of the various schools of Buddhist thought.
Hōnen-bō-Genkū (滕然房源空) (1133-1212) wrote the
“Senchaku-hongan-nenbutsu-shū”(選択本願念佛集) and proposed the
ikkō-nenbutsu-senshu (一向念佛市修), which means, “the concentrated practice of
nembutsu (念佛)” (chanting the name of Amida Buddha). Following him, Shinran (親
鸞), Dōgen (道元), and Nichiren (日蓮) appeared. These founders of Kamakura New
Buddhism denounced the kind of Buddhism that had been practiced up until the
Kamakura period as “mixed practice and mixed study,” and they emphasized
concentrated practice based on the doctrines that they had respectively developed.
Within this trend, Nichiren (日蓮) proposed focused practice on daimoku
senshu (題目市修)(chanting the title of the Lotus Sutra). In the Golden Age of the “Pure
Land sects” (浄土教), only Nichiren proposed focusing chanting practice on the title of
the Lotus Sutra. Nichiren’s acceptance of the Lotus Sutra is based on the doctrine of
ichi-nen sanzen (一念三千) discussed in Chih-i’s Great Concentration and Insight (摩
訶止観). Nichiren further developed the various theories of T’ien-t’ai/Tendai and
advocated the “acceptance of the title of the Lotus Sutra.” Nichiren’s practice has now
expanded all over the world.
The Lotus-Sutra based “New Buddhism” that developed in the modern age
differentiated itself from traditional Buddhism in that it aggressively tried to propagate
itself to the general public.
3. English translations of the Lotus Sutra from Sanskrit originals
As one of the projects of the East India Trading Company, the Eastern Sacred
Books series, edited by Max Muller, was published. Within that series, the Lotus Sutra
(􀁓􀁡􀁤􀁤􀁨􀁡􀁲􀁭􀁡􀁰􀁵􀁮􀁤􀁡􀁲􀁉􀁫􀁡􀀭􀁳􀁕􀁴􀁲􀁡), as translated by Kern, was published. Western research
on the Lotus Sutra was introduced by Keisho Tsukamoto in his article “Western View of
Nichiren—research by G. Renondeau and W. Kobler,” which appeared in the work,
Lotus-Sutra Based Buddhism in Modern Japan, edited by Mochizuki Kanko.
Since then, translations and research based on original Sanskrit have been
continuing, piece-by-piece, until today. Regarding the Lotus Sutra, the influence of
Iwanami Bunko’s three-volume series, “The Lotus Sutra,” is very great. In this translation
work, the left pages contain a translation from Sanskrit originals into Japanese by Hiroshi
Iwamoto. The upper half of the facing pages on the right contain the corresponding
translation by Kumarajiva into Chinese, while the lower half of the same page contains
the Japanese reading of Kumarajiva’s Chinese characters. This work was originally
intended to be a comparison of both translations by showing them facing each other. But
there were differences in the original source texts, so it was not necessarily possible to
make an accurate comparison at first glance. In the chapter on Kanzeon Bodhisattva
(Avalokitesvara), for instance, there is a Sanskrit sentence that does not appear in the
Chinese translation.
Among such differences, the most significant ones relate to the shohō-jissō (諸滕
實相) and the jū-nyoze (十如是) in chapter two. The comparison reveals that the
jū-nyoze (十如是) of the Chinese does not appear in such a form in the original Sanskrit.
In fact, scholars of Sanskrit originals share the opinion that there is no such jū-nyoze (十
如是) in the Sanskrit. At the same time, researchers on the Chinese translations consider
that further study should be done to determine whether it is really does not exist in the
Sanskrit; and, furthermore, that when following traditional understandings of the Chinese
translations of the Myō-hōrenge-kyō (妙滕蓮華經), such understandings cannot be
established without the jū-nyoze (十如是), which is why it cannot be eliminated.
4. Traditions within Chinese translations of Myō-hōrenge-kyō (妙滕蓮華經)
Regarding Kumarajiva’s Chinese translation work on the Myō-hōrenge-kyō (妙
滕蓮華經), his disciple and assistant, Sêng-chao [僧肇Jpn: Sōjō], left records;
however, no references to the above discussed jū-nyoze (十如是) could be found in
them. But as Dr. Fuse Kougaku mentioned in his article, “Assuming the Difficulty of
Translations by Kumarajiva” which appeared in Osaki Gakuhō (大崎学報) Volume 100,
the attitude of Kumarajiva’s translation project was not simply to translate Sanskrit into
Chinese, but to try convey the message of the Lotus Sutra as well.
Chih-i quoted seventeen epithets of the Lotus Sutra found in the Vasubandhu’s
“The Treatise on the Lotus Sutra of the Wonderful Law” in his lectures. When we
consider how such a tradition of reverence for the Lotus Sutra has been passed on
continuously until today, it is quite understandable that such reverence for the sutra could