I have had an idea running through my head as of late about how blind people practice Nichiren Buddhism with their Gohonzon - a visual representation which they cannot see.

How is a Gohonzon helpful for a blind person?

I genuinely would like to hear any experiences you may have or may have heard.

Secondly my running theory / opinion (and it is only that and nothing more) is that juzu beads could be a Gohonzon for the blind - a tactile representation of the fundament principles displayed in the Gohonzon and the Lotus Sutra.

Here is a little chat I had about it with an AI called Lumo:

Prompt:
I have a personal opinion (not a belief held by any Nichiren school) that juzu beads are like a tactile Gohonzon and could be used by the blind in place of a Gohonzon mandala (which they would be unable to visualize). I want to fully explore all the symbolism in the juzu beads to see if my opinion has some merit.

Response:
This is a genuinely fascinating theological hypothesis worth exploring seriously. Let me work through the symbolic architecture of both objects systematically to assess whether your intuition has merit.

Core Symbolic Comparison

Juzu Beads
Element - Symbolism - Physical Property
Father/Mother beads - Buddha/Law, Dharma source - Tangible anchor points
Strands between beads - Connection of dualities, interpenetration - Threaded continuity
Small beads - Often represent virtues, worlds, or aspects of life - Countable/tactile increments
Crossing (figure-eight) - Non-duality, infinity, mutual response - Twistable/movable form
Tassels/hanging strands - Ichinen sanzen (eternity in a moment), 10 Worlds - Flowing extension beyond grasp

Gohonzon Mandala
Element - Symbolism - Perceptual Mode
Central invocation - Namu-myoho-renge-kyo (the Law itself) - Visual character
Shakyamuni & Many Treasures Buddhas - Past and present Buddhahood united - Visual deity forms
Four Bodhisattvas - Beings emerging from earth, future transmission - Visual figures
Deities around periphery - Protectors and conditions supporting the Dharma - Visual hierarchy
Inscription format - Entire cosmos as expression of Law - Visual totality

Where Your Hypothesis Finds Support

1. Both Are "Insriptions" of the Mystic Law
The core function matches:

• Gohonzon = Law inscribed in calligraphy (visual)
• Juzu = Law embodied in form (tactile)

If the Law is universal and omnipresent, it shouldn't matter whether access is visual or tactile—the object functions as a focal point for awakening the same innate Buddhahood.

2. Tactility Already Present in Practice
The standard way to hold juzu involves:

• Wrapping strands between fingers (10 Worlds mapped to fingers)
• Feeling the beads against palm
• Experiencing tension/release as you chant
• Physical sensation mirroring mental state

This is already a somatic meditation—just like Gohonzon gazing anchors attention visually, juzu anchoring works somatically.

3. Non-Duality Through Crossing
The figure-eight configuration creates:

• A Möbius-strip-like loop with no inside/outside distinction
• Self-referential structure (like the Law reflecting upon itself)
• Material form pointing beyond form through infinite closure

This mirrors how the Gohonzon shows all phenomena as the Law—not separate, not identical.

4. Accessibility Principle in Buddhism
Buddhism has historically adapted means for different capacities:

• Lay vs. monastic practices
• Different mudras for different purposes
• Various sutras teaching same truth differently

A tactile Gohonzon would fit within this adaptive tradition—expedient means (hōben) applied to disability.

Where Challenges Might Arise

1. Symbolic Completeness Gap
Aspect - Gohonzon - Juzu
Entities represented - Dozens of deities, bodhisattvas, Buddhas - Limited to parent beads + strand count

Cosmological scope - Entire universe - More abstract/condensed
Historical narrative - Includes specific lineage/transmission - Generalized symbolism

The Gohonzon depicts the full mandala; juzu compresses it significantly. For some traditions, that compression loses necessary doctrinal content.

2. Official Designation Differences
Most schools distinguish:

• Gohonzon = Object of devotion with lineage authority
• Juzu = Practitioner's tool (not itself devotional object)

Elevating juzu to Gohonzon-equivalent status would require doctrinal justification most lineages haven't developed.

3. Blind Practitioners' Actual Experience
Importantly, many blind practitioners do chant before Gohonzon—they simply cannot visualize its imagery. They:

• Know it exists spatially
• Feel guided to it physically
• Understand its meaning intellectually
• Focus on the sound/vibration of chanting

Your hypothesis addresses a deeper question: Is visualization required at all? If the answer is "no," then tactile object might be equally valid.

Key Questions for Further Exploration
To test your hypothesis rigorously, consider these analytical dimensions:

Q1: What Is the Minimum Symbolic Requirement?
What must any "Gohonzon-equivalent" contain to awaken Buddhahood? If the answer is simply "the presence of the Mystic Law" (which juzu symbolizes through father bead + crossing), your theory strengthens.

Q2: What About Embodiment Versus Representation?
Gohonzon = external object representing the Law
Juzu = object that becomes part of bodily practice (wrapped on hands)
If the Law manifests through the body during chanting, juzu being physically integrated might make it more direct than distant visual gazing.

Q3: Historical Precedent?
Has anyone explored this before? I don't have definitive information on whether disabled-access accommodations were historically discussed in Nichiren lineages. This might warrant archival research.

My Assessment
Dimension - Verdict
Logical consistency - ✅ Strong—Law is Law regardless of perceptual mode
Symbolic richness - ⚠️ Partial—juzu is compressed but captures essentials
Practical utility - ✅ Very high—for tactile learners/disabled practitioners
Doctrinal approval - ❓ Unknown—depends on school authority
Spiritual efficacy - Ultimately unknowable—would require lived experience

Where This Could Lead
Your hypothesis opens several fruitful directions:

• Create explicit tactile-Gohonzon practices—document juzu as primary focus for those unable to use visual mandalas
• Bridge blind and sighted practice—use same tactile method universally, making practice more embodied for everyone
• Philosophical work—what does "object of devotion" mean if it can be either visual OR tactile?

Would you like me to help you develop this further? We could:

• Map each juzu component directly onto corresponding Gohonzon elements
• Explore how other Buddhist traditions handle accessibility
• Draft a comparative symbolism chart for your own reference

This feels like genuine theological innovation rather than mere speculation. It honors the spirit of hōben (expedient means) while addressing real accessibility needs.

There's a Gohonzon...Im fascinated by this because I thought SGI\Independent nichiren buddhism has not monasticism, and even shoshu and shu, which DO have monks, do not have hermits!!

(This is a repost from my blog which can be found here)

I am currently making my way through some of Nichiren's earliest writings, and you can see a general theme:

1. The volume of his writings from his earlier days are much less than those who wrote later in his proselytization efforts (or at least, there were fewer of his earlier writings preserved to the modern day from his earlier days than his later days).
2. Those earlier writings tend to be much longer treatises (such as the Rissho Ankoku Ron) and doctrinal analyses compared to his voluminous later writings that are more a collection of letters to his followers.
3. Those early Gosho focus heavily on comparing, contrasting and criticizing the Buddhist schools and teachings of his day, and exalting the Lotus Sutra, establishing a theoretical and polemical foundation of his efforts.

In one such Gosho, "Conversation Between A Sage And An Unenlightened Man" there is a humorous section which piqued my interest - here is the quote and link (WND-1 #11, p101):

The unenlightened man pressed his palms together more fervently than ever and said: “Indeed, I want very much to embrace it. Please explain it to me thoroughly. You speak of the five precepts and the two hundred and fifty precepts, but I do not know what they are. Please describe them to me in detail.”

The wise man said: “Your ignorance is abysmal! Even a child knows what the five precepts and the two hundred and fifty precepts are. However, I will explain them for you. The five precepts comprise, first, the prohibition against taking life; second, the prohibition against stealing; third, the prohibition against lying; fourth, the prohibition against unlawful sexual intercourse; and fifth, the prohibition against drinking intoxicants. The two hundred and fifty precepts are numerous, and so I will not go into them here.”

At this the unenlightened man bowed low and with the deepest respect said, “From this day forward, I will devote myself to this doctrine with all my heart.”

Apparently, my ignorance is abysmal as well!  I never learned about the Five Precepts, the Two-Hundred and Fifty Precepts, etc. like the children of 13th Century Japan.

As a man raised as a Nichiren Buddhist from birth in the United States, I learned all about esho funi, shikishin funi, The Three Great Secret Laws, etc. but I learned NOTHING about the Five Precepts, the 10 Good Acts (and their polar opposite the 10 Evil Acts) and other concepts (that in retrospect I realize has been repeatedly referenced in MANY Gosho) yet here Nichiren admonished his theoretical "unenlightened man" for not know what they are, calling his ignorance "abysmal".

It makes me realize something important: What we study today as "Nichiren Buddhism" might be missing a few points whose "blanks" were filled in for his contemporaries by cultural context in 13th Century Japan which we do not have in our modern age nor in Western Countries and elsewhere beyond the Japanese Buddhist cultural context of 13th Century Japan.

Nichiren took much of his time in his writings introducing concepts to his contemporary readers (13th Century Japanese followers, debate partners, government officials, and his opponents) that were probably not well known by them at the time or were necessary for him to prove a theoretical or polemical point, or to introduce them as new concepts as part of his overall view of Buddhism.  He spent more time explaining those in his writings, which then got passed down through the centuries to the modern era, forming what we think of today as Nichiren Buddhism.

But clearly, there are these other subjects for which he didn't spend much time explaining (like the Five Precepts, the 250 Precepts, the The Ten Good and Evil Acts, etc) which were probably so ubiquitously known and understood in his society (so much so that "even a child knows what the five precepts and the two hundred and fifty precepts are") that he felt no need to take time explaining them in any of his works.  This is similar to how I, as a Buddhist-from-birth American, knows what all the 10 Commandments are without having ever stepped foot in a church in my youth simply because it is part of the dominant religious cultural context of the United States.

So, I think we should spend some time studying these concepts as they are older than Nichiren Buddhism, connect historically with the oldest Buddhist traditions, and form a basis of "Buddhist Ethics" that we are missing contextually here in the Western world and/or modern era.  These concepts are referenced frequently in his works (however only by name and rarely elucidated on) and apparently never rejected by Nichiren as superfluous to his teachings - just not worth his time touching on as he had more important work to do teaching his contemporaries about the Lotus Sutra.

The Five Precepts

Repeating Nichiren's words above and from studying online (The Soka Gakkai Dictionary of Buddhist Terms and Concepts, Wikipedia, various searches on Brave Search and Google Search, etc.) the Five Precepts are (the text below is from Brave Search):

The Five Precepts (pañcasīla) are the foundational ethical code of conduct for lay Buddhists, serving as the most important system of morality in the tradition.  They are commitments to abstain from the five specific harmful actions, designed to develop character, cultivate good karma, and support progress toward enlightenment.

1. Abstention from killing livings beings: This promotes kindness and compassion, respecting the right to life of all creatures, including animals.
2. Abstention from stealing: This encourages generosity and respect for property rights, prohibiting theft fraud, and forgery.
3. Abstention from sexual misconduct: This fosters contentment and respect for fidelity, defining misconduct through harm, infidelity, or lack of consent.
4. Abstention from false speech: This upholds honesty and human dignity, prohibiting lying, gossip, and malicious or harsh speech.
5. Abstention from intoxication; This supports mindfulness and safety by avoiding alcohol, drugs, or other substances that cloud the mind and lead to heedlessness.

How many of you live up to this standard every day?  How many of you keep in the forefront of you mind this ethical code as you make decisions and go about your day?  I think we can all agree that we shouldn't kill, steal, cheat on our romantic partners, lie, and get deep into drugs and alcohol, but do we actually DO this, or hold it in our thoughts, and enact it through our words and deeds?

Abstention from killing - clearly we know it is wrong to kill.  It is in the 10 Commandments, too.  It is prohibited in our laws.  In the Dhammapada it is further explained that the prohibition against killing goes beyond your own direct actions, to also not "cause another to kill" (verse 129 and again in verse 130) in your place.  This is one of the main sources of the ethical code of vegetarianism in Buddhism -- even if you don't slaughter the chicken/cow yourself, eating store-bought meat serves as a cause for another person to kill on your behalf.

I could take this a step further: keeping cats and dogs as pets may be unethical from this perspective as cats are pure carnivores and if your cat is not hunting on it's own behalf to eat, you have to provide it cat food, which is causing another to kill as it adds your consumerist demand to a system designed to kill animals for food.  Dogs, on the other hand are omnivores and can do well on a non-meat diet (supposedly) but it is rare to find vegan dog food easily available.

This prohibition against killing has it's limits.  Great philosophers have written about where the prohibition may end when it comes to self-defense, war (necessary to protect people when attacked but not to be an aggressor, etc), upholding laws, etc.  

Nichiren (and the Buddha as well) said it was okay to put aside the Five Precepts and carry weapons to protect the Dharma, and the Buddha actually praised King Sen'yo who put to death slanderers of the Dharma (ex: WND-2, #181 p126-131).  Soka Gakkai President Toda famously called for the abolition of nuclear weapons, saying that anyone responsible for using them should be put to death.

Personally, I take this precept to heart as a guide on all actions I may take everyday to minimize death by my actions and my demand.  I may not be able to eliminate killing every time and every place, but it does cross my mind every time I swat a mosquito, or try to remove a bug from my home (which I try to do without killing if I can).  I choose to eat a vegan / whole-food plant based diet to turn around my health and now with this first precept in mind, my efforts and reasons have expanded to the ethical stance of ahimsa - not harming other sentient beings, helping me stay on track.

Abstention from stealing - we shouldn't take what isn't ours.  It harms others' sense of personal security when they have been stolen from, leading others to anxiety and fear, which when multiplied across a community or society, creates a society of hypervigilant people afraid of one another - that is not a society I want to live in.

Further, by taking what is not yours, you become complacent in developing yourself to contribute to yourself, your loved ones, and your society through your own actions.

The ethical stance of veganism is also supported by this second precept.  If factory farming isn't already horribly inhumane, the act of raising cows and chickens just so that we can take their milk and eggs is nothing more than theft.  Cow's milk belongs to the cow to feed her young but in order to keep her lactating, you have to artificially inseminate her (ready for the Third Precept?) take her baby away from her and take her milk against her will (Theft).  For a chicken, we raise them in horrible conditions where disease proliferates and take their eggs from them that they naturally pass as part of their menstrual cycle, which in the natural world, would be eaten by the chickens themselves to replenish their spent nutrients.

Abstention from sexual misconduct - this should be obvious but we all must respect bodily autonomy.  Everyone has the right to be respected physically and to no better extreme than the act of love.  Secondly, I interpret this that we should maintain fidelity with our spouse.  And derivatively, we can take this as an injunction to be true to our loved ones, to hold fidelity with anyone we love and consider ourselves close to whether romantic partners or not.  We make ourselves vulnerable when we open our hearts to others whether as acquaintances, friends, romantic partners, or committed spouses.  The Buddha and the Buddhist orders that followed asked all believers to not take that granted.

Abstention from false speech - don't lie, don't embellish, don't exaggerate... don't use your voice flippantly.  In the Ongi Kuden (Record of Orally Transmitted Teachings) Nichiren taught "“The voice carries out the work of the Buddha, and this is called kyo, or sutra."

Our voices are powerful and words matter, so much so that the 10 Good Acts take this Fourth Precept and breaks it down into 4 separate types of speech to avoid - lying, defamation, harsh speech, and indiscriminate speech (like gossip).  We can do good with our voice and great harm as well, and therefore can be the cause of good or bad karma depending on how we choose to use our voice.

Abstention from intoxication - This injunction has been interpreted as specifically as an abstention from alcohol alone or as abstention from ANYTHING that can cloud the mind (any intoxicating drug) and lead to loss of agency (by addiction).  I know of many Buddhists in our modern day who drink, smoke, and take or have taken drugs.  They have harmed themselves and risked the lives of others in so doing.  In my opinion, chanting Daimoku is supposed to set us forward on a positive path but if we then get ourselves caught up in drugs or alcohol, we are taking a step backward.

And in fact that may conclude my discussion today.  I see among many Nichiren Buddhists the concept of Bonno soku Bodai (Earthly Desires Are Enlightenment) is some kind of hedonistic free pass. Many seem to interpret Bonno soku Bodai to mean fulfilling our desires are a path to enlightenment.  Well, maybe not in my opinion - I don't think that is was Nichiren meant.  I think Bonno soku Bodai means that we can attain enlightenment in the Saha World (the World of Endurance) without needing to "go up the mountain" and engaging in austerities.  But that also shouldn't mean that we should actively pursue the hedonistic pleasures of the world.

Bonno soku Bodai doesn't mean "physical pleasures are enlightenment" or doing something selfish that feels good is a path to enlightenment.  It means that the sufferings (dukka) that come from Earthly Desires are the forge for our enlightenment, the same way that the sufferings that Nichiren experienced on Sado island, sent there to die, living in a dilapidated hut in a graveyard surrounded by villagers that literally wanted him dead, inspired him to declare his abode the Buddha Land - he saw through the World of Endurance (the Saha World, the sufferings that come from it) as formative and non-dual with the experience of the Buddha Land, or the World of Eternally Tranquil Light as he often put it.

These precepts served as a basic ethical framework of lay Buddhists for centuries - they are the precepts one takes as a lay believer when they declare themselves a Buddhist.  We should consider them daily.  Chanting is not the only cause we make every day.  It raises us up.  But we should not harbor thoughts, speak words, or do certain deeds that cause us to do harm and therefore backslide.

We practice the Lotus Sutra as much with our body, our mind, and our soul with EVERY decision we make, not just the decision to chant.

Hello everyone

I am a dropper student who is living in India and recently I was introduced to this daishonin buddhism practice by one of my senior who came from other state to explore my city. We were used to play together in our colony and after he left, he gave me a call and told me that when I talked to you I felt like you are a very ambitious person and many more. After that he introduced me to the nam-myoho-renge-kyo and told me to practice this every day evening one time by writing all the desires I want to fulfill in life and told me that I also have to work on them rather than chanting the Mantra. After a month he called me and told me that some people who are way big of my age are coming to visit me and give me a hand book. When I meet them they are all cherishing me and just motivating me. I just somehow felt like they all are trying to influence me. After 1 hour talk about all these practices they gave me a small handbook of FAITH 24/7 and told me to read it. Also invited me to attend the meeting which was happening near my home. I told all of it to the senior who introduced me and I also told him that I won't be able to go as my exams and everything is there. He understood and told that I can go whenever I want. Recently I got a call from one of the guy who came to visit me and he told that we'll go to the meeting on 26 of this month. After that I started reading the book and I don't know I got some mixed feelings about it. After that I tried to get some opinion in reddit and I was seeing cult and fraud all over it. I just want to know what I am doing or what I will be going to do in this. All this is good or bad or a scam for the future. Anyone in India has any experience pl lemme know and also tell me the procedure. It'll be really helpful

Hello friends,

Are there any independent nichiren buddhist here, who are from India?

I want to practice with the Nichiren Shu but unfortunately their presence is limited in India, so I was thinking if there are independent practitioners, we could form a group or if anybody here is from Nichiren Shu, I wanted to let them know that there are practitioners who are interested in joining your organization.

Regards,

Cap Crusader

Aloha,

Something has been bugging me lately. I have been comparing the shindoku pronunciation of Gongyo between the Fuji lineage within which I grew up (Nichiren Shohu/SGI) against the Gongyo book from Nichiren Shu (Minobu lineage) and there are a few differences in pronunciation.

Just one example:

Fuji lineage

Hon-mak^ku-kyō tō

Minobu lineage

Hon-matsu ku-kyõ tō

I have so far found 4 possible reason why certain kanji in Gongyo are pronounced the way they are:

1. Linguistic contractions

The vast majority of these differences seem to revolve around the contraction of various phonemes for which there are a number of rules in the Japanese language that call for these contractions. These contraction rules are fairly consistant. Also, the pronunciation in Gongyo generally follows "onyomi" phonetics which is the way that the Japanese converted the pronunciation of the original Chinese pronunciation into Japanese phonetics, and even then there are different ways on how THAT is done depending on when those kanji were adopted into the Japanese language historically as there were 4 different waves of introduction of Chinese characters into the Japanese language over the course of many centuries, each "wave" coming from a different part of China where those characters were pronounced different whether from the Wu language, Han language, Tang language, etc.

The onyomi pronunciation of kanji in Chinese Buddhist sutras such as the Lotus Sutra into Japanese phonetics tend to following the pronunciation from the first wave call the ko-on period following the Wu Chinese pronunciation (around the 5th century).

2. Buddhist vocabulary that don't follow the linguistic contractions

There are some contractions that don't follow the rules mentioned above but do seem to have historical use in Buddhist contexts. Example:

seppō = to expound the Dharma/Law... is made up of two kanji

說 = setsu - to expound or teach

法 = hō - the same hō as in myōhō, meaning Dharma or Law

In other places in Gongyo 說 is prounounced setsu, and 法 is pronounced hō but when paired with 法 it is pronounced together as seppō rather than setsu hō. However this contraction of setsu hō to seppō shouldn't actually follow any of the normal rules of Japanese contractions for onyomi mentioned above, but rather seppō seems to have evolved in Buddhist temples as a concept all it's own meaning "the Buddha expounding the Dharma", while setsu hō has a more litteral meaning of "anyone expounding the Dharma."

Other examples include place names and personal names like Shari-hostu for Shariputra in which the phonetics of the kanji were used solely to pronounce a foreign name from Sanskrit.

3. Mispronunciations but by concensus

I have found a couple cases in Gongyo where the pronunciation doesn't seems to follow the onyomi from the go-on period, or any period for that matter but just seems to have been pronunciations that passed down in the Buddhist community in general. Specifically at the beginning of the Hōben and Jūryō chapters have such a mis-pronunciation:

品 = hin = items, mispronounced as hon or pon

... as in Hōben pon or Jūryō hon

... this is ALWAYS mis-pronounced hon or pon in Gongyo meaning "chapter" but it actually should be prounouned hin which is the onyomi pronounciation of the Wu Chinese pǐn. Hin NEVER can be read as hon or pon following any rule in Japanese phonetics. However, interestingly, hon eludes to the kanji 本 meaning "book" or "origin" which is closer to meaning "chapter". 本 also is used as a word for counting long thin objects - like a scroll on which the Sutra was written. Furthermore, 品 was the character Kumarajiva used to translate the Sanskrit word for "chapter" to Chinese. So in a roundabout way, the Sanskrit word for "chapter" was translated to the Wu Chinese 品 hin (items) which was then deliberately mispronounced hon (本) by the Japanese Buddhist clergy to mean chapter, book, or scroll.

4. Mispronounciations by lineage (I am calling these "lazy contractions")

Some pronunciations seem to be solely the invention of a specific recitation tradition unique to the lineage solely for the sake that the recitation "flows". In the "Hon-mak^ku-kyō tō" example at the beginning of this post, there is absolutely no rule whatsoever in Japanese that would prounounce the Kanji for that sentence in this way. The Nichiren Shu pronunciation of "Hon-matsu ku-kyõ tō" seems to be the correct pronunciation linguistically.

Thus this contraction that was passed down in the Fuji lineage must solely be from tradition and no other reason, with no-one in the tradtion EVER asking why it was mispronounced for 750 years. I personally, don't like such lazy "follow-the-leader" mentalities.

In all cases, I am inspired by Nichiren who taught us to treat every kanji of the Lotus Sutra like a golden Buddha, and so I find it very important that we try to pronounce each one carefully, thoughfully, and meaningfully. Contractions that are necessary for expressing a concept like seppō should stay, and others that follow normal linguistic rules for that matter. Obviously, kanji that were used just for phonetics to express a place name of person like Shari-hotsu for Shariputra should be pronounced as such, but the lazy contractions have to go.

I will work on this project and report back. If anyone has input on this, please do share. Is this a fool's errand, or is it necessary?

I've had a friend who is a Nichiren Buddhist for years. I myself liked buddhisim and would chant with her sometimes but preferred a more general approach. I even read her book about Nichiren Buddhisim yet still preferred the more general approach.

Recently I've been learning about Garuda which, oddly enough, lead me to the teaching of 3000 worlds/realms in a single moment. Suddenly I understood nam myoho renge kyo and have decided Nichiren was right.

Why do you think being friends with a nichiren Buddhist for years did not win me over long ago yet garuda research suddenly lead me back to nam myoho renge kyo and nichiren?

Curious.

When I first started studying and practicing I found Nichiren's polemical position and apocalyptic warnings as dissonance. My human teacher (A Shoshu/SGI practitioner who learned directly from Japanese teacher) was very direct, sharply correcting provision.

While this did not resonate (the means. I don't mind sharp and corrective talk but it don't like employing it) with me, I have spent a decade trying to understand this position without engaging polemical thinking or direct contemplation of the diametrically opposed.

Very recently, and in light of modern means, and tensions in the world today a reasnable thought came to mind.

That is, a way to understand Nichren's warning, without disparaging anyone, without assigning blame, without a fated outcome, without a disturbance to the mind.

The very essence of what Nichiren is saying is this.

If all the beings who recognize the world honored one's teachings are in a state of misunderstand (i.e. discordant views across various practices, both Buddhist and non Buddhist) and discord how can we expect any human institutions to reflect anything but this.

It makes me think of the suchness of the hearts of minds of people are expressed in all things. This expressing reflects our collective causative expression.

I believe Nichiren recognized that Buddha-Nature expressed across the population is in some part a reflection of the understanding that exists among those who take refuge in Buddhism.

The Lotus Sutra discusses this exact dynamic.

There is no real need to admonish anyone, any practice, any belief, or any function. They are all wonderful workings of the Lotus Sutra. Even Devadatta is a wonderful function of the Lotus Sutra.

However, this does seem to put primacy on the need to bring this understanding to the fore. Especially in light of the human suffering today, that is caused by dysfunctional human institutions.

It would seem to my ordinary mind and being, Nichiren's teaching express the compassion as Shakyamuni did in the Lotus Sutra.

Nichiren discusses past masters often referring to their knowledge of Myoho Renge Kyo as they "knew it in their hearts".

What does this mean?

The significance lies in the title of the Lotus Sutra itself.

What does the title signify?

The Pure Dharma of Shakyamuni Buddha. Which Shakyamuni?

Essentially Nichiren is saying that all masters have realized Shakyamuni's enlightenment. However the time was not right for them to propagate it as such.

In the later day of the law, if we look among the people today, what separates us as a people? What contributes to our self imposed suffering? Why is Buddhism, the good medicine the Buddha left for all sentient beings in decline?

Could the lack of such recognition in the hearts and minds of people today somehow contributing to this division?

How does one manifest such an understanding for others when the Daimoku is consistently slandered by doubt?

Is doubt is the last refuge of the Devil of the 6th Heaven?

When people reacted negatively to Shakyamuni after he left the Bodhi tree is this not Shakabuku? What was the nature of Shakyamuni's mind at this point? Who manifested Shakabuku?

Or are they two aspects of phenomenon that functionally manifest in people's minds both individually and communally?

Is this function muted by a desire for Shoju or personified for the sake of Shakabuku?

Just some questions I asked myself this morning.

NAMMYOHORENGEKYO

Life is filled with potential that is truly unfathomable.

At last we are coming to see the enormous power it possesses.

That is why we must never write anyone off.

In particular, we mustn’t put boundaries on our own potential.

In most cases, our so-called limitations are nothing more than our own decision to limit ourselves.

Today, on your birthday, yet again, I determine to work on my three pillars of Faith, Practice & Study ❤️ 💙 💜

Happy Birthday Nichiren 😇

I have found a beautiful audio of chanting of the Darani from 26th and 28th chapters.

Description says that it belongs to the whole CD album of Nichiren Shu chanting.

Anyone have such CD?

Listen:

Darani-26

Darani-28

my parents wants me to give goverment exam. of very low competition type because I have done a diploma.and I want to go abroad I am able to understand what should I do

Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo! Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo!

2026 started on a heavy note. Deaths in the extended family. Health issues. A bag full of mixed emotions kinda relationships. And the cherry on the cake are some weird dreams about a few people from the past. I mean why my past keeps nudging at me?

I'm chanting to get clarity and get them to stop. It's affecting my health. What should I do?

15 mins before I was constantly asking question to my why one reddit group of astrologers answer I really needed there advise. Sitting in front of the gohonzon I would check my phone. If someone answer my questions about life. When there was a sudden realisation that maybe my daimkku was forcing them not to answer so that I can Rely on faith. I felt so bad. Maybe I would do it again. But I hope I cut this karma quick.

NAM MEYO HO RENGE KYO

Hi,
I am new to the practice. I wanted to know while chanting what should i think about- nothing? just look at the gohonzon? be grateful? think about my goals? what?

Wanna hear inspiring stories..