This is a continuation of the introduction to Miraculous Stories from the Japanese Buddhist Tradition.

The moral from Kyōkai’s tale “On the Stolen Bronze Buddha Which Gave an Extraordinary Sign and Identified a Thief” states in full:

We learn indeed that the Buddha performed a miracle in order to stop evil and that the Buddha’s spirit responds to utmost devotion! In the twelfth volume of the Nehan-gyō [Nirvāṇa Sūtra] there is a passage which runs like this: “I have a high regard for the Mahayana teachings. I killed a Brahman who spoke ill of a Mahayana scripture. Consequently I will not fall into hell hereafter.” Another passage in the thirty-third volume of the same scripture speaks to the same effect: “Those of the ichisendai shall perish forever. If you kill even an ant, you will be accused of the sin of killing; you will not, however, be accused of the sin of killing if you kill the ichisendai.” (Because the ichisendai slanders the Three Treasures, fails to preach for all beings, and lacks a sense of gratitude, killing him is not a sin.) (Page 191)

Nichiren appears sympathetic to Kyōkai’s view that some people are simply beyond salvation. Nichiren used this same quote from the Nirvāṇa Sūtra in explaining why killing slanderers of the Lotus Sūtra was no great sin. See this discussion from my 100 Days of Study.

On the other hand, Kyōkai’s tale “On the Mutual Revenge for Killing by Being Reborn as a Fox and a Dog” offers this moral:

Virūḍhaka killed ninety-nine million and nine hundred thousand men of the Śākyas to revenge the past. If vengeance is used to requite vengeance, then vengeance will never end, but will go on rolling like the wheel of a cart. Forbearance is the virtue of the man who restrains himself by taking his enemy as a teacher and not seeking revenge. Accordingly, enmity is nothing but the teacher of forbearance. This is what the scripture means when it says: “Without respect for the virtue of forbearance one would kill even one’s own mother. ” (Page 226)

Putting this idea to work we read “On a Monk Who Was Saved fom Drowning in the Sea by Reciting a Mahayana Scripture”

In the capital of Nara there was a fully qualified monk whose name is unknown. He used to recite a Mahayana scripture and lived as a layman, supporting his family by lending money. His only daughter married and lived separately with her husband. In the reign of Empress Abe, her husband was appointed an official in Mutsu province. Therefore, he borrowed twenty kan of money from his father-in-law to outfit himself and went off to his new post. After many years, he repaid only the principal but not the interest, which had become as much as the principal in the course of time. Meanwhile the father-in-law asked for repayment. The son developed a secret hatred of him and looked for a chance to kill him. The father-in-law, however, did not know this and urged him, as usual, to repay the debt.

One day the son said to his father-in-law, “I would like to take you to Mutsu province.” The latter agreed and got on board a ship for Mutsu. Plotting with the sailors, the son tied his father-in-law up and threw him into the sea. When he went home, he said to his wife, “As your father wanted to see you, I took him on the ship for the voyage. Before long we ran into a storm at sea, and the ships sank. Your father, being beyond any means of rescue, was drowned. He drifted on the sea before he sank under the water, while I barely saved myself.” The wife, greatly dejected by this news, wailed and said, “How unhappy I am to lose my father! Did my idea of inviting him cause me to lose my treasure? It would be easier to find a jewel on the bottom of the sea than to see him and collect his bones. What a pity.”

Meanwhile, the monk sank into the water, reciting a Mahayana scripture with utmost devotion, and found that the water left a hollow space allowing him to crouch safely on the bottom. After two days and nights another ship bound for Mutsu province sailed by. The sailors noticed the tip of a rope drifting on the sea, and, seizing it, pulled up the monk on the other end. He looked as well as ever. The sailors, therefore, wondered greatly and asked him, “Who are you?” He answered, “I am so and so. I met robbers and was thrown into the sea with my limbs bound with a rope.” Then they asked him again, “Venerable Master, by what magic could you survive without being drowned in the water?” He said, “I am always reciting a Mahayana scripture. No doubt its mysterious power has saved me.” Thus he never revealed his son-in-law’s name. He asked then, “Will you take me to a port in Mutsu?” Accordingly, they took him there.

As for the son-in-law in Mutsu province, he held a service for the drowned father, making an offering to the Three Treasures. The father, who had been wandering and begging there, happened to attend the service with a group of self-ordained monks and received an offering of food while his face was covered. When the son-in-law held out offerings for the monks, the drowned father put his hands out to receive them. The startled son-in-law shrank back in horror, his eyes shifting restlessly and his face flushing. He hid himself, stricken with terror. The smiling father-in-law showed no anger but only forbearance, never revealing the evil deed. Owing to the hollow space in the water, he did not drown; nor was he eaten by a poisonous fish but remained safe in the sea. Indeed we know that this was caused by the miraculous power of a Mahayana scripture and the protection of various Buddhas.

The note says: How good he was to be tolerant and not to accuse his son-in-law of his evil deed! Indeed he was the very model of fortitude. This is what the Jōagon-gyō [The Collection of Long Scriptures] means when it says: “To requite vengeance with vengeance is like trying to put out a fire with hay, but to requite vengeance with mercy is like putting out a fire with water.” (Page 225-226)

PreviouisNext

This is a continuation of the introduction to Miraculous Stories from the Japanese Buddhist Tradition.

From Kyoko Motomochi Nakamura preface:

Kyōkai reveals his view of man in a section of his autobiographical material (111.38). Although man is driven by desire, he also possesses potential for enlightenment. Kyōkai believed that some people totally lacked such potential, for in interpreting his first dream, he says: “ ‘He does not have any ways to support them’ means that those who lack potential are not oriented for enlightenment” (111.38). In the note to a story on a wicked robber who broke a Buddhist statue, he quotes from the Nehan-gyō [Nirvāṇa Sūtra], and adds his comment:

“Those of the ichisendai shall perish forever. If you kill even an ant, you will be accused of the sin of killing; you will not, however, be accused of the sin of killing if you kill the ichisendai.” (Because the ichisendai slanders the Three Treasures, fails to preach to all beings, and lacks a sense of gratitude, killing him is not a sin.) [11.22].

Ichisendai is a transliteration of a Sanskrit term icchantika, which is translated as “culmination of desires” “one lacking faith,” “one lacking good stock.” It designates a man who is driven continuously by his desires and lacks any potential for enlightenment, who commits sins and never repents.

Ichisendai was a controversial concept in both Chinese and Japanese Buddhism, for it conflicts with the idea of universal Buddha-nature expounded in the same Nehan-gyō. Since the goal of Buddhists is enlightenment, the doctrine of Buddha-nature or Tathāgatagarbha is fundamental. The Hoke-kyō and Nehan-gyō, which influenced Kyōkai more than any other scriptures, are known for the doctrine that Buddha-nature exists in all sentient beings, while both denounce those who slander Mahayana teachings. However, Kyōkai never stressed the central message of the Nehan-gyō, that all sentient beings have Buddha-nature; instead, he repeatedly warned against those who committed offenses against the Three Treasures, such as persecutors of monks, usurpers of temple properties, and slanderers of dharma. Kyōkai explicitly says that a man who commits such acts is inferior to an ant. He also says:

Without compassion man is just like a crow. The Nehan-gyō says: “Though there is a distinction in respectability between man and animal, they share the fact that they cherish life and take death seriously.” [11.101

Man shares a common destiny of mortality with other living beings, and knowledge of mortality makes him cherish both his own life and that of others. However, he differs from them in that he is able to attain enlightenment. Buddhists often say that it is difficult to obtain birth as a human being and hear dharma. This statement can be understood only in the context of the Buddhist cosmology which presupposes an infinite expanse of time and various modes of existence. If a man fails to make good use of this rare opportunity with gratitude, he is no better than an animal. (Page 61-62)

Doctrine of universal salvation

In the Japanese religious tradition, no clear-cut distinction can be made between sacred and secular. What is closest to “sacred” is (sei, shō, or hijiri), but its antonym is “ordinary,” as understood by Kyōkai. “Sacred” means “supreme, preeminent, extraordinary.” No discontinuity exists. This is the basis for the doctrine of universal salvation. Each person has the potential to be a bodhisattva, although there are differences in the degrees of achievement, which is by no means predestined. The ideal image of man is not a scholarly and virtuous monk, but one who lives an ordinary life yet reveals an extraordinary quality through such a life. In other words, he is in society and at the same time rises above society. (Page 79)

PreviousNext