
namely, that of all the teachings set forth in the course of the Buddha's lifetime,
the Kegon Sutra represented the highest, the Nirvana Sutra stood in second place,
and the Lotus Sutra in third place. No one from the ruler on down to the common
people disputed this interpretation, because it was shared by the Dharma Teacher
Fa-yun, the Dharma Teacher Chih-tsang and the other leaders of the ten schools,
who were all looked up to as great sages.
Then, during the Middle Day of the Law, in the time of the Ch'en and Sui dynasties,
there appeared a young monk named Chih-i, who was later to be known as the Great
Teacher T'ien-t'ai Chih-che. Although he taught many doctrines, his teachings
in the end centered upon this single issue of the relative superiority of the
Lotus, Nirvana and Kegon sutras.
The Dharma Teacher Chih-i declared that the teachers of Buddhism had these three
works ranked upside down. The ruler of the Ch'en dynasty, in order to determine
the truth of the matter, thereupon summoned a group of more than a hundred men,
including the Administrator of Monks Hui-heng, the Supervisor of Monks Hui-kuang,
Hui-jung, the Dharma Teacher Fa-sui, and others, all among the most eminent
leaders of the ten schools of northern and southern China, and had them confront
the Great Teacher T'ien-t'ai in debate.
The Great Teacher T'ien-t'ai said, "The Lotus Sutra itself says that 'among
the sutras, it holds the highest place.' It also says, 'Among all the sutras
I [Shakyamuni] have preached, now preach and will preach, this Lotus Sutra is
the most difficult to believe and the most difficult to understand.' The Muryogi
Sutra makes clear that the sutras the Buddha already 'had preached' here refer
to 'the Makahannya Sutra, the Kegon teaching of oceanic emptiness' and so forth.
And with regard to the sutras he 'would preach' in the future, the Nirvana Sutra
says, 'From the Hannya Haramitsu [Sutra] derives the Great Nirvana [Sutra].'
These scriptural passages show that the Lotus Sutra is superior the Kegon and
Nirvana sutras; they make it abundantly clear, clear as could possibly be. You
should understand accordingly."
Rebuked in this manner, his opponents in some cases simply shut their mouths,
in other cases spewed out abuse or turned pale. The Ch'en ruler then rose from
his seat and bowed three times, and all the hundred officials pressed their
palms together in reverence. The leaders of the other schools were powerless
to prevail and were forced to concede defeat. Thus it was established that,
among the teachings of the Buddha's lifetime, the Lotus Sutra holds the highest
place.
Then, during the latter five hundred years of the Middle Day of the Law, the
new translations of the sutras and treatises appeared one after another. In
the third year of the Cheng-kuan era (629) in the reign of Emperor T'ai-tsung,
a monk named Hsuan-tsang journeyed to India. He spent seventeen years mastering
the various Buddhist doctrines of the five regions and returned to China in
the nineteenth year of the same era (645), introducing the Jimmitsu Sutra, the
Yuga Ron, the Yuishiki Ron and the other teachings of the Hosso school.
Hsuan-tsang declared, "Although there are many different schools in India,
this school is the foremost." Emperor T'ai-tsung was one of the wisest
rulers China has known and he took Hsuan-tsang to be his teacher.
In essence, what this school teaches is that for some persons, the three vehicles
are a mere expedient and the one vehicle represents the truth, while for others
the one vehicle is an expedient and the three vehicles represent the truth.
It also teaches that the five natures are completely separate, and that those
sentient beings whose nature predestines them [to the two vehicles] or who lack
the nature of enlightenment can never attain Buddhahood.
Such doctrines were as incompatible with those of the T'ien-t'ai of Tendai school
as are fire and water. But by this time both the Great Teacher T'ien-t'ai and
the Great Teacher Chang-an had passed from the scene, and their successors were
not the men they ought to have been. Hence it appeared that the Tendai School
had already gone down in defeat.
Later, during the reign of Empress Tse-t'ien, the Kegon School appeared in China.
The translation of the Kegon Sutra in sixty volumes, which the Great Teacher
T'ien-t'ai had criticized, was set aside, and thereafter, the school was established
on the basis of a new translation of the Kegon Sutra in eighty volumes, introduced
by the Tripitaka Master Jih-chao. In general, this school teaches that the Kegon
Sutra represents the "root teaching" of the Buddha while the Lotus
Sutra represents the "branch teachings." Empress Tse-t'ien was a Buddhist
nun, and she had a certain degree of understanding of both the inner and outer
scriptures. In her arrogance she looked down upon the Tendai School. Between
the Hosso and Kegon schools, the Lotus Sutra thus became doubly obscured.
Later, in the reign of Emperor Hsuan-tsung, the three Tripitaka masters Shan-wu-wei,
Chin-kang-chih and Pu-k'ung traveled to China from India, bringing with them
the Dainichi, Kongocho and Soshitsuji sutras. In both their character and doctrine,
these three men were quite beyond comparison with the earlier teachers of Buddhism
in China. And, in addition, because they introduced mudras and mantras, which
had been previously unknown, it was thought that Buddhism had not really existed
in China before their arrival. These men declared that the Tendai School was
superior to the Kegon, Hosso and Sanron teachings, but that it could not measure
up to the doctrines of the Shingon sutras.
Still later, the Great Teacher Miao-lo produced refutations of the Hosso, Kegon
and Shingon schools, schools that the Great Teacher T'ien-t'ai had of course
not criticized. But he did not carry out his refutations in a public debate,
as the Great Teacher T'ien-t'ai had done. Thus the Lotus Sutra became like a
piece of brocade worn in the dark of night, while the mudras and mantras, which
are not to be found in the Lotus Sutra, were clearly visible before people's
eyes. Therefore everyone agreed in declaring the Shingon school to be superior.
During the Middle Day of the Law, Buddhism was introduced to Japan in the sixth
year of the reign of Emperor Kimmei (544). During the more than two hundred
years from the reign of Emperor Kimmei to the reign of Emperor Kammu, the six
sects - Sanron, Jojitsu, Hosso, Kusha, Kegon and Ritsu - were propagated. The
teachings of the Shingon School were introduced during the reign of the forty-fourth
sovereign, Empress Gensho, and those of the Tendai School, during the reign
of the forty-fifth sovereign, Emperor Shomu. But neither of these teachings
was propagated at the time.
During the reign of Emperor Kammu there lived the Dharma Teacher Saicho, who
was later known as the Great Teacher Dengyo. Before journeying to China he mastered
the teachings of the six sects, and in addition, he spent fifteen years in retirement
on the mountain, examining the doctrines of the Tendai and Shingon schools.
Therefore, even before going to China he was able to criticize the earlier six
sects from the viewpoint of the Tendai teachings, and his criticisms persuaded
all the leaders of the seven major temples of Nara to acknowledge themselves
as his disciples. Thus the doctrines of the six sects were refuted.
Later, in the twenty-third year of the Enryaku era (804), he journeyed to China,
returning to Japan in the twenty-fourth year of the same era (805). At that
time he propagated the Tendai and Shingon teachings in Japan. But as far as
their relative superiority was concerned, though it appears that he discerned
it in his heart, he did not expound it to others.
During this same period lived Kukai, who was later known as the Great Teacher
Kobo. He, too, went to China in the twenty-third year of the Enryaku era and
returned to Japan in the third year of the Daido era (808). He studied only
the teachings of Shingon and propagated them in Japan. In his opinion, the Lotus
Sutra could not measure up even to the Kegon Sutra, much less to the Shingon
teachings.
The Great Teacher Dengyo had a disciple named Ennin, who was later known as
the Great Teacher Jikaku. He went to China in the fifth year of the Jowa era
(838) and returned to Japan in the fourteenth year of the same era (847). During
those ten years he studied both the Shingon and Tendai doctrines. While in Japan,
he had thoroughly studied the Tendai and Shingon doctrines under the Great Teacher
Dengyo, Gishin and Encho, and in addition, during his ten years in China he
studied Shingon under eight distinguished teachers and received instruction
in Tendai from Tsung-jui, Chih-yuan and others. After returning to Japan, he
announced that the Tendai and Shingon schools both alike represented the flavor
of ghee, and that the sutras of both schools were profound and recondite. An
imperial edict was issued supporting these opinions.
After him there appeared Enchin, who was later known as the Great Teacher Chisho.
Before journeying to China, he was a disciple of the Eminent Monk Gishin. While
in Japan, he studied the Tendai and Shingon teachings under Gishin, Encho, Ennin
and others. In addition, he went to China in the third year of the Ninka era
(853), returning in the first year of the Jogan era (859). During his seven
years in China, he made a thorough study of the two teachings of Tendai and
Shingon under such men as Fa-ch'uan and Liang-hsu.
He declared that the relative merits of the two sects of Tendai and Shingon
were as clear as though reflected in a mirror, but that this point would surely
be disputed in later times, and so he would settle the matter. He therefore
stated his opinion that the two sects of Tendai and Shingon were comparable
to the two eyes of a person or the two wings of a bird. Those who held interpretations
at variance with this were going against the teachings of the founder, the Great
Teacher Dengyo, and should not be permitted to remain on the mountain. An imperial
edict was again promulgated in support of this position, and Enchin spread his
interpretation throughout the country.
Thus it would appear that, though there are many wise men in both China and
Japan, there could be no one who would refute this interpretation. If it is
valid, then those persons who practice in accordance with it are certain to
attain Buddhahood, and those rulers who pay respect to it are bound to enjoy
peace and safety in their realm.
I had thought that, though I might venture to tell others my own opinion, they
would not only refuse to heed it but in fact would try to do me harm, and that
my disciples and lay patrons who heard my views would also be placed in peril.
And in fact everything has turned out just as I anticipated.
Nevertheless, I believe that the interpretations put forth by the persons I
have mentioned above simply do not accord with the Buddha's intent. Judging
from the eight volumes and twenty-eight chapters of the Lotus Sutra, if there
should be any other sutra that surpasses this one, then the Lotus Sutra would
represent no more than a gathering of the Buddhas of the ten directions who
came together to pile up great lies. But in fact when we examine the Kegon,
Nirvana, Hannya, Dainichi and Jimmitsu sutras, we do not find any passage that
controverts the Lotus Sutra's clear statement that "among the sutras, it
holds the highest place."
Thus, although Shan-wu-wei, Hsuan-tsang, Kobo, Jikaku, Chisho and the others
put forth a variety of clever arguments, they could produce no passage of scripture
that would prove the Lotus Sutra to be inferior to the Dainichi Sutra. Their
whole argument rests solely on the question of whether or not the sutra includes
mudras and mantras. Rather than writing hundreds of volumes of argument, traveling
back and forth between China and Japan with their unending schemes, and arranging
for the promulgation of imperial edicts in order to intimidate people, they
would have been better off producing some clear passage of proof in the sutras
themselves. Who then could have doubted their assertions?
Dewdrops accumulate to form a stream, and streams accumulate to form the great
ocean. Particles of dust accumulate to form a mountain, and mountains accumulate
to form Mount Sumeru. And in the same way, trifling matters accumulate to become
grave ones. How much more so in the case of this matter, which is the gravest
of all! When these men wrote their commentaries, they should have exerted themselves
in examining both the principles and documentary evidence of the two teachings,
and when the court issued imperial edicts, it, too, should have delivered its
admonitions after thoroughly investigating both sides and citing some clear
passage of proof.
Not even the Buddha himself could repudiate his statement that among all the
sutras he had preached, now preached and would preach, [the Lotus Sutra stands
supreme]. How much less then can scholars, teachers and rulers of states use
their authority to do so! This statement has been heard by Bonten, Taishaku,
the deities of the sun and moon, and the Four Heavenly Kings and duly recorded
in their respective palaces.
While there were still persons who truly did not know of this statement, it
seems that the false interpretations of the teachers I mentioned earlier spread
without anyone incurring retribution. But once a person of forceful character
has come forward to make this sutra passage known in a bold and uncompromising
fashion, then grave matters are certain to occur. Because people have looked
down upon this person and cursed him, struck him, sent him into exile or attempted
to take his life, Bonten, Taishaku, the deities of the sun and moon, and the
Four Heavenly Kings rose up in anger and became that votary's allies. Thus unexpected
censures have come down from Heaven, and the people are about to be wiped out
and the nation destroyed.
Though the votary of the Lotus Sutra may be of humble background, the heavenly
deities who protect him are fearsome indeed. If an asura demon tries to swallow
the sun or moon, his head will split into seven pieces. If a dog barks at a
lion, its bowels will rot. And as I view the situation today, the same sort
of retribution is happening here in Japan.
On the other hand, those who give alms and support to the votary will receive
the same benefit as though they were supporting the Lotus Sutra itself. As the
Great Teacher Dengyo says in his commentary: "Those who praise him will
receive blessings that will pile up as high as Mount Sumeru, while those who
slander him will be committing a fault that will condemn them to the hell of
incessant suffering."
He who offered a humble meal of millet to the Pratyekabuddha became the Tathágata
Universal Brightness. He who offered a mud-pie to the Buddha became the ruler
of the continent of Jambudvipa. Though one may perform meritorious deeds, if
they are directed toward that which is not true, then they may bring great evil
but they will never result in good. On the other hand, though one may be ignorant
in mind and his offerings meager, if he presents them to a person who upholds
the truth, his merit will be great. How much more so in the case of persons
who in all sincerity make offerings to the True Law!
In addition, we live today in a time of trouble, when there is little that ordinary
people can do. And yet, busy as you are, in your sincerity of heart you have
sent me bamboo shoots of the moso variety as offerings to the Lotus Sutra here
in the mountains. Surely you are sowing good seeds in a field of fortune. My
tears flow when I think of it.