Chanting

[chutai]

The mantra of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo reminds you of the Lotus Sutra because somebody told you that it relates to the Lotus sutra, not because there is anything special about the phrase.

Not exactly as basically the mantra is the actual title of the Lotus Sutra.

This is not uncommon in the majority of Buddhist traditions. For instance, in Pure Land Buddhism in Japan uses the mantra "Namu Amida Butsu", which means "Homage to the Buddha of Infinite Light." In Tibetan Buddhism many different mantras are used, depending upon the specific lineage. A widely used mantra in Tibetan Buddhism is "Om Mani Padme Hum." This means something like "Om, the Jewel in the Lotus, Hum." In Zen Buddhism practitioners chant the Heart Sutra which ends with the mantra "Gate, Gate, Paragate, Parasamgate, Bodhi, Svaha!" This mantra means, "Gone, Gone, Gone Beyond, Gone Beyond Beyond, Awakening, Svaha!" (Svaha is an exclamation, something like "hurray!" or "hallelujah!".) However, although the Zen tradition chants the Heart Sutra regularly, its primary meditative form is silent meditation. And so on and so forth.

Just as a phrase like "Pāṇātipātā veramaṇī sikkhāpadaṃ samādiyāmi" can only remind you not to kill if somebody tells you that is the meaning, the phrase has no power in and of itself.

Yes it can. Although that is also within the guidelines of the Eightfold Path. However, that neither detracts from, nor adds to, my reasoning nor add to that "any kind of repetitious chanting is very close in feeling, if not identical in structure, to mantra recitation".

If you told somebody that Nam-myoho-renge-kyo is a refreshing soft drink and by chanting it they would get such a refreshment I'm sure that it would give rise to desire in the mind, not transformation.If you told somebody who had never heard of Coca Cola (if such a person exists) but was inspired by the Lotus sutra that chanting Coca Cola was the key to achieving awakening infinite wisdom and endless compassion, then they'd likely find that chanting Coca Cola would give rise to faith.

Well then perhaps you should put both to the test ?

The mental realm is an actual realm in which humans dwell. Just as we dwell in a visual realm, and a sonic realm, we also dwell in a mental realm, which has a geography. For the most part, people are not clear about the geography of mind. There is a way, however, to clarify the geography of mind.

Take a word, say "freedom". The word exists at a location in mental realm. Now ask yourself what words you consider synonyms for the word "freedom". Write down the words (a synonym means a word that you would use as a substitute for the word freedom, or a word that you would accept as a substitute for the word "freedom" when someone else uses it.) Common synonyms include "liberty", "justice", and "choice." But you will have your own words that come to mind. Don’t worry about creating a long list. A list of three to six synonyms is sufficient. Whatever words come spontaneously to mind is best.

These synonyms are located near the word "freedom" in your mind. The word "freedom" is in the center, and these synonyms surround the word, giving you an idea of the geography of the word freedom in your mind. Now, each of the synonyms you have come up with can be similarly treated, meaning you can ask yourself what synonyms you would come up with for this other word. By engaging in this process you bring to consciousness what I refer to as a "webroad" of meaning. Each synonym carries you farther from the central term you are considering; in this case "freedom." This webroad is a path in the geography of one’s mind.

We can apply this kind of analysis to mantra recitation, with slight modification. Since mantras are usually groups of words, instead of asking what synonym I would use for the mantra, I ask myself what associations come to m!y mind with the mantra.

This is pretty common sense and I've yet to see you give any convincing reason otherwise.

Although you fail to see the reasoning because it defies "common sense" does not mean that chanting a particular mantra is is actually beyond reason. After all, millions upon untold millions of people, even though specific mantras have striking differences. For instance, the Pure Land Mantra of Amida is focussed primarily on heaven and the grace that gets me there. The mantra of the Lotus Sutra is focussed primarily on the ability to awaken. Thus the two mantras are differently weighted even though the function of association remains the same. However, the associations with a mantra like "Namu Amida Butsu" shifts one’s focus to a celestial dimension; but, as the Buddha taught, no heaven lasts forever. On another side of the geographical pattern the mantra of the Lotus Sutra is focussed primarily on the ability to awaken.

For example it’s perfectly acceptable for a doctor to use technical terms among other doctors without worrying about how accessible and efficacious for ordinary people they are.

Chanting resembles someone taking medicine; they do not necessarily know, and in most cases probably do not know, how the medicine works. Nevertheless, they get better and the disease subsides. Similarly, a practitioner does not have to be consciously aware of how mantra recitation transforms, fore instance, obsession in order to benefit from such a transformation. Nevertheless, the transformation occurs. Nam-myoho-renge-kyo is the one essential phrase that transforms poison into medicine as prescribed by a good doctor.It's also worth noting that Bodhisattva Medicine King also figures prominently in the Lotus Sutra.

The problem only arises when one group decides that the phrase they

are chanting is somehow special and in and of itself is the mainstay

of their spiritual path.

I would suggest that's in your own perception. We become what we place our attention on. If someone wants to become a mathematician, they study mathematics every day. Soon, they are a mathematician. If someone wants to become a musician, they practice every day. Soon, they are a musician. If someone wants to learn a foreign language, they practice that language every day. Soon they can comprehend that language.

Now, if someone wants to awaken to wisdom, compassion, and the presence of eternity, what is it that needs to be practiced in order to accomplish this? It was the great discovery of Nichiren Daishonin that the Lotus Sutra is the surest guide, the clearest presentation, of how this is accomplished. That’s the connection between the specific mantra recitation practice of Nichiren Buddhism and the awakening that all Buddhist schools consider their ultimate goal.

Nam-myoho-renge-kyo

[Brucenkhamen]

Thanks for attempting to answer some of my questions.

This is not uncommon in the majority of Buddhist traditions. For instance, in Pure Land Buddhism in Japan uses the mantra "Namu Amida Butsu", which means "Homage to the Buddha of Infinite Light." In Tibetan Buddhism many different mantras are used, depending upon the specific lineage. A widely used mantra in Tibetan Buddhism is "Om Mani Padme Hum." This means something like "Om, the Jewel in the Lotus, Hum." In Zen Buddhism practitioners chant the Heart Sutra which ends with the mantra "Gate, Gate, Paragate, Parasamgate, Bodhi, Svaha!" This mantra means, "Gone, Gone, Gone Beyond, Gone Beyond Beyond, Awakening, Svaha!" (Svaha is an exclamation, something like "hurray!" or "hallelujah!".) However, although the Zen tradition chants the Heart Sutra regularly, its primary meditative form is silent meditation. And so on and so forth.

Yes this is my point, there are so many different phrases out there that are used as mantras. Are you now not saying yours is not the only one that’s special? (I’m deliberately avoiding the use of the words magical or mystical). So if Namu Amida Butsu is also special, and Om Mani Padme Hum is also special then how many special phrases can there be before they should be considered ”normal” just like any other chant or mantra?

Yes it can. Although that is also within the guidelines of the Eightfold Path. However, that neither detracts from, nor adds to, my reasoning nor add to that "any kind of repetitious chanting is very close in feeling, if not identical in structure, to mantra recitation".

This is exactly the point we have been trying to make, that chanting your phrase is just like chanting any other mantra, or phrase, I think it’s a bit ingenuine to claim that’s been your reasoning all along.

Well then perhaps you should put both to the test ?

Billions of people use billions of phrases every day without claiming they are special, lead to wisdom, pierce the cosmos, or penetrate your life… Somehow I think the onus of proof is on you.

The mental realm is an actual realm in which humans dwell. Just as we dwell in a visual realm, and a sonic realm, we also dwell in a mental realm, which has a geography. For the most part, people are not clear about the geography of mind. There is a way, however, to clarify the geography of mind.

Sounds good.

Take a word, say "freedom…

We can apply this kind of analysis to mantra recitation, with slight modification. Since mantras are usually groups of words, instead of asking what synonym I would use for the mantra, I ask myself what associations come to m!y mind with the mantra.

Again you are agreeing with my points, that it’s not the phrase that is special but what you associate it with, it’s those ideas that inspire you and give rise to faith, not a specific phrase in a specific language.

Although you fail to see the reasoning because it defies "common sense" does not mean that chanting a particular mantra is is actually beyond reason. After all, millions upon untold millions of people, even though specific mantras have striking differences. For instance, the Pure Land Mantra of Amida is focussed primarily on heaven and the grace that gets me there. The mantra of the Lotus Sutra is focussed primarily on the ability to awaken. Thus the two mantras are differently weighted even though the function of association remains the same. However, the associations with a mantra like "Namu Amida Butsu" shifts one’s focus to a celestial dimension; but, as the Buddha taught, no heaven lasts forever. On another side of the geographical pattern the mantra of the Lotus Sutra is focussed primarily on the ability to awaken.

Yes, but only if the seed of that teaching has already been planted in your mind. If so then I can see a concentration technique can support and give energy to someones faith in that but I still don’t see that leading to wisdom without the practitioner moving on to contemplate the nature of existence.

Chanting resembles someone taking medicine; they do not necessarily know, and in most cases probably do not know, how the medicine works. Nevertheless, they get better and the disease subsides. Similarly, a practitioner does not have to be consciously aware of how mantra recitation transforms, fore instance, obsession in order to benefit from such a transformation. Nevertheless, the transformation occurs. Nam-myoho-renge-kyo is the one essential phrase that transforms poison into medicine as prescribed by a good doctor.It's also worth noting that Bodhisattva Medicine King also figures prominently in the Lotus Sutra.

Before you take medicine you must trust the doctor who prescribes it. Of your teacher you said ”So essentially, within the Nichiren tradition, the chanting of daimoku is viewed as encapsulating all previous practices and observances as was discovered in the Life Span" (sixteenth) chapter of the Lotus Sutra and remained hidden or unknown until Nichiren revealed them. Nichiren regarded them as the vital teaching that Shakyamuni Buddha transferred to Bodhisattva Superior Practices in the "Supernatural Powers" (twenty-first) chapter of the sutra. The Three Great Secret Laws (secret because they remained hidden in chapter sixteen of the LS) represent Nichiren's embodiment of the Mystic Law, to which he was enlightened, in a form that all people can practice and thereby gain access to that Law (Shakyamuni Buddha) within their own lives.” Which frankly sounds like a lot of new age nonsense to me.

So I’d rather put my trust in the medicine prescribed by Shakyamuni Buddha, and later teachers who are honest enough not to make grandiose claims.

I would suggest that's in your own perception. We become what we place our attention on. If someone wants to become a mathematician, they study mathematics every day. Soon, they are a mathematician. If someone wants to become a musician, they practice every day. Soon, they are a musician. If someone wants to learn a foreign language, they practice that language every day. Soon they can comprehend that language.

Good point.

Though I’m not really sure why you want to become Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, I’d rather become awake, aware, equanimous and free from greed hatred and delusion, so this is what I put my attention on.

Now, if someone wants to awaken to wisdom, compassion, and the presence of eternity, what is it that needs to be practiced in order to accomplish this? It was the great discovery of Nichiren Daishonin that the Lotus Sutra is the surest guide, the clearest presentation, of how this is accomplished. That’s the connection between the specific mantra recitation practice of Nichiren Buddhism and the awakening that all Buddhist schools consider their ultimate goal.

Ok, so now you appear to be saying that the Lotus Sutra is the most important teaching in Buddhism, more important than the 4 noble truths, the noble eightfold path, the 3 characteristics, the life story of Shakyamuni.

See, I don’t see much in your posts that relates to these so assume based on the above you consider these teachings of lesser importance than the Lotus Sutra. Personally I wouldn’t call that Buddhism, but that’s just me.

I’m also wondering why you talk in terms of the great discovery of Nichiren Daishonin, I mean he didn’t write the Lotus Sutra or anything, all he did was read it and presumably come up with a new interpretation.

[sabaijai]

Chutai I'm still waiting for an answer to my question as to why the Japanese pronunciation of a Chinese translation of Sanskrit would be more effective than English (or German, etc) or the original Sanskrit.

As Bruce mentioned, the notion that chanting could bring about fruition of the path was around long before Gotama Buddha found for himself that such techniques were neither necessary nor sufficient to bring about liberation.

According to the Pali Buddhist teachings, the only way sound can be effective is when it leads to right view, ie, sensations received by sense doors. Regarding a phrase as having special power to liberate because of its meaning or translation or reference point (as opposed to calming the mind temporarily or helping one remember the teachings, also temporarily) would be unskilful action mired in wrong view, from the Theravadin perspective.

Be that as it may, the arising of divergent views on Buddhism has brought about all the different schools. May they all flourish.

[mark lamai]

wow, lots of thinking going on in this thread.

how do you know you know, if you do.

[sabaijai]

You don't. If someone wishes to follow the teachings of the Buddha then they need to look at what he taught. If they adhere to those ideas that conflict with what he said then they are not following the Dhamma, they are following something else.

[chutai]

Chutai I'm still waiting for an answer to my question as to why the Japanese pronunciation of a Chinese translation of Sanskrit would be more effective than English (or German, etc) or the original Sanskrit.

I've already answered this. You should go back and read what I had to say concerning the fluidiity of chanting the phrase and the "Esperanto" nature of all in the 192 countries and provinces throughout that chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo in the same language. Further, I've also tried to explain why I think it is that Nichiren chose to begin with "Nam" and continued the rest in Chinese.

Compare the chanting (below) with the incantation at moderately slow pace, with actually chanting "I devote myself to the wonderful Law of the Lotus"; it would be equally as laborious in any other of the Latin based languages. Although of course the Daishonin would have been unaware of any but the the other three languages that I've previously mentioned.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=tNbU2-9YcGI&...re=channel_page

There really is nothing more to add.

As Bruce mentioned, the notion that chanting could bring about fruition of the path was around long before Gotama Buddha found for himself that such techniques were neither necessary nor sufficient to bring about liberation.

Where in the earlier, provisional, or any of the latter Sutras did Shakyamuni mention this ? In fact there is a discussion as to whether Shakyamuni himself didn't chant the phrase himself; although myself am not au fait with the academic hypothesis. It's sufficient to know that Shakyamuni Buddha cast off the expedient means, that he employed in pre Lotus Sutra teachings, in order to reveal the fruition of all before by pronouncing that all can attain Buddhahood irrespective. As Nichiren Daishonin wrote:

In his dying instructions, the Buddha said, “Rely on the Law and not upon persons.” This means that if what a person says is not in agreement with what is expounded in the sutras, one should not believe it, no matter how fine the person may be. And he also said, “rely on the sutras that are complete and final and not on those that are not complete and final.”

According to the Pali Buddhist teachings, the only way sound can be effective is when it leads to right view, ie, sensations received by sense doors. Regarding a phrase as having special power to liberate because of its meaning or translation or reference point (as opposed to calming the mind temporarily or helping one remember the teachings, also temporarily) would be unskilful action mired in wrong view, from the Theravadin perspective.

This is exactly the point. It's not by following any rules or any other thing outside of ourselves that we find the transformation of mind that prompts both highly attuned ethical sensitivity and wisdom.

Be that as it may, the arising of divergent views on Buddhism has brought about all the different schools. May they all flourish.

Indeed so. It's with this in mind that the Institute of Oriental Philosophy (Europe) based at Taplow Court in the UK, initiated a successful inter-Buddhist conference - hosted jointly with the Network of Buddhist Organisations (UK) last June. The theme of the conference was "The British Buddhist Landscape--Transplantation and Growth."

[Brucenkhamen]

There really is nothing more to add.

Ok, so if I understand correctly the Japanese pronunciation of a Chinese translation of Sanskrit is used so that everybody is chanting the same thing no matter what their mother tongue, and it flows better than a lot of peoples mother tongues.

This doesn’t explain why the Japanese pronunciation of a Chinese translation of Sanskrit is considered more special (aka magical or mystical) than the original Sanskrit. Nor why any other language is not considered special at all.

Where in the earlier, provisional, or any of the latter Sutras did Shakyamuni mention this ? In fact there is a discussion as to whether Shakyamuni himself didn't chant the phrase himself; although myself am not au fait with the academic hypothesis. It's sufficient to know that Shakyamuni Buddha cast off the expedient means, that he employed in pre Lotus Sutra teachings, in order to reveal the fruition of all before by pronouncing that all can attain Buddhahood irrespective. As Nichiren Daishonin wrote:

Nobody said Shakyamuni mentioned anything about chanting, certainly not your special chant. The point was that the idea that chanting or mantras could lead to spiritual advancement was around before the Buddh’a time, at least as far back as the vedic period (around 1500 BC).

Given the fact that as you say Shakyamuni didn’t mention chanting as an option, nor do it himself this seems a good indication to me of what he thought of it’s usefulness.

Now you may say that 700 years after his death despite being dead he cast off expedient means (by which I assume you mean the 4 noble truths, 8fold path, vipassana, samatha etc) because somebody (who was that?) wrote the Lotus Sutra. I’m afraid I see no logic in that.

As a matter of interest where in the Lotus Sutra does it say that repeatedly chanting a Japanese pronunciation of a Chinese translation of Sanskrit of the title of this Sutra will lead to liberation. If it doesn’t then why did it take nearly 1000 years for somebody like Nicherin to come along and discover this important detail?

In his dying instructions, the Buddha said, “Rely on the Law and not upon persons.” This means that if what a person says is not in agreement with what is expounded in the sutras, one should not believe it, no matter how fine the person may be. And he also said, “rely on the sutras that are complete and final and not on those that are not complete and final.”

Good advice. So who gets to decide which Suttas are complete and final?

This is exactly the point. It's not by following any rules or any other thing outside of ourselves that we find the transformation of mind that prompts both highly attuned ethical sensitivity and wisdom.

Too true. By repeatedly chanting a Japanese pronunciation of a Chinese translation of Sanskrit of the title of the Lotus Sutra surely one is “following a rule”. Not following a rule would be trying different translation styles or other skilful means that have the potential to lead to liberation, seeing what works, adjusting the practice as you see the results.

Any builder who only uses a hammer will not build many building, he must use various tools to get the job done, no one tool does everything.

Edited December 12, 2008 by Brucenkhamen

[sabaijai]

This is exactly the point. It's not by following any rules or any other thing outside of ourselves that we find the transformation of mind that prompts both highly attuned ethical sensitivity and wisdom.

In that case, there's absolutely no need to chant the name of the Lotus Sutra, is there? One could read the sutra instead, for example Or chant "Homage to the Sublime Lotus Sutra' in English repeatedly.

[fabianfred]

Although I have stated my opinion in this thread that i don't believe that merely chanting a word or phrase or mantra can bring one to enlightenment and thus Nirvana..... I do understand that chanting can be of benefit in a lesser way.

My first teacher....Luang Por Jaran ...who is the abbot of Wat Ampawan, Singhburi....a Vipassana centre well known amongst Thais.....favours greatly the chanting of the victory chants.

He often advises people to chant first

Praises to the buddha .... Ittipiso.....

Praises to the Dhamma.......savakato.....

Praises to the Sangha....... Supatipanno...

followed by the victory stanzas....Bahung...

then ....Mahakaruniko...

then.......Ittipiso again...as many times as one's age plus one...so i at 56 have to chant Ittipiso..... 57 times

Luang por usually advises those with particular problems to chant daily for at least three months before expecting results.... and there are many documented cases on his website and in books