It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
nucifera said:Does everyone here listened Lotus Sutra?? Now I am studying.... I heard people Lotus Sutra is ultimate of all sutras....
Adiana said:Hello, Nucifera!The so-called controversy surrounding the SGI is referring to the rift between the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood and the SGI. You can go to this website to read more about it: http://www.gakkaionline.net. That should give you the background regarding the problems between the two organizations. Adiana:wavey: :usflag:
zenmonk_genryu said:Actually the controversy extends to a lot more than that, including the fact that no Buddhist tradition accepts Nichiren and in particular SGI as being Buddhist. Whilst SGI followers may not like that, that's the way it is. Information about SGI, both pro and anti, can be found on most cult information sites.
VoidWhereProhibited said:Well, it seems incorrect to me to say that no buddhist tradition accepts Nichiren as being buddhist. Here in Japan everyone knows that Nichiren was a buddhist. In the writings of D.T. Suzuki, Nichiren buddhism is mentioned at times, and not always unapprovingly. I am not a follower of Nichiren buddhism nor of the Lotus Sutra, but Nichiren clearly founded a school of buddhism. It does seem to me, however, that SGI is a distortion of Nichiren buddhism.
no Buddhist tradition accepts Nichiren
VoidWhereProhibited said:Good points. I am simply dissagreeing with ZenMonk`s statement because if taken literally it implies that all of the sects which consider the monk Nichiren to have been their "founder" are in fact not Buddhist. .
zenmonk_genryu said:That's correct. And anyone who has read Nichiren's writings would understand why.
zenmonk_genryu said:And neither did the Buddha teach that only those who are ordained can attain enlightenment, and there are several laymen and women in the Suttas who awakened.
Adiana said:What I think the SGI is implying is that the Buddha nature is in each and every one of us and that we all can achieve enlightenment. There are some sects of Buddhism, Nichiren Shoshu among them, that believe enlightenment is only for the priesthood and not for the lay believers. That is their business if they choose to think that. I do not do so, however. To each their own.Adiana:usflag:
keithg said:Although I am probably not qualified to give a knowladgable enough answer, I am going to try anyway. :lol: Another way you might want to look at that would be that some christians are not to fond of catholics, and not all catholics practice everything the church dishes out to them. In fact I bet some of them disagree with great parts of it. I hope that helps everyone come to a understanding. :smilec: KeithEdit: I wasnt respodning to you directly Adiana, just putting that there so everyone can compare the two.
Adiana said:Some people have posted that they think that the SGI is a form of "cult." I have never felt that way and I have always felt welcome in any SGI center I have gone to. I believe in religious acceptance, as well as tolerance, for everyone.Adiana:usflag: :wavey:
zenmonk_genryu said:Not at all. It simply means that D.T Suzuki wrote about Sakyamuni's image as it was used by both Nichiren followers and by Buddhists. It does not imply for example that D T Suzuki endorsed Nichiren's views. If he did, after all, he'd be calling for the beheading of Zen, Tendai, Shingon and Pure Land priests and nuns, which would be a strange thing to do since Suzuki himself was an ardent Pure Land Buddhist, especially in his later years. As one Buddhist writer put it, "Nichiren is to Buddhism what Mormonism is to Christianity".
So I thought I ought to read the Lotus Sutra.But what did I find? Over and over again the Lotus Sutra proclaims itself the highest teaching of the Buddha. But as I read through it I kept waiting to find this great teaching. To me it just seemed like a lot of colorful imagery. Lots of miraculous happenings, but in the whole Sutra it barely touches on anything that I might recognize as a useful teaching, except that through its imagery and parables it does seem to illustrate important Mahayana concepts such as skillful means, the boddhisattva ideal, and the possibility of universal salvation. On the other hand there were several things that bothered me:1. It speaks of the supposedly great merit of cutting off your own arm or big toe and burning it up as an offering to the Buddha. 2. It speaks of Buddha-lands that have as one of their “pure” features the absence of any women.3. It speaks of advanced Buddhist practitioners who are women and who therefore will be reborn as men in order to reach Buddhahood. 4. It says that anyone who scoffs at the Lotus Sutra or its followers will go to Hell (albeit temporarily) and details the violent calamities that will befall opponents of either the Lotus Sutra or its preachers. 5. It goes into detail about the rewards, including bodily beauty, that will come to the preachers of the Sutra. 6. It says that those who believe/chant just one syllable of the Lotus Sutra will gain merit at least equal to or even more than that of venerating all the many thousands of Buddhas. 7. It says that the Sutra itself will be regarded as a Buddha by those who follow it.
buddhafoot said:ZMWhat do you think of DT Suzuki?I'm reading some of his works at the moment. -bf
VoidWhereProhibited said:I`ve been waiting for someone to post some wonderfully wise way for me to understand the things I posted above:I`m still waiting....
VoidWhereProhibited said:Thanks for some pointers. But not sure how to test some of these things. Kalama Sutra? Don`t know it.
VoidWhereProhibited said:Thanks for some pointers. But not sure how to test some of these things. Kalama Sutra? Don`t know it. I am, in fact, a "New Buddhist". I`ve studied about Buddhism over the years, but I haven`t actually been a Buddhist for very long. I don`t have any "realization" at all, my knowlege is mostly just in the head. I haven`t made up my mind about many controversial points, or even what school to follow. I was a Catholic Christian most of my life, then lost my faith, as they say. My knowledge of Christian belief and practice is more than my knowledge of the Dharma. And now I am a bit cautious about identifying with any particular religion. Please forgive me if I sound a wrong note or seem argumentative or challenging at times. But I would really like to be able to freely speak my doubts here and not offend any body.For one thing, in my reading I have discovered that in Vajrayana of the Himalayan/Mongolian variety there is something know as Tantric Vows. I have also read how these vows may be broken, referred to as a "root downfall" (reminds me of a "mortal sin" in Catholicism.) I have read that it is a Tantric Root Downfall to deny any teaching of the Buddha as actually having been given by him.Anyway, I have lived in Japan just for about a year and a half, but long enough to see how Buddhism can be thoroughly "corrupt" but also how it can thoroughly permeate a culture even in these modern days.
Anyway, I have lived in Japan just for about a year and a half, but long enough to see how Buddhism can be thoroughly "corrupt" but also how it can thoroughly permeate a culture even in these modern days.
Just as a side note, I'm working on something so secret, not even I know anything about it.(that's most of what I do now).
On testing things: that is one point I find difficult about Esoteric Buddhism (as Tantric Buddhism is known here: Mikkyo literally "secret")-- if the teachings are secret until you are initiated into the practice, how can you "try them out" before you are, perhaps, in over your head?
Perhaps I can see your point, Brigid, about Buddhism and corruption. But it also seems to me that an ardent follower of any teaching or religion might claim the same thing: that once it is corrupted it is no longer itself.