moskowit@paul.rutgers.edu (Len Moskowitz) (02/12/91)
I have been concerned about Keith Evans' posts describing the Nicherin
Shoshu sect. What he describes is nothing like the Buddhism with
which I'm familiar. I asked a Ch'an monk whom I greatly respect, the
Ven. Shih Shen Lung, (a dharma heir also known as "That Old Frog" and
Ryugen Fisher, telephone: 715-362-3371) to tell me about Nicherin
Shoshu. This is his reply:
From: Old Frog Rec'd Sent
To: Len Moskowitz Msg #765, 12:33pm Feb-06-91
Subject: Re: Inter-sect rivalries
The Nicherin Shoshu folks are Buddhists only insofar as they call
themselves Buddhists. The common feeling from ALL OTHER Buddhist
persuasions that I know of is that calling one's self a Buddhist (or
calling one's philosophy Buddhism) don't necessarily make it true. ...
Buddhism (with this exception) has three and only three defining
criteria:
1) That one take refuge in the Buddha
(this can be either the historical Shakyamuni of India or
of the "Cosmic Buddha-Nature" [Vairocana] flavor {or both})
2) That one take refuge in the Dharma
(dharma being either the body of texts attributed to the
historical Buddha and/or a selected number of his followers,
but being based on the 4 Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path;
OR the more subtle meaning of dharma [truth] which means in
this context the former AND the body of experiential knowledge
that one personally aquires)
3) That one take refuge in the Sangha
(Sangha being the community of those persons who subscribe to
#1 and #2 above and further pledge their support for likeminded
others)
The militant proselytizing of the Nicherin Shoshu cult fails the first
two tests in that they take refuge in their teacher Nicherin
Daishonin, who was kicked out of his own country for his radical
political views and aggressive militancy (he espoused taking arms
before one even came to a sea of troubles...) and they do not practice
the Eightfold Path. What few Westerners know is that $$$ from
contributions to the Nicherin Shosho Sect (in Japan) are given to the
Sokka Geikai - an ultra rightwing political party (yep, same views as
got the founder exiled) in Japan. The Sokka Geikai is on record as
believing in the renunciation of the Japanese Constitution
(specifically as regards Japan creating Armed Forces [i.e. Army, Navy,
etc.]), tariff protectionism, Japanese ownership of the Okinawan
islands (and parts of the Phillipines), second class citizenship for
'non-ethnic Japanese' (Koreans, etc.).... generally they are the KKK
of Japan.
That "...long winded, but finished for now..." Old Frog
-----
Len Moskowitzmayne@vsserv.scri.fsu.edu (William (Bill) Mayne) (02/13/91)
In article <Feb.11.15.49.47.1991.9097@paul.rutgers.edu> moskowit@paul.rutgers.edu (Len Moskowitz) writes: >I have been concerned about Keith Evans' posts describing the Nicherin >Shoshu sect. What he describes is nothing like the Buddhism with >which I'm familiar. I agree that Nicherin Shoshu is nothing like the Buddhism with which I am familiar either, which includes Zen (of several varieties), Tibetan, Theravada, and to a lesser extent several others. In spite of some big external differences and differences in emphasis all of these have a large core in common. If that core is what defines Buddhism then Nicherin Shoshu is not Buddhism. But we don't have a trademark on the name. I support free speech in this forum, and Keith Evans is as welcome as anybody to express his opinions here. Regardless of whether or not other Buddhists consider Nicherin Shoshu to be "real Buddhism (tm)" it is clearly an eastern religion and hence within the subject of soc.religion.eastern. Since I don't like to see Buddhism misrepresented and Nicherin Shoshu is so unlike main stream Buddhism I just wish he would identify his sect and supply some sources for his assertions, rather than make blanket statements as if they were Buddhist teaching. Perhaps this concern is unfounded, though. His posts are so full of statements denigrating all but a small part of the teaching attributed to the Buddha it may be obvious even to the uninformed that his statements don't reflect the views of most Buddhists. >[Quoting a Ch'an monk, Ven. Shih Shen Lung, a.k.a "That Old Frog"] > >The Nicherin Shoshu folks are Buddhists only insofar as they call >themselves Buddhists... [Explanation of Refuges as defining characteristic of Buddhists omitted.] [Referring to Sokka Geikai [sic, sp?], the political party associated with Nicherin in Japan] >... generally they are the KKK of Japan. Statements like this invite further rancorous debate which may do even more damage to the image of Buddhism than Keith Evans' posts. I am writing this post merely as a concerned individual and not as acting moderator. I have no intention of censoring or even editting the posts of anyone. I am asking my fellow Buddhists to consider refraining from attacking or debating Keith Evans, or at least using email. This is an argument we can't win except by staying above it. If Mr. Evans will kindly make clear in his posts that he is representing the views of Nicherin Shoshu we should have no problem with that. I am much less concerns with explicit attacks on main stream Buddhist teaching than with the presentation of unorthodox teaching as Buddhism (tm). If he wishes to post answers to general questions about Buddhism from the perspective of Nicherin Shoshu that is fine. We can answer the same questions directly from our own perspectives, quite possibly contradicting the Nicherin Shoshu position but without attacking it. This is how the Buddha told monks to respond to anyone who slandered the Buddha, the Dharma, or the Sangha. I don't have the actual text in front of me, but it came down to simply stating what is factual and what is not.
torkel@sics.se (Torkel Franzen) (02/13/91)
In article <Feb.11.15.49.47.1991.9097@paul.rutgers.edu> moskowit@paul.rutgers. edu (Len Moskowitz) writes: >I have been concerned about Keith Evans' posts describing the Nicherin >Shoshu sect. What he describes is nothing like the Buddhism with >which I'm familiar. I think it's of interest here to quote the views of a well-known Buddhist scholar, Edward Conze. In his "Buddhism: its essence and development", he remarks: It is customary to reckon the sect of Nichiren (1222-1282) as one of the schools of Amidism. It would be more appropriate to count it among the offshoots of nationalistic Shintoism. Nichiren suffered from self-assertiveness and bad temper, and he manifested a degree of personal and tribal egotism which disqualifies him as a Buddhist teacher. He did not only convince himself that he, personally, was mentioned in the "Lotus of the Good Law," but also that the Japanese were the chosen race which would regenerate the world. The followers of the Nichiren sect, as Suzuki puts it: "even now are more or less militaristic and do not mix well with other Buddhists."
acosta@locus.com (Joseph Acosta) (02/13/91)
Len, I wish to elaborate on a few points bassed on your inquirey from "Old Frog". As a Nicheren Shoshu believer I wish to discuss these points rationally as possible and point out items that are not correct as far as my own undrestanding is concerned. I welcome the opportunity for dialog on the concerned subject matter. In article <Feb.11.15.49.47.1991.9097@paul.rutgers.edu> moskowit@paul.rutgers.edu (Len Moskowitz) writes: >From: Old Frog Rec'd Sent >To: Len Moskowitz Msg #765, 12:33pm Feb-06-91 >Subject: Re: Inter-sect rivalries > >The militant proselytizing of the Nicherin Shoshu cult fails the first >two tests in that they take refuge in their teacher Nicherin >Daishonin, >who was kicked out of his own country for his radical >political views and aggressive militancy (he espoused taking arms >before one even came to a sea of troubles...) This is not quite correct, Nicherin Daisonin was exiled to Sado Island (the Japanese Equivalent to Siberia) bassed on his remonstration with the Kamakura Govt. His remonstration was against the Pure Land sect or Nembutsu. In this remonstration he stated that the ill's suffered by the Japanese nation at that time period (~ 1240 AD) we due to the pratise of misleading religions and at the time the Nembutsu Sect was more or less a state sanctioned religion. This remonstration and related subject matter can become a long discussion so I will only sumarize here. Anyway as a result of this remonstration he (Nichiren Daishonin) was exiled to Sado Island. He never "espoused taking arms" at any time. After being exiled for about 2 years (I think it was 2) he was pardoned by the same Govt which exiled him. He returned to remonstrate with the Govt one last time and when the Govt refused to acknowledge him he retired to Mt Minobu (ie in Japan). His desire was the establisment of peace through the practice of true buddhism, not on "taking arms". >and they do not practice >the Eightfold Path. What few Westerners know is that $$$ from >contributions to the Nicherin Shosho Sect (in Japan) are given to the >Sokka Geikai - an ultra rightwing political party (yep, same views as >got the founder exiled) in Japan. That's Soka Gakkai, anyway the Soka Gakkai is an organization of lay believers who practise Nichern Shosu Buddhism. It is an organization which allows members to pratise these version of buddhism correctly and obtain as many benifits as possible. The Soka Gakkai raises money to support it's many community centers throughout the world and and raises money to support the Priesthood. An "ultra rightwing political party" it is not. >The Sokka Geikai is on record as >believing in the renunciation of the Japanese Constitution >(specifically as regards Japan creating Armed Forces [i.e. Army, Navy, >etc.]), tariff protectionism, Japanese ownership of the Okinawan >islands (and parts of the Phillipines), second class citizenship for >'non-ethnic Japanese' (Koreans, etc.).... generally they are the KKK >of Japan. > This are some big accusations I believe all of these to be false and will talk about them later. I know this is a second party post but I donnot agree with the accusations stated here and like to inquire further about the details/proof of these accusations. >That "...long winded, but finished for now..." Old Frog >Len Moskowitz Thanks Joe Acosta
chungdan@elaine11.stanford.edu (Zhueng Qi Iao (Daniel)) (02/15/91)
Kiel neniu mencias, ke Nitiren Daisyo^nin estas c^i tio?
Why does no one mention, that Nitiren Daisyo^nin is this?
+---+ \ --+-- | --- +-+ |
| | \ |-+-| ---+--- |=| | | |
|---| \ |=+=| | --| +-+ / \
| | / --+-- / \ ==+== / \
+---+ \------ / \ ----- / \
*Zhueng* Qi-Iao, Usono (U.S.A.)