Site hosted by Build your free website today!

The Entity of the Mystic Law

- Totaigi Sho -


Question: The lotus of the entity of the Mystic Law is difficult to understand, and therefore metaphor is used to make the meaning clear. But is there any example in the sutras to support such a practice?

Answer: The sutra says: "[They are] unsoiled by worldly things like the lotus flower in the water. Emerging from the earth..." Here we see that the Bodhisattvas of the Earth are the lotus of the entity of the Mystic Law, and that the lotus is being used here as a simile. But I will write to you about this again at some future time.

This teaching represents the ultimate principle of the entire Lotus Sutra. It is the ultimate purpose of Shakyamuni Buddha’s advent, as well as the heart and core of the Lotus Sutra, which was entrusted to the great bodhisattvas who sprang up out of the earth so that they might spread it widely in the Latter Day of the Law. Only when the ruler of our nation has shown himself to have faith may this doctrine be revealed. But until then it should remain a secret teaching. I have just completed transmitting it to you, Sairen-bo.


Question: What is the entity of Myoho-renge-kyo?

Answer: All beings and their environments in any of the Ten Worlds are themselves the entity of Myoho-renge-kyo.

Question: If so, then is it possible to say that all living beings, such as ourselves, are entities of the Mystic Law in its entirety?

Answer: Of course. The sutra says: "This reality [of all phenomena] consists of the appearance, nature... and their consistency from beginning to end."1

The Great Teacher Miao-lo comments on this as follows: "The true entity is invariably revealed in all phenomena, and all phenomena invariably possess the ten factors. The ten factors invariably function within the Ten Worlds, and the Ten Worlds invariably entail both life and its environment."2

T’ien-t’ai comments: "All phenomena consisting of the ten factors, Ten Worlds and three thousand realms are the entities of the Lotus Sutra."3

The Great Teacher Nan-yueh says: "Question: What does Myoho-renge-kyo represent? Answer: Myo indicates that all living beings are myo or mystic. Ho indicates that all living beings are ho or the Law." And T’ien-t’ai also says, "The Law of all living beings is mystic."4

Question: If the entity of all living beings is the Mystic Law in its entirety, then are all the actions and their results that are associated with the nine worlds, from Hell up to Bodhisattva, in effect the entity of the Mystic Law?

Answer: The mystic principle that is the essential nature of phenomena possesses two aspects, the defiled aspect and the pure aspect. If the defiled aspect is operative, this is called delusion. If the pure aspect is operative, this is called enlightenment. Enlightenment constitutes the realm of Buddhahood. Delusion constitutes the realms of common mortals.

These two aspects, the deluded and the enlightened, are indeed two different phenomena, and yet both are workings of the one principle, that is, the essential nature of phenomena, or the true aspect of reality. It is like a piece of crystal. If the crystal is placed in the sun’s rays, it will attract them and produce fire. But if it is placed in the moon’s rays, it will produce water. The crystal is a single entity, but the effects it produces differ according to the circumstances.

The mystic principle of the true aspect of reality is like this. The mystic principle of the true aspect of reality is one, but if it encounters evil influences it will manifest delusion, while if it encounters good influences it will manifest enlightenment. Enlightenment means enlightenment to the essential nature of phenomena, and delusion, ignorance of it.

It is like the case of a person who in a dream sees himself performing various good and evil actions. After he wakes up and considers the matter, he realizes that it was all a dream produced by his own mind. This mind of his corresponds to the single principle of the essential nature of phenomena, the true aspect of reality, while the good and evil that appeared in the dream correspond to enlightenment and delusion, or ignorance, respectively. When one becomes aware of this, it is clear that one should discard the ignorance associated with evil and delusion and take as one’s basis the awakening that is characterized by goodness and enlightenment.

The Daiengaku shutara ryogi Sutra declares: "The beginningless illusions and ignorance that beset all living beings are all produced by the perfectly enlightened mind of the Thus Come Ones."5

The Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai in his Maka shikan states: "Ignorance and delusion have as their essence enlightenment. But because of delusion, ignorance becomes manifest rather than enlightenment." The Great Teacher Miao-lo comments on this as follows: "Enlightenment has no separate entity, but is completely dependent upon ignorance; and ignorance has no separate entity, but is completely dependent upon enlightenment."6

Ignorance is a state of delusion that must be cut off, whereas enlightenment is the state that one must manifest. How then can we say that they are a single entity? To resolve doubts on this point, one should have a clear grasp of the passages that have been quoted here. The example of the dream given in the ninety-fifth volume of the Daichido ron and the Tendai school’s example7 of the piece of crystal cited above are very interesting illustrations.

Further proof of the truth that ignorance and enlightenment are one in entity is found in the passage in the Lotus Sutra that reads: "All these phenomena are aspects of an abiding Law, and all the characteristics of the world are eternal."8 The Daichido ron says: "Enlightenment and ignorance are not different things, not separate things. To understand this is what is called the Middle Way."

There are many passages of proof asserting that the mystic principle of the true aspect of reality possesses two aspects, the defiled and the pure. But none can surpass the one in the Kegon Sutra that says, "The mind, the Buddha and all living beings -- these three things are without distinction," or the passage in the Lotus Sutra that describes the true aspect of all phenomena.

The Great Teacher Nan-yueh says: "The entity of the mind is endowed with two aspects, the defiled and the pure. However, it does not have two different forms, but is single in nature and without distinction."9 And the example of the mirror10 that he gives truly presents a thorough explanation of the subject.

For a more detailed understanding, one may also refer to his interpretations in the Daijo Shikan.11

Another good explanation is given in the sixth volume of Miao-lo’s Hokke gengi shakusen, in the passage that reads: "While the three thousand realms remain latent [in ordinary beings], they are all designated by the term ‘ignorance.’ But when the three thousand realms all manifest themselves as the result [of Buddhahood], then they are all designated by the term ‘eternal happiness!’ However, because the three thousand realms themselves remain unchanged, ignorance is essentially one with enlightenment. Since the three thousand realms all remain constant, they possess both entity and function.12 This commentary makes the matter perfectly clear.

Question: If all living beings are the entity of Myoho-renge-kyo, then are common mortals like ourselves who are ignorant and deluded, unenlightened and dull-witted, also the entity of the Mystic Law?

Answer: Though there are a great many persons in the world today, they all fall into two categories--those who believe in the provisional teachings and those who believe in the true teaching. Those who believe in the provisional and expedient teachings such as the Nembutsu cannot be called the entity of Myoho-renge-kyo. But those who believe in the Lotus Sutra, which is the true teaching, are the entity of Myoho-renge-kyo, the mystic entity of the true aspect of reality. The Nirvana Sutra says: "Among all living beings, those who believe in the Mahayana are called the Mahayana people."

The Great Teacher Nan-yueh in his Shianrakugyo writes: "The Daigo shojin Sutra says: ‘Ordinary beings and the Thus Come One share a single Dharma body. Being pure and mystic beyond comparison, it is called Myoho-renge-kyo.’" He also says: "Those who practice the Lotus Sutra are pursuing through this single act of devotion the mind that is endowed with all manner of fortunate results. These are present simultaneously and are not acquired gradually over a long period of time. This is like the blossom of the lotus which, when it opens, already possesses a large number of seeds or results. Hence such persons are called the people of the one vehicle." He also says: "The people of the two vehicles and the bodhisattvas of inferior capacity choose to follow the way of expedient means, practicing methods that assure gradual progress over a long period of time. But the bodhisattvas of superior capacity honestly discard expedient means and do not carry out the practice of gradual progress. If they are able to complete the meditation based on the Lotus Sutra, then they will thereby possess all manner of fortunate results. Persons such as these are called the people of the one vehicle."

The phrase "practice of gradual progress" that appears in this commentary by Nan-yueh has been interpreted by the scholars of our time to refer to the specific teaching. In fact, however, it refers to the way of expedient means, as opposed to the way of the Lotus Sutra, which is endowed simultaneously with causes and results. Hence the term "practice of gradual progress" includes the perfect teachings preached before the Lotus Sutra, the various Mahayana sutras preached before the Lotus Sutra, and the Mahayana and Hinayana sutras that belong to the sudden and gradual teachings.

As proof, we may cite the following passage in the Muryogi Sutra: "Then I preached the twelve divisions of the Hodo sutras,13 the Makahannya Sutra and the Kegon teaching of the ocean-imprint meditation, describing the many kalpas of practice for bodhisattvas."

But the bodhisattvas of superior capacity honestly discard expedient means and do not carry out the practice of gradual progress. They practice the Lotus Sutra, and when they attain its truth, they simultaneously acquire all manner of fortunate results. Persons such as these are called the people of the one vehicle.

When we consider the meaning of these various passages, we understand that none of the ordinary persons and sages of the three vehicles, the five vehicles,14 the seven expedient means, the nine worlds or the four flavors and three teachings can be called Mahayana followers who are the entity of Myoho-renge-kyo. Though there are Buddhas in these teachings, they are Buddhas of the provisional teachings and cannot be called Buddhas in the true sense. This is because the Buddhas of the provisional teachings in their three bodies15 have not yet freed themselves from impermanence. How then could beings in realms other than Buddhahood be called [the entity of Myoho-renge-kyo]? That is why it is said that a person of humble station born in the Latter Day of the Law is more worthy of respect than the kings and high ministers who lived during the two thousand years of the Former and Middle Days.

Nan-yueh says in his commentary: "All living beings have within themselves the storehouse of the Dharma body, and therefore they are in no way different from the Buddha."16 That is why the Lotus Sutra says: "The pure and ordinary eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body and mind that one received at birth from one’s father and mother are also like this."17

Nan-yueh also writes: "Question: In what sutra does the Buddha explain the eyes and the other sense organs and designate them by the name Thus Come One? Answer: The Daigo shojin Sutra says: ‘Ordinary beings and the Thus Come One share a single Dharma body. Being pure and mystic beyond comparison, it is called Myoho-renge-kyo.’"18 This comes from a sutra other than the Lotus, but since the Lotus later clarified the same point, it is all right to quote it here.

If we take up the word "share" that is used in this passage of the Daigo shojin Sutra and apply it in our argument, we may say that those who share in and believe in the Lotus Sutra are the entity of that mystic sutra. But those who do not share in it, such as the Nembutsu believers, are not the entity of the mystic sutra because their inherent Buddha nature is being faced away from the Thus Come One of the Dharma body.

In essence, the entity of Myoho-renge-kyo is the physical body that the disciples and followers of Nichiren who believe in the Lotus Sutra received from their fathers and mothers at birth. Such persons, who honestly discard expedient means, put faith in the Lotus Sutra alone and chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, will transform the three paths of earthly desires, karma and suffering into the three virtues of the Dharma body, wisdom and emancipation. The threefold contemplation and the three truths19 will immediately become manifest in their minds, and the place where they live will become the Land of Eternally Tranquil Light. The Buddha who is the entity of Myoho-renge-kyo, of the Juryo chapter of the essential teaching, who is both inhabiting subject and inhabited realm, life and environment, body and mind, entity and function, the Buddha eternally endowed with the three bodies--he is to be found in the disciples and followers of Nichiren. Such persons embody the true entity of Myoho-renge-kyo; these are the meritorious workings that the spontaneous transcendental powers inherent in it display. Could anyone venture to doubt it? Indeed it cannot be doubted!

Question: The Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai has explained that the term Myoho-renge is used in two different senses, one meaning the entity of Myoho-renge and the other being figurative in meaning. What are these two kinds of renge or lotus?

Answer: The figurative renge or lotus is explained in detail in the three metaphors of the lotus blossom enfolding the seed, the lotus blossom opening to reveal the seed inside, and the lotus blossom falling blossom enfolding the seed, the lotus blossom opening to reveal the seed inside, and the lotus blossom falling and the seed ripening, so one should refer to them. The lotus that is the entity of Myoho-renge is explained in the seventh volume of the Hokke gengi as follows: "Renge or lotus is not a symbol; it is the actual name of the entity. For example, at the beginning of the kalpa of continuance, the various things in the world had no names. The sage observed the principles that govern them and on that basis made up names for them." And he also writes: "Now the name renge is not intended as a symbol for anything. It is the teaching expounded in the Lotus Sutra. The teaching expounded in the Lotus Sutra is pure and undefiled and explains the subtleties of cause and effect. Therefore, it is called renge or lotus. This name designates the true entity that the meditation based on the Lotus Sutra reveals, and is not a metaphor or figurative term."

The Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai also writes: "Question: Does the term renge in fact mean the renge or lotus that is the essence of the meditation based on the Lotus Sutra? Or does it in fact mean the ordinary lotus that is a species of plant?"

"Answer: It in fact refers to the lotus that is the essence of the Lotus Sutra. But because the essence of the Lotus Sutra is difficult to understand, the metaphor of the lotus plant is introduced. A person of sharp faculties will hear the name and immediately grasp the principle. He has no need to rely upon a metaphor but can understand the Lotus Sutra directly. But a person of intermediate or inferior perception will not understand immediately. Only through the medium of a metaphor will he be able to understand. Thus the easily understood metaphor of an actual lotus plant is used to make clear the difficult-to-understand lotus that is the essence of the Lotus Sutra."

"Thus, in the Lotus Sutra the Buddha employed three cycles of preaching in accordance with the respective understanding of those of superior, intermediate and inferior capacity. For persons of superior capacity, the renge or lotus that is the name of the Law was taught. But for persons of intermediate or inferior capacity, the lotus was used as a metaphor or symbol. As long as one understands that the word is being used both as a name for the Law itself and as a metaphor, depending upon which of the three groups of persons is being addressed, then there should be no reason to argue over it."20

This passage of commentary means that the supreme principle [that is the Mystic Law] was originally without a name. When the sage was observing the principle and assigning names to all things, he perceived that there is this wonderful single Law [myoho] which simultaneously possesses both cause and effect [renge], and he named it Myoho-renge. This single Law that is Myoho-renge encompasses within it all the phenomena comprising the Ten Worlds and the three thousand realms, and is lacking in none of them. Anyone who practices this Law will obtain both the cause and the effect of Buddhahood simultaneously.

The sage practiced with this Law as his teacher and attained enlightenment, and therefore he simultaneously obtained both the mystic cause and the mystic effect of Buddhahood, becoming the Thus Come One of perfect enlightenment and fully realized virtues.

Thus the Great Teacher Dengyo writes: "A single mind, the entity of Myoho-renge, simultaneously brings to maturity both the blossom of cause and the calyx of effect. The three cycles of preaching that the Buddha employed each contain both the lotus that is the entity and the lotus that is a metaphor. The Lotus Sutra as a whole consists of both entity and metaphor. In particular we may note the seven parables, the three equalities and the ten peerlessnesses, which each contain the lotus of the entity. And the teaching that fully sets forth this principle is called Myoho-renge-kyo, [the Lotus Sutra]."21

The Great Teacher Miao-lo says: "When interpreting the seven parables, one should understand the renge or lotus in each of them in terms of the doctrine of the provisional and true teachings. Why? Because these lotuses are no more than metaphors for the fact that the provisional teachings were set forth for the sake of the true teaching, and that the provisional teachings are opened in order to reveal the true teaching. All the seven parables are to be understood in this way."22

In the beginning of the kalpa of continuance, a plant existed. The sage observed its principle and gave it the name renge or lotus. The lotus plant resembles the principle of Myoho-renge in that it simultaneously contains both cause [blossom] and effect [seed]. Hence the plant came to bear the same name as the principle. The lotus that grows in water is the lotus that is a plant, such as the pink variety or the white variety. When we speak of the figurative lotus or the lotus that is a metaphor, it is this lotus plant we mean. This lotus plant is used to help clarify the difficult concept of Myoho-renge. That is what the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai means when he says that through the use of this metaphor, the difficult-to-understand Mystic Law is rendered more comprehensible.

Question: Since the beginning of the kalpa of continuance, has anyone become enlightened to the lotus that is the entity of the Mystic Law?

Answer: The Shakyamuni Buddha who lived in a past even more distant than gohyaku-jintengo became enlightened to the lotus that is the entity of the Mystic Law. Thereafter, in age after age and lifetime after lifetime, he declared that he had attained the way and he revealed the fundamental principle of wisdom and reality.23

In our present world as well he appeared in the kingdom of Magadha in central India, intending to reveal this lotus of the Mystic Law. But the people lacked the proper capacity and the time was not right. Therefore he drew distinctions regarding this lotus of the single Law and expounded it as three kinds of flowers, delivering to the people the provisional teachings of the three vehicles. For over forty years he guided and led them with these temporary teachings according to their capacities. During this period, because the capacities of the persons he addressed were so varied, he bestowed upon them the various flowers and plants of the provisional teachings, but he never spoke of Myoho-renge. That is why, In the Muryogi Sutra, the Buddha said: "In the past I sat upright in the place of meditation [for six years] under the bodhi tree ... In these more than forty years, I have not yet revealed the truth."

But when he preached the Lotus Sutra, he cast aside the various plants and flowers of the Hinayana doctrines and the provisional teachings, which correspond to the expedient means of the four flavors and three teachings, and explained the unique doctrine of Myoho-renge. When he opened the three figurative lotuses to reveal the single lotus of Myoho-renge, the people of the provisional teachings with their four flavors and three teachings were able to gain the lotus of the first of the ten stages of security.24 Not until he revealed the lotus of "opening the near and revealing the distant" were they able to obtain the lotus of the highest result, advancing to the second stage of security, the third stage of security, the tenth stage, the stage of near-perfect enlightenment25 and, finally, the highest stage of perfect enlightenment.

Question: Exactly which passages in which chapters of the Lotus Sutra expound the lotus that is the entity of the Mystic Law, and which ones expound the lotus that is a metaphor?

Answer: If we speak in terms of the three groups of voice hearers, then we would say that the whole of the Hoben chapter expounds the lotus that is the entity, while the Hiyu and Kejoyu chapters expound the lotus that is a metaphor. However, it cannot be said that explanations of the figurative lotus are entirely lacking in the Hoben chapter, nor can it be said that the other chapters are without explanation of the lotus as the entity.

Question: If so, then what passage contains a full elucidation of the entity?

Answer: The passage in the Hoben chapter that deals with the true aspect of all phenomena.

Question: How do we know that this passage deals with the lotus that is the entity?

Answer: Because T’ien-t’ai and Miao-lo quote this passage when they explain the essence of the Lotus Sutra. And the Great Teacher Dengyo in his commentary also writes: "Question: What is the essence of the Lotus Sutra? Answer: Its essence is the true aspect of all phenomena."26 This passage of commentary clarifies the matter. (Scholars of the time kept this commentary secret and did not reveal the name of the entity, but the passage is clearly referring to Myoho-renge.)

Furthermore, actual evidence of the entity is to be found in the examples of the three kinds of Buddhas27 described in the Hoto chapter, the bodhisattvas who appeared from the earth, and the dragon king’s daughter who attained Buddhahood in her present form. The Bodhisattvas of the Earth offer actual evidence because, as a passage of the Lotus Sutra says, "[They are unsoiled by worldly things] like the lotus flower in the water."28 Thus we learn of the true entity of these bodhisattvas. And the dragon king’s daughter offers actual evidence because she made her appearance at the gathering at Eagle Peak, "seated on a thousand-petaled lotus blossom big as a carriage wheel."29

Moreover, the thirty-four manifestations of Bodhisattva Myoon and the thirty-three manifestations of Bodhisattva Kannon constitute further evidence. For, as the commentary says, "If he had not gained the mysterious power of perfect freedom of action through the meditation based on the Lotus Sutra, then how could he manifest these thirty-three different forms?"30

In addition, there is the sutra passage that states, "…all the characteristics of the world are eternal." All these passages are documentary proofs cited by the scholars of our time. Personally, however, I prefer to cite the passage in the Hoben chapter on the true aspect of all phenomena, and the passage in the Jinriki chapter that refers to "all the doctrines possessed by the Thus Come One."31 This last passage is also cited by the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai in his commentary explaining the five major principles of the Lotus Sutra. Therefore I feel that this passage in particular can be cited as certain proof of the entity of the Mystic Law.

Question: The documentary proofs and actual proofs that you have cited above are particularly compelling. But why do you place such emphasis upon this one passage from the Jinriki chapter?

Answer: This passage is profoundly significant, and that is why it is particularly pertinent.

Question: What is that profound significance?

Answer: In this passage, Shakyamuni Buddha explains that he is entrusting to the Bodhisattvas of the Earth, his original disciples, the five characters of Myoho-renge-kyo, which is the essence of the Lotus Sutra. Shakyamuni, who attained enlightenment countless kalpas in the past, says elsewhere, "By now the original vows that I made have already been fulfilled. I have converted all living beings and caused them all to enter the Buddha way."32 Thus, he has already fulfilled his earlier vow. Then, intending to charge his disciples with the task of accomplishing widespread propagation in the fifth five hundred years after his death,33 he called forth the Bodhisattvas of the Earth and entrusted them with the heart of the sutra, the lotus of the entity of the essential teaching. This passage represents the ultimate purpose for which Shakyamuni Buddha appeared in the world, the secret Law that he attained in the place of meditation. It is this passage that gives proof of the lotus of the entity that, for those of us who live in the Latter Day of the Law, assures the attainment of Buddhahood in both the present and future.

Accordingly, at the present time in the Latter Day of the Law, other than the envoy of the Thus Come One, there can be no one who understands and produces this passage as proof of the lotus of the entity. Truly it is a passage of secret meaning. Truly it is a matter of great concern. Truly it is to be honored and admired. Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, Nam-myoho-renge-kyo!

(This is what is meant by the statement in the Lotus Sutra that the bodhisattvas of the perfect teachings preached before the sutra have assembled in a multitude of eighty thousand, wishing to hear the teaching of perfect endowment.34)

Question: Concerning the doctrines of our school, when persons of other sects come and want to know what passages give proof of the lotus of the entity, what passages from the Lotus Sutra should be cited?

Answer: You should point to the title Myoho-renge-kyo that appears at the very beginning of each of the twenty-eight chapters of the Lotus Sutra.

Question: But how do we know that the title Myoho-renge-kyo appearing in each chapter is the lotus of the entity of the Mystic Law? I ask this because, when the Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai explained the title of the Lotus Sutra, he interpreted the lotus in a figurative manner, so that we would have to say that this is the lotus that is a metaphor, would we not?

Answer: The renge or lotus in the title of the sutra is explained as both entity and metaphor. In the interpretation you have just referred to, T’ien-t’ai is explaining the lotus as a metaphor. This is what he does in the first volume of the Hokke gengi where he discusses the six metaphors of the theoretical and essential teachings. But in the seventh volume of the same work, he interprets the lotus as the entity of the Mystic Law. Thus T’ien t’ai’s doctrine is flawless in that it reveals both interpretations, explaining the lotus in the title of the sutra as both entity and metaphor.

Question: How do we know that these two interpretations can be used and that the title can be taken as both entity and metaphor? When the Great Teacher Nan-yueh explained the five characters Myoho-renge-kyo, he said: "Myo indicates that all living beings are myo or mystic. Ho indicates that all living beings are ho or the Law. Renge or lotus is a metaphor that is employed here."35 It would seem, then, would it not, that both Nan-yueh and T’ien-t’ai interpreted the lotus as a metaphor?

Answer: Nan-yueh’s interpretation is like that of T’ien-t’ai. While it is not entirely clear from the sutras that there can be two interpretations, that is, taking the lotus as both entity and metaphor, Nan-yueh and T’ien-t’ai discerned these two meanings through the treatises of Vasubandhu and Nagarjuna.

That is to say, in the Hokke Ron we read: "The words Myoho-renge have two meanings. First, they signify the lotus that appears on the surface of the water .... The way in which the lotus emerges from the muddy water is used as a metaphor to explain that when the Thus Come One joins the multitude of listeners, seats himself on a lotus in the same manner as the various bodhisattvas, and expounds on the unsurpassed wisdom of the Thus Come One and on the enlightened state of purity, the various voice-hearers, hearing this, are able to obtain the secret storehouse of the Thus Come One. Second, the words Myoho-renge signify the lotus opening up. [This is a metaphor explaining that] ordinary beings, though exposed to the Mahayana teachings, are timid and fearful in mind and incapable of taking faith in them. Therefore the Thus Come One opens or reveals his Dharma body in its purity and wonder, awakening in them the mind of faith."

In this passage, the word "various" in the phrase "the various bodhisattvas" refers to the various bodhisattvas of the Mahayana and Hinayana teachings who, arriving on the scene when the Lotus Sutra is preached, are able, for the first time, to understand the lotus of the Buddha. This is clear from the passage in the Hokke ron just quoted. Therefore we know that the statement that the bodhisattvas had already gained entrance [to enlightenment] through the various sutras was no more than an expedient.

T’ien-t’ai explains this passage of the Hokke ron as follows: "If we are to explain the meaning of the treatise, we would say that when the Thus Come One causes ordinary beings to see the Dharma body in its purity and wonder, he is showing them the lotus that opens through a mystic cause. And when the Thus Come One enters the multitude of listeners and seats himself on a lotus, he is showing them the lotus that is the realm produced as a mystic result."36

Again, when T’ien-t’ai wishes to give a detailed explanation of the dual interpretation of the lotus as both entity and metaphor, he quotes the passage in the Daijuku Sutra that reads: "I now bow in reverence before the lotus of the Buddha," and the passage in the Hokke ron that has just been quoted, to support his argument. As he explains, "According to the Daijuku Sutra, the lotus is both the cause and the effect of religious practice. When the bodhisattvas seat themselves on the lotus, this is the lotus of the cause. But the lotus of the Buddha that one bows before in reverence is the lotus of the effect. Or, if we go by the wording of the Hokke ron, this is the lotus that is the realm produced as a mystic result. That is, the bodhisattvas, by practicing the Law of the lotus, are as a result able to obtain the lotus of the realm. Thus we should understand that the objective realm and the subjective being who depends upon it, the cause [which is the bodhisattva and the effect [which is the Buddha], are all the Law of the renge or lotus. Therefore, what need is there to employ metaphors? But because dull-witted people cannot understand the lotus of the essential nature of phenomena, an ordinary lotus is introduced as a metaphor to assist them. What harm is there in that?"37

And elsewhere he says: "If we do not use a lotus, then what are we to employ as a metaphor for all the various teachings that have been described above? It is because the Law and the metaphor are expounded side by side that we refer to them by the phrase Myoho-renge."38

Next we come to the Daichido ron of Bodhisattva Nagarjuna, which states: "The lotus represents both the Law itself and a metaphor for it." The Great Teacher Dengyo, explaining these passages in the treatises of Vasubandu and Nagarjuna, writes as follows: "The passage in the Hokke ron says that the lotus of what is called Myoho-renge-kyo has two meanings. It does not say that an ordinary lotus has two meanings. On the whole, what is admirable here is the fact that the Law and the metaphor that is used for it resemble each other. If they did not resemble each other, then how could the metaphor help people understand the meaning? That is why the Daichido ron says that the lotus is both the Law itself and a metaphor for it. A single mind, the entity of Myoho-renge, simultaneously brings to maturity both the blossom of cause and the calyx of effect. This concept is difficult to understand, but through the use of a metaphor, it can be made easy to understand. The teaching that fully sets forth this principle is called Myoho-renge-kyo."39

These passages from the treatises and their explanations quoted here will make the matter clear, and one should therefore examine them carefully. Nothing is hidden or held back, and hence the dual explanations of the lotus as both entity and metaphor are fully expounded.

In the final analysis, the meaning of the Lotus Sutra is that the metaphor is none other than the entity of the Law, and the entity of the Law is none other than the metaphor. That is why the Great Teacher Dengyo in his commentary says: "The Lotus Sutra contains a great many metaphors and parables. However, when it comes to the major parables, we find that there are seven of them. These seven parables are none other than the entity of the Law, and the entity of the Law is none other than these metaphors and parables. Therefore there is no entity of the Law outside of the metaphors and parables, and there are no metaphors and parables outside of the entity of the Law. In other words, the entity of the Law refers to the entity of the truth of the essential nature of phenomena, while the metaphors and parables represent the entity of the Mystic Law as manifested in actual phenomena. The manifestations are none other than the entity of the truth, and the entity of the truth is none other than the manifestations. Therefore it can be said that the Law and its metaphors constitute a single entity. This is why the passages from the treatises and the annotations by the Tendai school all explain the lotus as both the Law itself and a metaphor for it."40

This passage is perfectly clear in meaning, and therefore I need say nothing further.
end of part one | part two

Gosho background information

Translated into Serbian by Mića Mijatović 05/31/2002 in Belgrade
Source: Major Writings of Nichiren Daishonin, Vol. 7.


Suština Mističnog Zakona

- Totaigi Šo -


Pitanje: Lotos suštine Mističnog Zakona je težak za razumevanje i stoga se koristi metafora da učini značenje jasnim. No, ima li ikakvog primera u sutrama koji podržavaju ovakvu jednu praksu?

Odgovor: Sutra kaže: "[Oni su] neuprljani svetovnim stvarima kao lotos u vodi. Izbijajući iz zemlje..." Ovde vidimo da su Bodisatve Zemlje lotos suštine Mističnog Zakona, i da je lotos ovde korišćen kao jedno poređenje. Ali pisaću ti o tome opet, jednom ubuduće.

Ovo učenje predstavlja vrhovni princip cele Lotos sutre. Ono je vrhovna svrha pojave Šakjamuni Bude, isto kao i suština i srž lotos sutre, koja beše poverena velikim bodisatvama poniklim iz zemlje da bi je nadaleko mogli razglasiti u Potonjem Danu Zakona. Jedino kada bi vladar naše nacije sâm pokazao veru ta bi doktrina smela biti otkrivena. Ali dotle, ovo treba da ostane tajno učenje. Upravo sam završio njegovo prenošenje tebi, Sairen-bo.


Pitanje: Šta je suština Mjoho-renge-kjoa?

Odgovor: Sva bića i njihova okruženja u bilo kom od Deset Svetova su sama suština Mjoho-renge-kjoa.

Pitanje: Ako je tako, da li je onda moguće reći da su sva živa bića, kao što smo i mi, suštine Mističnog Zakona u njegovoj potpunosti?

Odgovor: Naravno. Sutra kaže: "Ova stvarnost [svih fenomena] sastoji se od pojave, prirode... i njihove konsistentnosti od početka do kraja."1

Veliki Učitelj Miao-lo komentariše ovo na sledeći način: "Prava suština se stalno i nepromenljivo otkriva u svim fenomenima, i svi fenomeni stalno i nepromenljivo sadrže svih deset faktora. Deset faktora stalno i nepromenljivo funkcionišu u sklopu Deset Svetova, a Deset Svetova stalno i nepromenljivo iziskuju i život i njegovo okruženje."2

Tjen-tai komentariše: "Svi fenomeni, koji se sastoje od deset faktora, Deset Svetova i tri hiljade područja su suštine Lotos sutre."3

Veliki Učitelj Nan-jue kaže: "Pitanje: šta Mjoho-renge-kjo predstavlja? Odgovor: mjo ukazuje na to da su sva živa bića mjo ili mistična. Ho ukazuje na to da su sva živa bića ho ili Zakon." A Tjen-tai takođe kaže: "Zakon svih živih bića je mističan."4

Pitanje: Ako je suština svih živih bića Mistični Zakon u svojoj potpunosti, da li su onda sve akcije i njihovi rezultati združeni sa devet svetova, od Sveta Pakla do Sveta Bodisatve, u svom ishodu suština Mističnog Zakona?

Odgovor: Mistični princip koji je suštinska priroda fenomena, ima dva aspekta: uprljan aspekt i čist aspekt. Ako deluje uprljan aspekt, onda se to zove zabluda. Ako deluje čist aspekt, onda se to zove prosvetljenje. Prosvetljenje sačinjava područje budastva. Zabluda sačinjava područja običnih smrtnika.

Ova dva aspekta, zablude i prosvetljenja, svakako su dva različita fenomena, ali su ipak oba delovanje jednog principa, to jest, suštinske prirode fenomena, ili pravog aspekta stvarnosti. To je kao sa komadom kristala. Ako se kristal postavi na sunčeve zrake, onda će ih privući i proizvesti vatru. Ako se pak postavi na mesečeve zrake, proizvešće vodu. Kristal je jedna jedina suština, ali efekti koje proizvodi razlikuju se shodno okolnostima.

Mistični princip pravog aspekta stvarnosti je sličan ovome. Mistični princip pravog aspekta stvarnosti je jedan, ali ako se susreće sa lošim uticajima manifestovaće zabludu, dok ako se susreće sa dobrim uticajima manifestovaće prosvetljenje. Prosvetljenje znači prosvetljenje za suštinsku prirodu fenomena, a zabluda njeno nepoznavanje.

To je kao slučaj sa nekim ko u snu vidi sebe kako izvodi razne dobre i loše akcije. Pošto se probudi i razmotri stvari, on shvata da je to bio san koji je proizveo njegov vlastiti um. Taj njegov um odgovara principu suštinske prirode pojava, pravom aspektu stvarnosti, dok dobro i loše koji su se pojavili u snu odgovaraju prosvetljenju [dobro] i zabludi, ili neznanju [loše]. Kada se postane svesnim toga, jasno je da treba odbaciti neznanje združeno sa lošim i zabludom, i prihvatiti kao temelj buđenje koje je karakterizovano dobrotom i prosvetljenjem.

Daiengaku šutara rjogi sutra izjavljuje: "Iluzije i neznanje bez početka koji spopadaju sva živa bića su svi do jednog proizvedeni od strane savršeno prosvetljenog uma Takodošavšeg."5

Veliki Učitelj Tjen-tai u svojoj Maka šikan tvrdi: "Neznanje i zabluda imaju za svoju suštinu prosvetljenje. Ali usled zablude, neznanje se češće manifestuje nego prosvetljenje." Veliki Učitelj Miao-lo komentariše ovo na sledeći način: "Prosvetljenje nema neki svoj odvojen entitet, već je u potpunosti zavisno od neznanja; i neznanje nema neki svoj odvojen entitet, već je u potpunosti zavisno od prosvetljenja." 6

Neznanje je stanje zablude koje mora biti presečeno, dok je prosvetljenje stanje koje se mora manifestovati. Kako onda možemo reći da su ovo dvoje jedan jedini entitet? Da bi se razrešile sumnje po ovom pitanju, treba jasno shvatiti pasuse koji su ovde navedeni. Primer sa snom dat u devedeset petom tomu Daičido ron-a i primer Tendai škole7 sa komadom kristala citiranim gore, veoma su interesantne ilustracije.

Dalji dokaz istine da su neznanje i prosvetljenje jedno u suštini, nalazi se u pasusu Lotos sutre gde stoji: "Svi su ti fenomeni aspekti jednog stalnog Zakona, i sve su karakteristike sveta večne."8 Daičido ron kaže: "Prosvetljenje i neznanje nisu različite stvari, nisu odvojene stvari. Razumeti ovo je ono što se naziva Srednjim Putem."

Ima mnogo dokazujućih odeljaka koji tvrde da mistični princip pravog aspekta stvarnosti poseduje dva aspekta, uprljan i čist. Ali nijedan ne može nadmašiti onaj iz Kegon sutre koji kaže: "Um, Buda i sva živa bića - to su tri stvari bez [međusobne] razlike." Ili odeljak iz Lotos sutre koji opisuje pravi aspekt svih fenomena.

Veliki Učitelj Nan-jue kaže: "Suština uma je obdarena dvoma aspektima, uprljanim i čistim. Ipak, on nema dve različite forme, već je jedno po prirodi i bez razlike."9 I primer sa ogledalom10 koji daje doista predstavlja celovito objašnjenje ove teme.

Za detaljnije razumevanje može se uputiti na njegove interpretacije u Daiđo Šikan. 11

Drugo jedno dobro objašnjenje je dato u šestom tomu Miao-loovog Hoke gengi šakusen-a, u odeljku koji kaže: "Dok tri hiljade područja ostaje latentno [u običnim bićima], ona su sva označena izrazom 'neznanje'. Ali kada se ove tri hiljade područja manifestuju kao rezultat [budastva] onda su sva ona označena izrazom 'večita sreća'! Ipak, pošto tri hiljade područja sama ostaju nepromenjena, neznanje je suštinski jedno sa prosvetljenjem. Pošto tri hiljade područja sva ostaju stalna, ona poseduju i suštinu (biće) i funkciju.12 Ovaj komentar čini stvar savršeno jasnom.

Pitanje: Ako su sva živa bića suština Mjoho-renge-kjoa, onda su svi obični smrtnici kao što smo mi, koji žive u neznanju i zabludi, neprosvetljeni i otupeli, takođe suština Mističnog Zakona?

Odgovor: Mada je veliko mnoštvo ljudi na svetu danas, svi oni spadaju u dve kategorije - one koji veruju u privremena učenja i one koji veruju u pravo učenje. Oni koji veruju u privremena i dovitljiva učenja kao što su Nembutsu ne mogu se zvati suštinom Mjoho-renge-kjoa. Ali oni koji veruju u Lotos sutru, koja je pravo učenje, takvi jesu suština Mjoho-renge-kjoa, mistična suština pravog aspekta stvarnosti. Nirvana sutra kaže: "Među svim živim bićima, oni koji veruju u Mahajanu zovu se Mahajana narod."

Veliki Učitelj Nan-jue u svom Šianrakugjo piše: "Daigo šođin sutra kaže: 'Obična bića i Takodošavši dele jedno jedino Darma telo. Budući da je neuporedivo čisto i mistično, zove se Mjoho-renge-kjo'". On takođe kaže: "Oni koji praktikuju Lotos sutru, tim jedinim postupkom predanosti slede um obdaren svim vrstama srećnih posledica. Oni su prisutni simultano i nisu postepeno stečeni tokom dugog vremenskog perioda. Ovo je slično cvetu lotosa koji, kad se otvara, već ima veliki broj semenki ili posledica. Otuda, takve se osobe nazivaju ljudima jednog vozila." On takođe kaže: "Ljudi dvaju vozila i bodisatve inferiornih sposobnosti biraju da slede put pogodnih sredstava, praktikujući metode koji osiguravaju postepeni napredak tokom dugog vremenskog perioda. No, bodisatve superiornih sposobnosti iskreno odbacuju pogodna sredstva i ne izvode praksu postepenog napredovanja. Ako su sposobni da kompletiraju meditaciju zasnovanu na Lotos sutri, onda će time imati sve vrste srećnih posledica. Ovakve osobe zovu se ljudi jednog vozila."

Izraz "praksa postepenog napredovanja" koji se pojavljuje u ovim Nan-jueovim komentarima, tumačen je od strane učenika našeg doba tako da uputi na neko određeno učenje. U stvari, međutim, ovo se odnosi na način celishodnih sredstava, kao na nešto što je suprotno načinu Lotos sutre, koja je simultano obdarena uzrocima i posledicama. Otuda izraz "praksa postepenog napredovanja" uključuje savršena učenja propovedana pre Lotos sutre, razne mahajana sutre propovedane pre Lotos sutre i mahajana i hinajana sutre koje pripadaju iznenadnim i postepenim učenjima.

Kao dokaz, možemo navesti sledeći odeljak iz Mirjogi sutre: "Onda sam propovedao dvanaest podela Hodo sutri,13 Makahanja sutru i Kegon učenje o meditaciji okeanskog utiska, opisujući mnoge kalpe prakse bodisatvama."

Ali bodisatve superiornih sposobnosti iskreno odbacuju celishodna sredstva i ne izvode praksu postepenog napretka. One praktikuju Lotos sutru, i kada dostignu njenu istinu, simultano stiču sve vrste srećnih ishoda. Takve osobe se zovu ljudima jednog vozila.

Kada razmatramo značenje ovih raznih odeljaka, shvatamo da niko od običnih osoba niti mudraca triju vozila, pet vozila,14 sedam celishodnih sredstava, devet svetova ili pet ukusa i tri učenja ne može biti nazvan sledbenicima mahajane koji su suština Mjoho-renge-kjoa. Mada ima budâ u tim učenjima, to su bude privremenih učenja i ne mogu se nazvati budama u pravom smislu. Ovo je s toga što se bude privremenih učenja, u svojim trima telima15 nisu još oslobodile privremenosti. Kako bi se onda bića u područjima koja nisu budastvo mogla zvati [suštinom Mjoho-renge-kjoa]? Eto zašto se kaže da je neko skromnog položaja rođen u Potonjem Danu Zakona vredniji poštovanja od kraljeva i visokih ministara koji su živeli tokom dve hiljade godina Prethodnih i Srednjih Dana.

Nan-jue kaže u svom komentaru: "Sva živa bića imaju u sebi skladište Darma tela, te se stoga ni na koji način ne razlikuju od Bude."16 To je razlog iz kog Lotos sutra kaže: "Čiste i obične oči, uši, nos, jezik, telo i um koji su dobijeni rođenjem od majke i oca su takođe takvi."17

Nan-jue takođe piše: "Pitanje: u kojoj sutri Buda objašnjava oči i druge organe čula i imenuje ih imenom 'Takodošavši'? Odgovor: Daigo šonin sutra kaže: 'Obična bića i Takodošavši dele jedno {isto} Darma telo. Budući da je neuporedivo čisto i mistično, zove se Mjoho-renge-kjo.'"18 Ovo dolazi iz jedne sutre koja nije Lotos sutra, ali pošto Lotos sutra kasnije razjašnjava isto ovo pitanje, u redu je ovo citirati ovde.

Ako uzmemo reč "deliti {sudelovati}" koja se koristi u ovom odeljku Daigo šonin sutre i primenimo je na našu raspravu, možemo reći da su oni koji sudeluju u Lotos sutri i veruju u nju - suština ove mistične sutre. Ali oni koji ne sudeluju u njoj, kao što su vernici Nembutsua, takvi nisu suština ove mistične sutre, stoga jer je njihova inherentna buda priroda licem okrenuta od Takodošavšeg Darma tela.

U biti, suština Mjoho-renge-kjoa je fizičko telo koje su učenici i sledbenici Ničirena koji veruju u Lotos sutru dobili od svojih očeva i majki pri rođenju. Takve će osobe, koje iskreno odbacuju celishodna sredstva, veruju u samu Lotos sutru i recituju Nam-mjoho-renge-kjo, transformisati tri staze zemaljskih želja, karme i patnje u tri vrline {moći} Darma tela, mudrosti i emancipacije. Trostruka kontemplacija i tri istine19 će odmah postati manifestni u njihovim umovima i mesto na kome žive će postati Zemlja Večnog Smirenog Svetla. Buda koji je suština Mjoho-renge-kjoa, iz Đurjo poglavlja suštinskog učenja, koji je i nastanjujući subjekt i nastanjeno područje, život i okruženje, telo i um, biće i funkcija, Buda večno obdaren trima telima - nalazi se u učenicima i sledbenicima Ničirena. Takve osobe utelovljuju pravu suštinu Mjoho-renge-kjoa; to su zaslužna delovanja koja spontane transcendentalne moći, njima inherentne, pokazuju. Da li bi se iko mogao usuditi da sumnja u to? Svakako da se u to ne može sumnjati!

Pitanje: Veliki Učitelj Tjen-tai je objasnio da se izraz Mjoho-renge koristi u dva različita smisla, u jednom koji znači suštinu Mjoho-rengea, i u drugom koji ima figurativno značenje. Koje su to dve vrste značenja izraza renge ili lotos?

Odgovor: Figurativno značenje izraza renge ili lotos, objašnjeno je detaljno u tri metafore o lotosovom cvetu koji sadrži uvijeno seme, lotosovom cvetu koji se otvara da otkrije to seme, i lotosovom cvetu čije latice opadaju i seme sazreva, tako da se treba pozvati na njih. Lotos koji je suština Mjoho-rengea je objašnjen u sedmom tomu Hoke gengi na sledeći način: "Renge ili lotus nije neki simbol; to je jedno stvarno ime suštine. Na primer, na početku kalpe produženja, razne stvari na svetu nisu imale imena. Mudrac je osmotrio principe kojima su vladane i na toj osnovi im je dao imena." Takođe, on piše: "Dakle ime renge nije namenjeno da bude simbol ičemu. To je učenje izloženo u Lotos sutri. Ovo učenje izloženo u Lotos sutri je čisto i neuprljano i objašnjava tananosti uzroka i posledice. Otuda, ono se zove renge ili lotos. Ovo ime označava pravu suštinu koju meditacija zasnovana na Lotos sutri otkriva, i nije neka metafora ili figurativni izraz."

Veliki Učitelj Tjen-tai takođe piše: "Pitanje: da li izraz renge u stvari znači renge ili lotus koji je suština meditacije zasnovane na Lotos sutri? Ili u stvari znači običan lotos koji je vrsta biljke?"

"Odgovor: To se u stvari odnosi na lotos koji je suština Lotos sutre. Ali pošto je suštinu Lotos sutre teško razumeti, uvedena je metafora biljke lotosa. Bistar čovek će čuti ime i odmah shvatiti princip. On nema potrebe da se oslanja na neku metaforu, već može da razume Lotos sutru direktno. Ali neko čije je opažanje osrednje ili inferiorno neće odmah razumeti. Jedino posredstvom metafore biće sposoban da razume. Tako, lako razumljiva metafora jedne prave biljke lotosa se koristi da razjasni teško razumljiv lotos koji je bit Lotos sutre."

"Tako, u Lotos sutri je Buda upotrebio tri ciklusa propovedanja u skladu sa odgovarajućim razumevanjem superiornih, osrednjih i inferiornih sposobnosti. Za one superiornih sposobnosti, podučavan je renge ili lotos koji je ime Zakona. Ali za one osrednjih ili inferiornih sposobnosti lotos je korišćen kao metafora ili simbol. Dokle god se shvata da je ova reč korišćena i kao ime za Zakon sâm i kao metafora, zavisno od toga kojoj se od ovih triju grupa obraća, nema razloga da se raspravlja o tome."20

Ovaj odeljak komentara znači da je vrhovni princip [koji je Mistični Zakon] izvorno bio bez imena. Kada je mudrac bio posmatrao princip i davao imena svim stvarima, opazio je da postoji taj čudesni jedini Zakon [mjoho] koji simultano poseduje i uzrok i posledicu [renge], i nazvao ga je Mjoho-renge. Taj jedini Zakon koji je Mjoho-renge, obuhvata u sebi sve pojave koje su uključene u Deset Svetova i tri hiljade područja, i ne manjka ni u jednom od njih. Svako ko praktikuje ovaj Zakon izboriće će i za uzrok i za posledicu budastva simultano.

Mudrac je praktikovao ovaj Zakon kao njegov učitelj i dostigao je prosvetljenje, te prema tome je simultano stekao i mistični uzrok i mističnu posledicu budastva, postavši Takodošavši savršenog prosvetljenja i potpuno ostvarenih vrlina {moći}.

Stoga Veliki Učitelj Dengjo piše: "Sâm um, suština Mjoho-rengea, simultano dovodi do sazrevanja i cvet uzroka i čašicu posledice. Svaki od tri ciklusa propovedanja koje je Buda koristio sadrži i lotos koji je suština i lotos koji je metafora. Lotos sutra kao celina se sastoji i od suštine i od metafore. Što se pojedinosti tiče, možemo zapaziti sedam poređenja, tri jednakosti i deset neprevaziđenosti, od kojih svaka sadrži lotos suštine. A učenje koje u potpunosti iznosi ovaj princip se zove Mjoho-renge-kjo, [Lotos sutra]."21

Veliki Učitelj Miao-lo kaže: "Prilikom tumačenja sedam parabola, treba razumeti renge ili lotos u svakoj od njih u izrazima doktrine privremenih i istinskih učenja. Zašto? Stoga što ti lotosi nisu ništa više do metafore uz činjenicu da su privremena učenja iznesena za dobro istinskog učenja, i da su privremena učenja izložena u cilju da otkriju istinsko učenje. Svih sedam parabola treba shvatiti na taj način."22

Na početku kalpe produženja, postojala je jedna biljka. Mudrac je osmatrao njen princip i dao joj ime renge ili lotos. Biljka lotos slična je principu Mjoho-rengea u tome što simultano sadrži i uzrok [cvet] i posledicu [seme]. Otuda je proizašlo da je biljka ponela isto ime kao i princip. Lotos koji raste u vodi je lotos koji je biljka, kao što su ružičaste podvrste ili bele podvrste. Kada govorimo o figurativnom lotosu ili lotosu koji je metafora, mislimo na biljku lotos. Ova biljka lotos se koristi da pomogne pri razjašnjenju složenog pojma Mjoho-rengea. To je ono što Veliki Učitelj Tjen-tai misli kad kaže da je upotrebom ove metafore Mistični Zakon, težak za razumevanje, učinjen shvatljivijim.

Pitanje: Da li je iko postao prosvetljen za lotos koji je suština Mističnog Zakona, od početka kalpe produženja?

Odgovor: Šakjamuni Buda, koji je živeo u prošlosti davnijoj čak i od gohjaku-đintengo-a, postao je prosvetljen za lotos koji je suština Mističnog Zakona. Od tog doba, pokoljenje za pokoljenjem i život za životom, objavio je da je bio dostigao put i otkrio je temeljne principe mudrosti i stvarnosti.23

U našem današnjem svetu takođe, pojavio se u kraljevstvu Magadha u centralnoj Indiji, nameravajući da otkrije ovaj lotos Mističnog Zakona. Ali su ljudima nedostajale odgovarajuće sposobnosti i vreme nije bilo pravo. Stoga je povukao razlike u odnosu na ovaj lotos jedinog Zakona i izložio ga kao tri vrste cvetova, predajući ovim ljudima privremena učenja triju vozila. Više od četrdeset godina vodio ih je i savetovao koristeći ova privremena učenja, u skladu sa njihovim sposobnostima. Tokom ovog perioda, pošto su sposobnosti ljudi kojima se obraćao bile raznolike, darovao im je razne cvetove i biljke privremenih učenja, ali nikada nije govorio o Mjoho-rengeu. To je razlog iz koga je, u Murjogi sutri, Buda rekao: "U prošlosti sam sedeo uspravno u položaju meditacije [tokom šest godina] pod bodi drvetom... U toku ovih više nego četrdeset godina, još uvek nisam otkrio istinu."

Ali kada je propovedao Lotos sutru, bacio je u stranu razne biljke i sveće hinajana doktrina i privremenih učenja, koji odgovaraju celishodnim sredstvima četiri ukusa i tri učenja, i objasnio je jedinstvenu doktrinu Mjoho-rengea. Kada je izložio tri figurativna lotosa da bi otkrio jedini lotos Mjoho-rengea, ljudi privremenih učenja sa svoja četiri ukusa i tri učenja bili su sposobni da steknu lotos prvog od deset stupnjeva ubeđenja.24 Dok nije otkrio lotos "otvaranja bliskog i otkrivanja udaljenog" nisu bili sposobni da zadobiju lotos najvišeg uspeha, napredujući prema drugom stupnju ubeđenja, trećem stupnju ubeđenja, desetom stupnju, stupnju bliskom savršenom prosvetljenju25 i, konačno, najvišem stupnju savršenog prosvetljenja.

Pitanje: Koji su tačno odeljci i u kojim poglavljima Lotos sutre koji izlažu lotos koji je suština Mističnog Zakona, a koji od njih izlažu lotos koji je metafora?

Odgovor: Ako govorimo u terminima tri grupe onih koji slušaju glas, onda bismo rekli da celo Hoben poglavlje izlaže lotos koji je suština, dok Hiju i Keđoju poglavlja izlažu lotos koji je metafora. Međutim, ne može se reći da objašnjenja figurativnog lotosa u potpunosti nedostaju u Hoben poglavlju, niti se može reći da su ostala poglavlja bez objašnjenja lotosa kao suštine.

Pitanje: Ako je tako, koji onda odeljak sadrži potpuno tumačenje suštne?

Odgovor: Odeljak u Hoben poglavlju koji se odnosi na pravi aspekt svih fenomena.

Pitanje: Kako znamo da se taj odeljak odnosi na lotos koji je suština?

Odgovor: Stoga što Tjen-tai i Miao-lo navode taj odeljak kad objašnjavaju suštinu Lotos sutre. A Veliki Učitelj Dengjo u svom komentaru takođe piše: "Pitanje: šta je suština Lotos sutre? Odgovor: njena suština je pravi aspekt svih fenomena."26 Ovaj odeljak komentara razjašnjava stvar. (Učenici tog vremena su držali ovaj komentar u tajnosti i nisu otkrili ime suštine, ali odeljak se jasno odnosi na Mjoho-renge.)

Osim toga, pravi dokaz suštine se nalazi u primerima o tri vrste budâ27 koji su opisani u poglavlju Hoto, bodisatvama koje su se pojavile iz zemlje i kćerci zmajskog kralja koja je dostigla budastvo u svom [tada] prisutnom obliku. Bodisatve Zemlje nude pravi dokaz stoga što, kao što odeljak iz Lotos sutre kaže: "[Nezaprljani su svetovnim stvarima] kao lotosov cvet u vodi."28 Tako saznajemo o pravoj suštini ovih bodisatvi. A kćer zmajskog kralja pruža pravi dokaz pošto se pojavila na skupu na Orlovom Vrhu, "sedeći na cvetu lotosa od hiljadu latica velikom kao kolski točak."29

Štaviše, trideset četiri manifestacije Bodisatve Mjoona i trideset tri manifestacije Bodisatve Kanona čine dalji dokaz. Pošto, kao što komentar kaže, "ako nije bio stekao misterioznu moć savršene slobode akcije kroz meditaciju zasnovanu na Lotos sutri, kako bi onda mogao manifestovati ova trideset tri različita oblika?"30

Dodatno, postoji odeljak sutre koji tvrdi: "...sve su osobine sveta večne." Svi ovi odeljci su dokazi navođeni od strane učenika našeg vremena. Lično, međutim, volim da navodim jedan odeljak iz poglavlja Hoben o pravom aspektu svih fenomena, i jedan odeljak iz poglavlja Đinriki koji se odnosi na "sve doktrine koje Takodošavši poseduje."31 Ovaj poslednji odeljak Veliki Učitelj Tjen-tai takođe navodi u svom komentaru objašnjavajući pet glavnih principa Lotos sutre. Prema tome, osećam da taj odeljak posebno može biti naveden kao izvestan dokaz suštine Mističnog Zakona.

Pitanje: Dokumentovani i stvarni dokazi koje si citirao gore, posebno su zahtevni. No, zašto stavljaš takav naglasak na taj odeljak iz poglavlja Đinriki?

Odgovor: Taj odeljak je duboko značajan i to je razlog zašto je posebno podesan.

Pitanje: Kakav je to duboki značaj?

Odgovor: U ovom odeljku, Šakjamuni Buda objašnjava da poverava Bodisatvama Zemlje, svojim autentičnim učenicima, pet karaktera Mjoho-renge-kjoa, koji su suština Lotos sutre. Šakjamuni, koji je dostigao prosvetljenje pre bezbroj kalpi, kaže drugde: "Do sada su izvorni zaveti koje sam položio već ispunjeni. Preobratio sam sva živa bića i učinio da sva stupe na put bude."32 Prema tome, već je ispunio svoj raniji zavet. Zatim, imajući nameru da zaduži svoje učenike zadatkom izvršavanja širokog propagiranja tokom pet hiljada petsto godina posle njegove smrti,33 pozvao je Bodisatve Zemlje i poverio im srž sutre, lotos bîti suštinskog učenja. Taj odeljak predstavlja krajnji cilj zbog koga se Šakjamuni Buda pojavio u svetu, tajni Zakon koji je on dostigao na mestu meditacije. To je taj odeljak koji daje dokaz lotosa suštine koji, nama koji živimo u Potonjem Danu Zakona, jemči dostizanje budastva i sada i u buduće.

U skladu s tim, danas, u Potonjem Danu Zakona, niko drugi osim poslanika Takodošavšeg ne može razumeti i izneti ovaj odeljak kao dokaz lotosa suštine. Ovo je doista odeljak tajnog značenja. Ovo je doista stvar od velikog interesa. Ovo je doista predmet poštovanja i divljenja. Nam-mjoho-renge-kjo, Nam-mjoho-renge-kjo!

(To je ono što se mislilo izjavom u Lotos sutri da su se bodisatve savršenih učenja propovedanih pre Sutre okupile u mnoštvu od osamdeset hiljada, želeći da čuju učenje o savršenoj obdarenosti.34)

Pitanje: Što se tiče doktrina naših škola, kada neko iz druge sekte dođe i želi da zna koji odeljci daju dokaz lotosa suštine, koji bi odeljci iz lotos sutre trebalo da budu navedeni?

Odgovor: Treba da ukažete na naslov Mjoho-renge-kjo koji se pojavljuje na samom početku svakog od dvadeset osam poglavlja Lotos sutre.

Pitanje: Ali kako znamo da je naslov Mjoho-renge-kjo koji se pojavljuje u svakom poglavlju lotos suštine Mističnog Zakona? Ovo pitam stoga što je Veliki Učitelj Tjen-tai, kada je objasnio naslov Lotos sutre, tumačio lotos na figurativan način, tako da bismo mogli reći da je to lotos koji je metafora, zar ne?

Odgovor: Renge ili lotus u naslovu Sutre objašnjen je i kao suština i kao metafora. U interpretaciji na koju si se upravo pozvao, Tjen-tai objašnjava lotos kao metaforu. To je ono što čini u prvom tomu Hoke gengi gde raspravlja o šest metafora teorijskog i suštinskog učenja. No, u sedmom tomu istog dela, on tumači lotos suštine Mističnog Zakona. Stoga je Tjen-tajeva doktrina bez nedostatka u otkrivanju oba tumačenja, objašnjavajući lotos u naslovu Sutre i kao suštinu i kao metaforu.

Pitanje: Kako znamo da se ova dva tumačenja mogu koristiti i da se naslov može uzeti i kao suština i kao metafora? Kada je Veliki Učitelj Nan-jue objasnio pet karaktera Mjoho-renge-kjoa, rekao je: "Mjo ukazuje na to da su sva živa bića mjo ili mistična. Ho ukazuje na to da su sva živa bića ho ili Zakon. Renge ili lotos je metafora koja je ovde upotrebljena."35 Izgledalo bi, onda, zar ne, da su i Nan-jue i Tjen-tai tumačili lotos kao metaforu?

Odgovor: Nan-jueovo tumačenje je kao i Tjen-tajevo. Mada nije potpuno jasno iz sutri da postoje dva tumačenja, to jest, uzimajući lotos i kao suštinu i kao metaforu, Nan-jue i Tjen-tai su razaznali ova dva značenja iz rasprava Vasubandua i Nagarđune.

Kao što sledi, u Hoke Ron čitamo: "Reči Mjoho-renge imaju dva značenja. Prvo, one označavaju lotos koji se pojavljuje na površini vode... Način na koji lotos izbija iz blatnjave vode se koristi kao metafora da objasni da kad se Takodošavši pridružuje mnoštvu slušalaca, on se smešta na lotos na isti način kao i razne bodisatve, i izlaže nenadmašnom mudrošću Takodošavšeg i prosvetljenim stanjem čistoće, tako da su razni slušači glasa, čuvši to, sposobni da upotrebe tajno skladište Takodošavšeg. Drugo, reči Mjoho-renge označavaju lotosovo otvaranje. [Ovo je metafora koja objašnjava da su] obična bića, iako izložena mahajana učenjima, stidljivog, nesigurnog i plašljivog uma {duha} i nesposobna su da poveruju u njih. Stoga Takodošavši izlaže ili otkriva svoje Darma telo u njegovoj čistoći i čudesnosti, budivši u njima duh vere."

U tom odeljku, reč "razni" u frazi "razne bodisatve" se odnosi na razne bodisatve mahajana i hinajana učenja koje su, pristizavši na scenu gde se Lotos sutra propoveda, sposobne, po prvi put, da shvate lotos Bude. Ovo je jasno iz odeljka u Hoke Ron koji je upravo naveden. Otuda znamo da izjava da su bodisatve već pristupile [prosvetljenju] kroz razne sutre, nije bila ništa više do jedno sredstvo {do cilja}.

Tjen-tai objašnjava ovaj odeljak Hoke Ron-a na sledeći način: "Ako bismo da objasnimo značenje ove rasprave, rekli bismo da kada Takodošavši čini da obična bića vide Darma telo u njegovoj čistoći i čudesnosti, on im pokazuje lotos koji se otvara kroz mistični uzrok. A kada Takodošavši pristupa mnoštvu slušalaca i smešta se na lotos, on im pokazuje lotos koji je područje proizvedeno kao mistična posledica."36

Opet, kada Tjen-tai želi da dâ detaljno objašnjenje dvojake interpretacije lotosa i kao suštine i kao metafore, on navodi odeljak iz Daiđuku sutre koji kaže: "Klanjam se sada u poštovanju pred lotosom Bude"; i odeljak iz Hoke ron-a koji je upravo bio naveden, da bi podržao svoj argument. Kao što objašnjava, "prema Daiđuku sutri, lotos je i uzrok i posledica religiozne prakse. Kada se bodisatve smeste na lotos, to je lotos uzroka. Ali lotos Bude pred kojim se klanja u poštovanju je lotos posledice. Ili, ako sledimo reči Hoke ron-a, to je lotos koji je područje proizvedeno kao mistični ishod. To jest, bodisatve, praktikovanjem Zakona lotosa, sposobne su, u ishodu, da steknu lotos područja. Stoga treba da shvatimo da su objektivno područje i subjektivno biće koje zavisi od njega, uzrok [koji je bodisatva] i posledica [koja je buda], da su oni svi Zakon renge-a ili lotos. Prema tome, zašto je potrebno da se ovde koristi metafora? No, pošto pritupi ne mogu da shvate lotos suštinske prirode fenomena, običan lotos je uveden kao metafora da im pomogne. Zašto bi to bilo štetno?"37

I negde drugde on kaže: "Ako ne koristimo lotos, šta bismo onda koristili kao metaforu za sva ta razna učenja koja su gore opisana? Stoga što su Zakon i metafora izloženi jedno uz drugo, mi im se obraćamo frazom Mjoho-renge."38

Zatim dolazimo do Daičido ron-a Bodisatve Nagarđune, koji tvrdi: "Lotos predstavlja i Zakon sâm i njegovu metaforu." Veliki Učitelj Dengjo, objašnjavajući ove odeljke u raspravama Vasubandua i Nagarđune, piše sledeće: "Odeljak iz Hoke ron kaže da lotos onoga što se naziva {imenom} Mjoho-renge-kjo ima dva značenja. Sve u svemu, ono što je ovde za divljenje je činjenica da Zakon i metafora koja je upotrebljena za njega, jedno drugom nalikuju, pa stoga kako bi metafora mogla pomoći ljudima da shvate značenje? To je razlog iz koga Daičido ron kaže da je lotos i Zakon sâm i metafora za njega {Zakon}. Jedan isti um, suština Mjoho-rengea, simultano dovodi do sazrevanja i cvet uzroka i čašicu posledice. Ovaj je koncept teško razumeti, ali korišćenjem metafore može se učiniti da bude lako razumljiv. Učenje koje u potpunosti iznosi ovaj princip se zove Mjoho-renge-kjo."39

Ovi odeljci iz rasprava i njihova objašnjenja ovde navedena učiniće stvar jasnom, i stoga ih treba pažljivo ispitati. Ništa nije skriveno ili zadržano i otuda su dvojaka objašnjenja lotosa i kao suštine i kao metafore potpuno izložena.

U konačnoj analizi, značenje Lotos sutre je da je metafora ništa drugo do suština Zakona, a suština Zakona je ništa drugo do metafora. To je razlog iz koga Veliki Učitelj Dengjo u svom komentaru kaže: "Lotos sutra sadrži veoma mnogo metafora i parabola. Međutim, kada dođemo do glavnih parabola, nalazimo da ih ima sedam. Ovih sedam parabola su ništa drugo do suština Zakona, a suština Zakona je ništa drugo do ove metafore i parabole. Prema tome nema suštine Zakona izvan metafora i parabola i nema metafora i parabola izvan suštine Zakona. Drugim rečima, suština Zakona se odnosi na suštinu istine o esencijalnoj prirodi fenomena, dok metafore i parabole predstavljaju suštinu Mističnog Zakona onako kako se manifestuje u stvarnim fenomenima. Ove manifestacije su ništa drugo do suština ove istine, a suština istine je ništa drugo do ove manifestacije. Prema tome može se reći da Zakon i njegove metafore sačinjavaju jednu jedinstvenu suštinu. Ovo je razlog zašto odeljci iz ovih rasprava i beleške Tendaj škole objašnjavaju lotos i kao Zakon sâm i njegovu metaforu.40

Ovaj je odeljak savršeno jasnog značenja i prema tome nije potrebno da kažem ništa dalje.
kraj prvog dela | drugi deo

Podaci o poreklu gošoa

Preveo Mića Mijatović 31. 05. 2002. u Beogradu
Izvor: Major Writings of Nichiren Daishonin, tom 7.

Footnotes: / Napomene:

    1. Lotus Sutra, chap. 2. / Lotos sutra, pog. 2.
    2. Kongabei ron. / Kongabei ron.
    3. Source unknown. / Izvor nepoznat.
    4. Hokekyo anrakugyo gi. / Hokekjo anrakugjo gi.
    5. Hokke gengi, Vol. 2. / Hoke gengi, 2. tom.
    6. Hokke gengi shakuset; Vol. I. / Hoke gengi šakuset, 1. tom.
    7. Tendai school's example: This example appears in T'ien-t'ai's Maka shikan. Hence the expression "Tendai school" is used to mean T'ien-t'ai, the founder of the Chinese Tendai school. / Primer Tendaj škole: ovaj se primer pojavljuje u Tjen-tajevoj Maka šikan. Otuda se izraz "Tendaj škola" koristi da označi Tjen-taja, osnivača kineske Tendaj škole.
    8. Lotus Sutra, chap. 2. / Lotos sutra, pog. 2.
    9. Daijo shikan. / Daiđo šikan.
    10. Example of the mirror: This is expounded in the Daiji shikan (The Method of Concentration and Insight in the Mahayana), Vol. 2. Through the example of the inseparable relationship between an object and its image reflected in the mirror, Nan-yueh reveals that a living being and a Buddha are "two but not two" in essence; in other words, common mortals of the nine worlds are inherently endowed with Buddhahood. / Primer sa ogledalom: ovo je izloženo u Daiđi šikan (Metod Koncentracije i Uvida u mahajani), tom 2. Kroz ovaj primer nerazdvojivog odnosa između objekta i njegove slike reflektovane u ogledalu, Nan-jue otkriva da su neko živo biće i Buda "dvoje ali ne dvoje" u suštini; drugim rečima, obični smrtnici devet svetova su inherentno obdareni budastvom.
    11. Shianrakugyo: This refers to the Hokekyo anrakugyo gi. / Šianrakugjo: ovo se odnosi na Hokekjo anrakugjo.
    12. A reference to the teachings that expound the concept of attaining Buddhahood as a common mortal. But they teach it in name only with no actual examples of its having occurred, or postulate various distinctions and exceptions. / Odnosi se na učenja koja izlažu koncept o dostizanju budastva kao smrtno biće. Ali, ona to podučavaju samo nominalno, bez stvarnih primera, ili pak postuliraju razne razlike i izuzetke.
    13. Twelve divisions of the Hodo sutras: A reference to all the teachings that are included in the Hodo period, third of the five periods set forth by T'ien-t'ai. The "twelve divisions" is a classification of the sutras according to style and content. / Dvanaest podela Hodo sutri: odnosi se na sva ona učenja koja su uključena u Hodo period, treći od pet perioda kako ih je postavio Tjen-taj. Ovih "dvanaest podela" su klasifikacija sutri u skladu sa stilom i sadržajem.
    14. Five vehicles: Three vehicles of voice-hearers, cause-awakened ones and bodhisattvas plus the human and heavenly realms. / Pet vozila: tri vozila onih-koji-slušaju-glas, probuđenih-za-uzrok i bodisatvi uz još i ljudske i nebeske oblasti.
    15. In sutras other than the Lotus Sutra, the three bodies were held to exist separately, such as Dainichi in the Dharma-body aspect and Amida in the bliss-body aspect. However, on the basis of the doctrine of ichinen sanzen, T'ien-t'ai maintained that the three bodies are not separate entities but three integral aspects of one Buddha. / U drugim sutrama, ne računajući Lotos sutru, držano je da tri tela postoje odvojeno, kao što su Dainiči u vidu tela Darme i Amida u vidu tela blaženstva. Međutim, na temeljima doktrine ičinen sanzena, Tjen-tai je ustanovio da ova tri tela nisu odvojeni entiteti već tri integralna aspekta jednog bude.
    16. Hokekyo anrakugyo gi. / Hokekjo anrakugjo gi.
    17. The essential point of the Hosshi kudoku (19th) chapter of the Lotus Sutra. / Suštinsko mesto 19. poglavlja (Hosši kudoku) Lotos sutre.
    18. Hokekyo anrakugyo gi. / Hokekjo anrakugjo gi.
    19. The "threefold contemplation" and the "three truths" here mean subjective wisdom and objective reality, respectively, and the expression that these "will immediately become manifest in their minds" represents the fusion of wisdom and reality. See Glossary for Threefold contemplation and Three truths. /"Trostruka kontemplacija" i "tri istine" ovde znače subjektivnu mudrost i objektivnu stvarnost, a izraz da će "odmah postati manifestne u njihovom umu" predstavlja stapanje mudrosti i stvarnosti. Vidi Rečnik Trostruke kontemplacije i Tri istine.
    20. Source unknown. / Izvor nepoznat.
    21. Hokke gengi shakusen, Vol. 1. / Hoke gengi šakusen, tom 1.
    22. This refers to the Buddha of kuon ganjo-the time described as "a past even more distant than gohyaku-jintengo" -who became enlightened to the eternal Law of life. / Ovo se odnosi na Budu kuon ganđo-a, vremena opisanog kao "prošlost davnija čak i od gohjaku đintengo-a" - koji je postao prosvetljen za večni Zakon života.
    23. Principle of wisdom and reality: See Fusion of reality and wisdom in Glossary. / Princip mudrosti i stvarnosti. Vidi Stapanje stvarnosti i mudrosti u Rečniku.
    24. First of the ten stages of security: See First stage of security in Glossary. / Prvi od deset stadijuma sigurnosti. Vidi Prvi stadijum sigurnosti u Rečniku.
    25. Near-perfect enlightenment: See Fifty-two stages of bodhisattva practice in Glossary. / Prosvetljenje blizu savršenog. Vidi Pedeset dva stadijuma bodisatvičke prakse u Rečniku.
    26. A summary of a section from the Shugo kokkai Ad. / Izvod iz odeljka Šugo kokai-ja.
    27. Three kinds of Buddhas: Shakyamuni, Taho and all the other Buddhas who are emanations of Shakyamuni Buddha. / Tri vrste budâ: Šakjamuni, Taho i sve druge bude koje su emanacije Šakjamuni Bude.
    28. Lotus Sutra, chap. 15. / Lotos sutra, pog. 15.
    29. Ibid., chap. 12. In this chapter, it states, "Monjushiri was seated on a thousand-petaled lotus blossom," and in the latter part of this chapter it says that the dragon king's daughter perfected the bodhisattva practice and appeared in a world to the south called Spotless World, where she seated herself on a jeweled lotus flower, acquiring the thirty-two features and eighty characteristics of a Buddha, and thence proceeded to preach the Lotus Sutra to all living beings. / Isto delo, pog. 12. U ovom poglavlju izjavljuje se: "Manđušri beše sedeo na hiljadulatičnom lotosovom cvetu", a u potonjem delu ovog poglavlja kaže se da je kćer zmajskog kralja usavršila bodisatvičku praksu i da se pojavila u nekomsvetu na jugu zvanom Neumrljan Svet, gde je sela na draguljima optočen lotosov cvet, zadobivši trideset dve crte i osamdeset osobina bude, i otada nastavila da propoveda Lotos sutru svim živim bičima.
    30. Shikan bugyaden guketsu, Vol. 5. / Šikan bugjaden guketsu, tom 5.
    31. Shakyamuni declares to the Bodhisattvas of the Earth, "All the doctrines possessed by the Thus Come One, all the freely exercised transcendental powers of the Thus Come One, the storehouse of all the secret essentials of the Thus Come One, all the most profound matters of the Thus Come One-all these are proclaimed, revealed and clearly expounded in this sutra." After this statement, he transfers the essence of the Lotus Sutra to Bodhisattva Jogyo and the other Bodhisattvas of the Earth. / Šakjamuni izjavljuje Bodisatvama Zemlje da "sve doktrine koje ima Takodošavši, sve slobodno praktikovane transcendentalne moći Takodošavšeg, skladište svih tajnih suština Takodošavšeg, sve najdublje stvari Takodošavšeg - sve je ovo objavljeno, otkriveno i jasno izloženo u ovoj sutri." Posle ove izjave prenosi suštinu Lotos sutre Bodisatvi Đogju i drugim Bodisatvama Zemlje.
    32. Lotus Sutra, chap. 2. / Lotos sutra, pog. 2.
    33. Fifthy five hundred years after his death: See Fifthy five-hundred-year period in Glossary. / Pedeset pet stotina godina posle njegove smrti. Vidi Period od pedeset pet stotina godina u Rečniku.
    34. This refers to the Hoben (2nd) chapter ofthe Lotus Sutra. "The teaching of perfect endowment" indicates the heart of the sutra, the lotus of the entity of the essential teaching. / Ovo se odnosi na Hoben (drugo) poglavlje Lotos sutre. "Učenje o savršenoj obdarenosti" označava srce Sutre, lotos suštine esencijalnog učenja.
    35. This is found in the Hokke gengi shakusen. / Ovo se nalazi u delu Hoke gengi šakusen.
    36. Hokke gengi, Vol. 7. / Hoke gengi, tom 7.
    37. Ibid. / Isto delo.
    38. Ibid. / Isto delo.
    39. Shugo kokkai sho. / Šugo kokai šo.
    40. Source unknown. / Izvor nepoznat.

NičirenYU: [Onđi Kuden|Polazna strana|Predavanja|LotosSutra|Gošo|
|Razno|Panel-bandera|Iskustva|Saradnja|Screen Savers|Veze-Links]
NichirenYU: [Ongi Kuden|Home page|Lectures|LotusSutra|Gosho|
|Misc|Panel-pole|Experiences|Screen Savers|Links]
Ovo je privatni, neoficijelni sajt posvećen budizmu Ničirena Dajšonina. O njemu brine Mića Mijatović.
This is a private, unofficial site dedicated to Buddhism of Nichiren Daishonin. Owned & maintained by Mića Mijatović.