Showing posts with label ***. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ***. Show all posts

2022/04/12

** Islam by Huston Smith - Ebook | [complete: 0-9]

Islam by Huston Smith - Ebook | Scribd
https://www.scribd.com/book/163560629/Islam-A-Concise-Introduction
https://www.scribd.com/read/163560629/Islam-A-Concise-Introduction?mode=standard

Start reading


Islam: A Concise Introduction
By Huston Smith

4.5/5 (11 ratings)
93 pages
3 hours

===
Description

The world's premier authority on religious traditions presents a concise and timely guide to the history, teachings, and practice of Islam.

Drawn from his masterful presentation of Islam in the bestselling book The World's Religions (over two million copies sold), Huston Smith offers a revealing look into the heart of a tradition with more than one billion adherents worldwide. Dispelling narrow and distorted notions about the nature of Islam and featuring a new introduction by the author, this book compellingly conveys the profound appeal of Islam, while addressing such timely issues as the true meaning of jihad, the role of women in Islamic societies, and the remarkable growth of Islam in America.

Comparative Religion
Islam
All categories
=====
CONTENTS 
Introduction 
Prologue 
1. Islamic Background 
2. The Seal of the Prophets 
3. The Migration That Led to Victory 
4. The Standing Miracle 
5. Basic Theological Concepts 
6. The Five Pillars 
7. Social Teachings 
8. Sufism 
9. Whither Islam? 
 
Suggestions for Further Reading 
Notes 
About the Author 
Books by Huston Smith 
Copyright 
About the Publisher
===
INTRODUCTION

This book lifts the chapter on Islam from my The World’s Religions and publishes it as a small, free-standing book to help satisfy the hunger in America today for knowledge of this global faith. There is reason for this hunger. There are an estimated 1.2 billion Muslims in the world today—one out of every five persons on our planet is a Muslim—and Islam is probably the word’s fastest growing religion. And it is no longer, strictly speaking, a foreign religion. There are somewhere between four and seven million Muslims who are United States citizens, which means that they already outnumber Episcopalians and Presbyterians and, soon, even American Jews, and their proportion in relation to other traditions is growing.

The chief reason for the spike in interest in this religion, however, is its involvement in the toppling of the towers of the World Trade Center and the strike on the Pentagon in September 2001. What kind of religion could be involved in terror of these proportions?

This book does not speak directly to that question; it provides background information for those who seek it. Islam has been around for fourteen centuries, and if civilization manages to survive will be around for as many more. It is the foundations of this faith that this book places in the reader’s hands.

While that is the fact of the matter, it would be foolish to think that a description of Islam will be read in the same way after September 2001 as it would have been read before the calamitous events of that month. So I shall use the remainder of this introduction to touch briefly on three features of Islam that worry people since the September outrage: violence, the position of women, and fundamentalism.

First, violence. The popular Western image of Islam is of a religion of violence, the most violent in the world today if not in all history. That is utterly untrue. There are violent passages in the Koran, but they are no more violent than some passages in the Bible, and (a point often overlooked by reporters who quote them out of context) they relate specifically to occasions when Muhammad was struggling desperately to keep the revelation that was entrusted to him from being wiped off the face of the earth. Muslims have also fought, as have the adherents of every known faith—wars of religion have scarred Europe’s history from the beginning. But I shall leave assessing the record to Norman Daniel, whose Islam and the West: The Making of an Image is the most serious attempt that has been made to compare the use of force in Islam and Christianity. His conclusion is that what can be safely said is that Islam has resorted to violence no more than has Christianity, while adding that that is probably a conservative statement. He points out, as an example, that Spain and Anatolia changed hands about the same time. Every Jew and Muslim in Spain was killed, expelled from the country, or forced to convert to Christianity, whereas the seat of Orthodox Christianity remains in Constantinople to this very day.

To start at the beginning, with semantics, the word islam means explicitly surrender, but it is related to the Arabic word salam meaning peace as in the standard Islamic salutation, assalamu ‘alaykum, peace be upon you. And when a virtuous Muslim enters heaven, it is said, the only word he will be able to utter for three days, over and over, is peace, the virtue he has been longing for his entire life and that now overwhelms him with its total presence. Between the bookends of the religion’s name and its total realization in heaven stands history, and it is instructive.

When the Prophet Muhammad brought the Koranic revelation to seventh-century Arabia, a major part of his mission was devoted precisely to bringing an end the inter-tribal warfare that was wreaking havoc in the region. Pre-Islamic Arabia was caught up in a vicious cycle of warfare in which tribe fought tribe in an unending pattern of vendetta and counter-vendetta. At the start the Prophet and his cohorts had to fight too in order to survive, but once their foothold was secure, he turned his attention to building peaceful coalitions between tribes, so successfully that when he died he left as his political legacy a solidly united Arabia. And into warfare itself Muhammad introduced chivalry. No holds were barred in pre-Koranic warfare, but Muhammad introduced many traditions of forbearance. Agreements are to be honored and treachery avoided. The wounded are not to be mutilated or the dead disfigured. Women, children and the old are to be spared, as are orchards, crops, and sacred objects—no scorched earth policy or leveling of Hindu temples or destruction of Buddhist statues in authentic Islam.

The key—and inflammatory—issue, though, is jihad. Literally the word means only effort, exertion, or struggle, but it has taken on the meaning of a Holy War. No full-fledged religion has been able to manage without a doctrine something like this—complete pacifism remains for smallish sects such as the Mennonites and Quakers. Egregious aggression must be halted, and murder, rape, and pillage defended against. So far, alas, so good. What is not good is that jihad has been turned by outsiders into a rallying cry for hatred against Islam—mention the word and up come images of screaming mobs streaming through streets while brandishing swords and destroying everyone and everything in sight, all at the beck of some Ayatollah or bin Laden. The truth of the matter is that Islam’s concept of a Holy War is virtually identical with the Just War concept in Christian canon law, right down to the notion that martyrs in both are assured of entering heaven. In both cases the war must be defensive or fought to right a manifest wrong. Chivalry must be observed and the least possible damaged inflicted to secure the end in question. And hostilities must cease when the objective is accomplished. Retaliation is disallowed.

So, to face the hard question, were the destructive acts of September 2001 jihad? If the perpetrators saw those acts as responses to, first, continuing Israeli settlement of the West Bank and, second, the boycott cordon around Iraq and daily unmanned bombing of its territory, both regarded as acts of aggression against the dar al-salam, the House of Islam—to repeat, if the perpetrators of the damage saw their acts as responses to what they see as aggression, they doubtless saw themselves as waging jihad. Otherwise not.

On the second point of misunderstanding, the place of women in Islam, I can be brief. As I write these lines (October 2001) the treatment of women in Afghanistan is as cruel as anyone can imagine, but that has nothing to do with Islam. One of the most important principles to follow in trying to understand another religion is to distinguish between what is essential to it and defining of it and what, on the other hand, is cultural accretion that it has been picked up along the way. One of the times this distinction was brought home to me was when I was looking into the differences between the Protestant and Russian Orthodox missionary approaches to the Alaskan Eskimos. The Russian missionaries adapted the Christian message to Eskimo mores in every way possible. They learned their language, adopted their style of dress, and even incorporated their deities into the Christian angelic pantheon. By contrast, the Protestant missionaries seemed bent on Americanizing their converts as much as Christianizing them—teaching them English, dressing them in business suits, the works. Coming upon this second group of converts, a stranger who was ignorant in these matters might easily have assumed that Western garb was an ingredient of Christianity.

The actual status of women in the Koran bears no resemblance to the Western stereotype, which is woven of local customs that Muslims have assimilated to along the way. Muhammad’s wife was educated, intelligent, and a highly successful business woman. Actually this issue can be resolved quite simply. I suspect that we all know Muslim women who hold important positions in American society—my roster includes a physician, a teacher, a television director, and a shopkeeper—and who feel no conflict whatsoever between their religion and their positions in Western society.

One of my favorite sayings of the Prophet that has received little notice has at least an indirect bearing here, so I will use it to round off this section on women. On one occasion a companion of the Prophet heard a bystander ask him, Who is most entitled to my good conduct? The Prophet replied, Your mother. Then whom? the man asked. Again the Prophet answered, Your mother. The question was repeated a third time and received the same answer. It was only when the questioner asked his question a fourth time that the Prophet replied, Your father.

Finally, fundamentalism. Islamic fundamentalism is very different from Christian. Both share as their root cause the sense of being threatened, but by different things. Christian fundamentalism took shape in the 1920s as a reaction against the threat (as seen by conservative Christians) of, first, Darwinian evolution which seemed to challenge the biblical teaching that human beings were created directly by God, and, second, the threat of the higher criticism, which applies the tools of literary criticism to analyzing the Bible as if it were any other book.

Islamic fundamentalism is largely a regional phenomenon that centers in the Middle East—it causes few ripples in Indonesia and Africa. The reason it is powerful in Middle Eastern Islam is that 80 percent of the Muslims there are traditional in their outlook and way of life, while the 20 percent who rule them have been educated in the West and are modern in outlook and lifestyle. It takes no great feat of imagination to sense the threat the traditional majority feel from the ruling minority, and it causes them to dig in their heels. Two worlds, the old and the new, are in sharp collision.

The permutations on this basic theme vary from region to region and are far too complex to enter into here. Moreover, to enter that domain would run counter to the intent of this introduction. I have used it to say a few words about issues that are bound to be in the reader’s mind since the September atrocities, but nothing has happened to alter the foundation of this faith. Those foundations must provide the background, at least, for anything else one says about Islam, and to my knowledge they are presented accurately in the pages that follow.

Huston Smith

Berkeley, California

October 25, 2001

===

PROLOGUE

We can begin with an anomaly. Of all the non-Western religions, Islam stands closest to the West—closest geographically, and also closest ideologically; for religiously it stands in the Abrahamic family of religions, while philosophically it builds on the Greeks. Yet despite this mental and spatial proximity, Islam is the most difficult religion for the West to understand. No part of the world, an American columnist has written, is more hopelessly and systematically and stubbornly misunderstood by us than that complex of religion, culture and geography known as Islam.¹

This is ironic, but the irony is easily explained. Proximity is no guarantee of concord—tragically, more homicides occur within families than anywhere else. Islam and the West are neighbors. Common borders have given rise to border disputes, which, beginning with raids and counterraids, have escalated into vendettas, blood feuds, and all-out war. There is a happier side; in times and places Christians, Muslims, and Jews have lived together harmoniously—one thinks of Moorish Spain. But for a good part of the last fourteen hundred years, Islam and Europe have been at war, and people seldom have a fair picture of their enemies.² Islam is going to be an interesting religion for this book to negotiate.

Mistakes begin with its very name. Until recently it was called Muhammadanism by the West, which is not only inaccurate but offensive. It is inaccurate, Muslims say, because Muhammad didn’t create this religion; God did—Muhammad was merely God’s mouthpiece. Beyond this, the title is offensive because it conveys the impression that Islam focuses on a man rather than on God. To name Christianity after Christ is appropriate, they say, for Christians believe that Christ was God. But to call Islam Muhammadanism is like calling Christianity St. Paulism. The proper name of this religion is Islam. Derived from the root s-l-m, which means primarily peace but in a secondary sense surrender, its full connotation is the peace that comes when one’s life is surrendered to God. This makes Islam—together with Buddhism, from budh, awakening—one of the two religions that is named after the attribute it seeks to cultivate; in Islam’s case, life’s total surrender to God. Those who adhere to Islam are known as Muslims.


— 1 — ISLAMIC BACKGROUND

"Around the name of the Arabs, writes Philip Hitti, gleams that halo which belongs to the world-conquerors. Within a century after their rise this people became the masters of an empire extending from the shores of the Atlantic Ocean to the confines of China, an empire greater than that of Rome at its zenith. In this period of unprecedented expansion, they assimilated to their creed, speech, and even physical type, more aliens than any stock before or since, not excepting the Hellenic, the Roman, the Anglo-Saxon, or the Russian.¹

Central in this Arab rise to greatness was their religion, Islam. If we ask how it came into being, the outsider’s answer points to socioreligious currents that were playing over Arabia in Muhammad’s day and uses them to explain what happened. The Muslims’ answer is different. Islam begins not with Muhammad in sixth-century Arabia, they say, but with God. In the beginning God… the book of Genesis tells us. The Koran agrees. It differs only in using the word Allah. Allah is formed by joining the definite article al (meaning the) with Ilah (God). Literally, Allah means the God. Not a god, for there is only one. The God. When the masculine plural ending im is dropped from the Hebrew word for God, Elohim, the two words sound much alike.

God created the world, and after it human beings. The name of the first man was Adam. The descendants of Adam led to Noah, who had a son named Shem. This is where the word Semite comes from; literally a Semite is a descendant of Shem. Like the Jews, the Arabs consider themselves a Semitic people. The descendants of Shem led to Abraham, and so far we are still in the tradition of Judaism and Christianity. Indeed, it was the submission of Abraham in his supreme test—would he be willing to sacrifice his son Ishmael?—that appears to have provided Islam with its name. Abraham married Sarah. Sarah had no son, so Abraham, wanting to continue his line, took Hagar for his second wife. Hagar bore him a son, Ishmael, whereupon Sarah conceived and likewise had a son, named Isaac. Sarah then demanded that Abraham banish Ishmael and Hagar from the tribe. Here we come to the first divergence between the koranic and biblical accounts. According to the Koran, Ishmael went to the place where Mecca was to rise. His descendants, flourishing in Arabia, became Muslims; whereas those of Isaac, who remained in Palestine, were Hebrews and became Jews.


===

— 2 — THE SEAL OF THE PROPHETS

Following Ishmael’s line in Arabia, we come in the latter half of the sixth century A.D. to Muhammad, the prophet through whom Islam reached its definitive form, Muslims believe. There had been authentic prophets of God before him, but he was their culmination; hence he is called The Seal of the Prophets. No valid prophets will follow him.

The world into which Muhammad was born is described by subsequent Muslims in a single word: ignorant. Life under the conditions of the desert had never been serene. People felt almost no obligation to anyone outside their tribes. Scarcity of material goods made brigandage a regional institution and the proof of virility. In the sixth century political deadlock and the collapse of the magistrate in the leading city of Mecca aggravated this generally chaotic situation. Drunken orgies were commonplace, and the gaming impulse uncontrolled. The prevailing religion watched from the sidelines, providing no check. Best described as an animistic polytheism, it peopled the sandy wastes with beastly sprites called jinn or demons. Fantastic personifications of desert terrors, they inspired neither exalted sentiments nor moral restraint. Conditions could hardly have been better calculated to produce a smoldering undercurrent, which erupted in sudden affrays and blood feuds, some of which extended for half a century. The times called for a deliverer.

He was born into the leading tribe of Mecca, the Koreish, in approximately A.D. 570, and was named Muhammad, highly praised, which name has since been borne by more male children than any other in the world. His early life was cradled in tragedy, for his father died a few days before he was born, his mother when he was six, and his grandfather, who cared for him after his mother’s death, when he was eight. Thereafter he was adopted into his uncle’s home. Though the latter’s declining fortunes forced the young orphan to work hard minding his uncle’s flocks, he was warmly received by his new family. The angels of God, we are told, had opened Muhammad’s heart and filled it with light.

The description epitomizes his early character as this comes down to us by tradition. Pure-hearted and beloved in his circle, he was, it is said, of sweet and gentle disposition. His bereavements having made him sensitive to human suffering in every form, he was always ready to help others, especially the poor and the weak. His sense of honor, duty, and fidelity won him, as he grew older, the high and enviable titles of The True, The Upright, The Trustworthy One. Yet despite his concern for others, he remained removed from them in outlook and ways, isolated in a corrupt and degenerate society. As he grew from childhood to youth and from youth to manhood, the lawless strife of his contemporaries, the repeated outbursts of pointless quarrels among tribes frequenting the Meccan fairs, and the general immorality and cynicism of his day combined to produce in the prophet-to-be a reaction of horror and disgust. Silently, broodingly, his thoughts were turning inward.

Upon reaching maturity he took up the caravan business, and at the age of twenty-five entered the service of a wealthy widow named Khadija. His prudence and integrity impressed her greatly, and gradually their relation deepened into affection, then love. Though she was fifteen years his senior, they were married and the match proved happy in every respect. During a long, desolate period that lay ahead, in which no one would believe in him, not even himself, Khadija was to remain steadfastly by his side, consoling him and tending hope’s thin flame. God, tradition was to record, comforted him through her, for she made his burden light.

Following his marriage were fifteen years of preparation before his ministry was to begin. A mountain on the outskirts of Mecca, known as Mount Hira, contained a cave, and Muhammad, needing solitude, began to frequent it. Peering into the mysteries of good and evil, unable to accept the crudeness, superstition, and fratricide that were accepted as normal, this great fiery heart, seething, simmering like a great furnace of thoughts, was reaching out for God.¹

The desert jinn were irrelevant to this quest, but one deity was not. Named Allah² he was worshiped by the Meccans not as the only God but as an impressive one nonetheless. Creator, supreme provider, and determiner of human destiny, he was capable of inspiring authentic religious feeling and genuine devotion. Certain contemplatives of the time, called hanifs, worshiped Allah exclusively, and Muhammad was one of their number.

Through vigils, often lasting the entire night, Allah’s reality became for Muhammad increasingly evident and awesome. Fearful and wonderful, real as life, real as death, real as the universe he had ordained, Allah (Muhammad was convinced) was far greater than his countrymen supposed. This God, whose majesty overflowed a desert cave to fill all heaven and earth, was surely not a god or even the greatest of gods. He was what his name literally claimed: He was the God, One and only, One without rival. Soon from this mountain cave was to sound the greatest phrase of the Arabic language; the deep, electrifying cry that was to rally a people and explode their power to the limits of the known world: La ilaha illa ’llah! There is no god but God!

But first the prophet must receive, around 610, his commission. Gradually, as Muhammad’s visits to the cave became more compelling, the command that he later saw as predestined took form. It was the same command that had fallen earlier on Abraham, Moses, Samuel, Isaiah, and Jesus. Wherever, whenever, this call comes, its form may differ but its essence is the same. A voice falls from heaven saying, You are the appointed one. On the Night of Power, as a strange peace pervaded creation and all nature was turned toward its Lord, in the middle of that night, say the Muslims, the Book was opened to a ready soul. Some add that on the anniversary of that Night it is possible to hear the grass grow and the trees speak, and that those who do so become saints or sages, for on the annual return of that Night one can see through the fingers of God.³

On that first Night of Power, as Muhammad lay on the floor of the cave, his mind locked in deepest contemplation, there came to him an angel in the form of a man. The angel said to him: Proclaim!⁴ and he said: I am not a proclaimer; whereupon, as Muhammad was himself to report, "the Angel took me and whelmed me in his embrace until he had reached the limit of my endurance. Then he released me and said again, ‘Proclaim!’ Again I said: ‘I am not a proclaimer,’ and again he whelmed me in his embrace. When again he had reached the limit of my endurance he said ‘Proclaim!,’ and when I again protested, he whelmed me for a third time, this time saying:

Proclaim in the name of your Lord who created!

Created man from a clot of blood.

Proclaim: Your Lord is the Most Generous,

Who teaches by the pen;

Teaches man what he knew not."


(Koran 96:1–3)

Arousing from his trance, Muhammad felt as if the words he had heard had been branded on his soul. Terrified, he rushed home and fell into paroxysms. Coming to himself, he told Khadija that he had become either a prophet or one possessed—mad. At first she resisted this disjunction, but on hearing his full story she became his first convert—which, Muslims often remark, in itself speaks well for his authenticity, for if anyone understands a man’s true character it is his wife. Rejoice, O dear husband, and be of good cheer, she said. You will be the Prophet of this people.

We can imagine the spiritual anguish, the mental doubts, the waves of misgivings that followed in the wake of the experience. Was the voice really God’s? Would it come again? Above all, what would it require?

It returned repeatedly, and its command was always the same—to proclaim. O thou, inwrapped in thy mantle, arise and warn, and glorify thy Lord. Muhammad’s life was no more his own. From that time forth it was given to God and to humanity, preaching with unswerving purpose in the face of relentless persecution, insult, and outrage, the words that God was to transmit for twenty-three years.

The content of the revelation will be reserved for later sections. Here we need only speak of the response it drew and note that its appeal throughout was to human reason as vectored by religious discernment.

In an age charged with supernaturalism, when miracles were accepted as the stock-in-trade of the most ordinary saint, Muhammad refused to pander to human credulity. To miracle-hungry idolaters seeking signs and portents, he cut the issue clean: God has not sent me to work wonders; He has sent me to preach to you. My Lord; be praised! Am I more than a man sent as an apostle?⁵ From first to last he resisted every impulse to inflate his own image. I never said that God’s treasures are in my hand, that I knew the hidden things, or that I was an angel. I am only a preacher of God’s words, the bringer of God’s message to mankind.⁶ If signs be sought, let them be not of Muhammad’s greatness but of God’s, and for these one need only open one’s eyes. The heavenly bodies holding their swift, silent course in the vault of heaven, the incredible order of the universe, the rain that falls to relieve the parched earth, palms bending with golden fruit, ships that glide across the seas laden with goodness—can these be the handiwork of gods of stone? What fools to cry for signs when creation tokens nothing else! In an age of credulity, Muhammad taught respect for the world’s incontrovertible order, a respect that was to bring Muslims to science before it did Christians. Apart from his nocturnal ascent through the heavens, which will be mentioned, he claimed only one miracle, that of the Koran itself. That he with his own resources could have produced such truth—this was the one naturalistic hypothesis he could not accept.

As for the reaction to his message, it was (for all but a few) violently hostile. The reasons for the hostility can be reduced to three: (1) Its uncompromising monotheism threatened polytheistic beliefs and the considerable revenue that was coming to Mecca from pilgrimages to its 360 shrines (one for every day of the lunar year); (2) its moral teachings demanded an end to the licentiousness that citizens clung to; and (3) its social content challenged an unjust order. In a society riven with class distinctions, the new Prophet was preaching a message that was intensely democratic. He was insisting that in the sight of his Lord all people were equal.

As such a teaching suited neither their tastes nor their privileges, the Meccan leaders were determined to have none of it. They began their attack with ridicule: pinpricks of laughter, petty insults, and hoots of derision. When these proved ineffective, their words turned uglier—to abuse, calumny, vilification, and then overt threats. When these too failed, they resorted to open persecution. They covered Muhammad and his followers with dirt and filth as they were praying. They pelted them with stones, beat them with sticks, threw them in prison, and tried to starve them out by refusing to sell to them. To no avail; persecution only steeled the will of Muhammad’s followers. Never since the days when primitive Christianity startled the world from its sleep, wrote a scholar whose words assume added weight because he was on the whole a severe critic of Islam, had men seen the like arousing of spiritual life—of faith that suffers sacrifices.⁷ Muhammad himself set the pattern for their fidelity. Under the most perilous of circumstances, he continued to throw heart and soul into his preaching, adjuring listeners wherever he could find them to abandon their evil ways and prepare for the day of reckoning.

At first the odds were so heavily against him that he made few converts; three long years of heartbreaking effort yielded less than forty. But his enemies could do nothing to forever seal the hearts of the Meccans against his words. Slowly but steadily, people of energy, talent, and worth became convinced of the truth of his message until, by the end of a decade, several hundred families were acclaiming him as God’s authentic spokesman.


===
— 3 — THE MIGRATION THAT LED TO VICTORY

By this time the Meccan nobility was alarmed. What had begun as a pretentious prophetic claim on the part of a half-crazed camel driver had turned into a serious revolutionary movement that was threatening their very existence. They were determined to rid themselves of the troublemaker for good.

As he faced this severest crisis of his career, Muhammad was suddenly waited on by a delegation of the leading citizens of Yathrib, a city 280 miles to Mecca’s north. Through pilgrims and other visitors to Mecca, Muhammad’s teachings had won a firm hold in Yathrib. The city was facing internal rivalries that put it in need of a strong leader from without, and Muhammad looked like the man. After receiving a delegation’s pledge that they would worship Allah only, that they would observe the precepts of Islam, and that they would obey its prophet in all that was right and defend him and his adherents as they would their women and children, Muhammad received a sign from God to accept the charge. About seventy families preceded him. When the Meccan leaders got wind of the exodus they did everything in their power to prevent his going; but, together with his close companion Abu Bakr, he eluded their watch and set out for Yathrib, taking refuge on the way in a crevice south of the city. Horsemen scouring the countryside came so close to discovering them that Muhammad’s companion was moved to despair. We are only two, he murmured. No, we are three, Muhammad answered, for God is with us. The Koran agrees. He was with them, it observes, for they were not discovered. After three days, when the search had slackened, they managed to procure two camels and make their hazardous way by unfrequented paths to the city of their destination.

The year was 622. The migration, known in Arabic as the Hijra, is regarded by Muslims as the turning point in world history and is the year from which they date their calendar. Yathrib soon came to be known as Medinat al-Nabi, the City of the Prophet, and then by contraction simply to Medina, the city.

From the moment of his arrival at Medina, Muhammad assumed a different role. From prophecy he was pressed into administration. The despised preacher became a masterful politician; the prophet was transformed into statesman. We see him as the master not merely of the hearts of a handful of devotees but of the collective life of a city, its judge and general as well as its teacher.

Even his detractors concede that he played his new role brilliantly. Faced with problems of extraordinary complexity, he proved to be a remarkable statesman. As the supreme magistrate, he continued to lead as unpretentious a life as he had in the days of his obscurity. He lived in an ordinary clay house, milked his own goats, and was accessible day and night to the humblest in his community. Often seen mending his own clothes, no emperor with his tiaras was obeyed as this man in a cloak of his own clouting.¹ God, say Muslim historians, put before him the key to the treasures of this world, but he refused it.

Tradition depicts his administration as an ideal blend of justice and mercy. As chief of state and trustee of the life and liberty of his people, he exercised the justice necessary for order, meting out punishment to those who were guilty. When the injury was toward himself, on the other hand, he was gentle and merciful even to his enemies. In all, the Medinese found him a master whom it was as difficult not to love as not to obey. For he had, as one biographer has written, the gift of influencing men, and he had the nobility only to influence for the good

For the remaining ten years of his life, his personal history merged with that of the Medinese commonwealth of which he was the center. Exercising superb statecraft, he welded the five heterogeneous and conflicting tribes of the city, three of which were Jewish, into an orderly confederation. The task was not an easy one, but in the end he succeeded in awakening in the citizens a spirit of cooperation unknown in the city’s history. His reputation spread and people began to flock from every part of Arabia to see the man who had wrought this miracle.

There followed the struggle with the Meccans for the mind of Arabia as a whole. In the second year of the Hijra the Medinese won a spectacular victory over a Meccan army many times larger, and they interpreted the victory as a clear sign that the angels of heaven were battling on their side. The following year, however, witnessed a reversal during which Muhammad himself was wounded. The Meccans did not follow up their victory until two years later, when they laid siege to Medina in a last desperate effort to force the Muslims to capitulate. The failure of this effort turned the tide permanently in Muhammad’s favor; and within three years—eight years after his Migration from Mecca—he who had left as a fugitive returned as conqueror. The city that had treated him cruelly now lay at his feet, with his former persecutors at his mercy. Typically, however, he did not press his victory. In the hour of his triumph the past was forgiven. Making his way to the famous Ka’ba, a cubical temple (said to have been built by Abraham) that Muhammad rededicated to Allah and adopted as Islam’s focus, he accepted the virtual mass conversion of the city. Himself, he returned to Medina.

Two years later, in A.D. 632 (10 A.H., After the Hijra), Muhammad died with virtually all of Arabia under his control. With all the power of armies and police, no other Arab had ever succeeded in uniting his countrymen as he had. Before the century closed his followers had conquered Armenia, Persia, Syria, Palestine, Iraq, North Africa, and Spain, and had crossed the Pyrenees into France. But for their defeat by Charles Martel in the Battle of Tours in 733, the entire Western world might today be Muslim. Within a brief span of mortal life, Muhammad had called forth out of unpromising material a nation never united before, in a country that was hitherto but a geographical expression; established a religion which in vast areas superseded Christianity and Judaism and still claims the adherence of a goodly portion of the human race; and laid the basis of an empire that was soon to embrace within its far-flung boundaries the fairest provinces of the then civilized world.³

In The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History, Michael Hart places Muhammad first. His unparalleled combination of secular and religious influence entitles Muhammad to be considered the most influential single figure in human history, Hart writes.⁴ The explanation that Muslims give for that verdict is simple. The entire work, they say, was the work of God.

--

— 4 — THE STANDING MIRACLE

The blend of admiration, respect, and affection that the Muslim feels for Muhammad is an impressive fact of history. They see him as a man who experienced life in exceptional range. Not only was he a shepherd, merchant, hermit, exile, Soldier, lawmaker, prophet-priestking, and mystic; he was also an orphan, for many years the husband of one wife much older than himself, a many times bereaved father, a widower, and finally the husband of many wives, some much younger than himself. In all of these roles he was exemplary. All this is in the minds of Muslims as they add to the mention of his name the benediction, Blessings and peace be upon him. Even so, they never mistake him for the earthly center of their faith. That place is reserved for the bible of Islam, the Koran.

Literally, the word al-qur’an in Arabic (and hence koran,) means a recitation. Fulfilling that purpose, the Koran is perhaps the most recited (as well as read) book in the world. Certainly, it is the world’s most memorized book, and possibly the one that exerts the most influence on those who read it. So great was Muhammad’s regard for its contents that (as we have seen) he considered it the only major miracle God worked through him—God’s standing miracle, as he called it. That he himself, unschooled to the extent that he was unlettered (ummi) and could barely write his name, could have produced a book that provides the ground plan of all knowledge and at the same time is grammatically perfect and without poetic peer—this, Muhammad, and with him all Muslims, are convinced defies belief. He put the point in a rhetorical question: Do you ask for a greater miracle than this, O unbelieving people, than to have your language chosen as the language of that incomparable Book, one piece of which puts all your golden poetry to shame?

Four-fifths the length of the New Testament, the Koran is divided into 114 chapters or surahs, which (with the exception of the short first chapter that figures in the Muslim’s daily prayers) are arranged in order of decreasing length. Thus Surah Two has 286 verses, Surah Three has 200, down to Surah One Hundred Fourteen, which has only six.

Muslims tend to read the Koran literally. They consider it the earthly facsimile of an Uncreated Koran in almost exactly the way that Christians consider Jesus to have been the human incarnation of God. The comparison that reads, If Christ is God incarnate, the Koran is God inlibriate (from liber, Latin for book) is inelegant but not inaccurate. The created Koran is the instantiation, in letters and sounds, of the Koran’s limitless essence in its Uncreated Form. Not that there are two Korans, of course. Rather, the created Koran is the formal crystallization of the infinite reality of the Uncreated Koran. Two levels of reality are operative here. There is the Divine Reality of the Uncreated Koran, and there is the earthly reality of the created Koran. When the created Koran is said to be a miracle, the miracle referred to is the presence of the Uncreated Koran within the letters and sounds of its created (and therefore necessarily in certain ways circumscribed) manifestation.

The words of the Koran came to Muhammad in manageable segments over twenty-three years through voices that seemed at first to vary and sometimes sounded like the reverberating of bells, but which gradually condensed into a single voice that identified itself as Gabriel’s. Muhammad had no control over the flow of the revelation; it descended on him independent of his will. When it arrived he was changed into a special state that was externally discernible. Both his appearance and the sound of his voice would change. He reported that the words assaulted him as if they were solid and heavy: For We shall charge thee with a word of weight (73:5; all such references in this chapter are to surah and verse[s] in the Koran). Once they descended while he was riding a camel. The animal sought vainly to support the added weight by adjusting its legs. By the time the revelation ceased, its belly was pressed against the earth and its legs splayed out. The words that Muhammad exclaimed in these often trance-like states were memorized by his followers and recorded on bones, bark, leaves, and scraps of parchment, with God preserving their accuracy throughout.

The Koran continues the Old and New Testaments, God’s earlier revelations, and presents itself as their culmination: We made a covenant of old with the Children of Israel [and] you have nothing of guidance until you observe the Torah and the Gospel (5:70, 68). This entitles Jews and Christians to be included with Muslims as People of the Book. (Because the context of the koranic revelation is the Middle East, religions of other lands are not mentioned, but their existence is implied and in principle validated, as in the following verses: To every people we have sent a messenger…[Some] We have mentioned to you, and [some] we have not mentioned to you [10:47, 4:164]). Nevertheless, Muslims regard the Old and New Testaments as sharing two defects from which the Koran is free. For circumstantial reasons they record only portions of Truth. Second, the Jewish and Christian Bibles were partially corrupted in transmission, a fact that explains the occasional discrepancies that occur between their accounts and parallel ones in the Koran. Exemption from these two limitations makes the Koran the final and infallible revelation of God’s will. Its second chapter says explicitly: This is the Scripture whereof there is no doubt.

From the outside things look otherwise, for from without the Koran is all but impenetrable. No one has ever curled up on a rainy weekend to read the Koran. Carlyle confessed that it was as toilsome reading as I ever undertook; a wearisome, confused jumble, crude, incondite. Nothing but a sense of duty could carry any European through the Koran. Sir Edward Gibbon said much the same: The European will peruse with impatience its endless incoherent rhapsody of fable and precept, and declamation, which seldom excites a sentiment or an idea, which sometimes crawls in the dust, and is sometimes lost in the clouds.¹ How are we to understand the discrepancy of the Koran as read from within and from without?

The language in which it was proclaimed, Arabic, provides an initial clue. No people in the world, writes Philip Hitti, are so moved by the word, spoken or written, as the Arabs. Hardly any language seems capable of exercising over the minds of its users such irresistible influence as Arabic. Crowds in Cairo, Damascus, or Baghdad can be stirred to the highest emotional pitch by statements that, when translated, seem banal. The rhythm, melodic cadence, the rhyme produce a powerful hypnotic effect. Thus the power of the koranic revelation lies not only in the literal meaning of its words but also in the language in which this meaning incorporated, including its sound. The Koran was from the first a vocal phenomenon; we remember that we are to recite in the name of the Lord! Because content and container are here inseparably fused, translations cannot possibly convey the emotion, the fervor, and the mystery that the Koran holds in the original. This is why, in sharp contrast to Christians, who have translated their Bible into every known script, Muslims have preferred to teach others the language in which they believe God spoke finally with incomparable force and directness.²

Language, however, is not the only barrier the Koran presents to outsiders, for in content too it is like no other religious text. Unlike the Upanishads, it is not explicitly metaphysical. It does not ground its theology in dramatic narratives as the Indian epics do, nor in historical ones as do the Hebrew scriptures; nor is God revealed in human form as in the Gospels and the Bhagavad-Gita. Confining ourselves to the Semitic scriptures, we can say that whereas the Old and New Testaments are directly historical and indirectly doctrinal, the Koran is directly doctrinal and indirectly historical. Because the overwhelming thrust of the Koran is to proclaim the unity, omnipotence, omniscience, and mercy of God—and correlatively the total dependence of human life upon him—historical facts are in its case merely reference points that have scarcely any interest in themselves. This explains why the prophets are cited without any chronological order; why historical occurrences are sometimes recounted so elliptically as to be unintelligible without commentaries; and why the biblical stories that the Koran refers to are presented in an unexpected, abbreviated, and dry manner. They are stripped of their epic character and inserted as didactic examples of the infinitely various things that declare God’s praise. When the Lord-servant relationship is the essential point to get across, all else is but commentary and allusion.

Perhaps we shall be less inclined to fault the Koran for the strange face it presents to foreigners if we note that foreign scriptures present their own problems to Muslims. To speak only of the Old and New Testaments, Muslims express disappointment in finding that those texts do not take the form of Divine speech and merely report things that happened. In the Koran God speaks in the first person. Allah describes himself and makes known his laws. The Muslim is therefore inclined to consider each individual sentence of the Holy Book as a separate revelation and to experience the words themselves, even their sounds, as a means of grace. The Qur’an does not document what is other than itself. It is not about the truth: it is the truth.³ By contrast the Jewish and Christian Bibles seem more distant from God for placing religious meaning in reports of events instead of God’s direct pronouncements.

The Koran’s direct delivery creates, for the reader, a final problem that in other scriptures is eased by greater use of narrative and myth. One discerning commentator on the Koran puts this point as follows: "The seeming incoherence of the text has its cause in the incommensurable disproportion between the Spirit [Uncreated Koran] and the limited resources of human language. It is as though the poverty-stricken coagulation which is the language of mortal man were under the formidable pressure of the Heavenly Word broken into a thousand fragments, or as if God in order to express a thousand truths, had but a dozen words at his command and so was compelled to make use of allusions heavy with meaning, of ellipses, abridgements and symbolical syntheses."⁴

Putting comparisons behind us, it is impossible to overemphasize the central position of the Koran in the elaboration of any Islamic doctrine. With large portions memorized in childhood, it regulates the interpretation and evaluation of every event. It is a memorandum for the faithful, a reminder for daily doings, and a repository of revealed truth. It is a manual of definitions and guarantees, and at the same time a road map for the will. Finally, it is a collection of maxims to meditate on in private, deepening endlessly one’s sense of the divine glory. Perfect is the Word of your Lord in truth and justice (6:115).


===

— 5 — BASIC THEOLOGICAL CONCEPTS

With a few striking exceptions, which will be noted, the basic theological concepts of Islam are virtually identical with those of Judaism and Christianity, its forerunners. We shall confine our attention in this chapter to four that are the most important: God, Creation, the Human Self, and the Day of Judgment.

2020/12/05

** 묘법연화경 - 위키백과 / (한국어) 법화경 / Lotus Sutra 영어

묘법연화경 - 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전

묘법연화경

위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전.
둘러보기로 가기검색하러 가기
메트로폴리탄 미술관 소장 《묘법연화경》 2권 변상도(1340년 고려(高麗)에서 간행)

묘법연화경》(妙法蓮華經, 산스크리트어सद्धर्मपुण्डरीक सूत्र 삿다르마 푼다리카 수트라 →흰 연꽃과 같은 올바른 가르침) 또는 《법화경》(法華經)은 대승경전의 하나로, 예로부터 모든 경전왕으로 생각되었으며, 석가모니의 40년 설법을 집약한 경전으로, 법화사상을 담고 있는 천태종(天台宗)의 근본 경전이다.[1] 초기 대승경전(大乘經典) 중에서 가장 중요한 경전이다.[2]

산스크리트어 원본으로는 영국인 호지슨이 네팔에서 발견한 것을 비롯하여 여러가지의 단편(斷片)이 존재한다. 프랑스어와 영어로 번역이 되어 있으며, 한편 한문티베트어위구르어서하어몽골어만주어 등으로 번역되어 넓은 지역의 여러 민족에게서 애호되었다.[2]

현존하는 3종의 한문 번역 가운데 구마라집(鳩摩羅什)이 번역한 《묘법연화경(妙法蓮華經)》(T.0262) 7권(후에 8권이 되었음)이 가장 널리 유포되어 있다.

오늘날 학자는 그 성립을 기원 전후에 신앙심이 강하고 진보적인 신자집단에 의해 서북부 인도에서 《소부》(小部)의 것이 만들어졌고 후일에 증보되었을 것이라고 추정한다.[2]

  • 《묘법연화경》에서 부처는 머나먼 과거로부터 미래 영겁(未來永劫)에 걸쳐 존재하는 초월적인 존재이다. 한없이 긴 세월.
  • 그가 이 세상에 출현한 것은 모든 인간들이 부처의 깨달음을 열 수 있는 대도(大道, 一乘)를 보이기 위함이며, 그 대도를 실천하는 사람은 누구라도 부처가 될 수 있다는 주장이 경전의 핵심이다.[2] 

《법화경》은 모두 28개의 품(品, 장)으로 이루어져 있다. 간혹 《무량의경》, 《불설관보현보살행법경》과 함께, 《법화삼부경》(法華三部經)이라고 지칭하기도 한다.[3]


역사[편집]

유포[편집]

법화경은 동쪽으로 전해지기 전에 유라시아 대륙에서는 널리 유포된 경전이었다. 인도의 산스크리트어 경전이 존재했고, 티베트 불교의 게르크파의 개조가 된 총카파는 자신의 저서 보리도차제대론(菩提道次第大論)에서 죄를 멸하는 방편으로써 법화경을 독경하는 것을 권하고 있다. 네팔에서는 구법경전의 하나로써 다룬다. 중국 천태종에서는 법화경을 가장 중요시하여, 저장 성(浙江省)의 천태산 국청사(天台山国清寺)의 천태대사 지의(智顗)는 쿠마라지바가 번역한 묘법연화경을 소의경전으로 삼고 있다. 

400년경 서역에서 중국의 수도 장안으로 온 쿠차 출신의 승려 쿠마라지바 산스크리트어 경전을 한자로 번역하면서부터 법화경은 중국, 나아가 동아시아 전역으로 퍼져나갔다. 쿠마라지바의 번역에서는 산스크리트어 원전의 진언(真言)이나 인(印)을 생략했는데, 훗날 첨품법화경(添品法華経)에서는 이를 다시 추가시켰다.

법화경은 빠르게 한반도에도 전래되었다. 고구려의 수도(427년 천도 ~ 668년까지)였던 평양의 대성산성(大城山城) 성돌 사이에서 발견된 1천 자 정도의 글자가 남은 묘법연화경이 현재 북한의 조선중앙역사박물관에 소장되어 있다. 《삼국유사》에는 백제의 승려 혜현(惠賢)이 수덕사에서 아침저녁으로 법화경을 독송했다는 기록을 남기고 있고, 신라의 승려 원효는 법화경의 교리를 해설한 《법화경종요》(法華經宗要)를 짓기도 했다.

현재 한국에서 유통되고 있는 《법화경》은 1236년에 간행된 《법화경》과 1467년(세조 13) 간경도감에서 간행된 《법화경》을 제외하고는 거의 대부분이 송나라 계환(戒環)이 1126년(인종 4)에 저술한 《묘법연화경요해》(妙法蓮華經要解) 7권본이다. 《법화경》에 대한 연구 주석서로는 신라 시대 고승들의 저술을 비롯하여 중국 역대 고승들의 저술이 수십 종에 이르고 있다.

이 중 계환의 주해가 우리나라에서 크게 유통된 것은 그 내용이 한국 불교의 흐름과 일치하고 문장이 간결하며 이해가 쉽기 때문이라고 볼 수 있다. 현존 판본을 살펴보면 고려 시대 3종이고, 조선 시대의 것이 117종으로 모두 120종에 이르고 있다. 그리고 현존하고 있는 법화경판은 34종 3,036장이다.

오늘날 학자는 《법화경》을 대승 불교 교단이 소승 불교 교단과 갈라져 나오면서 형성된 경전으로 추정하며, 초기에는 운문의 형태로 암송되어 전래되어 오다가, 후에 서술형 문구와 운문의 형태가 융합된 형태를 띠게 되었으리라 추정한다. 따라서 오늘날 학자는 《법화경》은 반야경》 이래로 등장한 대승 불교 경전들의 최고 집대성이자 완성된 시기의 경전으로 그 역사적 의미를 부여하고 있다.[4]

설법 장소[편집]

영취산(靈鷲山 · 鷲栖山)은 석가모니가 《법화경》을 설법한 인도 왕사성 근방에 있는 산이다. 《법화경》을 설법할 때 그 모임을 일러 불교에서는 영산회(靈山會) 또는 영산회상(靈山會上)이라고 하며, 이 모임의 장면을 영산회상도라고 하며, 법당의 후불탱화로 많이 사용된다.[5]

구성 및 내용[편집]

구성[편집]

법화경 28품
무량의경(無量義經=開經)
덕행품(德行品)第一
설법품(說法品)第二
십공덕품(十功德品)第三
적문(迹門)14品
서품(序品)第一
방편품(方便品)第二
비유품(譬喩品)第三
신해품(信解品)第四
약초유품(藥草喩品)第五
수기품(授記品)第六
화성유품(化城喩品)第七
오백제자수기품(五百弟子受記品)第八
수학무학인기품(數學無學人記品)第九
법사품(法師品)第十
견보탑품(見寶塔品)第十一
제바달다품(提婆達多品)第十二
권지품(勸持品)第十三
안락행품(安樂行品)第十四
본문(本門)14品
종지용출품(從地涌出品)第十五
여래수량품(如來壽量品)第十六
분별공덕품(分別功德品)第十七
수희공덕품(隨喜功德品)第十八
법사공덕품(法師功德品)第十九
상불경보살품(常不經普薩品)第二十
여래신력품(如來神力品)第二十一
촉루품(囑累品)第二十二
약왕보살본사품(藥王普薩本事品)第二十三
묘음보살품(妙音菩薩品)第二十四
관세음보살보문품(觀世音菩薩普門品)第二十五
다라니품(陀羅尼品)第二十六
묘장엄왕본사품(妙莊嚴王本事品)第二十七
보현보살권발품(普賢菩薩勸發品)第二十八
불설관보현보살행법경(佛說觀普賢普薩行法經)

법화칠비[편집]

《법화경》에는 부처가 되기 위한 길로 7가지의 비유를 들어 설해놓은 것이 있다. 이를 법화칠비(法華七譬) 또는 법화칠유(法華七喩)라 한다.

  1. 삼거화택(三車火宅)의 비유(火宅喩)
  2. 장자궁자(長者窮者)의 비유(窮子喩)
  3. 삼초이목(三草二木)의 비유(藥草喩)
  4. 화성보처(化城寶處)의 비유(化城喩)
  5. 계중명주(契中明珠)의 비유(契珠喩)
  6. 빈인계주(貧人繫珠)의 비유(衣珠喩)
  7. 양의병자(良醫病子)의 비유(醫子喩)

지정 문화재[편집]

국보 제185호[편집]

《상지은니묘법연화경》(橡紙銀泥妙法蓮華經)은 《묘법연화경》 전 7권을 고려 공민왕 22년(1373)에 은색 글씨로 정성들여 옮겨 쓴 불경이다. 봉상대부 지옥주사 허사청이 발원하여 영암 도갑사에 봉안되어 있던 책이며, 지금은 국립중앙박물관 소장이다.

보물 제961-2호[편집]

‘묘법연화경 권4~7(妙法蓮華經卷四~七)’은 불교의 대표적인 대승경전으로 조선 태종 5년(1405)에 전라도 도솔산 안심사(安心社)에서 성달생(成達生, 1376~1444년)과 성개(成槪, ?~1440) 형제가 필사한 것을 새긴 목판본 전 7권 가운데 권4~7의 1책이다.[6]

권수 변상도(變相圖)의 왼편에 정씨(鄭氏)가 죽은 남편 왕씨(王氏)의 초생정토(超生淨土)를 기원하기 위하여 화공(畵工)을 시켜 그림을 그리고, 판각하여 유통시킨다는 조성경위를 밝히고 있다. 권말에는 간행사실을 밝히는 권근(權近, 1352~1409년)의 발문을 갖추고 있어 조선 초기의 불경 간행 방식을 알 수 있는 등 서지학과 불경 연구에 중요한 자료로 평가된다.[6]

보물 제1147-2호[편집]

이 책은 1470년(성종 원년) 4월에 세조의 왕비인 정희대왕대비가 발원하여 돌아가신 세조, 예종, 의경왕의 명복을 빌기 위해 간행한 묘법연화경 7권 가운데 권 1∼2이다. 이 책은 권돈일, 고말종, 장막동, 우인수, 최금동, 이영산, 최덕산 등 당대의 일류 각수(刻手)들에 의해 이루어져 새김이 매우 정교하다. 우리나라에서 유통된 법화경은 대부분 계환의 해석이 붙어 있는 것을 사용하였는데, 이때 새긴 법화경은 천도의식용으로 사용하기 위해 원문만 새긴 것이다. 이와 같은 판본으로 기 지정되어 있는 <묘법연화경 권 제3~4, 5~7> 중 권7 말 김수온 발문에 간행동기 및 간행시기가 밝혀져 있어 왕실불교관련 및 서지학적인 가치가 매우 높은 자료이다.[7]

보물 제1164-2호[편집]

‘묘법연화경 권3~4, 5~7(妙法蓮華經卷三~四, 五~七)’은 조선 전기 왕실에서 주도하여 간행한 불경으로, 김수온(金守溫, 1410~1481년)의 발문에 간행 시기와 연유가 분명하게 남아 있고, 보존상태도 원래의 표지만 결락되었을 뿐 온전하다. 또한 장막동(張莫同), 최금동(崔今同), 고말종(高末終), 이영산(李永山) 등 일류 각수(刻手)들이 참여하여 판각이 정교하고, 정밀하게 인출하여 먹색이 진하고 고르다. 한 책(권5~7)의 서배(書背)에는 비단이 남아 있는 것으로 보아 본래 비단 표지의 포배장 이었을 것으로 추정된다.[6]

묘법연화경은 구마라집(姚秦, 344~413년)이 한역한 불교경전으로 ‘법화경’이라 약칭하기도 하는데, 초기 대승경전 중에서도 가장 중요한 불교경전이다. 천태종의 근본경전으로 한국에서는 일찍부터 불교전문강원의 과목으로 채택되었고 화엄경과 함께 한국 불교사상을 확립하는 데 가장 크게 영향을 미쳤다.[6]

보문사 소장의 묘법연화경은 글자의 깨짐과 계선의 마멸상태로 보아 초인본은 아니고, 성종연간(1470~1494년)에 간행된 후인본으로 보인다. 동일한 판본으로는 보존상태가 온전하고, 인쇄상태와 지질도 뛰어나므로 자료로서의 가치는 높다고 판단된다.[6]

보물 제1194호[편집]

통도사성보박물관 소장 보물 제1194호 《묘법연화경 권2》은 닥종이에 찍은 목판본으로 병풍처럼 펼쳐서 볼 수 있는 형태로 되어있으며, 접었을 때의 크기는 세로 33cm, 가로 10.9cm이다.

간행기록이 없어 정확한 연대는 알 수 없지만『대불정여래밀인수증요의제보살만행수능엄경』권 제9∼10(보물 제1195호)과 글씨체가 같은 것으로 보아 조선 초기에 찍어낸 것으로 보인다.

보물 제1196호[편집]

통도사성보박물관 소장 보물 제1196호《묘법연화경》은 권1에서 권7에 해당하는 책으로 세조 1년(1456)에 동궁(東宮)의 빈(嬪)인 한씨가 좌의정 한확의 부인 홍씨의 명복을 빌기 위해서 간행한 것이다. 닥종이에 찍은 목판본으로 권1에서 권7의 내용을 3책으로 엮었으며 각 권의 크기는 세로 30cm, 가로 17.6cm이다.

표지의 일부가 약간 훼손되었을 뿐 비교적 상태가 양호한 완전본이다. 제목은 붉은 바탕 위에 금색 글씨로 썼으며, 각 권의 첫머리에는 불경의 내용을 요약하여 그린 변상도(變相圖)가 있다.

판에 새긴 후 처음 찍어낸 책은 아니지만, 권1에서 권7까지 완전하게 전해진다는 점에서 귀중한 자료이다.

보물 제1306-1호[편집]

직지사 성보박물관 소장 《묘법연화경》은 양촌(陽村) 권근(權近)의 발문(跋文)에 의하면, 조계종의 대선(大選), 신희(信希) 등이 기로(耆老)들을 위해 보기에 편리하도록 중자(中字)로 간행하기를 원했는데 성달생(成達生)·성개(成槪) 형제가 상중(喪中)에 이를 듣고 선군(先君)의 추복(追福)을 위해 필사(筆寫)한 것을 도인(道人) 신문(信文)이 전라도(全羅道) 운제현(雲梯縣) 도솔산(兜率山) 안심사(安心社)에 갖고 가서 조선 태종 5년(1405)에 간행(刊行)한 것이다. 2001년 1월 2일 대한민국의 보물 제1306호로 지정[8]되었다가, 2019년 3월 6일 제1306-1호로 문화재 지정번호가 변경되었다.[9]

부산광역시 유형문화재 제116호[편집]

취정사 소장 《묘법연화경》은 조선시대 명필가인 성달생(成達生, 1376~1444)과 성개(成槪, ?~1440) 형제가 선친의 명복을 기원할 목적으로 정서(精書)한 《법화경》을 판하본(板下本)으로 하여, 1405년(태종 5)에 전라도 도솔산 안심사(安心寺)에서 도인 신문(道人信文)이 주관하여 목판으로 새긴 것을 조선 전기에 후인(後印)한 것이다. 전체 7권3책 중 권1, 2와 권3, 4의 4권 2책만 남아 있는 결본이다.

같이 보기[편집]

각주[편집]

  1.  한국민족문화대백과사전[깨진 링크(과거 내용 찾기)]
  2. ↑ 이동:    "종교·철학 > 세계의 종교 > 불교 > 불교의 성전 > 법화경", 《글로벌 세계 대백과사전
    "법화경(法華經) 원명을 삿다르마푼다리카 수트라(Saddharmapundarika­sutra)라고 하며 '백련화(白蓮華)와 같은 올바른 가르침'이라는 뜻으로서 예로부터 제경(諸經)의 왕으로 생각되었고, 초기 대승경전(大乘經典) 중에서 가장 중요한 것이다. 산스크리트어 원본은 영국인 호지슨이 네팔에서 발견한 것을 비롯하여 여러가지의 단편(斷片)이 존재하며, 이들의 불역(佛譯)·영역(英譯)이 있는 한편 한역·티베트어역·위구르어역·서하어역(西夏語譯)·몽고어역·만주어역 등이 있어서, 이 경이 매우 넓은 범위에 걸쳐 여러 민족에게 애호되었음을 말해주고 있다. 그 성립 시기는 기원 전후에 신앙심이 강한 진보적인 일단의 사람들에 의해 서북 인도에서 소부(小部)의 것이 만들어졌고 후일에 증광(增廣)되었다고 한다. 현존하는 3종의 한역 중에는 라습(羅什)역의 《묘법연화경》(妙法蓮華經) 7권(후에 8권이 되었음)이 가장 널리 쓰이고 있다. 이 경(經)에서는, 불타는 구원(久遠)한 옛날부터 미래 영겁(未來永劫)에 걸쳐 존재하는 초월적 존재(超越的存在)로 되어 있고, 이 세상에 출현한 것은 모든 인간들이 부처의 깨달음을 열 수 있는 대도(大道, 一乘)를 보이기 위함이며, 그 대도를 실천하는 사람은 누구라도 부처가 될 수 있다는 주장이 그 중심으로 되어 있다."
  3.  《묘법연화경》은 7권 28품으로 된 불교경전으로 ‘법화경’이라 약칭하기도 한다. 천태종(天台宗)의 근본 경전으로, 불교전문강원의 수의과(隨意科) 과목으로 채택되고 있다. ≪화엄경≫(華嚴經)과 함께 한국불교사상을 확립하는 데 가장 크게 영향을 미친 경전이다. 이 경은 예로부터 모든 경전들 중의 왕으로 인정받았고, 초기 대승경전(大乘經典) 중에서도 가장 중요한 불경이다.매우 넓은 범위에 걸쳐 여러 민족에게 애호되었던 이 경은 기원 전후에 신앙심이 강하고 진보적인 사람들에 의해 서북 인도에서 최초로 소부(小部)의 것이 만들어졌고, 2차에 걸쳐 증보되었다. 한국에서는 여러 종류의 한역본 중 구마라습(鳩摩羅什)이 번역한 ≪묘법연화경≫(妙法蓮華經) 8권이 가장 널리 보급, 유통되었다.
  4.  틱낫한, 틱낫한 스님이 읽어주는 법화경, Opening, the heart of the cosmos ISBN 8976772059-0322
  5.  “봉정사 산내암자”. 봉정사. 2016년 3월 11일에 원본 문서에서 보존된 문서. 2008년 11월 29일에 확인함.
  6. ↑ 이동:     문화재청고시제2014-4호, 《국가지정문화재(보물) 지정 및 지정번호 변경》, 문화재청장, 대한민국 관보 제18186호, 32면, 2014-01-20
  7.  문화재청고시제2008-19호, 《국가지정문화재<보물> 지정 및 지정번호변경》, 문화재청장, 2008-03-12
  8.  관보 제14693호[깨진 링크(과거 내용 찾기)] 2001년 1월 2일. 문화재청고시제2000-60호 .〈보물지정〉. 2016년 5월 8일 확인함.
  9.  문화재청고시제2019-27호(국가지정문화재〈국보·보물〉 지정 및 지정번호 변경), 제19452호 / 관보(정호) / 발행일 : 2019. 3. 6. / 144 페이지 / 720KB

Lotus Sutra

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Sanskrit manuscript of the Lotus Sūtra in South Turkestan Brahmi script.

 

The Lotus Sūtra (SanskritSaddharma Puṇḍarīka Sūtralit. 'Sūtra on the White Lotus of the True Dharma')[1] is one of the most popular and influential Mahayana sutras, and the basis on which the TiantaiTendaiCheontae, and Nichiren schools of Buddhism were established.

According to British professor Paul Williams, "For many East Asian Buddhists since early times, the Lotus Sutra contains the final teaching of the Buddha, complete and sufficient for salvation."[2]

Title[edit]

Lotus Sutra title inscription (daimoku)

The earliest known Sanskrit title for the sūtra is the सद्धर्मपुण्डरीक सूत्रSaddharma Puṇḍarīka Sūtra, meaning 'Scripture of the Lotus Blossom of the Fine Dharma'.[3] In English, the shortened form Lotus Sūtra is common. The Lotus Sūtra has also been highly regarded in a number of Asian countries where Mahāyāna Buddhism has been traditionally practiced.

Translations of this title into the languages of some of these countries include:

  • Chinese妙法蓮華經pinyinMiàofǎ Liánhuá jīng (shortened to 法華經Fǎhuá jīng).
  • Japanese妙法蓮華経romanizedMyōhō Renge Kyō (short: 法華経Ho(k)ke-kyō).
  • Korean묘법연화경RRMyobeop Yeonhwa gyeong (short: 법화경Beophwa gyeong).
  • Tibetanདམ་ཆོས་པད་མ་དཀར་པོའི་མདོWyliedam chos padma dkar po'i mdoTHLDamchö Pema Karpo'i do.
  • VietnameseDiệu pháp Liên hoa kinh (short: Pháp hoa kinh).

Nichiren (1222-1282) regarded the title as the summary of the Lotus Sutra´s teachings. The chanting of the title as a mantra is the basic religious practice of his school.[4][5]

Textual history[edit]

Formation[edit]

In 1934, based on his text-critical analysis of Chinese and Sanskrit versions, Kogaku Fuse concluded that the Lotus Sūtra was composed in four main stages. According to Fuse, the verse sections of chapters 1-9 and 17 were probably composed in the 1st century BCE, with the prose sections of these chapters added in the 1st century CE. He estimates the date of the 3rd stage (ch. 10, 11, 13-16, 18-20 and 27) to be around 100 CE, and the last stage (ch. 21-26), around 150 CE.[6][note 1]

According to Stephen F. Teiser and Jacqueline Stone, there is consensus about the stages of composition but not about the dating of these strata.[8]

Tamura argues that the first stage of composition (ch. 2-9) was completed around 50 CE and expanded by chapters 10-21 around 100 CE. He dates the third stage (ch. 22-27) around 150 CE.[9]

Karashima proposes another modified version of Fuse's hypothesis with the following sequence of composition:[10][11]

  • Chapters 2–9 form the earliest stratum.
    • The first layer of this stratum includes the tristubh verses of these chapters which may have been transmitted orally in a Prakrit dialect.
    • The second layer consists of the sloka verses and the prose of chapters 2-9.
  • Chapters 110–2027, and a part of chapter 5 that is missing in Kumarajiva's translation.[12][note 2]
  • Chapters 21–26 and the section on Devadatta in chapter 11 of the Sanskrit version.

Translations into Chinese[edit]

Three translations of the Lotus Sūtra into Chinese are extant.[15][16][17][note 3]

The Lotus Sūtra was originally translated from Sanskrit into Chinese by Dharmarakṣa´s team in 286 CE in Chang'an during the Western Jin Period (265-317 CE).[19][20][note 4] However, the view that there is a high degree of probability that the base text for that translation was actually written in a Prakrit language has gained widespread acceptance.[note 5] It may have originally been composed in a Prakrit dialect and then later translated into Sanskrit to lend it greater respectability.[22]

This early translation by Dharmarakṣa was superseded by a translation in seven fascicles by Kumārajīva´s team in 406 CE.[23][24][25][note 6] According to Jean-Noël Robert, Kumārajīva relied heavily on the earlier version.[26] The Sanskrit editions[27][28][29][30] are not widely used outside of academia.

The Supplemented Lotus Sūtra of the Wonderful Dharma (Tiān Pǐn Miàofǎ Liánhuá Jīng), in 7 volumes and 27 chapters, is a revised version of Kumarajiva's text, translated by Jnanagupta and Dharmagupta in 601 CE.[31]

In some East Asian traditions, the Lotus Sūtra has been compiled together with two other sutras which serve as a prologue and epilogue:

  1. the Innumerable Meanings Sutra (Chinese無量義經pinyinWúliángyì jīngJapaneseMuryōgi kyō);[32] and
  2. the Samantabhadra Meditation Sutra (Chinese: 普賢經; pinyin: Pǔxián jīng; Japanese: Fugen kyō).[33][34] This composite sutra is often called the Threefold Lotus Sūtra or Three-Part Dharma Flower Sutra (Chinese: 法華三部経; pinyin: Fǎhuá Sānbù jīng; Japanese: Hokke Sambu kyō).[35]

Translations into Western languages[edit]

Eugene Burnouf's Introduction à l'histoire du Buddhisme indien (1844) marks the start of modern academic scholarship of Buddhism in the West. His translation of a Nepalese Sanskrit manuscript of the Lotus Sutra, "Le Lotus de la bonne loi", was published posthumously in 1852.[36][37] Prior to publication, a chapter from the translation was included in the 1844 journal The Dial, a publication of the New England transcendentalists, translated from French to English by Elizabeth Palmer Peabody.[38] A translation of the Lotus Sutra from an ancient Sanskrit manuscript was completed by Hendrik Kern in 1884.[39][40][41]

Western interest in the Lotus Sutra waned in the latter 19th century as Indo-centric scholars focused on older Pali and Sanskrit texts. However, Christian missionaries in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, based predominantly in China, became interested in Kumārajīva's translation of the Lotus Sutra into Chinese. These scholars attempted to draw parallels between the Old and New Testaments to earlier Nikaya sutras and the Lotus Sutra. Abbreviated and "christo-centric" translations were published by Richard and Soothill.[42][43]

In the post World War II years, scholarly attention to the Lotus Sutra was inspired by renewed interest in Japanese Buddhism as well as archeological research in Dunhuang. This led to the 1976 Leon Hurvitz publication of the Lotus Sutra based on Kumarajiva's translation. Whereas the Hurvitz work was independent scholarship, other modern translations were sponsored by Buddhist groups: Kato Bunno (1975, Nichiren-shu/Rissho-kosei-kai), Murano Senchu (1974, Nichiren-shu), Burton Watson (1993, Soka Gakkai), and the Buddhist Text Translation Society (Xuanhua).[44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51] The translations into French,[52] Spanish[53] and German[54][55] are based on Kumarajiva's Chinese text. Each of these translations incorporate different approaches and styles that range from complex to simplified.[56]

Outline[edit]

The sutra is presented in the form of a drama consisting of several scenes.[57] According to Sangharakshita, it uses the entire cosmos for its stage, employs a multitude of mythological beings as actors and "speaks almost exclusively in the language of images."[58]

The Lotus Sutra can be divided into two parts:

  1. Chapters 1–14 are called the Theoretical Teachings (Japanese: Shakumon).
  2. Chapters 15–28 are referred to as the Essential Teachings (Japanese: Honmon).

The difference between the two lies with the standpoint of who is preaching them. The Theoretical Teachings (ch. 1–14) are preached from the standpoint of Shakyamuni Buddha, who attained Buddhahood for the first time at the City of Gaya in India. On the other hand, Shakyamuni declares in the Essential Teachings (ch. 15–28) that his enlightenment in India was provisional, and that he in fact attained Buddhahood in the inconceivably remote past. As result of this (based on the interpretations of the Tiantai/Tendai school and Nichiren Daishonin), all the provisional Buddhas, such as Amida NyoraiDainichi Nyorai, and Yakushi Nyorai, were integrated into one single original Buddha.[59][60]

Chapter 1[edit]

The Eagle Peak near Rajagaha was the Buddha’s favorite retreat and the scene for many of his discourses

Chapter 1: Introduction – During a gathering at Vulture PeakShakyamuni Buddha goes into a state of deep meditative absorption (samadhi), the earth shakes in six ways, and he brings forth a ray of light which illuminates thousands of buddha-fields in the east.[note 7][62][63] Bodhisattva Manjusri then states that the Buddha is about to expound his ultimate teaching.[64][65]

Chapters 2-9[edit]

Scholars suggest that chapters 2-9 contain the original form of the text. Chapter 2 explains the goals of early Buddhism, the Arhat and the Pratyekabuddha, as expedient means of teaching. The Buddha declares that there exists only one path, leading the bodhisattva to the full awakening of a Buddha. This concept is set forth in detail in chapters 3-9, using parables, narratives of previous existences and prophecies of enlightenment.[66]

Chapter 2: Expedient Means – Shakyamuni explains his use of skillful means to adapt his teachings according to the capacities of his audience.[67] He reveals that the ultimate purpose of the Buddhas is to cause sentient beings "to obtain the insight of the Buddha" and "to enter the way into the insight of the Buddha."[68][69][70]

Chapter 3: Simile and Parable – The Buddha teaches a parable in which a father uses the promise of various toy carts to get his children out of a burning house.[71] Once they are outside, he gives them all one large cart to travel in instead. This symbolizes how the Buddha uses the Three VehiclesArhatshipPratyekabuddhahood and Samyaksambuddhahood, as skillful means to liberate all beings – even though there is only one vehicle.[72] The Buddha also promises Sariputra that he will attain Buddhahood.

Chapter 4: Belief and Understanding – Four senior disciples address the Buddha.[73] They tell the parable of the poor son and his rich father, who guides him with pedagogically skillful devices to regain self-confidence and "recognize his own Buddha-wisdom".[74][75]

Chapter 5: The Parable of Medicinal Herbs – This parable says that the Dharma is like a great monsoon rain that nourishes many different kinds of plants who represent ŚrāvakasPratyekabuddhas, and Bodhisattvas,[76] and all beings receiving the teachings according to their respective capacities.[77]

Chapter 6: Bestowal of Prophecy – The Buddha prophesies the enlightenment of MahakasyapaSubhuti, Mahakatyayana and Mahamaudgalyayana.

Chapter 7: The Parable of Phantom City – The Buddha teaches a parable about a group of people seeking a great treasure who are tired of their journey and wish to quit. Their guide creates a magical phantom city for them to rest in and then makes it disappear.[78][79][80] The Buddha explains that the magic city represents the "Hinayana nirvana" and the treasure is buddhahood.[81]

Chapter 8: Prophecy of Enlightenment for Five Hundred Disciples – 500 Arhats are assured of their future Buddhahood. They tell the parable of a man who has fallen asleep after drinking and whose friend sews a jewel into his garment. When he wakes up he continues a life of poverty without realizing he is really rich, he only discovers the jewel after meeting his old friend again.[82][83][84][79] The hidden jewel has been interpreted as a symbol of Buddha-nature.[85] Zimmermann noted the similarity with the nine parables in the Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra that illustrate how the indwelling Buddha in sentient beings is hidden by negative mental states.[86]

Chapter 9: Prophecies Conferred on Learners and Adepts – AnandaRahula and two thousand Śrāvakas are assured of their future Buddhahood.[87]

Chapters 10-22[edit]

Chapters 10-22 expound the role of the bodhisattva and the concept of the eternal lifespan and omnipresence of the Buddha.[66] The theme of propagating the Lotus Sūtra which starts in chapter 10, continues in the remaining chapters.[note 8]

Chapter 10: The Teacher of the Law – Presents the practices of teaching the sutra which includes accepting, embracing, reading, reciting, copying, explaining, propagating it, and living in accordance with its teachings. The teacher of the Dharma is praised as the messenger of the Buddha.[89]

The floating jeweled stupa; illustrated Lotus Sutra, Japan 1257.

Chapter 11: The Emergence of the Treasure Tower – A great jeweled stupa rises from the earth and floats in the air;[90] a voice is heard from within praising the Lotus Sūtra.[91] Another Buddha resides in the tower, the Buddha Prabhūtaratna who is said to have made a vow to make an appearance to verify the truth of the Lotus Sutra whenever it is preached.[92] Countless manifestations of Shakyamuni Buddha in the ten directions are now summoned by the Buddha. Thereafter Prabhūtaratna invites Shakyamuni to sit beside him in the jeweled stupa.[93][94] This chapter reveals the existence of multiple Buddhas at the same time[91] and the doctrine of the eternal nature of Buddhahood.

Chapter 12: Devadatta – Through the stories of the dragon king's daughter and Devadatta, the Buddha teaches that everyone can become enlightened – women, animals, and even the most sinful murderers.[95]

Chapter 13: Encouraging Devotion – The Buddha encourages all beings to embrace the teachings of the sutra in all times, even in the most difficult ages to come. The Buddha prophecies that 6000 nuns who are also present will become Buddhas.[96]

Chapter 14: Peaceful Practices – Manjusri asks how a bodhisattva should spread the teaching. In his reply Shakyamuni Buddha describes the proper conduct and the appropriate sphere of relations of a bodhisattva.[97] A bodhisattva should not talk about the faults of other preachers or their teachings. He is encouraged to explain the Mahayana teachings when he answers questions.[98] Virtues such as patience, gentleness, a calm mind, wisdom and compassion are to be cultivated.

Chapter 15: Emerging from the Earth – In this chapter countless bodhisattvas spring up from the earth, ready to teach, and the Buddha declares that he has trained these bodhisattvas in the remote past.[99][100] This confuses some disciples including Maitreya, but the Buddha affirms that he has taught all of these bodhisattvas himself.[101]

Chapter 16: The Life Span of Thus Come One – The Buddha explains that he is truly eternal and omniscient. He then teaches the Parable of the Excellent Physician who entices his sons into taking his medicine by feigning his death.[102][103]

Chapter 17: Distinction in Benefits – The Buddha explains that since he has been teaching as many beings as the sands of the Ganges have been saved.

Chapter 18: The Benefits of Responding with Joy – Faith in the teachings of the sutra brings much merit and lead to good rebirths.

Chapter 19: Benefits of the Teacher of the Law - the Buddha praises the merits of those who teach the sutra. They will be able to purify the six senses.[104]

Chapter 20: The Bodhisattva Never Disparaging – The Buddha tells a story about a previous life when he was a Bodhisattva called sadāparibhūta ('never disparaging') and how he treated every person he met, good or bad, with respect, always remembering that they will become Buddhas.[105]

Chapter 21: Supernatural Powers of the Thus Come One – Reveals that the sutra contains all of the Eternal Buddha’s secret spiritual powers. The bodhisattvas who have sprung from the earth (ch. 15) are entrusted with the task of propagating it.[106]

Chapter 22: Entrustment – The Buddha transmits the Lotus Sutra to all bodhisattvas in his congregation and entrusts them with its safekeeping.[107][108] The Buddha Prabhūtaratna in his jeweled stupa and the countless manifestations of Shakyamuni Buddha return to their respective buddha-field.[109]

Chapters 23-28[edit]

Chapter 22: "Entrustment" – the final chapter in the Sanskrit versions and the alternative Chinese translation. Shioiri suggests that an earlier version of the sutra ended with this chapter. He assumes that the chapters 23-28 were inserted later into the Sanskrit version.[110][111] These chapters are devoted to the worship of bodhisattvas.[112][113]

Chapter 23: "Former Affairs of Bodhisattva Medicine King" – the Buddha tells the story of the 'Medicine King' Bodhisattva, who, in a previous life, burnt his body as a supreme offering to a Buddha.[114][115][116] The hearing and chanting of the Lotus Sūtra' is also said to cure diseases. The Buddha uses nine similes to declare that the Lotus Sūtra is the king of all sutras.[117]

AvalokiteśvaraAjanta cave no 1, 5th century

Chapter 24: The Bodhisattva Wonderful Sound – Gadgadasvara ('Wonderful Voice'), a Bodhisattva from a distant world, visits Vulture Peak to worship the Buddha. Bodhisattva 'Wonderful Voice' once made offerings of various kinds of music to the Buddha "Cloud-Thunder-King". His accumulated merits enable him to take 34 different forms to propagate the Lotus Sutra.[118][111]

Chapter 25, The Universal Gateway of the Bodhisattva Perciever of the World's Sounds – The Bodhisattva is devoted to Avalokiteśvara, describing him as a compassionate bodhisattva who hears the cries of sentient beings, and rescues those who call upon his name.[119][120][121]

Chapter 26 – DhāraṇīHariti and several Bodhisattvas offer sacred dhāraṇī ('formulae') in order to protect those who keep and recite the Lotus Sūtra.[122][123][note 9]

Chapter 27 – Former Affairs of King Wonderful Adornment - tells the story of the conversion of King 'Wonderful-Adornment' by his two sons.[125][126]

Chapter 28 – Encouragement of the Bodhisattva Universal Worthy- a bodhisattva called "Universal Virtue" asks the Buddha how to preserve the sutra in the future. Samantabhadra promises to protect and guard all those who keep this sutra in the future Age of Dharma Decline.[127]

Teachings[edit]

Portable shrine depicting Buddha Sakyamuni preaching the Lotus Sūtra.[128] The Walters Art Museum.

One vehicle, many skillful means[edit]

This Lotus Sūtra is known for its extensive instruction on the concept and usage of skillful means – (Sanskrit: upāya, Japanese: hōben), the seventh paramita or perfection of a Bodhisattva – mostly in the form of parables. The many 'skillful' or 'expedient' means and the "three vehicles" are revealed to all be part of the One Vehicle (Ekayāna), which is also the Bodhisattva path. This is also one of the first sutras to use the term Mahāyāna, or "Great Vehicle". In the Lotus Sūtra, the One Vehicle encompasses so many different teachings because the Buddha's compassion and wish to save all beings led him to adapt the teaching to suit many different kinds of people. As Paul Williams explains:[129]

Although the corpus of teachings attributed to the Buddha, if taken as a whole, embodies many contradictions, these contradictions are only apparent. Teachings are appropriate to the context in which they are given and thus their contradictions evaporate. The Buddha’s teachings are to be used like ladders, or, to apply an age-old Buddhist image, like a raft employed to cross a river. There is no point in carrying the raft once the journey has been completed and its function fulfilled. When used, such a teaching transcends itself.

The sutra emphasizes that all these seemingly different teachings are actually just skillful applications of the one Dharma and thus all constitute the "One Buddha Vehicle and knowledge of all modes". The Lotus Sūtra sees all other teachings are subservient to, propagated by and in the service of the ultimate truth of the One Vehicle leading to Buddhahood.[16] The Lotus Sūtra also claims to be superior to other sūtras and states that full Buddhahood is only arrived at by exposure to its teachings and skillful means.

All beings have the potential to become Buddhas[edit]

The dragon king´s daughter offers her priceless pearl to the Buddha. The narrative of her instantaneous attainment of Buddhahood was understood as a promise of the enlightenment of women.[130] Frontispiece of a 12th century Lotus Sutra handscroll.[131]

The One Vehicle doctrine defines the enlightenment of a Buddha (anuttara samyak sambhodi) as the ultimative goal and the sutra predicts that all those who hear the Dharma will eventually achieve this goal. Many of the Buddha´s disciples receive prophecies that they will become future Buddhas. Devadatta, who, according to the Pali texts, had attempted to kill the Buddha, receives a prediction of enlightenment.[132][133][134] Even those, who practice only simple forms of devotion, such as paying respect to the Buddha, or drawing a picture of the Buddha, are assured of their future Buddhahood.[135]

Although the term buddha-nature (buddhadhatu) is not mentioned once in the Lotus Sutra, Japanese scholars Hajime Nakamura and Akira Hirakawa suggest that the concept is implicitly present in the text.[136][137] Vasubandhu (fl. 4th to 5th century CE), an influential scholar monk from Ghandara, interpreted the Lotus Sutra as a teaching of buddha-nature and later commentaries tended to adopt this view.[138][139] Based on his analysis of chapter 5, Zhanran (711-778), a scholar monk of the Chinese Tiantai school, argued that insentient things also possess buddha-nature and in medieval Japan, the Tendai Lotus school developed its concept of original enlightenment which claimed the whole world to be originally enlighted.[140][141]

The nature of the Buddhas[edit]

Another key concept introduced by the Lotus Sūtra is the idea of the eternal Buddha, who achieved enlightenment innumerable eons ago, but remains in the world to help teach beings the Dharma time and again. The life span of this primordial Buddha is beyond imagination, his biography and his apparent death are portrayed as skillful means to teach sentient beings.[142][143] The Buddha of the Lotus Sūtra states:

In this way, since my attainment of Buddhahood it has been a very great interval of time. My life-span is incalculable asatkhyeyakalpas [rather a lot of aeons], ever enduring, never perishing. O good men! The life-span I achieved in my former treading of the bodhisattva path even now is not exhausted, for it is twice the above number. Yet even now, though in reality I am not to pass into extinction [enter final nirvana], yet I proclaim that I am about to accept extinction. By resort to these expedient devices [this skill-in-means] the Thus Come One [the Tathagata] teaches and converts the beings.[144]

The Buddhas Prabhūtaratna and Shakyamuni seated side-by-side in the jeweled stupa. Stele, bronze and gold, dated 518 CE

The idea that the physical death of a Buddha is the termination of that Buddha is graphically refuted by the appearance of another Buddha, Prabhûtaratna, who passed long before. In the vision of the Lotus Sūtra, Buddhas are ultimately immortal.

Crucially, not only are there multiple Buddhas in this view, but an infinite stream of Buddhas extending infinitely in space in the ten directions and through unquantifiable eons of time. The Lotus Sūtra illustrates a sense of timelessness and the inconceivable, often using large numbers and measurements of time and space.[citation needed]

According to Gene Reeves, the Lotus Sūtra also teaches that the Buddha has many embodiments and these are the countless bodhisattva disciples. These bodhisattvas choose to remain in the world to save all beings and to keep the teaching alive. Reeves writes, "because the Buddha and his Dharma are alive in such bodhisattvas, he himself continues to be alive. The fantastically long life of the Buddha, in other words, is at least partly a function of and dependent on his being embodied in others."[145] The Lotus Sūtra also teaches various dhāraṇīs or the prayers of different celestial bodhisattvas who out of compassion protect and teach all beings. The lotus flower imagery points to this quality of the bodhisattvas. The lotus symbolizes the bodhisattva who is rooted in the earthly mud and yet flowers above the water in the open air of enlightenment.[146]

Impact[edit]

According to Donald Lopez, the Lotus Sutra is "arguably the most famous of all Buddhist texts," presenting "a radical re-vision of both the Buddhist path and of the person of the Buddha."[147][note 10]

The Lotus Sutra was frequently cited in Indian works by NagarjunaVasubandhuCandrakirtiShantideva and several authors of the Madhyamaka and the Yogacara school.[148] The only extant Indian commentary on the Lotus Sutra is attributed to Vasubandhu.[149][150] According to Jonathan Silk, the influence of the Lotus Sūtra in India may have been limited, but "it is a prominent scripture in East Asian Buddhism."[151] The sutra has most prominence in Tiantai (sometimes called "The Lotus School"[152]) and Nichiren Buddhism.[153] It is also influential in Zen Buddhism.

China[edit]

Tao Sheng, a fifth-century Chinese Buddhist monk wrote the earliest extant commentary on the Lotus Sūtra.[154][155] Tao Sheng was known for promoting the concept of Buddha nature and the idea that even deluded people will attain enlightenment. Daoxuan (596-667) of the Tang Dynasty wrote that the Lotus Sutra was "the most important sutra in China".[156]

Zhiyi (538–597 CE), the generally credited founder of the Tiantai school of Buddhism, was the student of Nanyue Huisi[157] who was the leading authority of his time on the Lotus Sūtra.[152] Zhiyi's philosophical synthesis saw the Lotus Sūtra as the final teaching of the Buddha and the highest teaching of Buddhism.[158] He wrote two commentaries on the sutra: Profound meanings of the Lotus Sūtra and Words and phrases of the Lotus Sūtra. Zhiyi also linked the teachings of the Lotus Sūtra with the Buddha nature teachings of the Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra and made a distinction between the "Eternal Buddha" Vairocana and the manifestations. In Tiantai, Vairocana (the primeval Buddha) is seen as the 'Bliss body' – Sambhogakāya – of the historical Gautama Buddha.[158]

Japan[edit]

The Lotus Sūtra is a very important sutra in Tiantai[159] and correspondingly, in Japanese Tendai (founded by Saicho, 767–822). Tendai Buddhism was the dominant form of mainstream Buddhism in Japan for many years and the influential founders of popular Japanese Buddhist sects including NichirenHonenShinran and Dogen[160] were trained as Tendai monks.

Calligraphic mandala (Gohonzon) inscribed by Nichiren in 1280. The central characters are the title of the Lotus Sūtra.[161]

Nichiren, a 13th-century Japanese Buddhist monk, founded an entire school of Buddhism based on his belief that the Lotus Sūtra is "the Buddha´s ultimate teaching",[162] and that the title is the essence of the sutra, "the seed of Buddhahood".[163] Nichiren held that chanting the title of the Lotus Sūtra – Namu Myōhō Renge Kyō – was the only way to practice Buddhism in the degenerate age of Dharma decline and was the highest practice of Buddhism.[158] Nichiren described chapters 10-22 as the "third realm" of the Lotus Sutra (Daisan hōmon) which emphasizes the need to endure the trials of life and bodhisattva practice of the true law in the real sahā world.[164]

Dogen, the 13th-century Japanese founder of Sōtō Zen Buddhism, used the Lotus Sūtra often in his writings. According to Taigen Dan Leighton, "While Dogen's writings employ many sources, probably along with his own intuitive meditative awareness, his direct citations of the Lotus Sūtra indicate his conscious appropriation of its teachings as a significant source"[165] and that his writing "demonstrates that Dogen himself saw the Lotus Sutra, 'expounded by all buddhas in the three times,' as an important source for this self-proclamatory rhetorical style of expounding."[166] In his Shobogenzo, Dogen directly discusses the Lotus Sūtra in the essay Hokke-Ten-Hokke, "The Dharma Flower Turns the Dharma Flower". The essay uses a dialogue from the Platform Sutra between Huineng and a monk who has memorized the Lotus Sūtra to illustrate the non-dual nature of Dharma practice and sutra study.[165] During his final days, Dogen spent his time reciting and writing the Lotus Sutra in his room which he named "The Lotus Sutra Hermitage".[167]

The Soto Zen monk Ryōkan also studied the Lotus Sūtra extensively and this sutra was the biggest inspiration for his poetry and calligraphy.[168] The Rinzai Zen master Hakuin Ekaku achieved enlightenment while reading the third chapter of the Lotus Sūtra.[169]

According to Shields, "modern(ist)" interpretations of the Lotus Sutra begin with the early 20th century nationalist applications of the Lotus Sutra by Chigaku Tanaka, Nissho Honda, Seno'o, and Nisshō Inoue.[170] Japanese new religions began forming in the 19th century and the trend accelerated after World War II. Some of these groups have pushed the study of the Lotus Sutra to a global scale.[171][172] While noting the importance of several Japanese New Religious Movements to Lotus Sutra scholarship, Lopez focuses on the contributions made by the Reiyukai and Soka Gakkai[173] and Stone discusses the contributions of the Soka Gakkai and Risshō Kōsei Kai.[174] Etai Yamada (1900–1999), the 253rd head priest of the Tendai denomination conducted ecumenical dialogues with religious leaders around the world based on his interpretation of the Lotus Sutra which culminated in a 1987 summit. He also used the Lotus Sutra to move his sect from a "temple Buddhism" perspective to one based on social engagement.[175] Nichiren-inspired Buddhist organizations have shared their interpretations of the Lotus Sutra through publications, academic symposia, and exhibitions.[176][177][178][179][180]

Influence on East Asian culture[edit]

The Buddhas Prabhūtaratna and Shakyamuni sitting side by side in the jeweled stupa; wall painting, Yulin Caves

The Lotus Sūtra has had a great impact on East Asian literature, art, and folklore for over 1400 years.

Art[edit]

Various events from it are depicted in religious art.[181][182][183] Wang argues that the explosion of art inspired by the Lotus Sutra, starting from the 7th and 8th centuries in China, was a confluence of text and the topography of the Chinese medieval mind in which the latter dominated.[184]

Motifs from the Lotus Sutra figure prominently in the Dunhuang caves built in the Sui era.[185] In the fifth century, the scene of Shakyamuni and Prabhutaratna Buddhas seated together as depicted in the 11th chapter of the Lotus Sutra became arguably the most popular theme in Chinese Buddhist art.[186] Examples can be seen in a bronze plaque (year 686) at Hase-dera Temple in Japan[187] and, in Korea, at Dabotap and Seokgatap Pagodas, built in 751, at Bulguksa Temple.[188]

Literature[edit]

Tamura refers to the "Lotus Sutra literary genre."[189] Its ideas and images are writ large in great works of Chinese and Japanese literature such as The Dream of the Red Chamber and The Tale of Genji.[190] The Lotus Sutra has had an outsized influence on Japanese Buddhist poetry.[191] Far more poems have been Lotus Sutra-inspired than other sutras.[192] In the work Kanwa taisho myoho renge-kyo, a compendium of more than 120 collections of poetry from the Heian period, there are more than 1360 poems with references to the Lotus Sutra in just their titles.[193][194]

Folklore[edit]

The Lotus Sutra has inspired a branch of folklore based on figures in the sutra or subsequent people who have embraced it. The story of the Dragon King's daughter, who attained enlightenment in the 12th (Devadatta) chapter of the Lotus Sutra, appears in the Complete Tale of Avalokiteśvara and the Southern Seas and the Precious Scroll of Sudhana and Longnü folkstories. The Miraculous Tales of the Lotus Sutra[195] is a collection of 129 stories with folklore motifs based on "Buddhist pseudo-biographies."[196]

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Chapter numbers of the extant Sanskrit version are given here. The arrangement and numbering of chapters in Kumarajiva's translation is different.[7]
  2. ^ In the Sanskrit manuscripts chapter 5 contains the parable of a blind man who refuses to believe that vision exists.[13][14]
  3. ^ Weinstein states: "Japanese scholars demonstrated decades ago that this traditional list of six translations of the Lotus lost and three surviving-given in the K'ai-yiian-lu and elsewhere is incorrect. In fact, the so-called "lost" versions never existed as separate texts; their titles were simply variants of the titles of the three "surviving" versions."[18]
  4. ^ Taisho vol.9, pp. 63-134.The Lotus Sūtra of the Correct Dharma(Zhèng Fǎ Huá Jīng), in ten volumes and twenty-seven chapters, translated by Dharmarakṣa in 286 CE.
  5. ^ Jan Nattier has recently summarized this aspect of the early textual transmission of such Buddhist scriptures in China thus, bearing in mind that Dharmarakṣa's period of activity falls well within the period she defines: "Studies to date indicate that Buddhist scriptures arriving in China in the early centuries of the Common Era were composed not just in one Indian dialect but in several . . . in sum, the information available to us suggests that, barring strong evidence of another kind, we should assume that any text translated in the second or third century AD was not based on Sanskrit, but one or other of the many Prakrit vernaculars."[21]
  6. ^ The Lotus Sūtra of the Wonderful Dharma (Miàofǎ Liánhuá jīng), in eight volumes and twenty-eight chapters, translated by Kumārajīva in 406 CE.
  7. ^ Sanskrit buddhaksetra, the realm of a Buddha, a pure land. Buswell and Lopez state that "Impure buddha-fields are synonymous with a world system (cacravada), the infinite number of “world discs” in Buddhist cosmology that constitutes the universe (...)."[61]
  8. ^ Ryodo Shioiri states, "If I may speak very simply about the characteristics of section 2, chapter 10 and subsequent chapters emphasize the command to propagate the Lotus Sūtra in society as opposed to the predictions given in section 1 out (sic) the future attainment of buddhahood by the disciples....and the central concern is the actualization of the teaching-in other words, how to practice and transmit the spirit of the Lotus Sutra as contained in the original form of section 1."[88]
  9. ^ Dhāraṇī is used in the "limited sense of mantra-dharani" in this chapter.[124]
  10. ^ Donald Lopez: "Although composed in India, the Lotus Sutra became particularly important in China and Japan. In terms of Buddhist doctrine, it is renowned for two powerful proclamations by the Buddha. The first is that there are not three vehicles to enlightenment but one, that all beings in the universe will one day become buddhas. The second is that the Buddha did not die and pass into nirvana; in fact, his lifespan is immeasurable."[147]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Buswell & Lopez 2013, p. 1785.
  2. ^ Williams 1989, p. 149.
  3. ^ Hurvitz 1976.
  4. ^ Buswell 2013, p. 208.
  5. ^ Stone 1998, p. 138-154.
  6. ^ Pye 2003, p. 177-178.
  7. ^ Pye 2003, p. 173-174.
  8. ^ Teiser & Stone 2009, p. 7-8.
  9. ^ Kajiyama 2000, p. 73.
  10. ^ Karashima 2015, p. 163.
  11. ^ Apple 2012, pp. 161-162.
  12. ^ Silk 2016, p. 152.
  13. ^ Bingenheimer 2009, p. 72.
  14. ^ Kern 1884, pp. 129-141.
  15. ^ Reeves 2008, p. 2.
  16. Jump up to:a b The English Buddhist Dictionary Committee 2002.
  17. ^ Shioiri 1989, pp. 25-26.
  18. ^ Weinstein 1977, p. 90.
  19. ^ Boucher 1998, pp. 285-289.
  20. ^ Zürcher 2006, p. 57-69.
  21. ^ Nattier 2008, p. 22.
  22. ^ Watson 1993, p. IX.
  23. ^ Tay 1980, pp. 374.
  24. ^ Taisho vol. 9, no. 262, CBETA
  25. ^ Karashima 2001, p. VII.
  26. ^ Robert 2011, p. 63.
  27. ^ Kern & 1908-1912.
  28. ^ Vaidya 1960.
  29. ^ Jamieson 2002, pp. 165–173.
  30. ^ Yuyama 1970.
  31. ^ Stone 2003, p. 471.
  32. ^ Cole 2005, p. 59.
  33. ^ Hirakawa 1990, p. 286.
  34. ^ Silk 2016, p. 216.
  35. ^ Buswell 2013, pp. 290.
  36. ^ Burnouf 1852.
  37. ^ Yuyama 2000, pp. 61-77.
  38. ^ Lopez (2016b)
  39. ^ Silk 2012, pp. 125–54.
  40. ^ Vetter 1999, pp. 129-141.
  41. ^ Kern 1884.
  42. ^ Deeg 2012, pp. 133–153.
  43. ^ Soothill 1930.
  44. ^ Deeg 2012, p. 146.
  45. ^ Kato 1975.
  46. ^ Murano 1974.
  47. ^ Hurvitz 2009.
  48. ^ Kuo-lin 1977.
  49. ^ Kubo 2007.
  50. ^ Watson 2009.
  51. ^ Reeves 2008.
  52. ^ Robert 1997.
  53. ^ Tola 1999.
  54. ^ Borsig 2009.
  55. ^ Deeg 2007.
  56. ^ Teiser & Stone 2009, p. 237-240.
  57. ^ Murano 1967, p. 18.
  58. ^ Sangharakshita 2014, p. chapter 1.
  59. ^ Obayashi, Kotoku (2002). The Doctrines and Practices of Nichiren Shoshu. Fujinomiya City, Japan: Nichiren Shoshu Overseas Bureau. p. 443.
  60. ^ Takakusa, Watanabe (1926). Tendai Daishi Zenshu. Tokyo, Japan: Taisho shinshu daizokyo Kanko-Kai.
  61. ^ Buswell 2013, p. 153.
  62. ^ Suguro 1998, p. 19.
  63. ^ Kern 1884, p. 7.
  64. ^ Apple 2012, p. 162.
  65. ^ Murano 1967, p. 25.
  66. Jump up to:a b Teiser & Stone 2009, p. 8.
  67. ^ Suguro 1998, p. 31.
  68. ^ Suguro 1998, pp. 34-35.
  69. ^ Pye 2003, p. 23.
  70. ^ Groner 2014, pp. 8-9.
  71. ^ Williams 1989, p. 155.
  72. ^ Pye 2003, p. 37-39.
  73. ^ Suzuki 2015, p. 170.
  74. ^ Lai 1981, p. 91.
  75. ^ Pye 2003, p. 40-42.
  76. ^ Murano 1967, p. 34-35.
  77. ^ Pye 2003, p. 42-45.
  78. ^ Pye 2003, p. 48.
  79. Jump up to:a b Williams 1989, p. 156.
  80. ^ Federman 2009, p. 132.
  81. ^ Lopez 2015, p. 29.
  82. ^ Murano 1967, pp. 38-39.
  83. ^ Pye 2003, p. 46.
  84. ^ Lopez 2015, p. 28.
  85. ^ Wawrytko 2007, p. 74.
  86. ^ Zimmermann 1999, p. 162.
  87. ^ Murano 1967, p. 39.
  88. ^ Shioiri 1989, pp. 31-33.
  89. ^ Tamura 1963, p. 812.
  90. ^ Buswell 2013, p. 654.
  91. Jump up to:a b Strong 2007, p. 38.
  92. ^ Hirakawa 2005, p. 202.
  93. ^ Lopez & Stone 2019, p. 138-141.
  94. ^ Lai 1981, p. 459-460.
  95. ^ Teiser & Stone 2009, p. 12.
  96. ^ Peach 2002, p. 57-58.
  97. ^ Silk 2016, p. 150.
  98. ^ Suguro 1998, pp. 115-118.
  99. ^ Apple 2012, p. 168.
  100. ^ Murano 1967, p. 50-52.
  101. ^ Tamura 2014.
  102. ^ Pye 2003, p. 51-54.
  103. ^ Williams 1989, p. 157.
  104. ^ Lopez & Stone 2019, p. 201.
  105. ^ Zimmermann 1999, p. 159.
  106. ^ Suzuki 2016, p. 1162.
  107. ^ Murano 1967, pp. 65-66.
  108. ^ Tamura 1989, p. 45.
  109. ^ Murano 1967, p. 66.
  110. ^ Tamura 1963, p. 813.
  111. Jump up to:a b Shioiri 1989, p. 29.
  112. ^ Lopez (2016), chapter 1
  113. ^ Teiser 1963, p. 8.
  114. ^ Williams 1989, p. 160.
  115. ^ Benn 2007, p. 59.
  116. ^ Ohnuma 1998, p. 324.
  117. ^ Suzuki 2015, p. 1187.
  118. ^ Murano 1967, pp. 73.
  119. ^ Chün-fang 1997, p. 414-415.
  120. ^ Baroni 2002, p. 15.
  121. ^ Wang 2005, p. 226.
  122. ^ Murano 1967, pp. 76-78.
  123. ^ Suguro 1998, p. 170.
  124. ^ Tay 1980, p. 373.
  125. ^ Wang 2005, pp. XXI-XXII.
  126. ^ Shioiri 1989, p. 30.
  127. ^ Murano 1967, pp. 81-83.
  128. ^ The Walters Art Museum.
  129. ^ Williams 1989, p. 151.
  130. ^ Teiser 2009, p. 21.
  131. ^ Abe 2015, p. 29, 36, 37.
  132. ^ Stone 2003, p. 473.
  133. ^ Kotatsu 1975, p. 88.
  134. ^ Teiser 2009, pp. 20-21.
  135. ^ Groner 2014, pp. 3,17.
  136. ^ Nakamura 1980, p. 190.
  137. ^ Hirakawa 1990, p. 284.
  138. ^ Abbot 2013, p. 88.
  139. ^ Groner 2014, p. 17.
  140. ^ Stone 1995, p. 19.
  141. ^ Chen 2011, pp. 71-104.
  142. ^ Teiser 2009, p. 23.
  143. ^ Xing 2005, p. 2.
  144. ^ Hurvitz 1976, p. 239.
  145. ^ Reeves 2008, p. 14.
  146. ^ Reeves 2008, p. 1.
  147. Jump up to:a b Jessica Ganga (2016), Donald Lopez on the Lotus Sutra, Princeton University Press Blog
  148. ^ Mochizuki 2011, pp. 1169-1177.
  149. ^ Groner 2014, p. 5.
  150. ^ Abbot 2013, p. 87.
  151. ^ Silk 2001, pp. 87,90,91.
  152. Jump up to:a b Kirchner 2009, p. 193.
  153. ^ "Cooper, Andrew, The Final Word: An Interview with Jacqueline Stone"Tricycle: The Buddhist Review. Spring 2006. Retrieved April 27, 2013.
  154. ^ Teiser 2009.
  155. ^ Kim 1985, pp. 3.
  156. ^ Groner 2014, pp. 1.
  157. ^ Magnin 1979.
  158. Jump up to:a b c Williams 1989, p. 162.
  159. ^ Groner 2000, pp. 199–200.
  160. ^ Tanahashi 1995, p. 4.
  161. ^ Stone 2003, p. 277.
  162. ^ Stone 2009, p. 220.
  163. ^ Stone 1998, p. 138.
  164. ^ Tanabe 1989, p. 43.
  165. Jump up to:a b Leighton 2005, pp. 85–105.
  166. ^ Leighton.
  167. ^ Tanabe 1989, p. 40.
  168. ^ Leighton 2007, pp. 85–105.
  169. ^ Yampolsky 1971, pp. 86-123.
  170. ^ Shields 2013, pp. 512–523.
  171. ^ Reader, Ian. "JAPANESE NEW RELIGIONS: AN OVERVIEW"(PDF)The World Religions & Spirituality Project (WRSP). Virginia Commonwealth University. p. 16. Retrieved April 13, 2017.
  172. ^ Metraux, Daniel (2010). How Soka Gakkai Became a Global Buddhist Movement: The Internationalization of a Japanese Religion. Virginia Review of Asian Studies. ISBN 978-0-7734-3758-6.
  173. ^ Lopez, Donald S, Jr. (2016). The Lotus Sutra: A Biography. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press. pp. 232, 109–115, 191–195, 201–215. ISBN 978-0-691-15220-2.
  174. ^ Stone 2009, p. 227–230.
  175. ^ Covell, Stephen G. (2014). "Interfaith Dialogue and a Lotus Practitioner: Yamada Etai, the "Lotus Sutra", and the Religious Summit Meeting on Mt. Hiei"Japanese Journal of Religious Studies41 (1): 191–217. doi:10.18874/jjrs.41.1.2014.191-217JSTOR 23784405.
  176. ^ Reeves, Gene (Dec 1, 2001). "Introduction: The Lotus Sutra and Process Thought"Journal of Chinese Philosophy28 (4): 355. doi:10.1111/0301-8121.00053.
  177. ^ Groner, Paul; Stone, Jacqueline I (2014). "The Lotus Sutra in Japan". Japanese Journal of Religious Studies41 (1): 2.
  178. ^ O'Leary, Joseph S. (2003). "Review of Gene Reeves, ed. A Buddhist Kaleidoscope: Essays on the Lotus Sutra". Japanese Journal of Religious Studies30 (–/2): 175–178.
  179. ^ "A Discussion with Gene Reeves, Consultant, Rissho Kosei-kai and the Niwano Peace Foundation"Berkley Center for Religion, Peace & World Affairs. Georgetown University. November 25, 2009. Retrieved 13 April 2017.
  180. ^ MURUGAPPAN, REVATHI (May 24, 2014). "Lotus Sutra's Dance of Peace". The Star Online. Retrieved 23 April 2017.
  181. ^ Watson 2009, p. xxix.
  182. ^ Lopez 2016, p. 17, 265.
  183. ^ Kurata 1987.
  184. ^ Wang 2005.
  185. ^ Wang 2005, p. 68.
  186. ^ Wang 2005, p. 5.
  187. ^ Paine 1981, p. 41.
  188. ^ Lim 2014, p. 33.
  189. ^ Tamura 2009, p. 56.
  190. ^ Hurvitz 2009, p. 5.
  191. ^ Yamada 1989.
  192. ^ Tanabe 1989, p. 105.
  193. ^ Shioiri 1989, p. 16.
  194. ^ Rubio 2013.
  195. ^ Dykstra 1983.
  196. ^ Mulhern 1989, p. 16.

Sources[edit]

Further reading[edit]

External links[edit]