Test

Historical Perspectives

On the Transmission of the Heritage of the Law--from a historical perspective--

The SGI-USA Study Department has compiled the following article mainly based on a thesis written by Masahiro Kobayashi for the December 1992 issue of Daibyakurenge, the monthly study journal of the Soka Gakkai. Mr. Kobayashi is a research fellow at the Institute of Oriental Philosophy.

The transmission of the heritage of the Law -- as the priesthood relates it to the transfer of the office of high priest -- has been long shrouded in mystery; it seems to have been a subject too 'sacred' for anyone to know, let alone to discuss in detail.

At a nationwide certified priests' seminar on Aug. 28, 1992, High Priest Nikken broke this tradition. Self-satisfied and loquacious, he discussed the transmission of the heritage of the Law in detail and made some statements nullifying the myths that he himself created around it.

In the sermon, Nikken acknowledged:

the historical existence of boy high priests;
instances in the past where the heritage of the Law was transferred, for so-called temporary custody, to someone other than a high priest; and
the fallibility of high priest.

Nikken has kindly brought the subject of the transmission of the heritage of the Law 'down' to the level of our discussion and has opened it up to scrutiny. It is hoped that many believers, unafraid of breaking 'taboo,' will further discuss and study the term's true significance based on Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism.

Priests and lay believers of the Nikken sect hold that the high priest 'alone' (yuiju ichinen) possesses a life-condition identical to that of Nichiren Daishonin through the transmission of the heritage of the Law (kechimyaku sojo). Absolute and infallible, the high priest alone can transcribe the Gohonzon and interpret the Daishonin's teaching; therefore only through the high priest can believers seek and attain enlightenment -- so they say. Examples of such a view abound in recent Nichiren Shoshu publications.

During his sermon on April 13, 1991, Chief Priest Jiho Takahashi of the Myoshin-ji temple in San Francisco, stated:

We must protect the teachings of each high priest, because each high priest carries on the heritage of the Law from Nichiren Daishonin, and it is through this direct heritage that all of Nichiren Daishonin's teachings are correctly passed down. If you cannot accept the high priest's teachings, it is the same as saying that you cannot accept Nichiren Daishinin's teachings and are no longer practicing Nichiren Daishonin's teachings...

The high priest of any time period inherits the pure lineage from Nichiren Daishonin as Nikko Shonin did...

If one is unable to accept the guidance of the High Priest of the Pure Lineage, one will then no longer be practicing Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism. (Myodo, June 1991, pp. 6-7)

In her twenty-page essay titled 'On the Soka Gakkai's Campaign to Criticize the Priesthood,' published in the official Nichiren Shoshu organ, Kazuko Uchida, a Hokkeko member, describes High Priest Nikken as 'the Daishonin of the modern day' (Dai-Nichiren, June 1991).

Regarding the basis of faith, Nichiren Shoshu senior executive priests state:

The bases of our school is the Dai-Gohonzon of the High Sanctuary and the high priest who alone has received the transmission of the heritage of the Law. In concrete terms, it is of utmost importance to follow the high priest's guidance and strive in faith and practice to embrace the Gohonzon, because the substance of the sole transmission of the heritage of the Law is the venerable entity that is one with the Dai-Gohonzon of the High Sanctuary. Faith in these two bases [the Dai-Gohonzon and the high priest], therefore, must be absolute. (Dai-Nichiren, September 1991)

Nichiren Shoshu senior executive priests also state in their document dated Sept. 6, 1991, "The Daishonin, who is the original Buddha, the Dai-Gohonzon of the High Sanctuary, and the venerable, hidden identity of the successive high priests are one and the same. "

In an article titled 'A Small Study of Heresy,' Chief Priest Takahashi of San Francisco states:

The pure lineage of the ultimate Law has been inherited by each successive high priest, including Nikken Shonin, the sixty-seventh and present high priest.

It follows, then, that the priesthood and laity respect the high priest as a master of Buddhism. The high priest succeeded to this position, and by definition his wisdom and mercy is equal to that of the Daishonin...

In Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism, 'between Buddha's means the Daishonin and the successive high priest...

We must receive the general heritage of faith from the high priest and understand the Daishonin's Buddhism through the high priest's guidance. Therefore, people who boast of having correct faith yet reject guidance about faith from the high priest will not receive benefits. (Myodo, October 1991, p. 10)

An article titled 'Attitudes of Faith for Members' from the October 1991 issue of Myodo states:

The Gohonzon, Nichiren Daishonin and all successive high priests correspond to each other and are inseparable...

Surely one cannot receive benefits from the Gohonzon transcribed by the high priest while slandering him at the same time. (ibid., p. 15)

The 'Order to Disband," which was issued under the names of Nichiren Shoshu Chief Executive Nikken Abe and General Administrator Nichijun Fujimoto on Nov. 7, 1991, states: "From the time of old, [believers] put their palms together in reverence toward the high priest because his hidden identity is considered to be the entity of the treasure of the Law and of the treasure of the Buddha."

These views of the Nikken sect on the transmission of the heritage of the Law and the office of high priest have no basis in the orthodox teaching of the Daishonin. This article intends to shed light on the history of Nichiren Shoshu, thus dispelling the myths that the Nikken sect has created around the transmission of the heritage of the Law. It thus attempts to clarify its significance according to the Daishonin

1) The 'temporary custody' of the heritage of the Law: Nichiei, the eighth high priest, transferred the heritage of the Law to a lay believer.

In 'On Accounts of the Fuji School,' Nissei, the seventeenth high priest, writes:

Lord Nichiei, in addressing believers, said that it was his grief and sorrow that he had no opportunity to transmit the heritage of the Law. At last, in the twenty-sixth year of O'ei [1419] when he fell ill, he transferred the heritage of the Law to Aburano Joren. (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 5, p. 255)

Unable to find his successor, Nichiei, the eighth high priest, here expresses his concern over the lack of appropriate candidates at Taiseki-ji. Before he died in Aug. 4, 1419 (Chronology of the Fuji School, vol. 1, p. 71), Nichiei had to transfer the heritage of the Law to Aburano (also Yuzuno) Joren, a lay believer, who in turn transferred it to Nichiu who was only 18. (Nichiko, the fifty-ninth high priest and a noted Buddhist scholar, comments that the transmission to Joren, the lay believer, was only temporary.) Nichiu became the ninth high priest and is well known as the author of 'On the Formalities of True Buddhism.'

So-called temporary custody of the heritage of the Law, in which someone other than a high priest receives the transmission such as in Nichiei's case, occurred several times in the past. In 1622 Nissho, the fifteenth high priest, transferred the heritage of the Law to Rikyo-bo Nichigi, who later transferred it to Nichiju, the sixteenth high priest (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 5, p. 260). In 1923 Nitchu, the fifty-eighth high priest, received the transmission of the heritage of the Law from Nissho, the fifty-seventh high priest, via two lay believers from Osaka (Refuting the Vicious Book 'Counterfeit Wooden Gohonzon,' Nittatsu Hosoi, the sixty-sixth high priest, published by the Nichiren Shoshu Propagation Society in 1956).

'Temporary custody' of the heritage of the Law has important implications. First, the transmission of the heritage of the Law is not the sole property of high priest; someone other than a high priest, even a lay believer, can receive the transmission. Second, the recipient of the heritage of the Law does not have to be a 'special' person whose hidden identity is supposedly the same as the Daishonin's.

If the priesthood insists that whoever received the transmission is endowed with the mystic life-condition, then these 'temporary custodians' of the heritage of the Law would become also 'the Daishonin of their days.' This, however, would contradict the priesthood's assertion that the high priest 'alone' possesses the heritage of the Law from the Daishonin. The priesthood must revise either its view or history.

2) The infallibility of the high priest was propounded to solidify the support for High Priest Nitchin -- a boy high priest who was appointed at 14.

In 1482, Nichiu, the ninth high priest, appointed Nitchin the twelfth high priest when he was only 14. Since Nichijo, the tenth high priest, and Nittei, the eleventh high priest, had passed away, Nichiu had to assume the office of high priest once again from 1472 until he passed away in 1482 (Chronology of the Fuji School, vol. 1, pp. 84-87).

It was Sakyo Nikkyo (1428-?) who provided the doctrinal support for this rather young high priest. Stressing that the Daishonin is the original Buddha, he propounded the perverse view that a high priest is absolute and infallible because of the transmission of the heritage of the Law he received from the Daishonin. He was clearly invoking the Daishonin's name to deify the boy high priest, who needed this kind of doctrinal support.

In Ruijukanshu Shi, Sakyo Nikkyo states: "When those who embrace the [Lotus] sutra have an audience with the current high priest, they meet with the original Buddha" (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 2, p. 329). In Rokunin Ryugi Haryu Sho Shiki, he also states: "Each successive high priest who received the transmission of the heritage of the Law is the Gohonzon as Sage Nichiren" (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 4, p. 29). According to Nichiko, the fifty-ninth high priest and known as one of the most outstanding scholars in modern Nichiren Shoshu history, Sakyo Nikkyo wrote this work at the request of High Priest Nitchin (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 9, p. 63).

3) The historical existence of boy high priests dispels the myth that a high priest is absolute; Nichiin became the 13th high priest at 10 and he knew nothing of the Daishonin's Buddhism.

In 1526, Nitchin, the twelfth high priest, appointed Nichiin, then called Ryo'odo, as his successor, and in 1527 when Nitchin passed away, Nichiin officially assumed the office of high priest at 10 (Chronology of the Fuji School, vol. 1, p. 99). According to 'On Accounts of the Fuji School,' Nichiin left his native Tosa Province of the Shizuoka Island for Taiseki-ji temple and started his study of the Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism there when he was 13 (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 5, p. 258).

Like his predecessor, Nichiin also faced a lack of appropriate candidates for his successor. 'On Accounts of the Fuji School' states:

High Priest Nichiin told Priest Myogyo that he wished to appoint his successor, yet he had no one. Priest Myogyo replied that there was a wise acolyte at Jingu-ji temple. (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 5, p. 259)

Nichiin decided to adopt a 13-year-old acolyte from Jingu-ji temple as his successor; only six years later in 1573, the boy (Nisshu, the fourteenth high priest) officially assumed the office of high priest (Chronology of the Fuji School, vol. 1, pp. 112-114).

The historical existence of boy high priests completely dispels the myth the Nikken sect has created about the office of high priest. Being a high priest in and of itself does not mean that he understands the Daishonin's Buddhism in a way that no one else can or that the Daishonin's life-condition mysteriously starts to manifest in his life.

When Nitchin transferred the office of high priest to Nichiin, then a 10-year-old boy, did Nichiin's understanding of the Daishonin's Buddhism become so profound that he was the 'only' one who could interpret it for the rest of the priesthood? Could he start transcribing the Gohonzon because his life-condition had become identical to that of the Daishonin the moment he became a high priest?

Not until he became 13 had Nichiin even started to study the Daishonin's Buddhism. Then how could he understand the essential doctrine of the Daishonin's Buddhism when he was 10? It is also difficult to imagine a 10-year-old boy, who knew nothing of the Daishonin's Buddhism, transcribing the Gohonzon as soon as he became a high priest.

Nikken said at the Aug. 28 seminar:

Under certain circumstances people in the sect considered the appointment of a boy high priest appropriate and supported him, thus securing the transmission of the heritage of the Law.

As Nikken himself stated, when a boy became high priest, he was supported by a group of priests who taught him Nichiren Shoshu doctrines and formalities, clearly indicating that the Daishonin's teaching is not the high priest's exclusive property. The Nikken sect's idea that only the high priest can correctly interpret the Daishonin's teaching is obviously wrong.

As the Daishonin states, 'Buddhism is reason' (The Major Writings of Nichiren Daishonin, vol. 3, p. 238).

4) During the seventeenth century, nine high priests were brought to Taiseki-ji temple from one of the erroneous Nichiren schools.

During the seventeenth century, Taiseki-ji continued to suffer from the lack of appropriate candidates for high priest. In 1594 Nisshu, the fourteenth high priest, invited Nissho to Taiseki-ji from Yoho-ji temple in Kyoto -- a temple from one of the erroneous Nichiren schools -- and two years later in 1596 Nissho became the fifteenth high priest (Chronology of the Fuji School, vol. 1, p. 121). For about a hundred years -- from 1596 to 1692 when Nikkei, the twenty-third high priest, passed away -- nine high priests came to Taiseki-ji from Yoho-ji temple.

According to 'On Accounts of the Fuji School,' Nissho was ordained at Yoho-ji temple when he was 7 and received instructions from Kozoin Nisshin, the nineteenth chief priest of Yoho-ji temple (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 5, p. 259). Nisshin propounded the erroneous doctrine -- alien to the orthodox teaching of the Daishonin -- to erect a statue of Shakyamuni as the object of worship and to encourage the recitation of the entire Lotus Sutra.

Nisshin's distorted views are completely refuted later by Nichikan Shonin, the twenty-sixth high priest, in he 'Teachings for the Latter Day' -- one of the 'Six-volume Writings.'

At the beginning of 'Teachings for the Later Day (I),' High Priest Nichikan states:

Question: Should it be allowed for the Latter Day's practitioner initially aspiring to the Way to recite the entire[Lotus] Sutra? Answer: It should not be allowed (Six-volume Writings, p. 152).

Furthermore, at the beginning of 'Teachings for the Latter Day (II),' Nichikan Shonin states:

Question: Should disciples of the founder, Nichiren Daishonin, be allowed to erect a statue of [Shakyamuni] Buddha, who assumes august attributes, as an object of worship? Answer: They should not be allowed. (Six-volume Writings, p. 168)

In light of such a clear doctrinal difference between the orthodox Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism and Yoho-ji temple, it is difficult to imagine that Nissho became a high priest only two years after he came to Taiseki-ji.

However, as the first high priest from Yoho-ji temple, Nissho faced tough opposition. In his letter dated June 2, 1601, and addressed to one of the influential lay patrons, Nissho states:

Since more than three years ago, I have been feeling disturbed by the words I hear and malicious intent I perceive within the priesthood. I am resolved to relinquish [my office]...

I am intending to invite the former [and retired] high priest Nisshu. Whatever I say is ignored the first of second time I say it...

This is how the deputy chief priest and assistant priests are. (Complete Writings of the Successive High Priests, vol. 1, p. 473)

The letter indicates that the deputy chief priest, who was next in rank to the high priest, and many other priests were openly going against Nissho. Disheartened by the severe opposition, Nissho complains to a lay believer that he wants to quit his position.

The high priest of any time period inherits the pure lineage from Nichiren Daishonin as Nikko Shonin did.... If one is unable to accept the guidance of the High Priest of the Pure Lineage, one will then no longer be practicing Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism. (Myodo, June 1991, p. 7).

In light of Nissho's letter, such an assertion by the Nikken sect sounds rather empty. It is a bit too difficult to imagine a high priest, whose life-condition is supposedly as vast as the Daishonin's, contemplating quitting his position because of some harassment from his juniors.

5) Nissei, the seventeenth high priest, committed slander of the Daishonin's Buddhism by encouraging believers to worship a statue of Shakyamuni and to recite the entire Lotus Sutra.

Nissei, the seventeenth high priest, was highly influenced by the erroneous doctrines of Yoho-ji temple, where he was ordained. In his 'Chronological Accounts of Sage Nichiren,' Nissei encouraged believers to worship a statue of Shakyamuni (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 5, pp. 118-119) and to recite the entire Lotus Sutra (ibid., pp. 130-131).

Nikken asserted at his Aug. 28 sermon that Nissei committed this error before he became high priest, not after, since according to Nikken, high priests cannot make mistakes. Yet Nissei's 'Chronological Accounts of Sage Nichiren" was written after Nissei assumed the office of high priest for the second time in 1637, because it contains a reference to a battle that took place in 1671 (ibid., pp. 84-85).

In 1633 Nissei wrote a thesis to defend his position regarding the worship of Shakyamuni's statue and the recitation of the entire Lotus Sutra. At the end of his thesis, Nissei writes:

A year after the completion of Hosho-ji temple, I had a statue of the Buddha made. Priests and lay believers of this school then brought up questions and criticism [against me]. To dispel the mist of their delusion and to prevent this from sinking into oblivion, I took up a brush to put down this one volume of writing. (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 9, p. 69)

Regarding Nissei's error, Nichiko, the fifty-ninth high priest and noted Buddhist scholar, writes:

As Nissei established the foundation in Edo [present-day Tokyo] and started to build local temples there to increase the sect's influence, he at last began propounding the worship of the Buddha's statues and the recitation of the entire Lotus sutra, thus bringing into [this school] the doctrine that Yoho-ji temple was then propounding. (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 9, p. 69)

Nissei's act was a serious slander of Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism completely unbecoming of a Nichiren Shoshu believer, let alone a high priest. In light of this historical fact, does the Nikken sect still continue to assert that 'the Gohonzon, Nichiren Daishonin and all successive high priests correspond to each other and are inseparable'?

6) Due to his dissension with an influential lay patron, High Priest Nissei abruptly quit and moved to Edo (present-day Tokyo), leaving the head temple without a high priest, thus risking its condemnation by the shogunate government.

There was an unusual incident surrounding the transfer of the office of high priest from Nissei to Nisshun, the nineteenth high priest. (Nichiei, the eighteenth high priest, passed away in 1638.)

In 'On Accounts of the Fuji School (II),' Nichiryo, the forty-eighth high priest, records:

Because of his discord with Venerable Priestess Nissho [Kyodai'in], a great lay patron, High Priest Nissei of this school left Mount Fuji and moved to Jozai-ji temple in Edo [present-day Tokyo], thus leaving the head temple without its chief priest.

At that time, the shogunate had to reauthorize the head temple's domain, yet there was no chief priest there, so the head temple was about to be condemned.

Distressed by this, priests and lay believers entreated Venerable Priestess Nissho for her help regarding the appointment of a next chief priest. So the venerable priestess was to choose one.

Nichikan, then chief priest of Hosho-ji temple, told her that there was no one like Nisshun. Thus the venerable priestess invited Teacher [Nisshun] to the head temple. (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 5, p. 269)

For some reason Nissei could not get along with Kyodaiíin, a great-grandchild of Tokugawa Ieyasu, the founder of the Edo Shogunate. Kyodaiíin was an influential lay patron who built the Miei-do temple on the head temple grounds in 1632 and donated the gigantic sum of 741 ryo in 1638 (Chronology of the Fuji School, vol. 1, pp. 132-134). So Nissei abruptly quit the office of high priest [i.e., chief priest of Taiseki-ji temple] and left the head temple, thus risking its condemnation. To survive the crisis, priests and lay believers had to resort to an unusual solution -- asking a lay believer to appoint the next high priest.

Followers of the Nikken sect have been somehow made to believe that the high priest, through his mystic, divine power, which descended from the Daishonin, appoints his successor; therefore, the office of high priest is sacred and should not be discussed lightly. In reality, however, the office of high priest has been decided upon many times through power struggles and factional infighting. In addition to the above examples, Nitchu, the fifty-eighth high priest, was effectively impeached by the opposing faction led by Nichikai Abe, Nikken's father and sixtieth high priest, and the next high priest, Nichiko, the fifty-ninth, was 'elected' in 1926.

The Nikken sect should not propound an idea that contradicts its own history; it should know that the only was to dignify the office of high priest is the high priest's own faith and behavior that accord with the Daishonin's spirit and the Gosho.

7) Nisshun, the nineteenth high priest, managed to survive the opposition movement through the erroneous doctrine that he was 'the Daishonin of the modern day.'

In 1641 Nisshun went to the shogunate government in Edo to receive new authorization for the head temple's domain. He then went to Jozai-ji temple to be recognized as a legitimate successor by Nissei. Later Nissei made peace with Kyodaiíin and went to the head temple to officially appoint Nisshun the nineteenth high priest in 1645 (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 5, pp. 269- 270).

When Nisshun was invited to Taiseki-ji, some opposed his appointment. To counter this movement, Nichikan, who recommended Nisshun to Kyodaiíin, advocated the absolute authority of high priest. In his letter to a head of lay believers, Nichikan states:

At Taiseki-ji, the heritage of the Law is transmitted through the golden mouth [of the Buddha]. One who received this transmission -- whether he is learned or unlearned -- is a living person of Shakyamuni and Nichiren. Only through putting faith in this can people of the Later Day sow the seed of Buddhahood...

Whoever becomes high priest, as long as he received the transmission of the heritage of the Law, should be known as a living person of Shakyamuni and Nichiren. This is the true intent of Nikko Shonin, the founder of Taiseki-ji, and the basis for this school's believers. (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 5, p. 271)

History proves that the absolute authority of high priest was advocated not because the high priest was highly respectable; rather, this unorthodox doctrine was a well-known device to silence criticism against a high priest who was somehow not supported.

8) The development of the parish system and emphasis on the concept of the Three Treasures.

During the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the economic power of the bourgeois, especially farmers and merchants, increased drastically while the control of the Muromachi shogunate government declined, creating many independent warring domains of samurai lords. This socioeconomic change prompted the Buddhist clergy to look to people for economic support rather than depending on the weakening authority of the Muromachi shogunate government.

The Buddhist clergy started emphasizing immediate, material gains of Buddhist practice and incorporating folk beliefs in various deities to cater to the rising middle class. It is ironic that the Japanese Buddhist clergy's decision to popularize Buddhism was simply a decision to switch from one financial base of support to another.

During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the Edo shogunate instituted strict control of religion. A parish system was developed in three phases. First, the Edo shogunate issued the 'Temple Ordinances' to establish the relationship between head temples and local temples and to promote Buddhist study and rituals. The promotion of study and rituals was designed to keep priests from becoming a secular -- political or economic -- power.

These laws empowered a head temple and made it virtually impossible for a local temple to go against or secede from its head temple. This way, the shogunate could control local temples through their head temples. These laws also defined the hierarchical relationships between teachers and students, chief priests and ordinary priests, and clergy and laity.

Second, to help enforce the ban on Christianity, the Edo shogunate required temples to issue certificates that proved believers had converted to Buddhism. With the authority to issue Buddhist certificates, priests gained life-and-death power over lay believers. If lay believers did not receive Buddhist certificates, they could be executed as Christians. The Buddhist certification system forced people to belong to temples the shogunate had prescribed for their parish, thus entirely eliminating people's freedom to choose and propagate religion.

Third, by the latter half of the seventeenth century, the Buddhist certification system had been modified to include records of age, religious faith, marital status and public service for all households. Temples became an agent of the shogunate for census taking. If people were not registered at the temple in their parish, they would be regarded a non-persons and denied of any rights.

With the establishment of the parish system, the Buddhist clergy gave up their right to propagate their beliefs and were subjected to strict government control; in return, however, they gained a stable base of parishioners for their financial security. Under the parish system, the relationship between priests and lay believers was just like that of lord and slave. Priests coerced lay believers to participate in temple rituals, of which they eagerly created many, in order to receive donations.

As the parish system prevailed, Taiseki-ji began to single out and stress the concept of the Three Treasures to substantiate such a relationship between priests and lay believers from the doctrinal viewpoint.

For example, in his 'Accounts of High Priest Nichiu,' Nichiin, the thirty-first high priest, comments on Nichiu's explanation of priesthood based on the three Treasures -- the concept that Nichiu himself did not employ:

Nichiin states: making offerings to the Three Treasures is a correct intention.... Making offerings to the treasure of the Priest is to make offerings to one's Buddhahood. (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 1, p. 192)

Nichiin also states: 'Formalities are the Buddha's Law' (ibid., p. 198) and 'In our school, formalities are the entity of the Law, and lay believers are to respect the Three Treasures' (ibid., p. 222).

To promote the importance of priests as ritual conductors, especially of funeral and memorial services, the concept of the Three Treasures was forced upon lay believers. The Nikken sect fully perpetuates this tradition of 'funeral Buddhism' from the Edo period to extract money from believers and is using the unorthodox interpretation of the Three Treasures to silence criticism toward the high priest.

9) Nisshun, the twenty-second high priest, promoted believers' reverence toward the treasure of the Priest to support the parish system.

In 1669 the Buddhist certification system was instituted, and in 1671 census registration at temples became mandatory. By the end of the seventeenth century, most temples in Japan established parish systems. Against this background, Nisshun became the twenty-second high priest in 1680.

Under the parish system, Nisshun tried to strengthen believers' ties to Taiseki-ji. Nisshun instituted two new memorial services -- the seventeenth anniversary and the twenty-fifth anniversary services -- which had never previously been observed at Taiseki-ji. To substantiate his asking for frequent offerings and services, Nisshun emphasized believers' reverence toward the Three Treasures, especially the treasure of the Priest.

For example, Nisshun states:

The benefit derived from making offerings to the Three Treasures of the true teaching -- the flower of the Law -- is vast without bounds and can be known only with the Buddha's wisdom. Nichiu and Nichijitsu [posthumous Buddhist names for certain lay believers] will receive the full effect of enlightenment, and the donor will no doubt have his great desires realized for the present and future. (ibid., p. 16)

In his sermon at a memorial service in 1687, Nisshun states:

The true treasure of the Priest for the Latter Day shall be limited to descendants of the [Bodhisattva] of the true teaching of the 'Juryo' chapter, that is, disciples of Nikko. (ibid., p. 81)

Nisshun defined the treasure of the Priest to include all priests in order to ensure believers' unquestionable reverence toward all priests. Cleverly, Nisshun also prepared a speech in praise of believers who frequent temples:

You should encourage them, saying: "Each of you has come to the temple forgoing one day's work to hear the Law because it is the time for Buddhism to be spread. Yours is an act of seeking the Law without begrudging your body and life." (ibid., p. 68)

Later, however, in 'Practice of This School,' Nichikan, the twenty-sixth high priest who is also known as a restorer of Nichiren Shoshu, redefined the treasure of the Priest to be Nikko Shonin:

The treasure of the Priest from the time without beginning is the founding high priest. The debt owed to the Buddha is profound, and the debt owed to the Law is limitless. However, if these [i.e., the treasures of the Buddha and the Law] had not been transmitted, how could we the people of the present Latter Day take faith in and embrace this great Law? Is it not because of the merit of the founding high priest who received the essence of the Law? (Six-volume Writings, p. 226)

To make believers pliant to priests, thus securing the establishment of the parish system, Nisshun promoted believers' reverence toward priests based on the concept of the Three Treasures.

10) Government persecutions during the Edo period (1600-1867)

During the Edo period, Nichiren Shoshu experienced nine government persecutions. The following is a breakdown of punishment inflicted upon lay believers (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 9).

Chiba Persecution (1706): 4 deaths penalties, 7 banished, about 100 ostracized
Kanazawa Persecution (1726, 1740, 1765, 1770, 1786): 1 died in prison, 5 imprisoned, 14 placed under house-arrest
Sanuki Persecution (1753): 1 died in prison
Sendai Persecution (1765, 1804): 1 banished, 6 sentenced for one-year term of slavery, 2 placed under house-arrest
Ina Persecution (1784): 8 banished, 1 evicted

Owari Persecution (1825, 1837, 1848, 1857): 1 tortured, about 30 imprisoned

Hachinohe Persecution (1844): 7 imprisoned

Koke Era Persecution (1847): 2 evicted, 3 discharged from their official positions

How about the priests who were supposed to protect believers from persecutions by the shogunate?

Sanuki Persecution: 1 died in prison
Sendai Persecution: 1 exiled, 1 forced to retire
Hachinohe Persecution: 1 banished
Koke Era Persecution: 2 banished, 2 imprisoned

Compared to approximately 200 lay believers who were punished in those government persecutions, only eight priests were subjugated to punishment. Priests apparently hid behind the believers, using them as a shield.

By equating the transmission of the heritage of the Law with the succession of the high priests, the Nikken sect is claiming that the high priest's life-condition is, in itself, the heritage of the Law. Nikken, by deifying himself, is trying to win the absolute obedience from priests and lay believers alike. There are many priests who, to secure their status in the priesthood, stress that following the high priest is the correct faith of Nichiren Shoshu.

In this regard, for the sake of future, the use of the phrase the transmission of the heritage of the Law may be reconsidered when used to describe the succession of high priests.

Descriptions of what is transmitted from high priest to high priest vary. For example, according to 'Transfer Document from Nikko to Nichimoku' and Nisshu, the fourteenth high priest, the content of the transmission is the Dai-Gohonzon of the High Sanctuary. Nichido, the fourth high priest, described it as a box with sheets of paper. It was Nam-myoho-renge-kyo of the 'Juryo' chapter of the essential teaching according to Nisshun, the twenty-second high priest. Nichion, the thirty-fifth high priest, describes it as the One Great Secret Law.

From available historical documents it becomes clear that, except for one thing -- the position of chief priest of the Head Temple Taiseki-ji -- nothing is consistent in the descriptions of the transmission of the heritage of the Law. The contents of the oral transmission and the formalities of the transfer ceremony also differ.

A careful scrutiny of Nichiren Shoshu history and Nikken's own sermon on Aug. 29, 1992, suggests that what he calls 'the transmission of the heritage of the Law' boils down to the appointment of a next high priest and the transfer of the office of high priest.

When the transfer of the office of high priest takes place, the person charged with protecting the Dai-Gohonzon of the High Sanctuary changes, and the reconfirmation of the fundamental doctrines may be conducted to avoid any possible doctrinal confusion in the future. As a part of the transfer ceremony, sometimes the important transfer documents from the Daishonin to Nikko Shonin may change hands.

However, there is nothing mysterious in that process, since all of the transfer documents are published and available. They are the 'Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings (Ongi Kuden),' 'The Hundred and Six Comparisons (Hyaku Rokka Sho),' 'On the True Cause (Honnin-myo-Sho),' 'Transfer Document On the Birth of the Original Buddha (Ubuyu Sojo no Koto)' and the like.

Furthermore, it is important to understand that both the protection of the Dai-Gohonzon and the correct transmission of the Daishonin's teaching are responsibilities vested not only in the high priest but more fundamentally in the Buddhist Order or samgha -- the original Sanskrit word for priesthood, signifying a group of people dedicated to the spread and transmission of the Buddha's teaching -- as a whole.

Regarding the transmission of the heritage of the Law, the Daishonin states: "The heritage of the Lotus Sutra flows within the lives of those who never forsake it in any lifetime whatsoever -- whether in the past, the present or the future" (MW-1, 23).

This is the original meaning of the transmission of the heritage of the Law. Nikken, however, denies this outright. At a nationwide certified priests' seminar on Aug. 28, 1992, he said:

[Soka Gakkai members] are discussing the lifeblood of faith, excluding the heritage of the entity of the Law. They are just preoccupied with leaves and branches.

Nikken called the Daishonin's definition of the transmission of the heritage of the Law 'leaves and branches.' Nikken categorizes the heritage of the Law into 'the lifeblood of faith' and 'the heritage of the entity of the Law' in his attempt to complicate the concept and thus conceal the essence the Daishonin talks about. Nikken implies that there is something much more profound to the heritage of the Law than the lifeblood of faith -- i.e., the heritage of the entity of the Law, which he 'alone' inherited from the Daishonin.

Nichiu, the ninth high priest, states in his 'On the Formalities of True Buddhism':

Faith, the heritage of the Law and the pure flow of the entity of the Law are identical. Unswayed faith indicates the unbroken lineage and thus the correctly transmitted heritage of the Law and the uninterrupted pure flow of the entity of the Law. (Essential Writings of the Fuji School, vol. 1, p. 64)

High Priest Nichiko states in his "Commentary on 'On the Formalities of True Buddhism' ":

In the final analysis, faith, the heritage of the Law and the pure flow of the entity of the Law refer to the same thing....

If faith is swayed, the pure flow of the entity of the Law ceases to flow. If one insists that it does not cease to flow, then the heritage of the Law and the pure flow of the entity of the Law, I shall say, become defiled and corrupt. Then Buddhism still ceases to exist. (ibid., p. 176)

The Daishonin succinctly defines the heritage of the Law, saying:

Shakyamuni who attained enlightenment countless aeons ago, the Lotus Sutra which leads all people to Buddhahood, and we ordinary human beings are in no way different or separate from each other. Therefore, to chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo with this realization is to inherit the ultimate law of life and death. (MW-1, 22)

To chant daimoku with the deep conviction that Shakyamuni (Nichiren Daishonin), the Lotus Sutra (the Law of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo or the Gohonzon) and we ordinary human beings are in no way different or separate from each other is the quintessence of the transmission of the heritage of the Law.

'The heritage of the Law' according to the Nikken sect is the antithesis of 'the heritage of the Law' according to the Daishonin. The Nikken sect is using the term 'the heritage of the Law' -- which the Daishonin defined based on the absolute equality between the Buddha, the Law and ordinary people -- in order to differentiate Nikken, who in no way deserves to be called a Buddha, from the people. Herein lies the insidious nature of religious authority.

The Daishonin states:

Nichiren has been trying to awaken all the people of Japan to faith in the Lotus Sutra so that they too can share the heritage and attain Buddhahood. But instead they attacked me time and again, and finally had me banished to this island. (MW-1, 24)

The Daishonin's sole desire was to help all people awaken to faith in Nam-myoho-renge-kyo thus 'sharing' the heritage of the Law to attain Buddhahood. For this sake, the Daishonin faced many life-threatening persecutions, including his exile to Sado Island, which in his day was equivalent of a death sentence.

The heritage of the Law exists for the sake of the people and their happiness; it is not meant to be an exclusive property of the chief priest of Taiseki-ji. The heritage of the Law is not something that has been transferred from one high priest to another in utmost secrecy. As the original Buddha, Nichiren Daishonin states, it is his disciples' mission to dedicate themselves to the battle of kosen-rufu to help all people share the heritage of the Law and reveal their own Buddha natures, thus establishing absolute happiness in their lives.

The subtitle of the Gosho 'On the True Cause' is 'On the Transmission of the Heritage of the Law of the Essential Teaching of the Hokke Sect.' The essential point of this Gosho is to understand that Nichiren Daishonin is the Buddha of absolute freedom from time without beginning , that is, the original Buddha of the Latter Day, and that Nam-myoho-renge-kyo is the source of enlightenment for all Buddhas throughout time and space. The essential point of 'The Hundred and Six Comparisons,' which, together with 'On the True Cause,' are called 'Two-volume Writings on the Heritage of the Law,' is the same.

When SGI members hold discussion meetings throughout the world, the essential point of the 'Two-volume Writings on the Heritage of the Law' is discussed. SGI members are encouraging one another to chant daimoku while seeking the teachings of the Daishonin as the original Buddha. In this sense, it can be said that the grand 'transfer ceremony of the heritage of the Law,' in which people are directly connecting with the Daishonin, is taking place the world over. Indeed within the faith of SGI members exists the direct transmission of the heritage of the Law from Nichiren Daishonin.

This article has pointed out some historical facts of Nichiren Shoshu that disprove Nikken's assertions regarding the transmission of the heritage of the Law. It has been written solely to return the heritage of the Law to the people, not to look for priests' errors for the sake of criticizing.

The transmission of the heritage of the Law is for the people and their happiness; it is the Daishonin's teaching based on absolute equality. Secrecy, esotericism and discrimination are marks of the Nikken sect, not of Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism.