|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Reaffirming Our Right to HappinessOn the Gohonzon Copyright © 1996 SGI-USA Contents Behind the SGI's Decision To Issue the Gohonzon Answers to Commonly Asked Questions About A Historical Perspective on the Transcription of the Gohonzon The Recent History of the Conferral of the Gohonzon
Behind the SGI’s decision to issue the GohonzonOn September 7, 1993, adopting a proposal from Sendo Narita, the chief priest of Joen-ji, a temple in Tochigi Prefecture, Japan, the SGI announced that it would start issuing Gohonzon, reproduced from a Gohonzon transcribed in 1720 by Nichikan, the 26th high priest of Taiseki-ji, to its members worldwide. Many SGI members who practiced without the Gohonzon since Nichiren Shoshu’s refusal to grant them the Gohonzon were overjoyed at the news. And many others, filled with hope, have been looking forward to a bright future of the spread of Nichiren Daishonin’s Buddhism ad a flourishing of the Soka Renaissance toward a world that embraces truly humanistic ideals. The significance of the SGI’s decision can be seen from the following two perspectives: First, Nichiren Daishonin inscribed the Gohonzon for all people through the world. His fundamental intent and desire in doing so was to make the Gohonzon available to all who sincerely seek to practice his teachings, thus enabling them to establish indestructible happiness through their faith and practice. Second, in the development of the priesthood issue, Nikken Abe, abusing his position as high priest, arbitrarily stopped grating the Gohonzon to SGI members, with the express purpose of destroying the SGI, which, since its inception, has been single-mindedly promoting kosen-rufu and had supported the priesthood. Nikken’s action runs completely counter to the Daishonin’s fundamental intent and sprit behind inscribing the Gohonzon. In light of these circumstances--and based on its responsibility as the body of believers selflessly and harmoniously practicing the Daishonin’s Buddhism in modern times--the SGI has decided to make the Gohonzon available to its membership. The SGI’s decision was made solely to protect the Daishonin’s Buddhism, to reply to the sincerity of those purely seeking the Gohonzon, and to further promote kosen-rufu, thus fulfilling the expectation the Daishonin placed in his future disciples. The priesthood claims: “The Soka Gakkai is a group that bas been excommunicated by Nichiren Shoshu, and has absolutely no relationship with Nichiren Shoshu, and has absolutely no relationship with Nichiren Shoshu” (NST News, Special Issue, p. I). Despite their denial of any relationship to the Gakkai, however, priests still seem to be obsessed and grow nervous about the SGI’s every action: “The Soka Gakkai announced that they will begin to independently bestow Gohonzons and, thus declaring complete independence from Nichiren Shoshu” (ibid., p. 2). From these two statements, it is clear what status the priesthood expects us, as SGI members, to maintain: excommunicated, but dependent. Since the SGI’s recent announcement, the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood and the Hokkeko (a group of lay believers affiliated with the Nichiren Shoshu temples) have been propounding spreading groundless accusations that have no basis in the Gosho or in any of the Daishonin’s teachings, calling the Gohonzon issued by the SGI “counterfeit.” The Nichiren Shoshu priesthood asserts that the Gohonzon issued by the SGI are “counterfeit” because:
This booklet attempts to address these and other accusations brought by the priesthood and demonstrate the validity of the SGI’s decision in light of the Daishonin’s teachings. (i) The SGI is the only group of believers that has brought Nichiren Daishonin’s Buddhism to the entire world, that has been carrying out the Daishonin’s will--kosen-rufu--in reality. Withy conviction in the SGI’s profound mission for kosen-rufu, and by further polishing our faith and practice, we can show Nikken and his supporters, through actual proof, the great power of the Gohonzon. As the Daishonin states: “Even more valuable than reason and documentary proof is the proof of actual fact” (MW-6, III). Rebutting the Nichiren Shoshu Priesthood’s
|
|
{Gohonzon issued by the SGI are counterfeit because} they have not been authorized by the high priest. |
NST quote #1
|
One should never worship anything as a Gohonzon that has not been authorized as such by the High Priest, who has inherited the Heritage of the Law, even if it was inscribed by Nichiren Daishonin himself, or even if it is a mandala transcribed by Nikko Shonin or any of the successive High Priests. This has been a basic tenet of Nichiren Shoshu for seven hundred years (NST News, Special Issue, p. 3-4). |
Rebuttal to allegation #1
(i) Nichiren Daishonin, in a letter known as “The Real Aspect of the Gohonzon,” writes: “Never seek this Gohonzon outside yourself. The Gohonzon exists only within the mortal flesh of us ordinary people who embrace the Lotus Sutra and chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo…. The Gohonzon is found in faith alone. As the sutra states, ‘Only with faith can one enter Buddhahood’ (MW-I, 213).
Here, the Daishonin teaches us that it is our faith that taps the Gohonzon’s power, and that the locus of the power is within us. If we believe in the Daishonin’s words, how can we accept the idea that anyone, by virtue of his or her assumed religious authority, can “switch on” or “switch off” the power of the Gohonzon? Yet Nikken would have us believe he possess such power.
According to the above NST statement, the authority of the high priest alone gives the Gohonzon its power. Even Gohonzon inscribed by Nichiren Daishonin himself, the priesthood asserts, have power only by dint of Nikken’s permission. Are we therefore supposed to believe that the Dai-Gohonzon, which the Daishonin bestowed upon all humanity, has power only by virtue of Nikken’s authority? What would Nichiren Daishonin think of this statement?
(ii) The Gohonzon issued by the SGI will be reproduced from a Gohonzon transcribed by Nichikan, the 26th high priest of Taiseki-ji, based upon the Dai-Gohonzon. In terms of Nichiren Daishonin’s Buddhism, it is obviously a valid object of worship.
(iii) The Daishonin inscribed the Gohonzon for all people throughout the world. This is exemplified in the Daishonin’s words, “Showing profound compassion for those ignorant of the gem of ichinen sanzen, the True Buddha wrapped it within the single phrase Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, with which he then adorned the necks of those living in the Latter Day” (MW-I, 82).
Especially for those who sincerely sought to practice his teachings, the Daishonin spared nothing of himself to inscribe the Gohonzon. He wrote to Abutsu-bo, a sincere elderly believer in Sado, saying, “Faith like yours is so extremely rare tat I will inscribe the Treasure Tower especially for you” (MW-I, 30).
Nowhere in the Gosho does the Daishonin state that we need permission from a high priest to tap the unlimited powers of the Buddha and the Laws embodied in the Gohonzon or to benefit from our practice. The Daishonin himself states, “Whether or onto your prayer is answered depends upon your faith; [if it is not,] the fault in no way lies with me, Nichiren” (MW-5, 305).
The Daishonin here admonishes us to depend on no one -- not even the Daishonin himself -- and nothing other than our faith to answer our prayers. As he wrote; “Faith alone is what really matters. No matter how earnestly Nichiren prays for you, if you lack faith, it will be like trying to set fire to wet tinder. Spur yourself to muster the power of faith” (MW‑I, 246).
(iv) In the past, many branch temple of Nichiren Shoshu reproduced and issued Gohonzon on their own without the high priest’s permission. [See “A Historical Perspective on the Transcription of the Gohonzon,” p. 74.] If the priesthood continues to insist that the SGI’s Gohonzon are counterfeit because they are not authorized by the high priest, it would have to deny its own recorded history. Examining this history, it becomes apparent that the absolute, exclusive authority over the Gohonzon by the high priest is a “basic tenet” that exists exclusively in the imagination of the present-day priesthood.
NST allegation #2
|
The high priest is endowed with complete authority of the Gohonzon. |
NST quote #2
|
The transmission document Seven Teachings on the Gohonzon Transmitted From Master to Disciple states, ‘This [the transcription of the characters “Nichiren” on the Gohonzon by the transcribing High Priest] specifically means that each High Priest corresponds [in function] to Nichiren’ (Fuji Shugaku Yoshu, vol. I, p. 32). This indicates that all of the doctrines relating to the Gohonzon are transmitted through the ten thousand years of the Latter Day of the Law through the exclusive transmission of the Heritage of the Law from one High Priest to the next. It is in this that the solemn transmission of the entity of the Law exists. (NST News, Special Issue, p. 3) |
(i) This “Seven Teachings on the Gohonzon” passage does not refer to the transmission of secret teachings about the Gohonzon exclusively through the successive high priests or imply the existence of a mystic spiritual entity (“the heritage of the entity of the Law”) possessed and transmitted only by high priests.
“Seven Teachings on the Gohonzon” records the Daishonin’s orally transmitted teachings and Nikko Shonin’s comments on the meaning of various inscriptions on the Gohonzon, as well as instructions on the transcription of the Gohonzon. This particular passage simply indicates that when transcribing the Gohonzon, the high priest must write “Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, Nichiren” down the center, exactly as the Daishonin did.
After the Daishonin’s passing, his senior disciples -- other than Nikko Shonin -- wrote “Nam-myoho-renge-kyo” down the center of the Gohonzon, but added their own names below instead of “Nichiren”. They regarded the inscription “Nichiren” under “Nam-myoho-renge-kyo” on the Gohonzon only as a signature, and failed to understand the significance of the oneness of the Person and the Law this expressed. In light of these circumstances, Nikko Shonin explains in this passage from “Seven Teachings on the Gohonzon” the importance of writing “Nichiren” on the Gohonzon. Could Nikko Shonin have intended the words “each high priest corresponds to Nichiren” as a magic formula that automatically turns each high priest into a true Buddha? It does not seem likely. There is nothing magical or supernatural in Buddhism. Nikko Shonin meant this as an admonition to each high priest that he is transcribing the Gohonzon on the Daishonin’s behalf, not his own. He is instructing them to write the Daishonin’s name, not their own, on the Gohonzon. Instead of taking Nikko Shonin’s spirit to heart, Nikken has completely twisted it, trying to use this admonition as a carte blanche endorsement of his own authority.
(ii) Gohonzon issued by the SGI are reproduced from the Gohonzon that High Priest Nichikan transcribed in exact accord with the instructions of the Daishonin and Nikko Shonin, including those in the “Seven Teachings on the Gohonzon.” They are therefore correct and valid Gohonzon of Nichiren Daishonin’s Buddhism.
(iii) All of the so-called transfer documents at Taiseki-ji already have been published. Regarding the transfer documents that he himself received as the 66th high priest, Nittatsu once stated: “Nichiko Shonin [the 59th high priest who was also a noted Buddhist scholar] has published everything. There is, therefore, nothing special or secret about it.” There exists no secret teaching in Daishonin’s Buddhism possessed exclusively by the high priest.
NST allegation #3
|
When 35th High Priest Nichion Shonin received the Transmission of the Law, he was honored with the following words from 33rd High Priest Nichigen Shonin. Nichigen Shonin gave me the instruction, “Once you have accepted and stored this ultimate secret Law [of the Gohonzon] within yourself, [the inner realization of] Nichiren, Nikko, Nichimoku, and all the successive High Priests up to Nichi’in, Nichigen, and including you, is all one entity. Realize that at this point in the Latter Day of the Law it is you Nichion who is the present High Priest possessing the three virtues of sovereign, teacher and parent, so that all the Daimoku chanted by those who believe in the teachings of Taisekiji is the Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo of the secret Law of your inner realization. The 56th High Priest Nichio Shonin, further explained: The Transmission of the Entity of the Law entails the legitimate entrustment of the golden utterance [of the Buddha]. If one has not been successively entrusted with the golden utterance, one is decidedly unable to transcribe the Gohonzon. How does the Soka Gakkai interpret these passage? It must be understood that the profound doctrines relating to the entity of the Law of the Gohonzon are definitely transmitted solely form one High Priest to the nest, and that complete authority concerning the Gohonzon is possessed by only one person -- the High Priest (NST News, Special Issue, p. 10). |
(i) “The secret Law” in Nichigen’s words above refers to nothing other than the Dai-Gohonzon of the Three Great Secret Laws. It does not refer to a “secret entity” possessed only by the high priest to the exclusion of all others.
There are no secrets in Nichiren Daishonin’s Buddhism. It is not a hermetic, esoteric or occult teaching. The “Three Great Secret Laws” (indicating the Dai-Gohonzon, Daimoku and the High Sanctuary of True Buddhism) are called so because before Nichiren Daishonin, they were “hidden in the depths” of the Lotus Sutra. The Daishonin revealed and clarified them for all humanity so that all people could attain Buddhahood equally in the Latter Day of the Law.
When we have faith in the Dai-Gohonzon [“the secret Law”] and chant daimoku, we can manifest the Daishonin’s life=condition, that is, the Buddha nature, from within our own lives. Thus we become “one entity” with the Daishonin. In the above passage, Nichigen encourages his successor, Nichion, that he is “one entity” with Nichiren Daishonin by virtue of his faith in the Dai-Gohonzon.
During this time, Taiseki-ji’s validity was being criticized and strongly attacked by other Nichiren sects. This statement thus instilled confidence in Nichion that he, among all the other high priests of the various sects, was directly connected to the Daishonin because of this faith in the Dai-Gohonzon. It was not intended to exclude everyone else from the possibility of having such a connection with the Daishonin. Nor was it meant to imply that Nichion, simply be becoming high priests, was automatically equivalent to the true Buddha himself, regardless of any faith or effort on his part. Nichigen’s words are to emphasize the importance of accepting the Dai-Gohonzon with sincere faith, to assert the head temple’s validity based on faith in the Dai-Gohonzon, and to emphasize the important responsibility of the high priest to protect the Daishonin’s Buddhism.
(ii) Immediately prior to the passage from Nichio, quoted by NST above, Nichio defines “the entity of the Law” as the Dai-Gohonzon, stating: “The entity of the Law specifically transferred is the Dai-Gohonzon of the High Sanctuary, which is enshrined at this temple.” (Bennaku Kanjin Sho, p. 212). In fact, Nichio (56th priest, who served from 1889-1908) was the first to ever use the phrase “heritage of the entity of the Law.” “The transmission of the heritage of the entity of the Law,” which the priesthood now claims is a secret entity only possessed by high priests, actually indicates the transference of the responsibility to protect the Dai-Gohonzon and preserve it for humanity.
“The legitimate entrustment of the golden utterance” indicates those transfer documents pertaining to the Gohonzon, such as the “Seven Teachings on the Gohonzon.” Here Nichio emphasizes the importance that whoever transcribes the Gohonzon understands the instructions of the Daishonin ad Nikko Shonin regarding the Gohonzon.
Gohonzon issued by the SGI are produced from a Gohonzon that High Priest Nichikan transcribed exactly following the instructions of the Daishonin and Nikko Shonin. Therefore, they do not contradict in the least what Nichio states in this passage.
(iii) The above two passages by Nichigen and Nichio were written to exalt the orthodoxy of Taiseki-ji based on faith in the Dai-Gohonzon over other Nichiren denominations. It is important to bear in mind the historical circumstances behind the writings of the successive high priests in order to grasp their intent and significance.
(iv) Nowhere in the Gosho does the Daishonin mention a “heritage of the entity of the Law” transmitted only through successive high priests. When he writes of “the heritage” (Jpn. kechimyaku) in the Gosho, the Daishonin is referring to the heritage or lifeblood of faith. He states:
Be resolved to summon forth the great power of your faith, and chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo with the prayer that your faith will be steadfast and correct at the moment of your death. Never seek any other way to inherit the ultimate law and manifest it in your life…. Without the lifeblood of faith, it would be useless to embrace the Lotus Sutra. (MW‑I, 25)
The heritage of the Law -- the lifeblood of faith -- is the universal means by which all people can attain enlightenment. The concept that the heritage of the Law was intended as the exclusive property of any select “lineage” of persons is, in fact, an idea that the Daishonin vigorously fought against.
The Daishonin wrote: “Nichiren has been trying to awaken all the people of Japan to faith in the Lotus Sutra so that they too can share the heritage and attain Buddhahood. But instead they attacked me time and again, and finally had me banished to this island” (MW‑I, 24). The priesthood’s claim of an exclusive right to the heritage of the Law is a feudal concept that clearly betrays the spirit of equality for which the Daishonin risked his own life.
NST quote #4
|
The concept of “practice towards kosen-rufu” which denies the Transmission of the Heritage of the true Law from High Priest to High Priest is nothing but an empty theory far removed from the fundamental teachings of the Daishonin…. A passage from the Gosho “On the True Cause” reads: [The documents of] this Heritage [of the school of the Essential Teachings of the Lotus Sutra] and [the documents of] the essential matters of the Gohonzon are documents of the Transmission of the Law from Nichiren to the successive master of the seat of the Law. They concern the Transmission bestowed [on Bodhisattva Jogyo] at the Treasure Tower, the Transmission of the Heritage of the Law exclusively from one to the next. Therefore, absolutely no one is qualified to bypass the High Priest and arbitrarily manufacture and confer the Gohonzon of Nichiren Shoshu, even in the form of wood block reproductions of a Gohonzon (NST News, Special Issue, pp. 11‑12). |
Rebuttal to allegation #4
(i) According to Nichiko, the 59th high priest and renowned Buddhist scholar, the passage quoted above was added later to the text of “On the True Cause” by someone other than the Daishonin or Nikko Shonin. (In The Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. I, p. 8, Nichiko underlines this passage and adds a cautionary footnote explaining that it was appended at a later date, long after the Daishonin wrote the body of the letter.)
(ii) The purpose of the passage quoted by NST is to assert that the Daishonin’s important writings such as this Gosho “On the True Cause” and other transfer documents regarding the Gohonzon, including “Seven Teachings on the Gohonzon,” had been transmitted through the high priests at Taiseki-ji.
However, these writings were hardly “secret documents” known only to the successive high priests at Taiseki-ji. The original manuscript of “On the True Cause” does not exist. High Priest Nichiko had to compile the text of this Gosho based on a copy made by Nichiji, the fifth high priest, and two other copies made and preserved at temples of other Nichiren schools (The Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. I, p. 8). Nichiko also had to rely on a copy made by a priest from a different Nichiren school in order to compile “Seven Teachings on the Gohonzon” (ibid., p. 33). It is strange that Nichiren Shoshu has been claiming exclusive possession of these documents when High Priest Nichiko himself had to go outside of Taiseki-ji to gain access to them.
Because all of the Daishonin’s important writings and transfer documents already have been published, the high priest possesses no secret teachings to which he alone is privy, nor does the priesthood in general. This passage, which was added to the end of “On the True Cause” after the Daishonin’s and Nikko Shonin’s time, still in no way supports Nikken’s claim to exclusive authority over the Gohonzon. “Exclusive transmission” refers to the Daishonin’s designation of Nikko Shonin as his legitimate successor. This was based on Nikko Shonin’s faith and practice, and his courage to endure persecutions alongside the Daishonin. Because he practiced with the same sprit and intent as Nichiren Daishonin, he was qualified to inherit the Daishonin’s teachings for posterity.
(iii) Regarding the heritage of the Law, the Daishonin writes: “The heritage of the Lotus Sutra flows within the lives of those who never forsake it in any lifetime whatsoever -- whether in the past, the present or the future” (MW‑I, 23). In this Gosho passage, the Daishonin clearly defines the heritage of the Law as our faith in the law of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo.
In “The True Entity of Life,” the Daishonin further explains the important connection of our faith to kosen-rufu: “No matter what, maintain your faith as a votary of the Lotus Sutra, and forever exert yourself as Nichiren’s disciple. If you are of the same mind as Nichiren, you must be a Bodhisattva of the Earth. And since you are a Bodhisattva of the Earth, there is not the slightest doubt that you have been a disciple of the Buddha from the remotest past” (MW‑I, 93).
In the passage “If you are of the same mind as Nichiren, you must be a Bodhisattva of the Earth” lies an essential aspect of our faith. Those who are of the same mind as Nichiren Daishonin are those who practice with the awareness that they are Bodhisattvas of the Earth, that is, those who fight for others’ happiness for the sake of kosen-rufu. Our dedication to kosen-rufu -- to the peace and happiness of all people -- is fundamental to our faith and is the source of good fortune that permeates past, present and future.
As the Daishonin wrote, “Without the lifeblood of faith, it would be useless to embrace the Lotus Sutra” (MW‑I, 25). Even if one does gongyo and chants daimoku to the Gohonzon, if he acts counter to the “mind of Nichiren,” in other words, acts to interfere with kosen-rufu or to harm those who strive to accomplish it, that person will be destroying his own good fortune.
Without faith and practice dedicated to kosen-rufu, no one, not even a high priest, can inherit the lifeblood of faith from the Daishonin. This is Nichiren Daishonin’s Buddhism.
(iv) The SGI has developed to the extent it has because it is the only group of believers in modern times that unstintingly practices the Daishonin’s Buddhism in harmonious unity, with the aim of accomplishing kosen-rufu. Many millions of people have changed their karma, developed good fortune and shown proof of victory in their lives by practicing together in the SGI. This is clear evidence that the lifeblood of faith from the Daishonin is alive and pulsating within the SGI.
In this regard, Nichiren Daishonin wrote:
All disciples and believers of Nichiren should chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo with one mind (itai doshin), transcending all differences among themselves to become as inseparable as fish and e water in which they swim. This spiritual bond is the basis for the universal transmission of the ultimate Law of life and death. Herein lies the true goal of Nichiren’s propagation. When you are so united, even the great hope for kosen-rufu can be fulfilled without fail. But if any of Nichiren’s disciples should disrupt the unity of itai doshin, he will destroy his own castle from within. (MW‑I, 23)
The Daishonin bestowed the Gohonzon upon all the people of the world. He never intended it for possession by only a few. And the role and responsibility of making the Gohonzon available for those who sincerely seek to practice the Daishonin’s Buddhism naturally rest with the believers who are united in working toward the goal of kosen-rufu. With this qualification and responsibility, based on the Daishonin’s Buddhism, the SGI is conferring the Gohonzon upon its members.
NST allegation #5
|
“Faith based on the Dai-Gohonzon” without pilgrimage to the Head Temple is an obvious contradiction. |
NST quote #5
|
As Nichiren Daishonin proclaims, “I, Nichiren, infuse my life into sumi and inscribed the Gohonzon,” The Dai-Gohonzon of the High Sanctuary enshrined at Taisekiji is the spirit and embodiment of the true Buddha, Nichiren Daishonin. How can people who do not wish to worship the Dai-Gohonzon call themselves believers with a direct connection to the Daishonin?… We must always bear in mind that regardless of the time or circumstances, there can be no true means of attaining Buddhahood if one separates oneself from the Dai-Gohonzon of the High Sanctuary and from the Head Temple Taisekiji (NST News, Special Issue, pp. 12‑13). |
NST allegation #6 Gakkai’s counterfeits constitute slander
towards Nichikan Shonin. NST quote #6 In an explanation of reverence for the Three
Treasures of the Latter Day of the Law in his work “On the Three
Robes of Nichiren Shoshu,” Nichikan Shonin discussed the Treasure
of the Priest as follows: I offer my sincere
devotion to Nikko Shonin, the great master of propagation, the primary
High Priest of the ten thousand years of Mappo and the founder of
the Head Temple Taisekiji. O offer my sincere devotion to the High
Priest Nichimoku Shonin, the master of the seat of the Law and to
each of the successive High Priests to whom the Law is transmitted.
In this way, one should single-mindedly chant Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo
and fix one’s mind on the Three Treasures, fingering the prayer
beads. In short, Nichikan Shonin
taught that the Buddhism of the Heritage of the Law means chanting
Daimoku with faith in the Three Treasures, which are the true Buddha
Nichiren Daishonin (Treasure of the Buddha), the Dai-Gohonzon of
the High Sanctuary (Treasure of the Law) and Nikko Shonin and the
successive High Priests (Treasure of the Priest). According to Nichikan
Shonin himself, this is the direct path to attaining enlightenment. In other words, Nichikan
Shonin revered all the successive High Priests, who each received
the legitimate Heritage of the Law, as the Treasure of the Priest.
There can be no worse defilement of Nichikan Shonin than for the
Soak Gakkai, a dissident organization that repudiates the Heritage,
to maliciously take advantage of a Gohonzon transcribed by Nichikan
Shonin to commit one slander after another (NST News, Special
Issue, pp. 13‑14). (i) In this passage, High Priest Nichikan
discusses the successive high priests after Nikko Shonin as those who
are supposed to protect and spread the Daishonin’s Buddhism-the function
of the Treasure of the Priest. Actually, all believers who perform this
function -- the protection and spread of the Daishonin’s Buddhism -- are
included in the Treasure of the Priest as Nichikan states in “On the Three
Treasures”: “Believers of this school shall be included [in the Treasure
of the Priest] as well” (Complete Writings of the Successive High Priests,
vol. 4). In his work “The Practice of This School,” however, High
Priest Nichikan clarifies that the Treasure of the Priest in which we
should place our faith when chanting daimoku is Nikko Shonin alone. Nichikan
states, “The Treasure of the Priest from time without beginning is the
founder of Taiseki-ji [Nikko Shonin]” (Six‑volume Writings,
p. 226). With regard to the remainder of the successive high priests,
Nichikan revered them to the extent that they lived up to the spirit of
the role of the Treasure of the Priest to protect and spread the Daishonin’s
Buddhism as Nikko Shonin did. Nichikan’s statement that the Treasure of the Priest includes
lay believers as well as priests is completely in accord with the original
meaning of the “treasure of the priest.” Actually, the Japanese character
so, translated as “priest” in “Treasure of the Priest,” fundamentally
indicates the samgha, or the Buddhist Order, which included the
“four types of believers”: monks, nuns, laymen and laywomen. In general, the treasure of the Priest is understood in Buddhism
and even in Japanese society in general to mean “all those who uphold
and propagate the Buddha’s teachings.” This is the definition that appears
in standard Japanese dictionaries. In this sense, the SGI accords with
this general definition of “Treasure of the Priest,” while Nikko Shonin
is the specific “Treasure of the priest” -- whose exemplary faith and
practice as a disciple of the Daishonin we should all emulate. Nikken
and his supporters, through his behavior that has betrayed the spirit
of Nikko Shonin, has severed any relationship he might have had with the
“Treasure of the Priest.” (ii) High Priest Nichikan was well aware that
not all the successive high priests lived up to the spirit and role of
Nikko Shonin. For example, Nichikan wrote a treatise called “Teachings
for the Latter Day” to refute erroneous doctrines brought into Taiseki-ji
from another Nichiren school temple by Nissei, the 17th high
priest. These errors included the worship of a statue of Shakyamuni and
the recitation of the entire Lotus Sutra, practices that completely countered
the instructions and intent of Nichiren Daishonin and Nikko Shonin. When we study the life and accomplishments of Nichikan, there
is no doubt that he would praise the SGI’s decision to make available
the Gohonzon he transcribed from the Dai-Gohonzon for those who seek to
sincerely practice the Daishonin’s Buddhism. He certainly would rejoice
at the SGI’s efforts to reproach Nikken’s injustices and schemes in exact
accord with Nikko Shonin’s admonition: “Do not follow even the high priest,
if he goes against the Buddha’s Law and propounds his own views” (Gosho
Zenshu, p. 1618). NST allegation #7 “Counterfeit Gohonzons”: a repeat of
the Gakkai’s 1977 heresy of the reproduced wooden Gohonzon. NST quote #7 The Gakkai deceived its members
by reporting in the Seikyo Shimbun on October 24, 1978 that:
“With the permission of High Priest Nittatsu Shonin, we have respectfully
made wooden Gohonzons.” Afterwards, Nittatsu Shonin
addressed the issue of those objects of worship manufactured by
he Gakkai saying: “The Gakkai transformed some of its Gohonzons
into wooden form, but I knew nothing about it.” (Renge, July
1978). As he stated here, these “Gohonzons” were made without
Nittatsu Shonin’s permission. We have received repeated direction from the High Priest on the matter
of the Gohonzons that we impudently had carved, and have surrendered
them to the Hoanden (Taisekiji’s storehouse). From now on, in matters
that concern the Gohonzon, such as handling and procedures, as well
as the concerns of the present situation, we will deeply respect
the tenets of Nichiren Shoshu and redouble our efforts as we proceed
forth in strict conformity. (special study meeting text) At that time, with the Gakkai’s
apology, and on the premise that it would never make any such mistakes
again, Nittatsu Shonin closed further discussion on the matter of
the creation of the imitation “Gohonzons.” The Soka Gakkai is now
trampling on the generous spirit of Nittatsu Shonin. The Gakkai
is once again acting arrogantly and maliciously in arbitrarily reproducing
the Gohonzon transcribed by Nichikan Shonin and distributing the
copies. The Gakkai is committing a grave slander (NST News, Special
Issue, pp. 14‑15). (i)
In 1974, the Soka Gakkai asked High Priest Nittatsu for permission
to have several of the Gohonzon in its possession, including the joju
Gohonzon enshrined at the Soka Gakkai Headquarters, transferred into wooden
from in order to preserve them. At that time, Nittatsu responded that
because these Gohonzon belong to those who received them, they may be
transferred into wood in order to cherish them based upon faith, indicating
that it was up to the Soka Gakkai if they wished to do so. Nittatsu stated
that this was not something for others to meddle in. He further stated
that transferring paper Gohonzon into wooden form is an accepted practice
from the past and that there is no particular problem with the procedure. (ii)
Upon obtaining Nittatsu’s permission, the Soka Gakkai
proceeded, in 1974, to have eight Gohonzon reproduced in wooden form.
The Seikyo Shimbun, in issues dated January 4 and July 17, 1975,
reported that the joju Gohonzon at the Soka Gakkai Headquarters
and the Kansai Headquarters respectively had been transferred to wood.
The priesthood expressed no complaint or objection to this at the time. (iii)
In 1977, two years after the Gakkai transfer of these Gohonzon
to wood had been made public, a group of young priests -- who were later
expelled from Nichiren Shoshu and formed a group called the Shoshinkai
-- began using this issue as a pretext to attack the Gakkai in league
with Masatomo Yamazaki, a former Gakkai legal counsel latter found guilty
of extortion and sentenced to prison. (iv)
In 1978, these Shoshinkai priests gained so much influence
within the priesthood that the Nichiren Shoshu Administrative office could
no longer ignore them. Pressed by these Shoshinkai priests about the Soka
Gakkai’s wooden Gohonzon, Nittatsu stated at a certified priests’ guidance
meeting in June 1978: “The Gakkai transformed some of its Gohonzons
into wooden form, but I knew nothing about it.” He then said: “However,
I understood and acknowledged it afterwards. Therefore, I ask that you
please do not fight with one another over this matter.” Taking Nittatsu’s statement “I knew nothing
about it” out of continued to blame and attack the Gakkai. On a later
occasion, Nittatsu stated regarding the same issue: “I had received a
request from the Gakkai. I thought that I would receive an official document
of request later, but I did not.” AT that time, however, the priesthood
had no prescribed procedure or instructions regarding such a request. (v)
On September 2, 1978, Soka Gakkai leaders met with High Priest
Nittatsu and asked him about the handling of the wooden Gohonzon. On that
occasion Nittatsu stated, “It is all right if all [the wooden Gohonzon]
are kept at the Gakkai headquarters as treasures of the Soka Gakkai.”
When the Seikyo Shimbun reported this the next day, Shoshinkai
priests pressed Nittatsu again, stating, “The high priest was deceived
and taken advantage of again by the Gakkai.” To help the priesthood resolve
its internal turmoil, the Soka Gakkai returned the seven wooden Gohonzon
to the head temple, except for the wooden joju Gohonzon at the
Soka Gakkai Headquarters. (vi)
Nevertheless, the Shoshinkai priests continued to attack the
Gakkai on the pretext of these wooden Gohonzon. Therefore, Nittatsu issued
an October 3, 1978, memorandum, stating, “All discussions about
the Soka Gakkai’s wooden Gohonzon will be prohibited henceforth.” (vii)
On November 7, 1978, at a representative Soka Gakkai
leaders meeting, Takehisa Tsuji, then a Soka Gakkai vice president and
now chairperson of the Soka Gakkai Executive Advisors Conference, made
the following comments: In this sense, as far as the wooden Gohonzons
which the Soka Gakkai carelessly allowed to be inscribed, we have already
dedicated them all to the Treasure House of the Head Temple based on the
guidance we received from the high priest. Henceforth, regarding the treatment
of the Gohonzon and the procedure for receiving it, we will value the
time-honored way of Nichiren Shoshu in a much stricter manner. (World
Tribune, February 5, 1979, p. 6) Regarding this statement, Mr.
Tsuji has since testifies that on the night before this meeting, the priesthood
requested strongly that he insert the word carelessly [impudently
in NST’s translation] in order to silence the clamoring of the Shoshinkai
priests and settle the priesthood’s internal turmoil. The Soka Gakkai
accepted this request solely to protect High Priest Nittatsu and help
the priesthood to resolve its internal confusion. (viii) Regarding these wooden
Gohonzon, at a meeting with priests and their families on May 29, 1979,
Nittatsu said: “The Gakkai’s wooden Gohonzon were transcribed and engraved
exactly after the Gohonzon of Nichiren Shoshu. Therefore, they are not
counterfeit.” Nichiren Shoshu General Administrator Nichijun Fujimoto
also testified in a Tokyo District Court on July 8, 1982: “Upon
receiving permission from Nittatsu Shonin, the Soka Gakkai had its eight
paper Gohonzon transferred into wooden form. This is something neither
to be criticized nor to be called a slander of the Law.” It may be noted that the Shoshinkai priests
ha expressed virulent anti-Soka Gakkai sentiments for quite some times.
In this sense, their use of the wooden-Gohonzon issue was actually an
expression of their general animosity toward the Gakkai, fearing that
the Soka Gakkai and its facilities would supplant their future authority
as chief priests. These priests later sued Nikken and the priesthood,
alleging that Nikken did not actually or legally inherit the office of
high priest from Nittatsu. While in the past supporting the Soka Gakkai’s
right to have produced these Gohonzon -- as in the above testimony by
Nichijun Fujimoto -- the priesthood under Nikken is now contradicting
itself simply to support its own agenda against the Gakkai. (ix) Mr. Takeshi Akazawa, president
of Akazawa Choyo, Inc., and the Buddhist craftsman directly involved in
making the wooden Gohonzon for the Gakkai, made the following statement
in an interview for the Seikyo Shimbun: [High Priest Nittatsu] had known about the
Gakkai’s wooden Gohonzon from the beginning. I heard about it directly
from both [High Priest Nittatsu] and President Ikeda. I heard from President
Ikeda in January 1974. [Question: Was this before you started to
transfer the Gohonzon into wooden form?] Yes, it was. At the end of 1973, I heard
from the Soka Gakkai Headquarters that it wished to transfer several of
its Gohonzon into wooden form. At that time, I replied, “If you let the
high priest know, it would be reassuring for us.” In January 1974,
when I met President Ikeda, he spontaneously told me: “I have reported
to the high priest about the Gohonzon. The high priest has told me that
it would be all right [to transcribe the Gohonzon into wood] because it
is being done in order to protect and cherish them. So please rest assured.” On a different occasion, I directly confirmed
that [High Priest Nittatsu] to discuss a matter of business in a reception
room in the high priest’s living quarters. After discussing the business
at hand, just as the high priest was about to leave, he suddenly turned
to me and asked: “By the way, Akazawa is carving the Gakkai headquarters’
Gohonzon, isn’t it?” I replied, “Yes.” The high priest then asked, “Are
you doing others?” I replied: “Yes, we have. Actually, President Ikeda
told me that he had already reported this to you.” The high priest said:
“Yes, I heard about tit from President Ikeda. He asked me if he could
have five or six more Gohonzon done.” He then left the room. (Seikyo
Shimbun, September 30, 1993) (x) The transfer of paper Gohonzon
to wooden has been a common practice in Nichiren Shoshu. For example,
Nichiko, the 59th high priest, had the Gohonzon that Nichiren
Daishonin inscribed fro the Imperial Palace reproduced in wooden form
and worshipped it. This procedure has also been common at branch temples
of Nichiren Shoshu as well. Myohon-ji temple in Chiba Prefecture reproduced
ten wooden Gohonzon based on a photograph of one paper Gohonzon. In a similar procedure, Jozen-ji in Miyazaki
Prefecture had seven wooden Gohonzon made. The Soka Gakkai’s reproduction
of wooden Gohonzon in 1974 was done in exact accord with the doctrines,
traditions and procedures of the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood and was done
by the craftsman commonly employed by Nichiren Shoshu to carve its wooden
Gohonzon. Worshipping counterfeits while preaching
slander: the Gakkai is no different from the Nichiren Shu Denomination. NST quote #8 The
believers of the Nichiren Shu Denomination of Minobu worship Shakyamuni
as the true Buddha and claim that teachings of Nichiren Daishonin
do not include the doctrine of the Transmission from one single
individual (High Priest) to another. They view the pure orthodoxy
of Taisekiji with enmity. Even if followers of the Nichiren Shu
Sect pray day and night to a mandala inscribed by the Daishonin,
it is evident that they will never be able to attain enlightenment. In the same way, the Gakkai today looks up to Mr. Daisaku Ikeda as if
he is the true Buddha and views Taisekiji as an enemy. If the members
pray to the Gakkai counterfeit object of worship, they will not
only be barred from attaining enlightenment, they will certainly
fall into hell. However sacred the Gohonzon transcribed by Nichikan Shonin, a reproduction
of this Gohonzon made without legitimate permission has utterly
no relation to the Dai-Gohonzon of the high Sanctuary, and is nothing
more than a material object. Such objects of worship are similar
to counterfeit bank notes made by copying real bank notes. The members
of the Gakkai, who will pray to these counterfeit objects of worship
and inevitably fall into hell, are pitiable indeed (NST News,
Special Issue, pp. 15‑16). (i)
Other Nichiren denominations do not view Nichiren Daishonin
as the Buddha of the Latter Day of the Law but instead regard him as a
Bodhisattva-priest subordinate to Shakyamuni Buddha. For this reason,
they fail to recognize the Gohonzon, which embodies the oneness of the
Person and the Law, as the fundamental object of worship. Confused, they
worship statues of Shakyamuni and other objects along with Gohonzon. The SGI firmly believes
in Nichiren Daishonin as the Buddha of the Latter Day of the Law and,
since its inception, has been declaring so without compromise to the rest
of the world. Furthermore, the SGI embraces nothing other than the Gohonzon
as the fundamental object of worship. The faith of the SGI is solely based
on the orthodox teachings of the Daishonin’s Buddhism and is clearly different
from that of other Nichiren schools including Minobu. The Soka Gakkai,
in fact, represented by Daisaku Ikeda and other youth, thoroughly refuted
the Minobu sect in the famed Otaru Debate of 1955. (ii) Although believers of
other Nichiren sects may chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo to Gohonzon inscribed
by the Daishonin himself, because their understanding of the Daishonin’s
teachings is shallow and distorted, as mentioned above, they cannot tap
the beneficial power of the Gohonzon. Likewise, even if Nichiren Shoshu priests
and Hokkeko members pray to the Gohonzon (though it has become clear through
the testimony of many that priests at Taiseki-ji tend to be extremely
lax in this area), because they believe their enlightenment depends on
the authority of the high priest -- an erroneous teaching that has no
basis in the Gosho -0- and because they support an individual who actively
attempts to destroy kosen-rufu, they will not benefit from their practice. Our sincere faith and practice dedicated
to kosen-rufu are what are most important in tapping the powers of the
Buddha and the Law embodied in the Gohonzon. As Nichikan states, “Those
who exert the powers of faith and practice will accomplish the practice
of observing one’s mind through the powers of the Buddha and the Law”
(Selected Commentaries of Nichikan Shonin, p. 455). “Observing
one’s mind” means to call forth Buddhahood from within one’s life. (iii) The Nichiren Shoshu priesthood’s
own recorded history indicates that Nichiren Shoshu priests themselves
very often have been “no different from the Nichiren Shu Denomination.”
In 1922, for example, other Nichiren sects, including Minobu, petitioned
the emperor to bestow the title “Great Teacher Rissho” upon Nichiren Daishonin.
At that time, Nissho Abe, the 57th high priest of Taiseki-ji,
willingly signed the joint petition along with the other, slanderous Nichiren
schools. At the ceremony to celebrate the emperor’s
bestowal of that title, Nissho joined a group of priests from these errant
sects in the recitation of the sutra, which was led by the high priest
of the Minobu sect (to which the NST News is now comparing the
SGI). According to the clear guidelines of Nikko Shonin, Nissho’s conduct
clearly constitutes shameless complicity in slander of the Law. To begin with, the petition to the emperor
to bestow the title of “Great Teacher” upon Nichiren Daishonin gravely
debased the Daishonin’s spirit. The title “Great Teacher” is the highest
honor an emperor can bestow upon a priest. The fact that Taiseki-ji petitioned
the emperor to bestow upon a priest. The fact that Taiseki-ji petitioned
the emperor to bestow this title upon the Daishonin means that Taiseki-ji
must have compiled with Minobu’s and the other sects’ view of the Daishonin
as merely a priest-Bodhisattva. This deprecated the Daishonin’s status
as the Buddha of the Latter Day, subordinating him to the ruler. This
act clearly betrays the priesthood’s desire at the time to ingratiate
itself with the authorities and be accepted by the other Nichiren schools,
no matter what the Daishonin or Nikko Shonin would have thought about
the matter. (iv) On September 29, 1941,
the Nichiren Shoshu Study Department issued a memorandum instructing the
deletion of passages from the Gosho. Targeted were those passages that
place the Sun Goddess, which Shinto considers a supreme deity, or the
nations’ sovereign, in a role subordinate to the Buddha or the Buddhist
Law. For example, the priesthood deleted the following passage where the
Daishonin declares himself to be the Buddha of the Latter Day, stating:
“I am the foremost sage in the entire world” (MW‑2, 259). This Nichiren Shoshu study department memorandum
also prohibits use of the deleted passages, stating, “Do not quote [them]
in sermons or lecturers.” Nichiren Daishonin never quailed before authority,
nor did he ever court favor of any kind from the rulers of his nation.
When offered status and his own temple by the authorities of his day in
exchange for his silence about the errors of other sects, he adamantly
refused. The actions taken by the priesthood cited above are grave betrayal
of the Daishonin’s Buddhism and are no different from other erroneous
Nichiren denominations, including the Minobu sect. (v) In his letter titled, “On
the Buddha’s Behavior,” the Daishonin states, “One may make use of my
counsel, but if I am not given due respect as the votary of the Lotus
Sutra, then the country will perish” (MW-1, 190). Although, on the
surface, some may appear to practice the Daishonin’s Buddhism, if they
go against the true intent of his teachings, they will in effect be slandering
the Law itself thereby bringing suffering not only upon themselves but
also inviting destruction upon society. High Priest Nissho, who signed the joint
petition requesting bestowal by the emperor of the title of “Great Teacher”
upon the Daishonin with Minobu and other Nichiren sects in 1922, developed
a malignant tumor in his lower jaw and died the following year. In June 1945,
High Priest Nikkyo, who instructed the deletion of the Gosho passages,
accepted a Shinto talisman and tried to get the Gakkai to accept it as
well to escape government pressure, died tragically in a fire at the head
temple. Had he lived, he would have witnessed the utter destruction and
defeat of Japan’s military machine, which, to appease, he had been willing
to compromise the Daishonin’s Buddhism. The Buddhist Law elucidated by the Daishonin
does not discriminate based on status or position. Even a high priest
will suffer retribution if he slanders the Law or betrays Buddhism. If
an ordinary believer with no rank or status practices with the same sincerity,
spirit and courage as the Daishonin did, then the sate of life he or she
manifests will not be inferior in the least to any of the successive high
priests. (vi) The priesthood’s analogy,
comparing Gohonzon issued by the SGI to “counterfeit bank notes,” is puerile,
at best, and may even be said to shortchange the dignity of the Gohonzon.
Yet if the priesthood insist upon suing this analogy, let us try to view
it in the proper perspective based upon the events that have taken place. First, it is important to note that the high
priest has never inscribed Gohonzon. He transcribes or copies them based
on the Dai-Gohonzon. Following the priesthood’s contention, if the Gohonzon
being issued by the Gakkai are counterfeit because they are copies, all
Gohonzon produced by Nichiren Shoshu, including those transcribed by Nikken,
would be counterfeit as well. Genuine bank notes are reproductions of an
original template. As long as they are printed in accord with the rules
to which the people of the nation agree and have adopted, they are accepted
as real bank notes bearing monetary value, which can be used to pay for
goods and services. Imagine the following scenario: A president
or prime minister of a democratic country attempts to usurp power through
a coup. He dissolves the congress, the people’s representatives, and declares
himself the absolute authority. The treasury secretary, part of his cabinet,
announces: “Only money with my signature on it will have any value from
now on. Any other currency will be invalid. Only those who pledge allegiance
to this administration will be issued these notes!” The people, however,
resist and re-establish an electoral system of government, which votes
to issue money once again on behalf of the people. Forced into exile,
the president-turned-dictator and his treasury secretary continue to cry
that the people’s notes are counterfeit. Yet the people can go back to
their former state of prosperity using the new currency, which differs
only in that it is signed by a different treasury secretary. These notes,
produced by the mandate of the people, are valid based upon the good faith
the people and businesses have placed in them. The people entrust the treasury secretary
with the responsibility of printing and circulating bank notes to contribute
to the welfare of the people. Even through the treasury secretary is directly
involved with the printing of bank notes, the authority to issue bank
notes fundamentally rests with the government, that is, the people. The analogy of bank notes certainly does
not do justice to the power and the dignity of the Gohonzon. Traditionally,
however, successive high priests at Taiseki-ji have been entrusted with
the role of transcribing Gohonzon and issuing them to those who sincerely
seek to practice the Daishonin’s Buddhism. Yet the responsibility for
reproducing the Gohonzon fundamentally derives from the will of the Daishonin
to accomplish kosen-rufu. Now that the priesthood has abused and betrayed
its role, this responsibility naturally rests with those who unstintingly
practice the Daishonin’s Buddhism in harmonious unity toward kosen-rufu. Nikko Shonin spent the major part of his
life transcribing the Daishonin’s Gohonzon for the benefit of believers.
There even exists a Gohonzon, the ofude-dome Gohonzon (Gohonzon
of the Last Writing), that Nikko Shonin transcribed while practically
on his deathbed. This Gohonzon’s weak brush strokes attest to Nikko Shonin’s
waning life force at the time. In contrast to Nikko Shonin’s selfless
dedication in providing the Gohonzon to believers, Nikken has opted to
use the Gohonzon as a bargaining chip, as a trump card to lure believers
into his fold. Out of this motivation, he has refused to confer the Gohonzon
upon members of the SGI. Under such circumstances, the Soka Gakkai has
risen to its responsibility to provide the Gohonzon for those who sincerely
seek it. If it failed to do so, it would be betraying the spirit of Nikko
Shonin. The SGI’s conferral of the Gohonzon is in exact accord with the
Daishonin’s original intent in inscribing the Dai-Gohonzon for all people. {Gohonzon issued by the SGI are counterfeit because} they have
not received the legitimate “Opening of the Eyes” ceremony. Authority
over “Opening of the Eyes” of the Gohonzon rests with the High Priest. NST quote #9 These allegations by the Soka Gakkai are in direct conflict
with the words of Nichiren Daishonin, who clearly recognized the
“Opening of the Eyes” of an object of worship through the Lotus
Sutra. Nichiren Daishonin states: The offerings of the
“Opening of the Eyes” for wooden or painted images can be performed
using the Lotus Sutra only. (“Honzon Mondo Sho,” [English:] “Questions
and Answers on the Object of Worship,” Gosho Zenshu, p. 366) {Gohonzon issued by the SGI are counterfeit
because} they are not issued by the head temple. No benefit can
result from a counterfeit object of worship. NST quote #10 Q: The Nichikan
Gohonzon now being conferred by the SGI does not have some of the characters
that appear on the Gohonzon transcribed by Nittatsu or Nikken. Why? Does
it affect one’s prayer or benefits from chanting? A: The Daishonin’s purpose in inscribing
the Gohonzon was to allow all people, through the power of their faith
and practice, to develop the indestructible core of Buddhahood within
their lives. The essence of the Gohonzon is, therefore, the inscription
that embodies the powers of the Buddha and the Law, or “Nam-myoho-renge-kyo,
Nichiren” written boldly down the center of the scroll. This inscription is the enlightened life
of Nichiren Daishonin; this is the heart of the Gohonzon. All other names
on the Gohonzon, which indicate the mutual possession of the ten worlds,
are secondary. We might think that all Gohonzon are identical.
But to the contrary, even Nichiren Daishonin did not always use the same
names and figures when he inscribed various Gohonzon. For example, Devadatta
only appears on about a third of the 120 extant Gohonzon the Daishonin
inscribed from the time he was on Sado Island to just before his death
in 1282. The transient Bodhisattvas Fugen and Monju
appear on only 65, and the Two Vehicles represented by Shariputra and
Maudgalyayana are on only 63. The characters that do not appear on the
Nichikan Gohonzon include Devadatta, representing Hell; Ashura, representing
Anger; and the Wheel-Turning Kings, representing Humanity. There characters
are missing on about half of the Gohonzon inscribed by Nichiren Daishonin
himself. After the Daishonin died, the successive high priests exercised
their own judgment in deciding what names to include on the Gohonzon they
transcribed. The powers of faith and practice within each
one of us are what tap the benefits of the Gohonzon and draw forth the
power of the Buddha and the Law. As Nichiren Daishonin wrote in the oft-quoted
passage, “The Gohonzon is found in faith alone” ( MW‑1, 213).
It is interesting to note that the members who joined during the Soka
Gakkai’s postwar reconstruction and laid the early foundation for the
SGI practiced to a Gohonzon also transcribed by Nichikan. Q? What is
the relationship between the Dai-Gohonzon, the Gohonzon enshrined at
a community center or culture center and the Gohonzon in our homes? A: The Buddhist principle of disbursement
(bunshin santai) describes how a source retains its uniformity
even as it branches outward, just as river flowing from a lake to the
ocean contains the same water as the source. Similarly, today the Dai-Gohonzon
is the source for tapping into our inherent Buddha nature and attaining
absolute happiness. The Gohonzon enshrined at SGI facilities
and those in private homes also contain this same source. All Gohonzon
derive from the Dai-Gohonzon and all represent the same potential to create
change in our lives, depending on our faith and practice. Q: Why are there different sizes
of Gohonzon? I have heard the terms joju, okatagi and omamori.
What do they mean and do the different sizes have any significance
in terms of the power to be derived from chanting to the different Gohonzon? A: Joju (literally, “eternally
dwelling”) Gohonzon are those transcribed with the recipient’s name in
the margin. Okatagi (literally, “woodblock”) is
a term used to differentiate those Gohonzon manufactured via a printing
process from those written by hand. Originally, of course, Nichiren Daishonin
inscribed the Gohonzon by hand in sumi ink for each individual.
Successive high priests have also transcribed the Gohonzon personally
for each recipient. These personally inscribed Gohonzon are called joju
Gohonzon. As more people began requesting the Gohonzon, eventually a woodblock
printing process was employed. The woodblock was based on a Gohonzon transcribed
either by the current or a previous high priest. These Gohonzon are called
okatagi Gohonzon. Although produced today using advanced printing
techniques that allow sharper, more precise reproduction, the Gohonzon
most members receive when they begin practicing are still called okatagi
Gohonzon. There is also a smaller Gohonzon, about the
size of a large pendant, called an omamori (literally, “protection”)
Gohonzon. This Gohonzon is for use when traveling and is intended to encourage
person’s faith when he or she is away from the Gohonzon at home for an
extended period. Eventually, these smaller Gohonzon will be
available to anyone who requests one through the SGI organization. The size of the Gohonzon is unimportant.
The various sizes generally correspond to the size of the room in which
it is enshrined, thus making it easier for members to chant to it. No
matter the size, it is our faith in the Gohonzon that determines the benefit
we gain from our practice. Q: Why have
the side inscriptions been omitted on the Nichikan Gohonzon? A: The original Gohonzon transcribed
by Nichikan contains the following side inscriptions: “The thirteenth
day of the sixth month, the fifth year of Kyoho (1720)” and “Bestowed
upon Daigyo Ajari Honsho-bo Nissho of Hon’nyo-zan Joen-ji temple of Kogusuri
Village of Shimotsuke Province.” Nissho was then the chief priest of Joen-ji. It is an old tradition that a transcribing
high priest write the date of transcription and the name of a recipient
on the Gohonzon. But side inscriptions such as recipient names have no
bearing upon the doctrinal significance of the Gohonzon and thus are not
regarded as essential elements. Nowhere in the Daishonin’s writings or
transfer documents can we find a passage stating that the name of a recipient
is necessary to signify the concept to of the mutual possession of the
ten worlds or as praise of the Gohonzon. Side inscriptions have nothing
to do with the essential significance of the Gohonzon. The 2nd high priest, Nikko Shonin,
added the names of receiving priests or lay believers to some Gohonzon
inscribed by Nichiren Daishonin. Regarding this, he states: “I have added
the names of the recipients to extol them for the posterity.” The 59th
high priest, Nichiko, comments as follows: “The side inscriptions of the
names of recipients written on the object of worship are meant to praise
their honorable names to the multitude of posterity as pioneers of kosen-rufu
for their efforts to protect the Law” (Fuji Nikko Shonin Shoden [Detailed
Biography of Nikko of the Fuji School]). In other words, the side inscriptions
of recipients’ names were added to praise believers who remained steadfast
in faith throughout their lives. Since side inscriptions on the Gohonzon have
no doctrinal significance, both the date of transcription and the name
of the recipient on the Nichikan Gohonzon were not included in the reproduction.
The Soka Gakkai never erased anything from an existing Gohonzon. However, the priesthood has actually erased
side inscriptions--ones that read “At the request of Daisaku Ikeda”--from
the wooden Gohonzon enshrined at branch temples that were built and donated
to the priesthood by the Soka Gakkai. That is an act that tramples on
the noble spirit with which the previous high priest transcribed these
Gohonzon. Furthermore, some older and prestigious branch
temples have many Gohonzon whose side inscriptions have been damaged or
erased by accident or on purpose. According to the priesthood’s journal
Renge, the catalog of treasures kept at Josen-ji in Tokyo records
that the names of the recipients of three Gohonzon transcribed by Nikko
Shonin--dated respectively March 1, 1306, October 9, 1308,
and October 13, 1314--were erased and missing. And the name
of a recipient of a Gohonzon by the 9th high priest, Nichiu,--dated
December 29, 1473--was “cut off and missing.” Also, some Gohonzon transcribed by Nichiren
Shoshu high priests contain side inscriptions such as: “To extol the magnificence
of the emperor and to conquer Russia” from the period of the Russo-Japan
War; or “To commemorate the grand coronation of the emperor.” At the Nishinoyama Hachiman Shinto shrine
that stands in the vicinity of Taiseki-ji, a wooden Gohonzon transcribed
by the 51st high priest, Nichiei, with the side inscriptions:
“The guardian god of the Hachiman shrine, November 28, 1984,”
and “Bestowed upon the Shinto parish of Sakashita and Koyashiki villages
in Fuji County,” is enshrined. It should be noted that Nichiei transcribed
this Gohonzon for the Shinto parish, not for the believers of the Daishonin’s
Buddhism. In light of these historical records, can
the priesthood still continue to assert that side inscriptions are an
important, essential aspect of the Gohonzon? When someone pointed out to Nikken that he
forgot to write a part of the short inscription of praise on a Gohonzon
he had transcribed, he responded, “As long as the recipient is unaware,
pretend that you don’t know.” From Nikken’s statement, it becomes clear
that he is not one who is qualified to discuss the merit of side inscriptions
on the Gohonzon. Q: What about
the claim that the Gohonzon issued by the Soka Gakkai are counterfeit
because they are not made by priests? A: The Gohonzon issued by the Soka
Gakkai are not the Soka Gakkai’s own inventions. As already stated, in
response to a proposal from Sendo Narita, chief priest of Joen-ji temple,
the Soka Gakkai reproduced Nichikan’s Gohonzon and made it available to
its membership. Gohonzon issued y the Soka Gakkai are okatagi Gohonzon
(i.e., Gohonzon reproduced through a printing process) based upon a Gohonzon
transcribed by Nichikan in 1720. Also, the term priest (Jpn. so)
in Buddhism derives from the Sanskrit word samgha, which indicates
not individual priests, but a congregation of believers, both lay and
clergy. In the time of Shakyamuni, the Buddhist order was itself highly
valued, and this gathering of believers was considered one of the three
treasures to be respected in Buddhism. In his “Twenty-six Admonitions,” Nikko Shonin,
who is specifically regarded as the treasure of the priest in the Daishonin’s
Buddhism, states: “Until kosen-rufu is achieved, propagate the Law to
the full extent of your ability without begrudging your life” (Gosho
Zenshu, p. 1618). The Soka Gakkai has been dedicated to spreading
the Daishonin’s Buddhism exactly in accord with the spirit expressed here.
In this sense, the Soka Gakkai is qualified--based on its significant
role and function--to be regarded as the treasure of priesthood in the
Daishonin’s Buddhism at this time. The Daishonin writes in “The True Object
of Worship”: Know this: in the time for shakubuku
the Four Bodhisattvas appear as wise kings who rebuke and convert evil
kings, and in the time for shoju they appear as priests to protect
and spread true Buddhism. (MW‑1, 80) In “Kanjin no Honzon
Sho Mondan” (Commentary on “The True Object of Worship”), High Priest
Nichikan interprets “shakubuku by wise kings” to mean the kosen-rufu of
substantiation, which he refers to as “the time in which kosen-rufu is
achieved through positive relationships,” or a time when people can readily
form a connection with Buddhism. He also comments that “priests to protect
and spread true Buddhism” means shakubuku based upon the entity of the
Law, that is, the Gohonzon, and that ‘priests” here refers to Nichiren
Daishonin himself. The Soka Gakkai has been creating this “time
in which kosen-rufu is achieved through positive relationships” through
the efforts of many people practicing the Daishonin’s Buddhism. The Soka
Gakkai has been taking on the difficult task of spreading faith in the
Gohonzon among the people to save them form the depths of suffering and
unhappiness. The Soka Gakkai, therefore, should rightly be called a gathering
of “wise kings,” of Bodhisattvas of the Earth, who received the Buddha’s
decree to spread Buddhism. Regarding the first Soka Gakkai president,
Tsunesaburo Makiguchi, who died a martyr to protect the Law, High Priest
Nichiko expressed appreciation for this efforts, sating that he “surpassed
ordinary priests.” Also the 65th high priest, Nichijun, gave
his highest praise to President Makiguchi, saying, “Mr. Makiguchi, who
was born an emissary of the Buddha, revealed his identity through the
Lotus Sutra and lived up to it.” Regarding the second president, Josei
Toda, Nichijun said, “In accord with the significance of the five and
seven characters of Myoho-renge-kyo. President Toda called forth 750,000
people on this earth.” Furthermore, Nittatsu, the high priest previous
to Nikken, recognized President Ikeda’s role as a leader of Bodhisattvas
of the Earth, stating, “Following in the footsteps of the Four [leaders
of the] Bodhisattvas of the Earth, President Ikeda is advancing kosen-rufu
as a general of shakubuku.” In light of the Daishonin’s teachings, the
words of the successive high priests and, most of all, the actual proof
seen today in the global spread of the Daishonin’s Buddhism, the Soka
Gakkai has never been merely a group of lay believers belonging to Nichiren
Shoshu, but a Buddhist order directly connected to the Daishonin. Q: Is the faith of new SGI members
diminished since they no longer receive gojukai (i.e., a ritual
to accept Buddhist precepts) from Nichiren Shoshu priests? A: “Precepts” in Buddhism are guidelines
for Buddhist practitioners aimed at enabling them to “stem wrongdoing
and curtail evil.” “Bestowing the precepts” (Jpn. jukai) signifies
a believer’s acceptance of the Buddhist precepts upon converting to Buddhism.
From the perspective of the recipient, then, the term jukai of
gojukai indicates “accepting the precepts.” There is a well-known episode concerning
acceptance of the Buddhist precepts involving Shakyamuni Buddha. When
Shakyamuni first started to preach after having attained enlightenment,
one priest among those who heard his sermon asked him to bestow the Buddhist
precepts upon him, saying, “My teacher, let me be ordained under the World-Honored
One and receive the precepts.” To this, Shakyamuni replied, “Come, you,
priest. The Law has been preached well. So practice the Law to eradicate
your suffering” (Seikyo Shimbun, February 7, 1992). In other words, the spirit behind accepting
the Buddhist precepts lies in a practitioner’s pledge to seek the Buddha’s
teaching and carry out Buddhist practice; the sprit behind bestowing the
Buddhist precepts lies in the Buddha’s compassion and his guidance in
response to the practitioner’s seeking spirit. Accepting or bestowing
the Buddhist precepts required no complex rituals or ornate temple halls. In the Mahayana precepts for Bodhisattvas,
the emphasis was shifted from simply stemming one’s own evil acts to a
more active, positive attitude of striving to do good. In Mahayana Buddhism,
a practitioner’s acceptance of the Buddhist precepts was also regarded
not as a condition to enter the Buddhist order, but as a means for the
practitioner to be directly connected to the Buddha. It is because Mahayana
Buddhism placed greatest emphasis on a believer’s self-awareness as a
Buddhist and his or her pledge to carry out the Buddhist practice. Such emphasis is most clearly seen in one
of the Bodhisattva precepts called “the acceptance of the precepts by
pledging to oneself.” The Yoraku Hongo Sutra states: “After the Buddha’s
passing, if there is no teacher of the Law within a distance of a thousand
miles, practitioners should accept the precepts by pledging to themselves
before the statues of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, with their palms pressed
together in reverence.” Put simply, what matters most is one’s pledge
and resolve in accepting the precepts. Priests who bestow the precepts
on practitioners serve merely as messengers to convey the Buddhist precepts
or teachings on behalf of the Buddha. Priests of the Nikken sect, who
are themselves bereft of the spirit contained in the Buddhist precepts,
are not qualified to bestow the precepts upon anyone. In “Teaching, Practice and Proof,” the Daishonin
states: The five characters of Myoho-renge-kyo, the
heart of the essential teaching of the Lotus Sutra, contain all the benefits
amassed by the beneficial practices and meritorious deeds of all the Buddhas
throughout the past, present and future. Then, how can this phrase not
include the benefits obtained by observing all of the Buddha’s precepts?
Once the practitioner embraces this perfectly-endowed mystic precept,
he cannot break it, even if he should try. It is therefore called the
precept of the diamond chalice (MW‑4, 129). Here the Daishonin teaches us tat since the
Mystic Law is endowed with “the benefits obtained by observing all of
the Buddha’s precepts,” once we embrace it, our lives become like a diamond
chalice, eternally indestructible. Commenting on this passage from “Teaching,
Practice and Proof,” Nichijun, the 65th high priest, states:
“Once people embrace this mystic precept of Myoho-renge-kyo, their lives
will be indestructible throughout past, present and future. In contrast,
when people observe other precepts, their lives will be destroyed once
they break the precepts.” In the Latter Day of the Law, there is no
precept for us to accept other than the Mystic Law. To take faith in and
embrace the Mystic Law is to accept the precepts. From the viewpoint of
the essential meaning of the Buddhist precepts in the Daishonin’s Buddhism,
it becomes obvious that believers do not receive benefit simply by attending
a ritual to accept the precepts. There is no record that the Daishonin
conducted any ritual to bestow the precepts other than in one instance,
when he conducted a ceremony for Sairen-bo who had once received the ritual
as a student priest of the Tendai school. The priesthood started to conduct the gojukai
ceremony in 1937 in response to first President Makiguchi’s suggestion.
He proposed that new Gakkai members receive a ceremony to allow them to
develop a clear awareness as practitioners of the Daishonin’s Buddhism.
Chairperson Satoru Izumi of the Soka Gakkai’s Advisory Council, who began
practicing under President Makiguchi, once said: “Back in 1952, a Gakkai
member went to Fukushima Prefecture for an activity and brought one prospective
new member to a temple there for the gojukai ceremony. But the
priest was at a loss, not knowing the words to conduct the gojukai
ceremony. So that Gakkai member had to teach the priest how to conduct
the ceremony.” This clearly attests to how the priesthood’s tradition
of the gojukai ceremony developed in response to the Gakkai’s great
efforts to spread the Daishonin’s Buddhism. Also, although the priesthood claims the
importance of a ritual to accept the precepts, Nikken himself has proven,
through his lavish tastes and habits, to be a person who constantly breaks
the precepts. As Nichiu states, “Those who break the precepts and lack
wisdom should not remain in high status.” Q: Since the
Gohonzon issued by the Soka Gakkai are not mounted on a scroll, but part
of the scroll itself, aren’t they merely copies of the Gohonzon? A: This is
a claim the priesthood is making to attack the Gohonzon issued by the
Soka Gakkai for one-press production, that is, for the portion that contains
the inscriptions and the scroll around it being made together one whole
sheet of paper. The essential element of the Gohonzon is the white portion
with black lettering. The frame around it is merely an ornament. How the
Gohonzon scroll is produced is of no consequence to the benefit we can
receive from chanting to it. As has been explained elsewhere in this pamphlet, the priesthood condemns
the Gohonzon issued by the Soka Gakkai as being a “copy.” But the Gohonzon
conferred by the priesthood are also “copies.” All Gohonzon conferred
to new believers are reproduced by way of a printing press. Again, okatagi means “woodblock” and indicates Gohonzon reproduced
through a printing process, [though actual woodblock prints stopped being
produced decades ago]. All okatagi Gohonzon, whether produced
by the head temple or the Gakkai, are copies. If all “copied” Gohonzon
are counterfeit, then all okatagi Gohonzon,
including ones based on Nikken’s transcription and printed and issued
by Taiseki-ji, must also be counterfeit. The Soka Gakkai has been criticized for printing the main inscribed part
of the Gohonzon on the same paper as the surrounding scroll. But until
recently, the priesthood did not even bother to prepare the surrounding
mount part. It was a matter left to each local temple or the individual
recipient. In the past, branch temples would buy unmounted Gohonzon, in quantities
of 100 sheets per bundle, from Hodo-in temple where they were printed.
Each branch temple would then send these sheets to a mounter to have them
mounted on scrolls. Believers in outlying areas sometimes received unmounted
Gohonzon and had them mounted on the paper of their choice--with whatever
material, color or quality that they pleased. Over the years, the
priesthood has taught lay believers that only the successive high priests
can transcribe and issue the Gohonzon because they alone have received
“the heritage of the Law” from Nichiren Daishonin. Until relatively recently,
the SGI has supported this idea exactly as it was explained. A close examination of Nichiren Shoshu history,
however, reveals that others besides the successive high priests have
transcribed the Gohonzon and made it available for lay believers. This
historical fact runs counter to the priesthood’s current assertion that
only the person holding the position of high priest is qualified to transcribe
and issue the Gohonzon. In response to the SGI’s decision to issue
the Gohonzon, the Nichiren Shoshu Bureau of Religious Affairs issued a
statement dated September 7, 1993, that reads in part: “In Nichiren
Shoshu, all Gohonzons have always been transcribed by the successive High
Priests, to whom the heritage of the Buddhist Law has been transmitted.
All Gohonzons have been endowed with the spiritual properties of the Buddha
by the High Priest….” In “On the Formalities of True Buddhism,”
Nichiu (1402‑1482), the ninth high priest, states: Those at branch temples who have disciples
and lay patrons may transcribe the mamori [Gohonzon]. However,
they should not place their seals on it…. Those at branch temples who
have disciples and lay patrons may transcribe the mandala [i.e., the Gohonzon]
yet may not place their seals on it (Essential Writings of the Fuji
School, vol. 1, p. 71). In the past, as Nichiu
states here, chief priests of branch temples transcribed and issued Gohonzon
to believers. Because some branch temples were located far from the head
temple and transportation was primitive, it seems that chief priests in
distant areas were permitted to transcribe the Gohonzon. Records also
show that chief priests of branch temples near the head temple transcribed
the Gohonzon as well. There is also a much more recent example
of others besides high priests reproducing the Gohonzon. Myohon-ji in
Hota, Chiba Prefecture, is an old, prestigious temple established in 1335
by Nichigo, a disciple of Nichimoku Shonin. At this temple is kept the
man’nen kugo Gohonzon, which Nichiren Daishonin inscribed in December 1274.
(Man’nen kugo means “that which protects and saves [all living
beings] for all eternity.”) Myohon-ji seceded from the Minobu sect and
joined Nichiren Shoshu in 1957. (The reversion of Myohon-ji to Nichiren
Shoshu is detailed in The Human Revolution. See the Seikyo Times,
February 1993.) This temple has reproduced the man’nen kugo
Gohonzon both before and after it joined with Nichiren Shoshu. Its
chief priest, Nichio Kamakura, is now a senior executive priest in the
Nichiren Shoshu priesthood. The priesthood currently asserts that authority
regarding the Gohonzon rests solely with the high priest. It alleges that
only the high priest can reproduce the Gohonzon for believers, because
he alone can perform the “eye-opening” ceremony and thereby inject into
the Gohonzon the “living essence” of the Daishonin’s enlightened life
that only he possesses. However, not only is there no passage in the Gosho
to support such esoteric rituals; the fact that chief priests at branch
temples have transcribed the Gohonzon also completely contradicts this
reasoning. These chief priests did not possess, by the priesthood’s definition,
“the heritage of the Law” and thus the Daishonin’s “living essence.” Therefore,
according to the priesthood’s own history, “the heritage of the Law that
only the successive high priests inherit” is not an absolutely necessary
condition for the reproduction of the Gohonzon. Simply put, the successive high priests traditionally
have been entrusted with the role of reproducing and issuing the Gohonzon
for believers so that they can assist in the accomplishment of the Daishonin’s
mandate--kosen-rufu. Their transcription of the Gohonzon in no way indicates
that they possess any special spiritual state that the rest of us do not.
It is simply a part of their managerial responsibility as high priest
to support believers and advance kosen-rufu. After Nichiren Daishonin died, only Nikko
Shonin among the six senior priests understood the importance of the Gohonzon
as the true object of worship. Other senior priests in the Daishonin’s
order failed to recognize the Gohonzon as the object of worship and treated
it disrespectfully. For example, they would place Gohonzon behind
statues of Shakyamuni or hang them casually in a corridor of a temple.
They even sold Gohonzon for profit or buried them with dead bodies. Furthermore,
the reproduced Gohonzon using woodblock techniques and distributed them
among those who neither had solid faith nor any appreciation for the Gohonzon
(Gosho Zenshu, p. 1606). Under these circumstances, Nikko Shonin was
compelled to discourage the reproduction of Gohonzon via woodblock printing.
And he transcribed the Gohonzon by hand only for those who displayed strong
faith (Gosho Zenshu, p. 1606 / Detailed Accounts of Nikko
Shonin by Nichiko Hori, vol. 2, p. 227). Nikko Shonin’s desire, however, was to make
the Gohonzon as available as possible for those with seeking minds. He
continued to transcribe the Gohonzon until the last moment of hi life.
A Gohonzon exists that Nikko Shonin transcribed shortly before his passing.
The weak brush strokes attest to his waning physical strength. According to Nichiko, the 59th
high priest and renowned Buddhist scholar, during the time of Nichiei
(1352‑1419), the eighth high priest, the head temple began suing
woodblock printing to reproduce the Gohonzon (Essential Writings of
the Fuji School, vol. 1, p. 113). As mentioned before, during High Priest Nichiu’s
time, chief priests of branch temples were allowed to transcribe the Gohonzon.
However, they were not allowed to place on them their own handwritten
seals. The placement of a handwritten seal indicated that the transcriber
of the Gohonzon was officially acknowledged. If any priest could officially
transcribe the Gohonzon, it was likely to create confusion as the kind
caused by the five senior priests during Nikko Shonin’s time. To avoid
such confusion, Nichiu adopted strict restrictions regarding the placement
of transcribers’ handwritten seals. In other words, the use of wood blocks, the
transcription of the Gohonzon by chief priests of branch temples, and
the restrictions on the placement of transcribers’ handwritten seals were
all adopted to make the Gohonzon more readily available for believers
while maintaining strict control of the Gohonzon’s reproduction, thus
avoiding confusion or disrespect toward the Gohonzon. Commenting on Nichiu’s “On the Formalities
of True Buddhism,” High Priest Nichiko states: When this school’s fortune gradually increases
and people of different races overseas begin to invoke the Mystic Law,
how can the high priest alone possibly manage the bestowal of the mandala?
The situation might resurrect these articles [from “On the Formalities
of True Buddhism” on the transcription of the Gohonzon by chief priests
of branch temples]. Or should we use woodblock printing as a supplement?
(Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 1, p. 113) As High Priest Nichiko
states, if the transcription or reproduction of the Gohonzon is done manually
only by the high priest, the more kosen-rufu progresses, the less access
believers will have to the Gohonzon. Therefore, Nichiko suggests that
the method of reproducing the Gohonzon must be reconsidered so as to accord
with the unfolding of kosen-rufu. In fact, since the time of Nikko Shonin,
the method of reproducing the Gohonzon has changed according to societal
conditions, such as advancements in transportation, communication and
printing technology--and, more importantly--the conditions and progress
of the kosen-rufu movement. It was not until recently that the high priest
became the sole authority in the reproduction and issuance of the Gohonzon.
During the tenure of Nittatsu, the 66th high priest (1959‑1979),
all branch temples began issuing replicas of the same Gohonzon transcribed
by the high priest of the time. Until then, some branch temples issued
Gohonzon transcribed by previous high priests. In the process of reproducing and issuing
the Gohonzon, however, it is important to always maintain a delicate balance
between maximizing the availability of the Gohonzon for those with strong
faith and seeking minds, and minimizing the danger of confusion and disrespect
toward this precious object of worship, as Nikko Shonin instructed. The
reproduction and issuance of the Gohonzon must be handled strictly by
the body of believers dedicated to kosen-rufu, based on the teachings
of the Daishonin and Nikko Shonin. Regarding the Gohonzon, the Daishonin states: Now, over two hundred years have passed since
the beginning of the Latter Day of the Law. How awesome that Nichiren
was the first to inscribe this great mandala as the banner of progatation
of the Lotus Sutra, when even such great masters as Nagarjuna, Vasubandhu,
T’ien-t’ai and Miao-lo were unable to do so! (MW‑1, 211‑12) The Daishonin describes the Gohonzon as “the
banner of propagation of the Lotus Sutra”; so responsibility for the Gohonzon
should naturally rest with those of Nichiren Daishonin’s order who wholeheartedly
promote kosen-rufu. Now that Nikken is using the Gohonzon as “a banner
of authoritarianism,” a tool to manipulate believers, the SGI’s decision
to make the Gohonzon available for members is particularly welcome and
valid in light of the Daishonin’s teachings. Suggested readings: “On the Transmission of the Heritage of the
Law” by Masahiro Kobayashi, Seikyo Times, December 1992. “Refuting High Priest Nikken’s Distorted Views
on the Heritage of the Law and the High Sanctuary” by the Association
for the Reformation of Nichiren Shoshu, Seikyo Times, February 1993. “Eye-opening ceremonies by Slanderous Priests
Are Meaningless” by Daisaku Ikeda, Seikyo Times, February 1993. [1920s--early 1950s] ·
Gohonzon were issued mainly by branch temples in Tokyo.
Each branch temple on its own accord reproduced Gohonzon after one transcribed
by a high priest with whom it had close relationship in the past and conferred
them upon believers. For example, Myoko-ji (in Tokyo) reproduced and issued
a Gohonzon transcribed by Nippu, the 55th high priest; Hodo-in,
a Gohonzon transcribed by Nichio, the 56th high priest; and
Jozai-ji (in Tokyo), a Gohonzon transcribed by Nissho, the 57th
high priest. ·
Branch temples outside the Tokyo area received okatagi
Gohonzon (i.e., Gohonzon reproduced through a printing process) from large
branch temples in Tokyo and issued them to believers. Some branch temples
issued unmounted okatagi Gohonzon to believers. In these cases,
believers had to bring Gohonzon to a professional mounter to have them
mounted on a scroll for enshrinement. [Mid‑1950s‑‑1960] ·
Since the mid‑1950s, branch temples started to issue
okatagi Gohonzon based on one transcribed by Nichikan, the 26th
high priest. During the tenure of Nichijun (1956‑1959), the 65th
high priest, most newly issued Gohonzon were the replicas of Nichikan’s
okatagi Gohonzon. ·
Nichikan’s okatagi Gohonzon were printed at Hodo-in
in Tokyo. Branch temples that had business with mounters purchased unmounted
okatagi Gohonzon from Hodo-in and had them mounted by their affiliated
mounters. Branch temples without mounters had okatagi Gohonzon
mounted at Hodo-in. [Early to mid‑1960s] ·
Nichikan’s okatagi Gohonzon were printed at Hodo-in
and mounted at its affiliated mounter. The mounted okatagi Gohonzon
were then delivered to branch temples. [1966‑‑1979] ·
Since 1966, Nittatsu’s okatagi Gohonzon were printed
at Hodo-in and mounted by its affiliated mounter. Then they were delivered
directly from Hodo-in to each branch temple. ·
Around 1973, Myohon-ji temple in Chiba Prefecture reproduced
its man’nen kugo Gohonzon, which was inscribed by the Daishonin,
in a reduced size and conferred them upon believers without Nittatsu’s
permission. [1979‑‑present] ·
Since Nikken became high priest in 1979, a section was
created within the Administrative Office at Taiseki-ji to administer the
reproduction and distribution of Gohonzon. ·
Nikken’s okatagi Gohonzon are printed at a printing
company in Fujinomiya City near Taiseki-ji. They are brought back to Taiseki-ji
where the printing quality is inspected and are then mounted at one of
several mounters. After an inspection of the mounting quality, they are
delivered from the Administrative Office to each branch temple that ordered
them. ·
It is clear from these facts that high priests have not
performed “eye-opening” ceremonies upon all okatagi Gohonzon. According
to the testimony of priest who have served at Taiseki-ji, Nikken rarely
performs an eye-opening ceremony over okatagi Gohonzon destined
fro conferral upon believers. On the rare occasions that he has, he has
instructed acolytes to bring only a few of the many boxes of Gohonzon
allocated for shipment to be placed on the altar before the recitation
of ushitora gongyo at the Grand Reception Hall. Outside of gongyo,
no special ceremony is ever performed. If the priesthood, therefore, insists
that Gohonzon not authorized by the high priest, not issued by the head
temple or those not receiving the eye-opening ceremony are counterfeit,
it would have to admit that it has been deceiving believers by distributing
counterfeit objects of worship for centuries.
Nichiren Daishonin, whose state of life is described as that
of “the Buddha of absolute freedom,” would never intend our faith to be
so dependent on the whims of others. The priesthood’s intent in emphasizing
that we must physically worship the Dai-Gohonzon is none other than to
force our dependence upon them, since they now physically possess the
Dai-Gohonzon. There is a saying that “possession is nine-tenths of the
law.” When it comes to the “Buddhist Law,” however, our sincere faith
and practice, not possession, is the crucial factor.
Rebuttal to allegation #6
Rebuttal to allegation #7
NST allegation
#8
Rebuttal to allegation #8
NST allegation
#9
NST allegation #10
Answers to Commonly Asked Questions About the new Nichikan
Gohonzon
A Historical Perspective
on the Transcription
of the Gohonzon
The Recent History of the Conferral of the Gohonzon
|
Copyright
© 2002 SGI-USA. All rights reserved.
Copyright Policy - Acknowledgements - Contacts - Plugins |
