Mr. Altig’s Overview of the Wonderful Dharma of the Lotus Sutra

https://videopress.com/v/mj8Lp2hL?resizeToParent=true&cover=true&preloadContent=metadata&useAverageColor=true

Date: August 27, 2025

Subject: An In-Depth Analysis of Hōbō: The Doctrine of Slander of the Law in the Thought of Nichiren Daishonin

I. Executive Summary

This briefing document provides a detailed review of Hōbō, or “slander of the Law,” a foundational and controversial doctrine in Nichiren Buddhism. Originating with Nichiren Daishonin (1222–1282) during Japan’s turbulent Kamakura period, Hōbō is defined as the act of denying, opposing, disparaging, or vilifying the correct Buddhist teaching, specifically the Lotus Sutra. Nichiren believed that the prevalence of hōbō was directly linked to the national calamities of his era and asserted that upholding the true Dharma was essential for societal peace. The doctrine encompasses both external acts of opposition and subtle internal attitudes, such as arrogance and doubt. Hōbō carries severe karmic consequences, but Nichiren also taught the transformative power of “changing poison into medicine” through refuting slander and practicing Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. Modern interpretations of hōbō vary significantly among Nichiren Buddhist schools, with some maintaining a strict, exclusivist view and others, like Soka Gakkai International (SGI), emphasizing its psychological and internal dimensions for personal growth and interfaith dialogue.

II. Background: Nichiren and the Kamakura Period

Nichiren Daishonin emerged during the Kamakura period (1185–1333), an era marked by significant social, political, and spiritual upheaval, including the rise of the samurai, natural disasters, epidemics, and the threat of Mongol invasions. This turbulent environment fostered a widespread sense of apocalyptic foreboding, rooted in the Buddhist concept of mappō, the Latter Day of the Law, when the Buddha’s teachings were believed to be losing their efficacy (1, 3, 4, 5, 7).

Nichiren’s exhaustive study of contemporary Buddhist schools—including Tendai, Amidism (Pure Land), and Zen—led him to the singular conviction that the Lotus Sutra alone represented the “direct expression of the Buddha’s own intent” (zuiji’i) and possessed the power to effect liberation in the degenerate age of mappō (1, 9). Teachings preached before the Lotus Sutra were deemed “accommodated to the audience’s understanding” (zuita’i) (9).

III. Defining Hōbō: Slander of the Law

Hōbō (謗法) is the central imperative of Nichiren’s doctrine, which he saw himself as fulfilling “at the cost of his own life” (2). Literally meaning “slander of the Law,” it is formally defined as “the act of denying, opposing, disparaging, or vilifying the correct Buddhist teaching” (16). The Great Teacher T’ien-t’ai Chih-che simply stated, “to slander’ means to turn against” the Law (18).

Key Facets of Hōbō:

• External and Internal Offense: For Nichiren, hōbō was not merely an external act but, at its deepest level, “a slander of the Mystic Law inherent within one’s own life” (15). This “profound spiritual betrayal results in the immediate destruction of the ‘seeds for becoming a Buddha in this world’” (15, 16).
• Self-Harm: Hōbō is viewed as a “profound act of self-harm, a psychological and spiritual perversion that cuts off the practitioner from their own latent potential for enlightenment” (15). Nichiren’s polemics aimed to awaken people to the “interior dignity they were unknowingly betraying” (15).
• Root of Societal Calamities: Nichiren asserted a direct link between “the calamities afflicting the nation and the widespread prevalence of hōbō” (8). He argued that to achieve peace, it was essential to “restrain those who slander the Law and respect the followers of the correct way” (14).

IV. The Fourteen Slanders (Jūshi-hōbō)

To elaborate on the scope of hōbō, Nichiren articulated the “Fourteen Slanders” (Jūshi-hōbō), a canonical list enumerated by Miao-lo. This list highlights that hōbō is a “spectrum of attitudes and actions, ranging from subtle internal states to overt expressions of animosity” (21, 24).

Categories of Slander:

1. Internal Attitudes: These are “subtle, often unexamined, states of mind that do not require an outward act of condemnation” (21). Examples include:

• Arrogance: “Making light of Buddhism, placing excessive confidence in oneself” (21).
• Negligence: “Neglecting Buddhist practice out of laziness” (21).
• Wrong Views of the Self: “Interpreting Buddhism through an egotistical or distorted viewpoint” (21).
• Lack of Seeking Spirit: “Not seeking to understand the deep Buddhist doctrines” (21).

1. External Actions: These are “manifest expressions of the internal attitudes” (21). Examples include:

• Not Believing: “Disbelief in the correct teaching” (21).
• Vilifying/Slandering: “Criticizing or reviling the correct teachings or its practitioners” (21).
• Hating: “Detesting and opposing the teachings or practitioners” (21).
• Bearing Grudges: “Harboring resentment or enmity” (21).

Nichiren observed a psychological progression, stating, “The fourteen slanders will arise from the slander of not believing” (22). This underscores the “insidious nature of hōbō as a gradual corruption of the mind” (22).

V. Nichiren’s Polemical Refutation (Shika Kakugen)

Nichiren responded to the religious landscape of his time with an “uncompromising polemic” known as the “Four Criticisms” (Shika Kakugen), systematically refuting what he considered the four major types of slander committed by established Buddhist schools (34). He believed that in the mappō age, only the Lotus Sutra was “profound and powerful enough to lead all men and women to liberation” (11).

Nichiren’s Criticisms:

• Pure Land (Nenbutsu): Criticized for “devaluing the dignity of life and discouraging people from embracing the Lotus Sutra” (10). Nichiren argued it rejected the “self-power” (jiriki) of the Lotus Sutra in favor of an “external, other-worldly salvation” (32).
• Zen: Deemed a “provisional teaching ‘unsuited to the age’ that leads to arrogance and a rejection of the Buddha’s own words” (34). Dismissing sutras for “spontaneous insights” was a form of slander (34).
• Esoteric (Shingon/Tendai): Accused of becoming “corrupted by the introduction and acceptance of other doctrines” (1). Nichiren saw the government’s sponsorship of esoteric rites as a “misguided attempt to secure peace that was, in reality, a betrayal of the true Dharma” (32).
• Ritsu: The strict observance of monastic precepts was seen as a “superficial and ultimately futile effort in an age when the efficacy of such practices had diminished” (34).

Nichiren considered his fierce refutation of slander an act of “profound expression of compassion” and a “debt owed to the Buddha himself,” even at the cost of his own life (15, 2). His seminal treatise, Risshō Ankoku Ron (“On Establishing the Correct Teaching for the Peace of the Land”), directly linked the nation’s suffering to “false Buddhist teachings” (8).

VI. Karmic Retribution and Transformation

The doctrine of hōbō is intertwined with the concept of karmic retribution. Nichiren warned that those who slander the Law “immediately destroy the seeds for becoming a Buddha” and “fall into the hell of incessant suffering” (2, 15). He compared slander to “white leprosy,” which “seems minor at first but bit by bit becomes very serious indeed,” distinguishing it from the sudden effects of cardinal sins (13).

However, Nichiren’s teachings are not fatalistic. He introduced the revolutionary principle of “changing karma into mission” and “changing poison into medicine” (41). This means that past negative causes can be transformed into opportunities for “personal growth and human revolution” (20, 41).

Antidote to Slander:

• Chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo: Designated as the “Buddhism of true cause,” chanting activates innate Buddhahood, allowing one to “polish their life ‘like a tarnished mirror’ so that it may reflect the true nature of reality” (36).
• Rebuking Slander: Paradoxically, the “very act of ‘rebuking slander’”—confronting external and internal negativity—”becomes the primary means of purifying one’s own karma from past offenses” (27, 40). This creates a “philosophy of absolute hope” (43).

VII. Legacy and Modern Interpretations

Nichiren’s doctrine of hōbō has led to the fragmentation of his legacy into various schools, each with distinct interpretations (32).

Modern Interpretations:

• Nichiren Shoshu: Adopts a “strict, exclusivist interpretation of slander, including any support for other religions or deviation from its own dogma” (25). It “vehemently rejects all other religions as ‘evil and heretical’” (46). The priesthood, particularly the High Priest, is central (46).
• Soka Gakkai International (SGI): Adheres to Nichiren’s core teachings but interprets slander to include actions that “cause disunity within the Buddhist Order, betray the spirit of kosen-rufu (worldwide propagation of the Law), or otherwise denigrate the inherent dignity of life” (39). SGI promotes “peace, culture, and education” and engages in interfaith dialogue, focusing on “universal human dignity” (39). Lay leadership is emphasized (39, 47).
• Nichiren Shu: Uses the term hōbō to refer to actions against “the ‘correct teachings of the Buddha’ or denies the discovery of truth,” but “warns against using it to ‘dominate others based on ego, arrogance, and a strong sense of self-righteousness’” (23). It views Nichiren as a Bodhisattva rather than the True Buddha and is generally more traditional and accommodating (32, 37).

Scholarly Perspectives: Modern academic criticism sometimes labels Nichiren as “intolerant” due to his uncompromising stance (2). However, scholars argue that his polemics must be understood within their historical and rhetorical context, as he was criticizing “misapplication of these teachings” rather than rejecting fundamental principles (34, 37).

Internalization of Slander: A significant evolution in contemporary Nichiren Buddhism is the shift from an external, polemical application to an “inward-focused, psychological principle for personal development” (24). In this context, hōbō includes “internal conflicts and ‘ill feelings’ among practitioners, such as hatred, jealousy, and bearing grudges” (24). This reinterpretation provides guidance for “overcoming these feelings through a process of self-reflection, a focus on compassion, and the vigorous chanting of Daimoku” (24).

VIII. Conclusion

The doctrine of hōbō is a complex and central tenet of Nichiren Buddhism, encompassing theological, historical, karmic, and psychological dimensions. Nichiren’s unwavering conviction linked national well-being to spiritual health, viewing the proliferation of provisional teachings as a betrayal of the Buddha’s true intent (8, 15). While his polemics were historically aimed at institutional and political structures, the enduring significance of hōbō lies in its adaptability. Modern interpretations highlight its capacity to serve as a framework for personal accountability, ethical conduct, and the relentless pursuit of humanistic values, ultimately aiming to protect the “inherent dignity of life” and work for both individual and societal transformation, thereby fulfilling Nichiren’s original vision of establishing “the correct teaching for the peace of the land” (8, 24).