I challenge the SGI to a debate

Intro:

The following is a challenge to those who are defenders of one form of Buddhist orthodoxy. However, I think much of what follows would ring true for my brothers and sisters of other faiths as well.

My challenge:

I am willing to debate anyone concerning the validity of Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism. You know its practitioners as chanters of "Nam Myoho Renge Kyo."

More specifically, I challenge those who are members and leaders of the Soka Gakkai International, up to and including President Daisaku Ikeda. In a larger sense, I represent all laypersons who have dutifully - over a period of many years - sat in congregations listening to sermons, but still have nagging doubts. Or, even better, who have figured out where their own faiths have gone wrong and end up urging reformation of those faiths.

The debate I envision is open to anyone in the SGI who considers himself a defender of the faith. We could debate publicly or privately: Your choice.

Here are some points which could be covered in a debate.

Debating Points

ONE:  Why don't we ever have any "sermons" after Sunday morning chanting sessions at the SGI's Chicago Culture Center? Frankly, the closing comments made when we finish chanting are an embarrassment. The Lotus Sutra encourages us to preach, yet we don't. And, no, it doesn't count as "preaching" when some senior leader reads a line or two of guidance written by some other senior leader, who then encourages us to dress warmly on cold winter days and to always drive safely. Years ago, we used to have an occasional lecture analyzing the writings of Bodhisattva Nichiren, but we don't even have those any more.

TWO:  How many more times are we going to see those terribly boring videos of President Ikeda? How many more times are we going to hear how many honorary degrees he's been awarded? How many famous people he's rubbed elbows with? Give people a reason to be enthusiastic about bringing themselves (and guests) to our Sunday morning gatherings. Give them the benefit of hearing the uncensored wisdom of the "ordinary" members (and not only the leaders) from the stage of the Ikeda Auditorium.

THREE:  We are practicing correctly only if we are persecuted for our beliefs and actions - the writings of Nichiren are very clear on this point. For most of us, the obstacles in our personal lives can't be considered to be forms of persecution. As long as we continue to practice incorrectly and not make waves (no serious efforts to spread the teachings to others), we will continue to be left alone by the powerful forces which would otherwise persecute us. And you must have noticed by now, they are very much so leaving us alone.

FOUR:  Never once, in all of his many writings, did the founder of SGI's Buddhism (Nichiren Daishonin, 1222-1282) ever refer to himself as a Buddha (not even once saying, "I am the True Buddha of the Latter Day of the Law"). A Buddha always declares his Buddhahood - often and publicly. And he shows proof by demonstrating his supernatural powers. So why does the SGI claim that Nichiren is a Buddha in the absence of any claim or of any proof?

FIVE:  SGI makes a distinction between a True Buddha and a provisional Buddha, claiming Nichiren to be a True Buddha and Shakyamuni Buddha to be a provisional Buddha. SGI uses this device in an attempt to belittle the teachings of Shakyamuni and elevate the teachings of their founder Nichiren. However, even Nichiren agrees that Shakyamuni’s teachings in the ultimate Lotus Sutra are second to none. In fact, Nichiren refers to himself as a disciple of Shakyamuni Buddha. But in this modern day and age, the SGI claims that we are to ignore the Lotus Sutra (claiming it to be irrelevant) and only consider the teachings of Nichiren (and the writings of President Ikeda!).

In this, the SGI is making a profound mistake. Buddhist scriptures can be classified as True or Provisional, but there are not two different kinds of Buddhas (one superior and the other with an expiration date). Since Nichiren did not declare himself to be a Buddha, SGI has no business promoting him and demoting Shakyamuni.

SIX:  In order to elevate the importance of their founder, Nichiren, SGI teaches that the advent of Nichiren was predicted by Shakyamuni himself. For years, I heard this claim at SGI meetings: "The Buddha predicted that another, greater than himself, would be born during the fifth 500-year period after his passing in a country northeast of India." The source of this claim was never cited, but I can tell you one thing: It's not within the text of the Lotus Sutra.

But this claim becomes irrelevant, since it could only be true of Nichiren if he had been born on or after the year 1500 (instead of in 1222). Even SGI President Ikeda has written that Shakyamuni lived "about 2500 years ago." In Nichiren's time, however, it was believed that the Buddha died around 1,000 BCE. If that were true (and it's not), only then could Nichiren have possibly been the predicted one.

SEVEN:  If Nichiren is a Buddha, then why do we call him Nichiren Daishonin? Why don't we call him Nichiren Buddha? I knew a long-time SGI member, born in Chicago, who said, "The word daishonin is Japanese for Buddha." Wrong! Daishonin means "great sage," while butsu means Buddha. When SGI tried (maybe ten years or so ago) to promote the use of commonly understood terms and avoid esoteric Japanese words, I had asked a question which was never answered:

"Since SGI publishes a book entitled The Major Writings of Nichiren Daishonin, why don't they change its title to The Major Writings of the Sun Lotus Buddha? After all, they are the publishers and they claim to desire to use common English words wherever possible."

EIGHT:  Nichiren wrote that chanting the phrase Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo once has the same benefit as reading the entire Lotus Sutra once. If that's true, why does SGI bother to include sutra recitation as part of its daily liturgical recitation? This recitation takes a few minutes but that covers only a few small portions of the Lotus Sutra. Since those few minutes would be better spent chanting more N-M-R-K (each utterance of which is equal in benefit to one recitation of the entire Lotus Sutra), why should a member waste his time by chanting any sections of the Lotus at all?

It takes less than five seconds to chant Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo once. It takes 13 hours to read the entire Lotus one time aloud. If both actions are equal in benefit, why should anyone do other than chant N-M-R-K?

NINE:  Why did Nichiren state, chanting N-M-R-K once is equal to reading the entire Lotus Sutra once? Shakyamuni Buddha states, in the Lotus Sutra itself, that proper Buddhist practice consists of reading, reciting, and pondering this Lotus Sutra. He didn't say, "Just repeat its title [which is what N-M-R-K is] over and over and consider that to be equal to repeatedly reading the Lotus."

Nichiren made such a statement in order to entice his largely illiterate audience to make an initial connection to Buddhist practice. In 13^th century Japan, Buddhism was regarded by commoners to be a mysterious realm accessible only to intellectuals. Of course Nichiren realized that people who could be lured into practicing at such an elementary level could also be gradually introduced to core concepts alluded to in the chant itself and in the complete Lotus Sutra. However, he had to find some means to initially attract people.

I don't deny that repeatedly chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo opens doors. It does and it has the power to improve lives and bring benefit. Before I started asking hard questions, I chanted many long hours in many different settings. Maybe that's how I got to the point where I could actually ask hard questions. The longest I had chanted (that is, just chanted N-M-R-K) was for 17 hours, with 5 minute breaks every hour on the hour.

But ... it slowly dawned on me that Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo was not a substitute for the Lotus Sutra. In fact, the recitation of the entire Lotus Sutra is what is promoted by the Buddha [read: Shakyamuni] himself.

TEN:  In the SGI, we often refer to ourselves as the Bodhisattvas of the Earth. After reading the Lotus Sutra over 120 times, I can only conclude that we are not the BOTE (although they are present in this day and age, acting invisibly behind-the-scenes). BOTE are disciples of the Buddha going back trillions of years, who vowed to spread the teachings of the Lotus Sutra - but there's a problem. There are supposed to be billions of them and they're supposed to be flawless in conduct and godlike in appearance. I don't see them (do you?) and they are certainly not anyone I've ever met in the SGI. Though I've met a lot of wonderful people in that group.

But I know people like to be stroked. Which is why leaders in the SGI tell their members, "You are the BOTE - destined to save the world by propagating True Buddhism." These same leaders, however, don't ever emphasize how flawless these BOTE are. To do so would cause members to say, "Huh? That can't be us." Which is why, I suspect, we are not encouraged to read the Lotus Sutra since doing that would lead members to a different conclusion:

"What we really are, are the Teachers of the Law mentioned in the Lotus, who are flawed human beings with shortcomings." That doesn't sound as grand and glorious as the BOTE - but it happens to be the truth.

ELEVEN:  I don't consider President Ikeda or even Nichiren to be my sensei. To me, sensei is Shakyamuni Buddha who did not die centuries ago in India . The 16^th chapter, which SGI members chant every day, says so [but they don't understand this, because they chant it in Chinese!]:

"In order to save living beings, as an expedient means I appear to enter nirvana but in truth I do not pass into extinction. I am always here, preaching the Law. I am always here, but through my transcendental powers I make it so that living beings in their befuddlement do not see me even when close by."

Since Shakyamuni Buddha is still alive and can be sensei to anyone who accepts him in that role, it is a mistake to accept anyone else as sensei.

TWELVE:  Over and over again in the Lotus Sutra, Shakyamuni urges us to "accept, uphold, read, ponder, and recite this Lotus Sutra." That's correct practice, but SGI doesn't encourage this. SGI urges us to "follow the strategy of the Lotus Sutra," but discourages us from actually reading it. Instead we are urged to recite only brief parts of the sutra in a language we don't even understand. So how could we possibly ponder it?

THIRTEEN:  When I tried to explain (at an SGI discussion meeting) that we are not Buddhas, the leader/moderator said we should pursue that topic another time. I claimed that we are seekers of the Way, on the path to Buddhahood, but that we are not yet Buddha's - we're only working on it. One SGI leader even claimed that Buddhahood is not a destination but a journey. Bullshit. The Buddha speaks of countless individuals, including himself, who attained Enlightenment. That means, they crossed a threshold: After a given point in time, they became Buddhas remaining so forever after; before that, they were not yet Buddhas.

Closing Thoughts

I was banned by my local SGI leader from attending any more meetings at her home, since (she claims) I seek to propagate a new religion entirely different from SGI's brand of Nichiren Buddhism. What I had sought was a debate, but I guess that was too much to ask. Too threatening. Might get too many people questioning certain basic assumptions robotically carried around for decades.

I am not introducing anything new in the area of Buddhist doctrine. I seek to prevent a corruption of the teachings by so-called modernization. Well, no, I take that back. I am introducing a few new elements - but they are only new in the sense of not having been spoken of by others before me. But these are not really new, simply because they are truths open to anyone who reads the common language of the Lotus Sutra. [For instance, one such new element is my claim that Shakyamuni Buddha is still alive. But as I said...]

I know there are others like me in the other faith traditions - Buddhist and non-Buddhist alike - who cringe when they feel their teachings are being corrupted by worldly men with agendas of their own. There are Jews who tell their fellow Jews: "What you do is not in my name." There are Catholics who doubt the worldly Pope, certainly not thinking him infallible. There are Christians who loathe egotistical, self-idolizing televangelists. There are Shiites who think the world suffers from too many Ayatollahs [one of them, a billionaire!].

I believe that together - we, the devout laity of the world - must challenge our religious institutions. This challenge will do me good, it will do you good, and it will be good for the overall spiritual welfare of the world's people. Then, of course, world peace cannot be that far behind.

Steven Searle, just another member of the Virtual Samgha of the Lotus

"It has been written that the voice does the Buddha's work. If so, then it is time for the SGI to speak up. Debate me" - Steve.

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com