as *aggijādīhi [ins.] . . . bhūyate. 4 ） Cf. Sadd-ṭ tal 8–9: ettha ākhyātābhihite ti ettha kitākhyātābhihite ti pāṭho(//) icchitabbo// kitehi abhihite pi kattari paṭhamāvibhattisambhavato// tena puriso gāmaṃ gato ti payogo icchitabbo. 5）This view is not unique to the Sadd; Vajirabuddhi quotes a passage from the Saṃgaha in his Mmd 240,28–29, where the concept of kattari paṭhamā is observed. See Pind [2012, 114–116]. 6）This type of argument, which is commonly accepted in grammatical literature, is seen in the Sadd §572, as well. See Kahrs [1992, 191–192], Deokar [2012, 167–169].
Abbreviations
The abbreviations of Pāli texts follow the CPD, unless otherwise noted. A Aṣṭādhyāyī. See Appendix III in Cardona [1997].
CPD A Critical Pāli Dictionary. Ed. Vilhelm Trenckner et al. 3 vols. Copenhagen: Pali Text Society, 1924–2011.
Kacc Kaccāyana and Kaccāyanavutti. Ed. Ole Holten Pind. With an index prepared by S. Kasamatsu and Y. Ousaka. Bristol: Pali Text Society, 2013.
Sadd Saddanīti: La grammaire palie d’Aggavaṃsa. I Padamālā, II Dhātumālā, III Suttamālā (1928–1930), IV–V,2 Table (1949–1966). Ed. Helmer Smith. Acta Reg. Societatis Humaniorum Litterarum Lundensis, no. 12: 1–12: 5,2. Lund: Gleerup. Reprint, Oxford: Pali Text Society, 2001. Sadd-ṭ Saddanīti-ṭīkā. See Ruiz-Falqués [2014].
Bibliography
Cardona, George. 1997. Pāṇini: His Work and Its Tradition. Volume 1, Background and Introduction. 2nd ed. (revised and enlarged). Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass.
Deokar, Mahesh A. 2012. “Some Probable Sanskrit Sources of Pali Grammarians with Special Reference to Aggavaṃsa.” In Saṁskṛta-sādhutā: Goodness of Sanskrit; Studies in Honour of Professor Ashok N. Aklujkar, ed. Chikafumi Watanabe, Michele Desmarais, and Yoshichika Honda, 150–171. New Delhi: D.K. Printworld.
Kahrs, E. G. 1992. “Exploring the Saddanīti.” Journal of the Pali Text Society 17: 1–212.
Pind, O. H. 2012. “Pāli Grammar and Grammarians from Buddhaghosa to Vajirabuddhi: A Survey.” Journal of the Pali Text Society 31: 57–124.
Ruiz-Falqués, Aleix. 2014. “Two Treasure of Pāli Literature from the U Pho Thi Library in Thaton: The Saddanīti-ṭīkā and the Mukhamattasāra.” In Manuscripts in the U Pho Thi Library, Sadhammajotika Monastery, Thaton, Myanmar. By William Pruitt, Sunao Kasamatsu, Aleix Ruiz-Faluqués, Yutaka Kawasaki, and Yumi Ousaka, 27–41. Philosophica Asiatica Monograph Series, no. 1. Tokyo: Chuo Academic Research Institute.
(This research was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 15J10793.) Key words Saddanīti, bhāvapada, Pāli grammarian, Aggavaṃsa
（Graduate Student, The University of Tokyo, JSPS Research Fellow）
“Qizui biyi” Having Atoned for His Sin:
Nichiren and Sadāparibhūta
Suzuki Takayasu
1. The Aim of This Paper
The Saddharmapuṇḍarīka (Lotus Sutra, SP) is one of the most influential sutras in the Mahayana Sutra literature. In Eastern Asia, especially, the Lotus Sutra Cult (Fahua xinyang 法華信仰), based on the second Chinese version of the SP (Miaofa lianhua jing
妙法蓮華經, SPC2) rendered by Kumārajīva, is very popular.
The Sadāparibhūta-parivarta (SP 19) which is Chapter 19 of the Sanskrit text (SPS1)) of the SP, and the corresponding two Chinese versions, that is, Changbuqing pusa pin 常不
輕菩薩品 which is Chapter 20 of the SPC2 and Changbeiqingman pin 常被輕慢品 which
is Chapter 19 of the Zheng fahua jing 正法華經 (SPC1) (rendered by Zhu Fahu 竺法護) tell
the story of a Bodhisattva called Sadāparibhūta.
• There once existed a Bodhisattva called Sadāparibhūta. He continued to give a prediction of attaining buddhahood to all the Buddhists who held the mistaken idea that they had already attained enlightenment.
• Because of his prediction, he was persecuted by them. • They went to hell on the grounds of having persecuted him.
• Having purified their evil karma by themselves, they met the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta again. All of them were taught the SP by him and led to supreme enlightenment.
Three related accounts are Account 1 (SPS 382.3–10, SPC2 51a26–51b1, SPC1 123b13–20, (12)2)), Account 2 (SP
S 379.5–13, SPC2 51a3–7, SPC1 123a12–18, (7)), and Account 3 (SPS 384.1–4, SPC2 51b17–20, SPC1 123c8–13, (7)′).
Account 1 tells that the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta preached the SP to Buddhists and predicted their attaining buddhahood. Among them, those who persecuted him
suffered terrible pain in the great hell, Avīci. Having purified their evil karma by themselves, they met the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta again and were taught the SP by
him and led to supreme enlightenment. What draws our attention is that the SPC2 lacks
the description that the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta preached the SP. This point has a close relationship to the theme of this study. In any case, the SPS, the SPC2, and the SPC1 unanimously tell that it is those Buddhists who persecuted the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta that had to atone for their sin.
Account 2 tells that when the end of his life was drawing near, the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta through a voice from the sky heard the SP. The SPS, the SPC2, and the SPC1 share the same content.
Although Account 3 is the fourth verse in SP 19, which corresponds to Account 2 in the prose, only SPC2 tells that it is the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta that atoned for his sin (qizui biyi 其罪畢已) when he neared the time of his death. However, either the nature of the sin he committed or the reason for him committing the sin has remained unsolved to date.
This paper attempts to elucidate the reason why only the SPC2 tells it is the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta who atoned for his sin, and how the phrase “qizui biyi” in the SPC2 affected Japanese Buddhist history.
2. A Premise of This Study: The SP as the Prediction of All Sentient
Beings’ Attaining Buddhahood
As a premise of this study, we should here grasp the discussion in the previous studies3)
that the SP was compiled as the Buddha’s words predicting all the sentient beings attaining buddhahood after the Buddha had entered into his perfect peacefulness. The
SP asserts this as follows:
Only the Buddha can predict all the sentient beings attaining buddhahood. However hard one may strive for attaining buddhahood, he cannot accomplish it unless he is given a prediction (vyākaraṇa) by the Buddha of his attaining buddhahood. After the Buddha had entered into his perfect peaceful‐ ness, Buddhists were instructed to take over the role of the Buddha Śākyamuni (tathāgatakṛtyakara, SPS 227.1) through the preaching of the Buddha’s word, namely, the SP, predicting that all sentient beings will attain buddhahood. As long as this role, that is, the function of the tathāgata, is performed, the Buddha Śākyamuni eternally stays in this world and keeps carrying out the function of benefiting all sentient beings by predicting their attainment of buddhahood.
3. Why Does Only the SP
C2Have the Phrase “Qizui biyi”?
3.1. Two Kinds of Persecutors Expressed in SP 19 (Suzuki [2016])It has long been overlooked that two kinds of persecutors (Persecutors 1 and Persecutors 2) are expressed in SP 19, and the present author elucidated it in Suzuki [2016].
• Persecutors 1 are those Buddhists who persecuted the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta (Sadāparibhūta 1), who gave them an invalid prediction of their attaining buddhahood, as Sadāparibhūta 1 had not yet obtained the Buddha’s words, namely, the SP.
• Persecutors 2 are those Buddhists who persecuted the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta (Sadāparibhūta 2), who gave them valid predictions of their attaining buddhahood, as Sadāparibhūta 2 had already obtained the Buddha’s words, namely, the SP.
Persecutors 1 are the Buddhists in (4), (5), and (6), who do not suffer terrible pain in the great hell.
Sadāparibhūta 1, who wished to give the prediction of attaining buddhahood to all sentient beings, had to do so without any of the Buddha’s words (See (3)). Because his addresses could not have been the Buddha’s words, the Buddhists who heard his teachings had to persecute him: “He actually despises us by giving us such a false prediction of attaining buddhahood (See (4)).” Sometimes they cast a dirt clod or stick at him for the purpose of preventing his approach (See (5)). Those Buddhists insultingly named him Sadāparibhūta (See (6)). Yet after he had obtained the SP at (7), even these Buddhists came to realize that Sadāparibhūta 2, who preached the Buddha’s words, had performed the same function as the Buddha. All of them were converted to become hearers of the SP and led to supreme enlightenment by him (See (8)).
Persecutors 2 are the Buddhists in (12) and (13), who had to suffer terrible pain in the great hell.
3.2. Particularities of the SPC2
Particularity 1: In Account 1, only the SPC2 lacks the description that the Bodhisattva
suffered terrible pain in the great hell, Avīci. Having purified their evil karma by themselves, they met the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta again and were taught the SP by
him and led to supreme enlightenment. What draws our attention is that the SPC2 lacks
the description that the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta preached the SP. This point has a close relationship to the theme of this study. In any case, the SPS, the SPC2, and the SPC1 unanimously tell that it is those Buddhists who persecuted the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta that had to atone for their sin.
Account 2 tells that when the end of his life was drawing near, the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta through a voice from the sky heard the SP. The SPS, the SPC2, and the SPC1 share the same content.
Although Account 3 is the fourth verse in SP 19, which corresponds to Account 2 in the prose, only SPC2 tells that it is the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta that atoned for his sin (qizui biyi 其罪畢已) when he neared the time of his death. However, either the nature of the sin he committed or the reason for him committing the sin has remained unsolved to date.
This paper attempts to elucidate the reason why only the SPC2 tells it is the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta who atoned for his sin, and how the phrase “qizui biyi” in the SPC2 affected Japanese Buddhist history.
2. A Premise of This Study: The SP as the Prediction of All Sentient
Beings’ Attaining Buddhahood
As a premise of this study, we should here grasp the discussion in the previous studies3)
that the SP was compiled as the Buddha’s words predicting all the sentient beings attaining buddhahood after the Buddha had entered into his perfect peacefulness. The
SP asserts this as follows:
Only the Buddha can predict all the sentient beings attaining buddhahood. However hard one may strive for attaining buddhahood, he cannot accomplish it unless he is given a prediction (vyākaraṇa) by the Buddha of his attaining buddhahood. After the Buddha had entered into his perfect peaceful‐ ness, Buddhists were instructed to take over the role of the Buddha Śākyamuni (tathāgatakṛtyakara, SPS 227.1) through the preaching of the Buddha’s word, namely, the SP, predicting that all sentient beings will attain buddhahood. As long as this role, that is, the function of the tathāgata, is performed, the Buddha Śākyamuni eternally stays in this world and keeps carrying out the function of benefiting all sentient beings by predicting their attainment of buddhahood.
3. Why Does Only the SP
C2Have the Phrase “Qizui biyi”?
3.1. Two Kinds of Persecutors Expressed in SP 19 (Suzuki [2016])It has long been overlooked that two kinds of persecutors (Persecutors 1 and Persecutors 2) are expressed in SP 19, and the present author elucidated it in Suzuki [2016].
• Persecutors 1 are those Buddhists who persecuted the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta (Sadāparibhūta 1), who gave them an invalid prediction of their attaining buddhahood, as Sadāparibhūta 1 had not yet obtained the Buddha’s words, namely, the SP.
• Persecutors 2 are those Buddhists who persecuted the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta (Sadāparibhūta 2), who gave them valid predictions of their attaining buddhahood, as Sadāparibhūta 2 had already obtained the Buddha’s words, namely, the SP.
Persecutors 1 are the Buddhists in (4), (5), and (6), who do not suffer terrible pain in the great hell.
Sadāparibhūta 1, who wished to give the prediction of attaining buddhahood to all sentient beings, had to do so without any of the Buddha’s words (See (3)). Because his addresses could not have been the Buddha’s words, the Buddhists who heard his teachings had to persecute him: “He actually despises us by giving us such a false prediction of attaining buddhahood (See (4)).” Sometimes they cast a dirt clod or stick at him for the purpose of preventing his approach (See (5)). Those Buddhists insultingly named him Sadāparibhūta (See (6)). Yet after he had obtained the SP at (7), even these Buddhists came to realize that Sadāparibhūta 2, who preached the Buddha’s words, had performed the same function as the Buddha. All of them were converted to become hearers of the SP and led to supreme enlightenment by him (See (8)).
Persecutors 2 are the Buddhists in (12) and (13), who had to suffer terrible pain in the great hell.
3.2. Particularities of the SPC2
Particularity 1: In Account 1, only the SPC2 lacks the description that the Bodhisattva
Sadāparibhūta 1 from Sadāparibhūta 2. In the SPS and the SPC1 we can clearly see the reason why Persecutors 1 did not have to suffer terrible pain in the great hell because
Sadāparibhūta 1 did not preach the SP.4) However, in the SP
C2 it is difficult to distinguish Persecutors 1 from Persecutors 2 as Sadāparibhūta 1 and Sadāparibhūta
2 are indistinguishable. In consequence, we cannot see in the SPC2 the reason why
Persecutors 1 did not have to suffer while Persecutors 2 had to do so.
Particularity 2: The SPS 379.2–3 and the SPC1 123a7–9 tell that Persecutors 1 did no
direct harm to Sadāparibhūta 1. Seeing Sadāparibhūta 1 from afar, Persecutors 1 cast a dirt clod or stick at him for the purpose of preventing his approach since they did not want to hear his false and invalid prediction of their attaining buddhahood. Then Sadāparibhūta 1, who was not able to approach them, made them hear his prediction
from a distance. However, the SPC2 50c28–51a1 describes Persecutors 1 as very evil
persons who struck Sadāparibhūta 1. Having been struck, Sadāparibhūta 1 had to escape from them and ensure they heard his prediction from a distance. In the SPC2 it is not clear why Persecutors 2 had to suffer terrible pain in the great hell while Persecutors 1, who were possibly more evil than Persecutors 2, did not have to do so. It is possible that in order to answer this question the SPC2 has come to have the phrase “qizui biyi.”
3.3. At What Level Did the Phrase Corresponding to “Qizui biyi” Appear in the SP? Is it possible that the phrase corresponding to “qizui biyi” appears in the original text of the SP? We cannot find any clue in the extant Sanskrit manuscripts as no manuscript has the corresponding phrase. Seeing that the introduction of the Tianpin miaofa lianhua
jing 添品妙法蓮華經 says that the reading of the SPC2 accords with that of the
manuscript in Guizi 龜茲 (T. vol. 9, 134c4–5), it is possible that the SPC2 was based on
some particular texts.5) However particular the text the SP
C2 was based on, it is difficult to suppose that the phrase corresponding to “qizui biyi” already existed in any Sanskrit text because the difference between Sadāparibhūta 1 and Sadāparibhūta 2 is essential to the SP, which asserts this as we saw in Chapter 2.
Did Kumārajīva (344–413) from Guizi intentionally interpolate the phrase “qizui biyi” when translating the SP into Chinese? We will be examining this later.
3.4. For What Kind of Sin Did the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta Atone?
We cannot find any clue in the SPC2 in which the phrase “qizui biyi” unexpectedly
appears without any context. In the SPS and the SPC1, we naturally cannot find any clue as they do not have a phrase corresponding to “qizui biyi.” We now try to examine this question from a different point of view.
4. Nichiren and Sadāparibhūta
4.1. The Kaimokushō (Open Your Eyes to the Lotus Teaching)
The Kaimokushō 開目抄 (2 vols.) is said to be one of the chief writings of Japanese monk Nichiren 日蓮 (1222–1282) as well as the Risshō ankokuron 立正安國論 and the Kanjin
honzonshō 觀心本尊抄. He wrote this Kaimokushō in 1272, ten years before entering into
his perfect peacefulness. In his life, Nichiren had to experience the Four Great Persecutions (Matsubagayatsu hōnan 松葉ヶ谷法難, 1260; Izu hōnan 伊豆法難, 1261; Komatsubara hōnan 小松原法難, 1264; Ryūkō hōnan 龍口法難, 1271). After Ryūkō hōnan Nichiren was exiled to Sadogashima 佐渡島 (Sado Island), which is an island of severe cold, and at a dilapidated house called Tsukahara sanmaidō 塚原三昧堂 in Sadogashima, Nichiren wrote the Kaimokushō in order to answer the question his disciples, his followers, and even he himself had about the severe persecutions they had to suffer.
4.2. Nichiren’s Question and Its Solution Expressed in the Kaimokushō
While the SP repeatedly teaches that those who keep, read, preach, or explain the SP (practicers of the SP, Hokekyō no gyōja 法華經の行者) must experience severe
persecution (SPS 230.9–10, 236.11–12, 271.7–274.10, 382.3–9, and so on), it also
repeatedly teaches that practicers of the SP shall receive heavenly protection (SPS
230.11–231.6, 237.1–6, 286.5–10, 287.9–10, 395.2–403.8, 474.3–477.6, and so on), and that those who persecute practicers of the SP must experience severe retribution (SPS 93.11– 97.4, 229.7–10, and so on).
Nichiren realized the repeated persecutions he and his disciples had to suffer included the Four Great Persecutions as the evidence that they were the practicers of the SP. However, the persecutors experienced no retribution at all and Nichiren and his disciples received no heavenly protection. “Am I really one who practices the SP?”: This is the serious question Nichiren had to face. We will now look at how Nichiren found his answer to this question by quoting several accounts in the Kaimokushō.
Sadāparibhūta 1 from Sadāparibhūta 2. In the SPS and the SPC1 we can clearly see the reason why Persecutors 1 did not have to suffer terrible pain in the great hell because
Sadāparibhūta 1 did not preach the SP.4) However, in the SP
C2 it is difficult to distinguish Persecutors 1 from Persecutors 2 as Sadāparibhūta 1 and Sadāparibhūta
2 are indistinguishable. In consequence, we cannot see in the SPC2 the reason why
Persecutors 1 did not have to suffer while Persecutors 2 had to do so.
Particularity 2: The SPS 379.2–3 and the SPC1 123a7–9 tell that Persecutors 1 did no
direct harm to Sadāparibhūta 1. Seeing Sadāparibhūta 1 from afar, Persecutors 1 cast a dirt clod or stick at him for the purpose of preventing his approach since they did not want to hear his false and invalid prediction of their attaining buddhahood. Then Sadāparibhūta 1, who was not able to approach them, made them hear his prediction
from a distance. However, the SPC2 50c28–51a1 describes Persecutors 1 as very evil
persons who struck Sadāparibhūta 1. Having been struck, Sadāparibhūta 1 had to escape from them and ensure they heard his prediction from a distance. In the SPC2 it is not clear why Persecutors 2 had to suffer terrible pain in the great hell while Persecutors 1, who were possibly more evil than Persecutors 2, did not have to do so. It is possible that in order to answer this question the SPC2 has come to have the phrase “qizui biyi.”
3.3. At What Level Did the Phrase Corresponding to “Qizui biyi” Appear in the SP? Is it possible that the phrase corresponding to “qizui biyi” appears in the original text of the SP? We cannot find any clue in the extant Sanskrit manuscripts as no manuscript has the corresponding phrase. Seeing that the introduction of the Tianpin miaofa lianhua
jing 添品妙法蓮華經 says that the reading of the SPC2 accords with that of the
manuscript in Guizi 龜茲 (T. vol. 9, 134c4–5), it is possible that the SPC2 was based on
some particular texts.5) However particular the text the SP
C2 was based on, it is difficult to suppose that the phrase corresponding to “qizui biyi” already existed in any Sanskrit text because the difference between Sadāparibhūta 1 and Sadāparibhūta 2 is essential to the SP, which asserts this as we saw in Chapter 2.
Did Kumārajīva (344–413) from Guizi intentionally interpolate the phrase “qizui biyi” when translating the SP into Chinese? We will be examining this later.
3.4. For What Kind of Sin Did the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta Atone?
We cannot find any clue in the SPC2 in which the phrase “qizui biyi” unexpectedly
appears without any context. In the SPS and the SPC1, we naturally cannot find any clue as they do not have a phrase corresponding to “qizui biyi.” We now try to examine this question from a different point of view.
4. Nichiren and Sadāparibhūta
4.1. The Kaimokushō (Open Your Eyes to the Lotus Teaching)
The Kaimokushō 開目抄 (2 vols.) is said to be one of the chief writings of Japanese monk Nichiren 日蓮 (1222–1282) as well as the Risshō ankokuron 立正安國論 and the Kanjin
honzonshō 觀心本尊抄. He wrote this Kaimokushō in 1272, ten years before entering into
his perfect peacefulness. In his life, Nichiren had to experience the Four Great Persecutions (Matsubagayatsu hōnan 松葉ヶ谷法難, 1260; Izu hōnan 伊豆法難, 1261; Komatsubara hōnan 小松原法難, 1264; Ryūkō hōnan 龍口法難, 1271). After Ryūkō hōnan Nichiren was exiled to Sadogashima 佐渡島 (Sado Island), which is an island of severe cold, and at a dilapidated house called Tsukahara sanmaidō 塚原三昧堂 in Sadogashima, Nichiren wrote the Kaimokushō in order to answer the question his disciples, his followers, and even he himself had about the severe persecutions they had to suffer.
4.2. Nichiren’s Question and Its Solution Expressed in the Kaimokushō
While the SP repeatedly teaches that those who keep, read, preach, or explain the SP (practicers of the SP, Hokekyō no gyōja 法華經の行者) must experience severe
persecution (SPS 230.9–10, 236.11–12, 271.7–274.10, 382.3–9, and so on), it also
repeatedly teaches that practicers of the SP shall receive heavenly protection (SPS
230.11–231.6, 237.1–6, 286.5–10, 287.9–10, 395.2–403.8, 474.3–477.6, and so on), and that those who persecute practicers of the SP must experience severe retribution (SPS 93.11– 97.4, 229.7–10, and so on).
Nichiren realized the repeated persecutions he and his disciples had to suffer included the Four Great Persecutions as the evidence that they were the practicers of the SP. However, the persecutors experienced no retribution at all and Nichiren and his disciples received no heavenly protection. “Am I really one who practices the SP?”: This is the serious question Nichiren had to face. We will now look at how Nichiren found his answer to this question by quoting several accounts in the Kaimokushō.
Kaimokushō 1: I am sure that I deserve to receive heavenly protection, but there is not even a shred of it. Instead I have been condemned to heavier and heavier penalties. Looking back in this light, I wonder whether or not I am a practicer of the Lotus Sutra and whether or not various gods and deities have left this land. (STN 559. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 56])
Kaimokushō 2: Nevertheless, people doubt me, and I myself wonder why gods and deities have not come to help me. They made vows to the Buddha to protect a practicer of the Lotus Sutra. I would think, therefore, that they should hurriedly come to his aid, calling him a practicer of the Lotus Sutra, even if they have suspicions about him, and carry out their promise to the Buddha. Yet, none has come to help me. Does that mean that I am not a practicer of the Lotus Sutra? Since this question is the basis of this writing and of cardinal importance in my life, I will take this up again and again in order to find a definite answer. (STN 561. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 58]) Kaimokushō 3: However, as Nichiren has been abandoned by the gods, he probably is not a practicer of the Lotus Sutra. (STN 598. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 102])
Kaimokushō 4: Suppose there is a person who never slandered the Lotus Sutra in his previous lives and is upholding it in this present life. Whoever accused him of a trivial worldly offense, or for no offense at all, will immediately receive punishment. (STN 600. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 104])
Kaimokushō 5: In the “Never-Despising Bodhisattva” chapter of the Lotus Sutra: “Thus the bodhisattva made amends for the past sins.” It seems that the Never-Despising (Fukyō) Bodhisattva was attacked with rocks and tiles because of his past sins of slandering the SP. (STN 600. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 104])
Kaimokushō 6: In the immemorable past, I must have been born a wicked king and must have deprived practicers of the Lotus Sutra of their food and clothing and their properties on numerous occasions just as some people today in Japan have been destroying the Lotus temple. I must have also cut off the heads of numerous practicers of the Lotus Sutra. . . . Ever since I, Nichiren, strongly condemned those who slander the True Dharma in Japan, I have been persecuted. It must be that grave sins in my past lives are revealed through my merits in defending the dharma in this life. (STN 602–603. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 107])
Kaimokushō 7: I have always told my disciples not to have a doubt about the lack of heavenly protection and not to lament the lack of tranquility in this world. (STN 604. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 109])
Kaimokushō 8: My exile is merely a trifle in this present life, which is not lamentable at all. Instead, I feel it is a great joy as I am sure I will be rewarded with great happiness in my future lives. (STN 609. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 114–115])
4.3. One Passage from the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā
Here we consider the following passage from the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā (VjP):
api tu ye te subhūte kulaputrā vā kuladuhitaro vā imān evaṃrūpān sūtrāntān udgrahīṣyanti dhārayiṣyanti vācayiṣyanti paryavāpsyanti yoniśaś ca manasikariṣyanti parebhyaś ca vistareṇa saṃprakāśayiṣyanti te paribhūtā bhaviṣyanti suparibhūtāś ca bhaviṣyanti/ tat kasya hetoḥ/
yāni ca teṣāṃ subhūte sattvānāṃ paurvajanmikāny aśubhāni karmāṇi kṛtāny apāyasaṃ‐ vartanīyāni dṛṣṭa eva dharme paribhūtatayā tāni paurvajanmikāny aśubhāny karmāṇi kṣapa‐ yiṣyanti buddhabodhiṃ cānuprāpsyanti// (VjPS 82.23–83.2)
復次須菩提，善男子善女人受持讀誦此經，若爲人輕賤，是人先世罪業應墮惡道，以今世 人輕賤故，先世罪業則爲消滅，當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提．(VjPC1 750c24–27)
This passage says that those who preach the Buddha’s words may suffer persecution because of sins in their past lives. It also says that through suffering they can destroy their sins and attain buddhahood. However, what kinds of sins they have committed are untold even in this VjP.
4.4. The VjPC1 and the SPC2
Since both the VjPC1 and the SPC2 were rendered by Kumārajīva in 402 and 406 respectively, it is obvious that Kumārajīva already knew the VjP when translating the SP into the SPC2. Therefore, there is every possibility that it is Kumārajīva himself who inserted the phrase “qizui biyi” in the SPC2 because the text he referred to was so specific that he was not able to distinguish Sadāparibhūta 2 from Sadāparibhūta 1. 4.5. Why Did Nichiren Consider the Sins Sadāparibhūta Committed as Slander of the SP in His Past Lives?
To this question Okada B. [2016: 21, 104] points out that Nichiren himself was once a proponent of Pure Land Buddhism and Shingon Buddhism, and that repenting this he might consider the sins Sadāparibhūta committed as the slander of the SP in his past
lives (Sado gosho 佐渡御書, STN 615).6)
Through identifying himself with the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta, Nichiren established his self-awakening as a practicer of the SP and even deepened it.
5. Conclusion
As the SP asserts, “After the Buddha had entered into his perfect peacefulness, through the preaching of the Buddha’s words, namely, the SP, Buddhists should take over the role of the Buddha Śākyamuni predicting that all sentient beings will attain buddhahood,” the difference between Sadāparibhūta 1, who did not preach the SP, and Sadāparibhūta 2, who preached the SP, is essential to the SP. Therefore, it cannot be supposed that the phrase corresponding to “qizui biyi” already existed in any Sanskrit text. There is every possibility that Kumārajīva, who already knew the VjP before he
Kaimokushō 1: I am sure that I deserve to receive heavenly protection, but there is not even a shred of it. Instead I have been condemned to heavier and heavier penalties. Looking back in this light, I wonder whether or not I am a practicer of the Lotus Sutra and whether or not various gods and deities have left this land. (STN 559. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 56])
Kaimokushō 2: Nevertheless, people doubt me, and I myself wonder why gods and deities have not come to help me. They made vows to the Buddha to protect a practicer of the Lotus Sutra. I would think, therefore, that they should hurriedly come to his aid, calling him a practicer of the Lotus Sutra, even if they have suspicions about him, and carry out their promise to the Buddha. Yet, none has come to help me. Does that mean that I am not a practicer of the Lotus Sutra? Since this question is the basis of this writing and of cardinal importance in my life, I will take this up again and again in order to find a definite answer. (STN 561. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 58]) Kaimokushō 3: However, as Nichiren has been abandoned by the gods, he probably is not a practicer of the Lotus Sutra. (STN 598. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 102])
Kaimokushō 4: Suppose there is a person who never slandered the Lotus Sutra in his previous lives and is upholding it in this present life. Whoever accused him of a trivial worldly offense, or for no offense at all, will immediately receive punishment. (STN 600. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 104])
Kaimokushō 5: In the “Never-Despising Bodhisattva” chapter of the Lotus Sutra: “Thus the bodhisattva made amends for the past sins.” It seems that the Never-Despising (Fukyō) Bodhisattva was attacked with rocks and tiles because of his past sins of slandering the SP. (STN 600. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 104])
Kaimokushō 6: In the immemorable past, I must have been born a wicked king and must have deprived practicers of the Lotus Sutra of their food and clothing and their properties on numerous occasions just as some people today in Japan have been destroying the Lotus temple. I must have also cut off the heads of numerous practicers of the Lotus Sutra. . . . Ever since I, Nichiren, strongly condemned those who slander the True Dharma in Japan, I have been persecuted. It must be that grave sins in my past lives are revealed through my merits in defending the dharma in this life. (STN 602–603. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 107])
Kaimokushō 7: I have always told my disciples not to have a doubt about the lack of heavenly protection and not to lament the lack of tranquility in this world. (STN 604. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 109])
Kaimokushō 8: My exile is merely a trifle in this present life, which is not lamentable at all. Instead, I feel it is a great joy as I am sure I will be rewarded with great happiness in my future lives. (STN 609. Hori and Tanabe [2002: 114–115])
4.3. One Passage from the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā
Here we consider the following passage from the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā (VjP):
api tu ye te subhūte kulaputrā vā kuladuhitaro vā imān evaṃrūpān sūtrāntān udgrahīṣyanti dhārayiṣyanti vācayiṣyanti paryavāpsyanti yoniśaś ca manasikariṣyanti parebhyaś ca vistareṇa saṃprakāśayiṣyanti te paribhūtā bhaviṣyanti suparibhūtāś ca bhaviṣyanti/ tat kasya hetoḥ/
yāni ca teṣāṃ subhūte sattvānāṃ paurvajanmikāny aśubhāni karmāṇi kṛtāny apāyasaṃ‐ vartanīyāni dṛṣṭa eva dharme paribhūtatayā tāni paurvajanmikāny aśubhāny karmāṇi kṣapa‐ yiṣyanti buddhabodhiṃ cānuprāpsyanti// (VjPS 82.23–83.2)
復次須菩提，善男子善女人受持讀誦此經，若爲人輕賤，是人先世罪業應墮惡道，以今世 人輕賤故，先世罪業則爲消滅，當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提．(VjPC1 750c24–27)
This passage says that those who preach the Buddha’s words may suffer persecution because of sins in their past lives. It also says that through suffering they can destroy their sins and attain buddhahood. However, what kinds of sins they have committed are untold even in this VjP.
4.4. The VjPC1 and the SPC2
Since both the VjPC1 and the SPC2 were rendered by Kumārajīva in 402 and 406 respectively, it is obvious that Kumārajīva already knew the VjP when translating the SP into the SPC2. Therefore, there is every possibility that it is Kumārajīva himself who inserted the phrase “qizui biyi” in the SPC2 because the text he referred to was so specific that he was not able to distinguish Sadāparibhūta 2 from Sadāparibhūta 1. 4.5. Why Did Nichiren Consider the Sins Sadāparibhūta Committed as Slander of the SP in His Past Lives?
To this question Okada B. [2016: 21, 104] points out that Nichiren himself was once a proponent of Pure Land Buddhism and Shingon Buddhism, and that repenting this he might consider the sins Sadāparibhūta committed as the slander of the SP in his past
lives (Sado gosho 佐渡御書, STN 615).6)
Through identifying himself with the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta, Nichiren established his self-awakening as a practicer of the SP and even deepened it.
5. Conclusion
As the SP asserts, “After the Buddha had entered into his perfect peacefulness, through the preaching of the Buddha’s words, namely, the SP, Buddhists should take over the role of the Buddha Śākyamuni predicting that all sentient beings will attain buddhahood,” the difference between Sadāparibhūta 1, who did not preach the SP, and Sadāparibhūta 2, who preached the SP, is essential to the SP. Therefore, it cannot be supposed that the phrase corresponding to “qizui biyi” already existed in any Sanskrit text. There is every possibility that Kumārajīva, who already knew the VjP before he
translated the SP into the SPC2, inserted the phrase “qizui biyi” in the SPC2 because the text he referred to was so specific that he found it difficult to distinguish Sadāparibhūta 2 from Sadāparibhūta 1.
This phrase “qizui biyi” greatly influenced one Japanese monk, Nichiren, who founded the Nichiren School. Nichiren, who was the leader of a strong Lotus Sutra Cult, repeatedly faced severe persecution. In the course of his suffering due to the persecutions, he, who was once a proponent of Pure Land Buddhism and Shingon Buddhism, began to identify himself with Sadāparibhūta and finally reached a stage in which he took delight in being persecuted as he realized that this could help him atone for his sin.
If it were not for the phrase “qizui biyi” in the SPC2, Nichiren would have failed in establishing his self-awakening as a practicer of the SP and would have changed his faith in the SP. Moreover, he might have abandoned his faith in the SP because there is no other key to the answer than the phrase “qizui biyi” as to why he could not receive heavenly protection or was a practicer of the SP.
Therefore, if it were not for the phrase “qizui biyi” in the SPC2, the Japanese religious world and society would have been greatly different from what it is today. We can say that the phrase “qizui biyi” in the SPC2 is a good example of how a “Mahayana sutra can create the outer world.”7)
Notes
1）The reading of the SPT well accords with that of the SPS.
2）Numbers in parenthesis correspond to the numbers shown in Chapter 2 of Suzuki [2016]. 3）Okada Y. [2013] is the representative in this respect.
4）The SP repeatedly teaches that any person who speaks against the SP or against those who keep, read, preach, or explain the SP must experience severe retribution. (SPS 93.11–97.4, 229.7–10) 5）The differnce of reading in Account 1 cannot be found either in the extant manuscripts. 6）The phrase “senshō no hōbō no toga 先生の謗法の失, sin against the True Law in the past lives” in the Sainan taijishō 災難對治鈔 (STN 170) gives us another clue to this question.
7）See Shimoda [2011: 38, 49, 62]. Texts and Abbreviations SP Saddharmapuṇḍarīka.
SPS Saddharmapuṇḍarīka, Ed. H. Kern and Bunyiu Nanjio. 5 vols. Bibliotheca Buddhica 10. St.-Pétersbourg: Commissionnaires de l’Académie Impériale des Sciences, 1908–1912.
SPT Tibetan version of the SP, P no. 781 (Dam pa’i chos pad ma dkar po).
SPC2 Second Chinese version of the SP, T. no. 262 (Miaofa lianhua jing 妙法蓮華經). Trans. Kumārajīva (Chi. Jiumoluoshi 鳩摩羅什).
SPC1 First Chinese version of the SP, T. no. 263 (Zheng fahua jing 正法華經). Trans. Zhu Fahu 竺 法護.
SPMS Sanskrit Manuscripts of Saddharmapuṇḍarīka. Ed. Institute for the Comprehensive Study of Lotus Sutra. 15 vols. Tokyo: Publishing Association of Saddharma-pundarika Manuscripts, 1977–1982.
STN Shōwa teihon Nchiren shōnin ibun 昭和定本日蓮聖人遺文. Ed. Risshō Daigaku Nichiren Kyōgaku Kenkyūjo 立正大學日蓮教學研究所. 4 vols. Minobu-chō, Yamanashi: Sōhonzan Minobu Kuonji, 1952–1959.
VjP Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā.
VjPS Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā. Ed. P. L. Vaidya. Buddhist Sanskrit Texts 17. Darbhanga: The Mithila Institute, 1961.
VjPC1 First Chinese version of the VjP, T. no. 235 (Jingang bore boluomi jing 金剛般若波羅蜜經). Trans. Kumārajīva (Chi. Jiumoluoshi).
(T. Taisho Tripiṭaka; P Peking Kanjur) Bibliography
Hori Kyōtsū, and Tanabe George. 2002. Writings of Nichiren Shōnin: Doctorine 2. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.
Okada Bunkō 岡田文弘. 2016. Kōgiroku Kaimokushō kyōshitsu 講義録『開目抄』教室. Setouchi, Okayama: Myōkōji.
Okada Yukihiro 岡田行弘. 2013. “Hokekyō no tanjō to tenkai” 法華経の誕生と展開. In Chie/Sekai/ Kotoba 智慧／世界／ことば, ed. Katsura Shōryū 桂紹隆, Saitō Akira 斎藤明, Shimoda Masahiro 下田正弘, and Sueki Fumihiko 末木文美士, 271–303. Shirīzu Daijō Bukkyō シリーズ 大乗仏教 4. Tokyo: Shunjūsha.
Shimoda Masahiro 下田正弘. 2011. “Kyōten o sōshutsu suru: Daijō sekai no shutsugen” 経典を創 出する: 大乗世界の出現. In Daijō Bukkyō no tanjō 大乗仏教の誕生, ed. Katsura Shōryū 桂紹隆, Saitō Akira 斎藤明, Shimoda Masahiro 下田正弘, and Sueki Fumihiko 末木文美士, 37–71. Shirīzu Daijō Bukkyō シリーズ大乗仏教 2. Tokyo: Shunjūsha.
Suzuki Takayasu. 2016. “The Saddharmapuṇḍarīka as the Prediction of All the Sentient Beings’ Attaining Buddhahood: With Special Focus on the Sadāparibhūta-parivarta.” Indogaku Bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度学仏教学研究 64 (3): 113–121.
Key words Miaofa lianhua jing, 妙法蓮華經, Fahua jing, 法華經, Saddharmapuṇḍarīka,
Changbuqing pusa, 常不輕菩薩, Sadāparibhūta, qizui biyi, 其罪畢已, Nichiren, 日蓮, Kaimokushō, 開目抄, Hokekyō no gyōja, 法華經の行者
translated the SP into the SPC2, inserted the phrase “qizui biyi” in the SPC2 because the text he referred to was so specific that he found it difficult to distinguish Sadāparibhūta 2 from Sadāparibhūta 1.
This phrase “qizui biyi” greatly influenced one Japanese monk, Nichiren, who founded the Nichiren School. Nichiren, who was the leader of a strong Lotus Sutra Cult, repeatedly faced severe persecution. In the course of his suffering due to the persecutions, he, who was once a proponent of Pure Land Buddhism and Shingon Buddhism, began to identify himself with Sadāparibhūta and finally reached a stage in which he took delight in being persecuted as he realized that this could help him atone for his sin.
If it were not for the phrase “qizui biyi” in the SPC2, Nichiren would have failed in establishing his self-awakening as a practicer of the SP and would have changed his faith in the SP. Moreover, he might have abandoned his faith in the SP because there is no other key to the answer than the phrase “qizui biyi” as to why he could not receive heavenly protection or was a practicer of the SP.
Therefore, if it were not for the phrase “qizui biyi” in the SPC2, the Japanese religious world and society would have been greatly different from what it is today. We can say that the phrase “qizui biyi” in the SPC2 is a good example of how a “Mahayana sutra can create the outer world.”7)
Notes
1）The reading of the SPT well accords with that of the SPS.
2）Numbers in parenthesis correspond to the numbers shown in Chapter 2 of Suzuki [2016]. 3）Okada Y. [2013] is the representative in this respect.
4）The SP repeatedly teaches that any person who speaks against the SP or against those who keep, read, preach, or explain the SP must experience severe retribution. (SPS 93.11–97.4, 229.7–10) 5）The differnce of reading in Account 1 cannot be found either in the extant manuscripts. 6）The phrase “senshō no hōbō no toga 先生の謗法の失, sin against the True Law in the past lives” in the Sainan taijishō 災難對治鈔 (STN 170) gives us another clue to this question.
7）See Shimoda [2011: 38, 49, 62]. Texts and Abbreviations SP Saddharmapuṇḍarīka.
SPS Saddharmapuṇḍarīka, Ed. H. Kern and Bunyiu Nanjio. 5 vols. Bibliotheca Buddhica 10. St.-Pétersbourg: Commissionnaires de l’Académie Impériale des Sciences, 1908–1912.
SPT Tibetan version of the SP, P no. 781 (Dam pa’i chos pad ma dkar po).
SPC2 Second Chinese version of the SP, T. no. 262 (Miaofa lianhua jing 妙法蓮華經). Trans. Kumārajīva (Chi. Jiumoluoshi 鳩摩羅什).
SPC1 First Chinese version of the SP, T. no. 263 (Zheng fahua jing 正法華經). Trans. Zhu Fahu 竺 法護.
SPMS Sanskrit Manuscripts of Saddharmapuṇḍarīka. Ed. Institute for the Comprehensive Study of Lotus Sutra. 15 vols. Tokyo: Publishing Association of Saddharma-pundarika Manuscripts, 1977–1982.
STN Shōwa teihon Nchiren shōnin ibun 昭和定本日蓮聖人遺文. Ed. Risshō Daigaku Nichiren Kyōgaku Kenkyūjo 立正大學日蓮教學研究所. 4 vols. Minobu-chō, Yamanashi: Sōhonzan Minobu Kuonji, 1952–1959.
VjP Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā.
VjPS Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā. Ed. P. L. Vaidya. Buddhist Sanskrit Texts 17. Darbhanga: The Mithila Institute, 1961.
VjPC1 First Chinese version of the VjP, T. no. 235 (Jingang bore boluomi jing 金剛般若波羅蜜經). Trans. Kumārajīva (Chi. Jiumoluoshi).
(T. Taisho Tripiṭaka; P Peking Kanjur) Bibliography
Hori Kyōtsū, and Tanabe George. 2002. Writings of Nichiren Shōnin: Doctorine 2. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.
Okada Bunkō 岡田文弘. 2016. Kōgiroku Kaimokushō kyōshitsu 講義録『開目抄』教室. Setouchi, Okayama: Myōkōji.
Okada Yukihiro 岡田行弘. 2013. “Hokekyō no tanjō to tenkai” 法華経の誕生と展開. In Chie/Sekai/ Kotoba 智慧／世界／ことば, ed. Katsura Shōryū 桂紹隆, Saitō Akira 斎藤明, Shimoda Masahiro 下田正弘, and Sueki Fumihiko 末木文美士, 271–303. Shirīzu Daijō Bukkyō シリーズ 大乗仏教 4. Tokyo: Shunjūsha.
Shimoda Masahiro 下田正弘. 2011. “Kyōten o sōshutsu suru: Daijō sekai no shutsugen” 経典を創 出する: 大乗世界の出現. In Daijō Bukkyō no tanjō 大乗仏教の誕生, ed. Katsura Shōryū 桂紹隆, Saitō Akira 斎藤明, Shimoda Masahiro 下田正弘, and Sueki Fumihiko 末木文美士, 37–71. Shirīzu Daijō Bukkyō シリーズ大乗仏教 2. Tokyo: Shunjūsha.
Suzuki Takayasu. 2016. “The Saddharmapuṇḍarīka as the Prediction of All the Sentient Beings’ Attaining Buddhahood: With Special Focus on the Sadāparibhūta-parivarta.” Indogaku Bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度学仏教学研究 64 (3): 113–121.
Key words Miaofa lianhua jing, 妙法蓮華經, Fahua jing, 法華經, Saddharmapuṇḍarīka,
Changbuqing pusa, 常不輕菩薩, Sadāparibhūta, qizui biyi, 其罪畢已, Nichiren, 日蓮, Kaimokushō, 開目抄, Hokekyō no gyōja, 法華經の行者
