Letter To Renjo and Alt.Zen -*

Letter To Renjo and Alt.Zen -

By the year 1255, Nichiren Daishonin had written only two Gosho
letters which were to number among the hundreds later included in the
two-volume 'Writings of Nichiren Daishonin'.

One of the first two was 'On Attaining Buddhahood', which was a
marvelous dialectic on the Lotus Sutra locating the true entity within
the bodies of common mortals and declaring all other teachings which
stated otherwise as inferior. Furthermore, he declared that the
practice for the Latter Day of the Law to manifest this supreme state
of life was chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo with this idea that
Buddhahood was inherent in your life, and that no other practice would
fulfill the ultimate promise of the Lotus Sutra.

The second of the Goshos of 1255 was 'Letter to Renjo', which was
polemical in its refutation of Zen and was addressed to a Zen priest
(or candidate-priest) in Kamakura, by the name of Renjo, who is
otherwise unknown.

Since I am currently blocked via content filtering by Google (at the
behest of Zen), and also since it might just have well been addressed
directly to the alt.zen usenet group (were Nichiren here to send it
for himself), I am posting the 'Letter to Renjo' to alt.zen for him
(until Google makes the evil cause of content-filtering Nichiren
Daishonin, himself).

I have included a couple of annotations, since the "question:" and
"answer:" labels fluctuate and can be confusing to those of the Zen
school (not to those of the Lotus school), I have noted [Lotus school]
and [Zen school], appropriately.

If I have offended the Daishonin by my further annotating his Gosho or
posting it against his will, or if I have annotated incorrectly (which
I have not), then I will surely fall into hell for this error (which I
will not).

-Chas.

From the "Writings of Nichiren Daishonin II", pp. 3-9,

____ Letter To Renjo __________

____ WND II, p. 3 __________

The Zen school states that when the World-Honored One was about to
enter nirvana, he took his seat, twirled a flower, and showed it to
the assembly. Mahakashyapa's face broke into a smile. The Buddha said,
"I have a subtle teaching concerning the eye and treasury of the
correct teaching, the wonderful mind of nirvana, the true aspect that
is without characteristics. It represents a separate transmission
outside the sutras, independent of words or writing. I entrust it to
Mahakashyapa."

Question [Lotus school]: In what sutra does this passage occur?

The Zen school replies: The passage is from the Sutra of the Buddha
Answering the Great Heavenly King Brahma's Questions.

Question [Lotus school]: What Tripitaka master translated this sutra
into Chinese? It is not listed in the Chen-yuan era catalog or K'ai-
yuan era catalog of the sacred writings -- why is this?

The Zen school replies: This sutra is a secret sutra. Therefore its
words alone were transmitted from India to China. [Note 1: "Its words
alone were transmitted" is thought to mean that while the general
meaning of the sutra was orally transmitted, the sutra itself was
not.]

Question [Lotus school]: In the age of what sage or what Buddhist
teacher was it transmitted to China? Why is there no record of the
transmission? This sutra is not listed in the early records of the
sacred scriptures, but only appears in the records of later times. If
this sutra constitutes the source of the Zen school's teachings, it
ought to be listed in the earliest records of the scriptures. From
this it is obvious that this is a spurious text.

The Zen school says: The second volume of the Nirvana Sutra states,
"Now I take this unsurpassed correct teaching that I possess and
entrust it all to Mahakashyapa." How do you interpret this passage?

Answer [Lotus school]: Although the word "unsurpassed" would appear to
refer to the Mahayana teachings, here it indicates the Hinayana
teachings. In comparison to the erroneous doctrines of the non-
Buddhists, the Hinayana teachings are called the correct teaching.

For example, the Great Teacher Miao-lo in his commentary, when
explaining the phrase "the great teaching moved gradually
eastward," [Note 2: Chang-an's preface to T'ien-t'ai's 'Profound
Meaning of the Lotus Sutra'.] states, "The words 'great teaching'
refer to the Buddhist teachings in general." [Note 3: 'The Annotations
on "The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra".'] That is, the Mahayana,
Hinayana, provisional, and true teachings are all included in the term
"great teaching." When the Hinayana teachings are compared to the non-
Buddhist teachings, they are called the Mahayana, or great teaching.
It is as though a person of lowly status were, in accordance with the
circumstances, addressed as "Master," or spoken of as a person of
exalted status.

____ WND II, p. 4 __________

Volume three of the Nirvana Sutra states: "If the treasure of the Law
were entrusted to Ananda and the other monk-disciples, it would not be
able to endure for long. Why? Because all the voice-hearers and men
such as Mahakashyapa are subject to the process of change. They are
like that old man who is entrusted with another person's possessions
[but is unable to fulfill his duty]. [Note 4: The "old man" in this
paragraph and the "person ... in the prime of life" in the following
paragraph refer to a story told in the Nirvana Sutra. A rich man,
obliged to journey to another region, entrusts an old man with a large
sum of money to keep for him until his return. But the old man dies,
and since he has no heir, the money is lost. The sutra points out that
if the money had been entrusted to a young man "in the prime of life,"
with parents, a wife and children, retainers, and kin to look after
his affairs should he die, then the rich man would have been able to
receive his money.]

"Hence the unsurpassed Buddhist teaching should be entrusted to the
bodhisattvas. The bodhisattvas are skilled at questions and answers,
and for that reason the treasure of the Law will be able to endure for
long. Over countless thousands of ages it will thrive and grow ever
more brilliant, bringing benefit and peace to living beings. They are
like the person who, being in the prime of life, is fit to be
entrusted with another person's possessions. That is the reason it is
bestowed upon the great bodhisattvas-simply because they are skilled
at questioning."

From this it is clear that the Mahayana teachings and the Hinayana
teachings were entrusted to different persons.

Volume ten of the same sutra states: "Now, Manjushri, all of you must
broadly expound the great teaching for the sake of the four kinds of
believers. So now I entrust this sutra teaching to you, Manjushri. And
if Mahakashyapa, Ananda, and the others come, then in the same way I
will also entrust the correct teaching to them."

From this we know that Manjushri and Mahakashyapa were entrusted with
a great teaching. But the teaching the Buddha entrusted to the latter
was the Hinayana teaching.

"The Treatise on Enlightenment to One's Nature" [Note 5: A treatise
attributed to Bodhidharma, the founder of the Zen school.] says, "A
person who understands the mind can gain the way of enlightenment.
Therefore such a person is called a Buddha."

But there are five kinds of enlightenment. [Note 6: Five kinds of
enlightenment is a reference to the five stages in the attainment of
enlightenment described in 'The Treatise on the Great Perfection of
Wisdom'. They are (1) to arouse the aspiration for enlightenment, (2)
to subdue earthly desires and carry out paramita practices, (3) to
perceive the true nature of phenomena and attain purity of mind, (4)
to become free from earthly desires and attain complete knowledge, and
(5) to attain unsurpassed enlightenment.] What kind of enlightenment
is meant here? And there are various ways of "gaining the way." What
kind of "way" is referred to here? What is made clear in the sutras
[other than the Lotus Sutra] is not the great enlightenment or the
unsurpassed way. The Buddha says, "In these more than forty years, I
have not yet revealed the truth." [Note 7: Immeasurable Meanings
Sutra.]

Question [Zen school]: In the Lotus Sutra, eminent and humble persons,
men and women-what sort of "way of enlightenment" do they gain?

Answer [Lotus school]: [The Lotus Sutra says], "As soon as they have
heard one verse they will all without doubt be certain of attaining
Buddhahood." [Note 8: Lotus Sutra, chap. 2.] And again it says,
"Honestly discarding expedient means, I will preach only the
unsurpassed way." [Note 9: Ibid.] From this we know that what is
gained is unsurpassed enlightenment.

[The sutra further states]: "If one listens to them [the preachers of
the Law] for even a moment, one will immediately attain supreme
perfect enlightenment.'' [Note 10: Ibid., chap. 10.] This
enlightenment, then, is a benefit gained by one who listens to this
Lotus Sutra teaching for even a moment.

Question [Zen school]: You speak of a "moment." It is said that thirty
moments make up one day and one night. [Note 11: "Moment" here refers
to the Japanese word 'shuyu', which means a brief space of time. Here
'shuyu' is regarded as an equivalent of the Sanskrit word 'muhurta',
which means a thirtieth of one complete day, or twenty-four hours.]
When you say, "One listens to them for even a moment," is this the
kind of "moment" you mean?

Answer [Lotus school]: Yes. Volume two of T'ient'ai's 'Great
Concentration and Insight' says, "Do not neglect it even for a
moment." And 'The Annotations on "Great Concentration and Insight" '
states, "It is not permissible to neglect it even for a short time.
Therefore the text speaks of 'a moment.' '' Hence we know that "a
moment" means a very brief space of time.

Question [Zen school]: The field of the original nature is what we in
the Zen school take as the model on which to base our Zen meditation.
[What is your opinion on this?]

____ WND II, p. 5 __________

Answer [Lotus school]: What do you mean by "the field of the original
nature"? In what sutra does this term appear?

The Lotus Sutra is the true field of blessings for human and heavenly
beings, which means that it is the teaching used to instruct and
convert human and heavenly beings. Hence the Buddha is called the
"teacher of heavenly and human beings." [Note 12: One of a Buddha's
ten honorable titles.]

Persons who put faith in this sutra are able not only to see the
Buddha innate in their own being, but to see all the Buddhas of the
three existences of past, present, and future. It is as though one
were looking into the pure crystal mirror of King Yama, in which all
forms and shapes are seen. Thus the sutra says, "And it will be like a
pure bright mirror in which forms and shapes are all reflected." [Note
13: Lotus Sutra, chap. 19.]

The Zen school teaches that "the mind itself is the Buddha, and the
body is none other than the Buddha." [What is your opinion on this?]

Answer [Lotus school]: A sutra states: "The mind is the utmost enemy,
and this enemy works the greatest evil. This enemy can bind persons
and send them to the place of King Yama. When you are burning alone in
the fires of hell because of the retribution for your evil deeds, you
cannot hope to save the wife and children you cherished, your
brothers, or your kin." [Note 14: Meditation on the Correct Teaching
Sutra.] And the Nirvana Sutra says, "May I be the master of my mind
and not let my mind become my master!"

Deluded and shameless as the mind is, to declare that "the mind itself
is the Buddha" is to be a person who supposes he has attained what he
has not attained, who supposes he has understood what he has not
understood, is it not? [Note 15: This statement is based on the words
from the "Expedient Means" chapter of the Lotus Sutra, "What they had
not attained they supposed they had attained, what they had not
understood they supposed they had understood."]

Question [Zen school]: What is the view of the Lotus school?

Answer [Lotus school]: The Lotus Sutra states, "If you are endowed
with the thirty-two features, then this will be true
extinction." [Note 16: Lotus Sutra, chap. 7.] And it says that [living
beings] "quickly acquire the body of a Buddha." [Note 17: Ibid., chap.
16.]

But the Zen school, revering the Buddha, which is the essential nature
of phenomena, supposes that the self and [Shakyamuni] Buddha are
equal, which is to fall into the error of overbearing arrogance.
Surely a person who does so will be condemned to the Avichi hell.
Hence the Lotus Sutra says, "The monks who are overbearingly arrogant
will fall into a great pit. " [Note 18: Ibid., chap. 2.]

The Zen school says, "Go trampling on Vairochana's head." [Note 19:
These words are found in 'The Blue Cliff Records', a collection of
koans compiled by Yuan-wu in the early twelfth century. Koan refers to
a Zen master's statement, including questions and answers directed at
his disciples. Koans are used as objects of meditation for developing
insight.] But who is this Vairochana?

Do they mean the Dharma body that exists everywhere throughout the
entire realm of phenomena? If so, then the mountains and rivers, the
great earth itself, are all the body ground of Vairochana. This is
Vairochana as the essential nature of phenomena. This body ground is
trampled on by dogs and foxes and such like -- it is surely not the
property of the Zen school alone.

Or do they mean actually trampling on the head of the Buddha
[Shakyamuni]? But even the god Brahma cannot see the top of the
Buddha's head, so how could it be possible for ordinary mortals of an
inferior level to trample on it?

In his relation to all living beings, the Buddha manifests the three
virtues of sovereign, teacher, and parent. To trample on the head of a
loving father whose kindness and virtue are so vast is to behave as an
extremely stupid and wicked person, one perversely sinful and void of
filial respect.

Even the sacred texts of Confucius condemn such behavior, to say
nothing of the correct teaching of the Thus Come One! Could there be
anyone so foolish as to praise such wrong behavior, such an erroneous
teaching, and thereby incur immeasurably weighty blame?

____ WND II, p. 6 __________

When the Buddha was in the world, we are told that Mahakashyapa "bowed
his head in respectful obeisance." [Note 20: Lotus Sutra, chap. 4.]
But now that he has passed into nirvana, these benighted Zen believers
say they will trample on the Buddha's head -- what fearful words!

The Zen school says it is a separate transmission outside the sutras,
independent of words or writing. [What is your opinion on this?]

Answer [Lotus school]: Generally speaking, there are three types of
teachings that are propagated in the world. First is the Confucian
teaching, which is of twenty-seven varieties. Second is the Taoist
teaching, which comprises twenty-five schools. Third are the twelve
divisions of the Buddhist scriptures, or what the T'ien-t'ai school
defines as the four teachings and the eight teachings. Does the Zen
school claim that it is something outside these teachings?

It is customary among physicians to name anyone who departs from the
basic practices of medicine a "practitioner of outside ways." In human
society one speaks of those relatives who are of a surname other than
one's own as "outside relatives." And in Buddhism, that which departs
from the sutras and treatises is known as an "outside way."

The Nirvana Sutra states, "If there is any person who does not abide
by the expositions of the Buddha, you should understand that this
person is a servant of the devil." And volume nine of 'On "Great
Concentration and Insight" ' says, "Before the Lotus Sutra, they were
disciples of an outside [non-Buddhist] way."

The Zen school describes itself as something "not transmitted by the
Buddha and patriarchs." [What is your opinion on this?]

Answer [Lotus school]: If that is so, then why does the Zen school
talk about the "twenty-eight patriarchs of India" and the SIX
patriarchs of China"? If you speak in this way, you are refuting your
own assertion that the teachings were entrusted to Mahakashyapa, are
you not? How do you explain this contradiction in your own words?

The Zen school says, "This superior way of ours has not been
transmitted by the sages of the past."

Answer [Lotus school]: If that is so, then the Zen school of today can
have no real understanding of this "superior way" either. And if it
has no real understanding of it, then it is not true Zen!

All the Zen school does is sing about a "superior way," resting in
arrogance, never correcting its deluded views but instead boasting of
"perceiving one's true nature." Its greatest mistake is to create gaps
between people's capacities and the Buddha's teachings. In doing so,
it impedes the enlightening process of the Buddha's teachings and
falls ever deeper into error.

The Zen followers talk about a doctrine "outside the sutras" and
practice this thing "outside the sutras"; they say their doctrine is
"independent of words or writing," yet they love to take up their
brushes and write about it. Their words and their hearts fail to match
-- how could they be other than followers of the heavenly devil,
disciples of a non-Buddhist way?

It is through the use of words and letters that the Buddha saves
living beings.

Question [Zen school]: What proof have you of this?

Answer [Lotus school]: Volume fifteen of the Nirvana Sutra states, "My
wish is that all living beings will accept and uphold the words and
letters of the Buddhist teachings." And the Sutra on Resolving Doubts
about the Middle Day of the Law says, "It is through the use of words
and letters that living beings are saved and can attain
enlightenment."

If one rejects the use of words and letters, then how can the Buddha's
work be done?

____ WND II, p. 7 __________

Does the Zen school claim that it uses no words in teaching people? If
that is what it claims, then how does it account for the fact that
Bodhidharma from southern India wrote a commentary in five volumes on
the four volume Lankavatara Sutra? When he transmitted it to his
disciple Hui-k'o, he said, "Observing the land of China, I see that
this sutra alone is suitable for saving people. Therefore you must use
this for saving the world."

If this account is true, then how can you persist in your unreasonable
assertion that yours is a "separate transmission outside the sutras"?

Next, with regard to the claim that Zen is something "not transmitted
by the Buddha and patriarchs," [did not Bodhidharma] say, "Hot or cold
-- just experience them for yourself!"? Is this not an injunction in
words? And after this injunction has been passed from teacher to
disciple, the latter can then understand "hot and cold" for himself.

This is what the Lotus Sutra means when it says, "Thrust aside evil
friends and associate with good companions." [Note 21: Ibid., chap.
3.] 'Great Concentration and Insight' states: "If one does not meet up
with a teacher, one's perverse wisdom will grow day by day, one's
immersion in the sufferings of birth and death will become deeper with
each month. Like a person dragging a curved log through a dense
forest, when can one ever hope to escape?"

Even when encountering the problems of everyday life, one must consult
with others, and how much more is this true when attempting to
understand the profound principles of Buddhism. How can one hope to
grasp them easily by oneself? As the [Nirvana] sutra says, "Close, but
you cannot see it, like your eyelashes; far off, but you cannot see
it, like the trail of a bird's flight in the sky."

Leaving aside the seated Zen meditation of persons of superior
faculties and superior capacity, the Zen school followers of the
present time sit facing the wall as though they had an earthenware jar
over their heads. As the [Lotus] sutra says, "Their vision [is] so
impaired they can see nothing. They do not seek the Buddha, with his
great might, or the Law that can end their suffering, but enter deeply
into erroneous views, hoping to shed suffering through greater
suffering." [Note 22: Ibid., chap. 2.]

'On "Great Concentration and Insight" ' states: "They do not even
comprehend the clear words of everyday life, much less the profound
principles of the Middle Way. How can they possibly comprehend the
mystic teachings, which are perfect and eternally abiding?"

The Zen believers of the present age are all holders of greatly
erroneous views. In particular, they rely on the recorded sayings of
common mortals who have not yet freed themselves from the three
categories of illusion, and scorn the words and teachings of the Thus
Come One, the possessor of the four kinds of wisdom, perfect in
understanding. Could there be any greater folly? For the sickness they
have no medicine to offer, to fit the capacities of living beings they
have no teachings. Even bodhisattvas at the stage of near-perfect
enlightenment still relied upon the Buddha's teachings -- why do these
ignorant people who are on the lowest level of practice not put their
faith in the sutras?

Thus it happened that, when the Zen school rose to prominence in
China, that country rapidly fell into decline. And now, as an omen of
the impending downfall of our own nation, we see these Zen teachers
with their benighted understanding everywhere about us. 'Great
Concentration and Insight' says, "This is an ominous specter of the
destruction of the Law, this is an ominous specter of the age."

____ WND II, p. 8 __________

The Zen school says: The Lotus school seems to refute our claim to a
teaching "independent of words or writing." But then why does the
Buddha say, "I never preached a single word"?

Answer [Lotus school]: I assume you are quoting from the passage in
the Lankavatara Sutra. But apparently you do not understand the two
terms, the original and abiding Law, and the Law that the Buddha
realized for himself. [Note 23: Because there is no distinction
between these two Laws, the Lankavatara Sutra says, the Buddha never
preached a single word other than the original and abiding Law.
However, because the sutra does not explain the Law the Buddha
realized, the Daishonin says it is a teaching in which the Buddha has
"not yet revealed the truth."] If you are not familiar with these two
principles, you should study them. Moreover, the sutra you refer to
has already been invalidated by the words of the Buddha: "In these
more than forty years, I have not yet revealed the truth." Why use a
sutra such as that for your standard?

Question [Zen school]: The Sutra on Resolving Doubts about the Middle
Day of the Law states, "I have never seen the Thus Come One preach one
phrase of the Law." How do you account for this?

Answer [Lotus school]: These are the words of Bodhisattva Constant
Donations. [Note 24: A bodhisattva to whom the Sutra on Resolving
Doubts about the Middle Day of the Law is addressed.] The Lotus Sutra
states, "When the bodhisattvas hear this Law, they will be released
from all entanglements of doubt. The twelve hundred arhats, they too
will all attain Buddhahood." [Note 25: Lotus Sutra, chap. 2.] Thus we
know that the eighty thousand bodhisattvas and the twelve hundred
arhats all sat in the assembly and listened to the Law with joy. But
Constant Donations alone is not found among the group, so which
assertion should we rely on? The name Constant Donations is not listed
among those of the leaders of the bodhisattvas who sat in the assembly
when the Lotus Sutra was preached, so it is perfectly natural that he
should have spoken as he did.

What is more, the Sutra on Resolving Doubts about the Middle Day of
the Law goes on to state: "But, seeing how living beings come into the
world and then pass away, he preached the Law in order to save
people." Why cling only to the statement that the Buddha did not
"preach one phrase of the Law" and overlook the fact that in actuality
he preached a wonderful truth?

Every one of the principles you have described represents an erroneous
view of the grossest kind. You should abandon these mistaken beliefs
and instead put your faith in the Lotus Sutra. If you fail to do so,
it means you lack any true aspiration for enlightenment, does it not?

____ End - Letter To Renjo __________

____ Background [WND II, p. 8-9] __________

Nichiren Daishonin wrote this letter in 1255, some two years after he
had first publicly set forth his teaching. In his teaching, the
Daishonin asserted that the Lotus Sutra represents the core of the
lifetime teachings of Shakyamuni Buddha. At the same time, he
clarified that the essence of the Lotus Sutra is Nam-myoho-renge-kyo,
the teaching that best accords with the capacities of people of the
Latter Day of the Law and that enables them to attain Buddhahood.

In addition, the Daishonin refuted the doctrines of the well-known
religious schools of his day, such as the Nembutsu (or Pure Land),
Zen, True Word, and Precepts schools, which used sutras other than the
Lotus as their basis.

In this letter, he addresses the Zen school exclusively, criticizing
its core assertions. He determines that Zen, which describes its
doctrines as a "separate transmission outside the sutras" and
"independent of words or writing," is actually a teaching outside
Buddhism, which has been passed down through words and writing in the
form of sutras.

At the time, Zen had spread broadly among the samurai class, and key
individuals within the Kamakura shogunate liberally sponsored the
construction of Zen temples, inviting ranking Zen priests from Kyoto
and China to preside over them.

This letter is addressed to Renjo, about whom little is known.

____ End - Background __________

_________________________________________

LS Chap. 2

If when I encounter living beings
I were in all cases to teach them the Buddha way,
those without wisdom would become confused
and in their bewilderment would fail to accept my teachings.
I know that such living beings have never in the past cultivated good
roots
but have stubbornly clung to the five desires,
and their folly and craving have given rise to affliction.
Their desires are the cause
whereby they fall into the three evil paths,
revolving wheel-like through the six realms of existence
and undergoing every sort of suffering and pain.

This anthology:

http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=%22disappointing+zen%22+(%22Toxic+Zen%22+OR+%22Su
rvivor+Gita%22+OR+%2247+U.S.C.+223%22)&scoring=d&num0&

[ Auf dieses Posting antworten ]

Antworten

Allen L. Barker (15.08.2008 10:08)

Appledog (15.08.2008 11:37)

Juanjo (16.08.2008 22:59)