The Stories of the Lotus Sutra, p53-54Even the very fancy carriage that the father gives to the children is, after all, only a carriage, a vehicle. All of our teachings and practices should be understood as devices, as possible ways of helping people. They should never be taken as final truths.
Appropriate means are means, not ends. In this sense they have only instrumental and provisional importance. While it is true that the notion of skillful means is sometimes used to describe something provisional, it is important to recognize that being instrumental and provisional does not mean that such methods are in any sense unimportant. At one point at least, the Dharma Flower Sutra even suggests that it is itself an appropriate means. The context is one in which the Sutra is praising itself and proclaiming its superiority over others (“those who do not hear or believe this sutra suffer a great loss”), but then has those who embrace the Sutra in a future age say:
When I attain the Buddha way,
I will teach this Dharma to them
By skillful means,
That they may dwell within it. (LS 273)
Category: d5b
-
A More Generous and Inclusive Lotus Sutra
Today I continue my Office Lens housecleaning with another quote from Gene Reeves’ Translator’s Introduction to his 2008 translation of the The Lotus Sutra.
As in the case of the carriages in the parable of the burning house, the great vehicle can be understood as replacing the other vehicles, or as making skillful means unnecessary. There are passages in the sutra that suggest this interpretation. We might call this the narrow interpretation of the Lotus Sutra, a perspective taken by some followers of Nichiren. They insist that in the Lotus Sutra they have found the one truth in light of which all other claims, and all other forms of religion including all other forms of Buddhism, are to be rejected as false and misleading. Most of those who study the Lotus Sutra, however, understand the teaching of the one vehicle in a much more generous, inclusive way.
The one vehicle itself can be understood as nothing but skillful means. That is, without a great variety of skillful means there can be no one vehicle, since it is through skillful means that living beings are led toward the goal of being a buddha. Without skillful means the one vehicle would be an empty, useless vehicle. Furthermore, the one vehicle itself is a teaching device, a skillful means of teaching that the many means have a common purpose. (Reeves, p13)
-
The Difficulty of the Lotus Sūtra
In the “Life Span of the Buddha” chapter of the Lotus Sūtra the Buddha preaches about Himself, “I have been the Buddha since the eternal past, 500 (million) dust-particle kalpa (aeons).” We, ordinary beings, do not remember things in the past even things that occurred after our birth. How much more so can we remember things in the past life or two! How can we believe anything that took place as far away in the past as 500 million dust-particle kalpa ago?
The Buddha also spoke to His disciple Śāriputra predicting his future Buddhahood, “You will become a Buddha in the future after passing numerous and unimaginable number of kalpa (aeons). You will then be called the Flower Light Buddha.” Predicting the future of Mahā-Kāśyapa, the Buddha stated, “In a future life, you will become a Buddha named the Light Buddha during your last incarnation.”
These scriptural statements, however, are the predictions of the future, which does not seem possible for us ordinary people to put faith in. Therefore, this Lotus Sūtra is difficult for us, ordinary men and women, who have no knowledge of things in the past or in the future. Hence it does not make sense for us to practice the Lotus Sūtra. Yet it may be possible for some people to believe this Lotus Sūtra if there was someone at present who could present factual proofs to people in front of their very eyes.
Hōren-shō, Letter to Hōren, Writings of Nichiren Shōnin, Volume 6, Followers I, Page 50
-
The Nature of Buddha Nature
Two Buddhas, p94-95The Hossō school represents an intriguing case, in that its doctrinal position offered a steadfast minority opposition, not only to the Tiantai/Tendai schema of the five periods, but also to the entire notion of buddhahood as a universal possibility. Hossō thought distinguishes two kinds of buddha nature: buddha nature as suchness or principle (J. ri busshō), which is universal, and active buddha nature (gyō busshō), which is not. Buddha nature as principle is quiescent and does not manifest itself in the phenomenal world; thus its universality does not mean that all beings can become buddhas. Achieving buddhahood depends on the presence of “untainted seeds” originally inherent in the ālaya or storehouse consciousness, the root consciousness underlying samsaric existence in which all deeds and impressions are stored as “seeds” or latent potentials, later fructifying in the form of experience. According to Hossō doctrine, individuals can be divided into “five natures” according to what sort of seeds they possess. Some have “active buddha nature,” that is, seeds that enable them to practice the bodhisattva way and become buddhas. Others have seeds that allow them to practice the path of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha. These individuals can reach the nirvāṇa of the arhat, but they cannot become buddhas. Another group has a mixture of two or more of these three kinds of seeds: bodhisattva, śrāvaka, pratyekabuddha. Which kind of seed will develop is not predetermined; such persons are therefore said to be of “indeterminate nature.” Last, there are those who possess no untainted seeds and thus can never escape saṃsāra. They can, however, better their condition by accumulating merit through Buddhist practice.
Against the Lotus Sūtra’s claim that the three vehicles are the Buddha’s skillful means while the one vehicle is true, Hossō thinkers put forth this division of human capacity into five natures; they argued that the three vehicles of the śrāvaka, pratyekabuddha, and bodhisattva are true, while the one vehicle is a skillful method, designed by the Buddha to lead persons of the indeterminate group to follow the bodhisattva path and become buddhas, rather than taking the lesser path of the two vehicles. To support this argument, they invoked the Lotus Sūtra’s theme of “resuscitating” śrāvakas and restoring them to the bodhisattva path — as when the Buddha, in Chapter Three, reminds Śāriputra of his long-forgotten bodhisattva vow. Saichō, the Japanese Tendai founder, countered in part by drawing on Huayan (J. Kegon) thinkers to argue that suchness has not only a quiescent aspect as universal principle (fuhen shinnyo), but also a dynamic aspect that manifests itself as the concrete forms of the phenomenal world (zuien shinnyo). He also maintained that suchness has the nature of realizing and knowing. Thus, there was no need to postulate seeds in the store consciousness of only certain individuals as the cause of buddhahood. Saichō equated suchness in its dynamic aspect with active buddha nature, and because suchness is universal, everyone has the potential to realize buddhahood.