First, the priesthood of Nichiren Shoshu holds forth the doctrine of "absoluteness" or "absolute authority" of its high priest, the chief or head priest of their head temple, Taiseki-ji. A doctrine manufactured centuries after Nichiren Daishonin's passing, its purpose has been to press believers into absolute, unquestioning obedience toward the high priest specifically, and by extension toward the priesthood in general.

At the core of the concept of the absolute authority of the high priest is another fallacious doctrine known as "bequeathal received by only a single person." In 1993, after the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood refused to confer the Gohonzon to Soka Gakkai members any longer, the Soka Gakkai began conferring to its members a Gohonzon transcribed by Nichikan Shonin, the 26th high priest of Taisekiji, who is recognized as a restorer of Nichiren Buddhism. In order to attack this conferral by the Soka Gakkai, Nichiren Shoshu published its document Refuting the Soka Gakkai's Counterfeit Object of Worship, 100 Questions and Answers (Published in 1994 by the Nichiren Shoshu Doctrinal Research Committee). The priesthood called the Gohonzon counterfeit because it was bestowed without the permission or authority of Nikken, then the high priest, who had launched a program of attacks against the Soka Gakkai. Here, we'll address why the assertions made in this pamphlet that cite the doctrine of a lifeblood bestowed just a single person lack any basis.

1. Nichiren Shoshu's assertions:

The following questions in 100 Questions and Answers are answered by citing the doctrine of "bequeathal received by only a single person":

42: Is it not contradictory to deny the lifeblood received by only a single person and yet to advocate being "based on the Gohonzon?"

75: So long as they have "faith based on the Gohonzon" and "faith which aims for Kosen-rufu," is it all right for someone to duplicate the object of worship?

76: If a Gohonzon in the possession of a branch temple is offered by that temple's chief priest, is it permissible for a lay believer to reproduce it and distribute the copies, as the Soka Gakkai is currently doing?

The answers that follow these questions in Nichiren Shoshu's pamphlet each cite a passage from the concluding portion of the writing On the Mystic Principle of the True Cause (Hon'in-myo Sho) attributed to Nichiren Daishonin. That passage reads, "The principles of the great significance of the lifeblood and the object of worship are the documents transmitted from Nichiren to each of the successive head priests, and are the bequeathal received by only a single person, indicating the bequeathal inside the Treasure Tower of Taho Buddha (Shinpen, p. 1684)" (Translation taken directly from the English language book: A Refutation of the Soka Gakkai's "Counterfeit Object of Worship" 100 Questions and Answers).

In response to question 42, Nichiren Shoshu states: "As this passage indicates, the great significance of both the lifeblood received by only a single person and of the Gohonzon appear to be separate, but their entities are one. They cannot be discussed separately," and "Therefore, those who deny the bequeathal received by only a single person also deny the Gohonzon itself."

And in the answer to question 75, they write, "The authority over everything concerning the Gohonzon, such as the protection and maintenance of the Dai-Gohonzon of the High Sanctuary, as well as Gohonzon transcriptions and conferrals, is limited to the High Priest of the bequeathal of the lifeblood of the Law received by only a single person."

Also, in reply to question 6: "Accordingly, even, for example, if it is a Gohonzon in the possession of a branch temple, it is impermissible for the branch temple's chief priest to arbitrarily decide to offer that Gohonzon to another person."

The gist of Nichiren Shoshu's argument in each of these cases is that without the so-called "bequeathal [of the lifeblood of the Law] received by only a single person," there can be no transcription or conferral of the Gohonzon. To support their argument, they offer a single passage from the latter portion of the writing On the Mystic Principle of the True Cause (Hon'in-myo sho).

Refutation

1. "The bequeathal received by only a single person."

As mentioned above, Nichiren Shoshu bases its arguments concerning "the bequeathal [of the lifeblood] received by only a single person" (sometimes translated as "the heritage bestowed on only a single person") on a passage from the end of the writing On the Mystic Principle of the True Cause that reads, "The principles of the great significance of the lifeblood and the object of worship are the documents transmitted from Nichiren to each of the successive head priests, and are the bequeathal received by only a single person, indicating the bequeathal inside the Treasure Tower of Taho Buddha (Shinpen, p. 1684)"

In connection with this, the 59th head priest of Taiseki-ji temple, Nichiko Hori, in Essential Teachings of the Fuji School, wrote, "I have indicated with a line those passages that appear to have been added later." The passage Nichiren Shoshu quotes is one of those Nichiko had denoted with a line, as he indicates. In other words, Hori Nichiko, a renowned researcher and scholar of Nichiren Buddhism, concluded that the passage from the On the Mystic Principle of the True Cause that Nichiren Shoshu relies upon to make its assertion of a lifeblood received by only a single person are not the words of Nichiren Daishonin, but were added in later times by someone else.

The question of whether On the Mystic Principle of the True Cause is in fact a writing attributable to Nichiren Daishonin at all has long been disputed and remains unresolved. Present-day research cannot confirm through any documentary evidence that this writing was passed directly from Nichiren to Nikko, as Nichiren Shoshu tradition holds. For this reason, the work is one of the few writings appearing in Nichiren Daishonin Gosho Zenshu (the Collected Writings of Nichiren Daishonin) that was not translated and included by the Soka Gakkai in the recently published Writings of Nichiren Daishonin, Volume 2. In addition, in the Gosho Zenshu, passages of particularly questionable origin within this writing are shown in small print.

The original of this work is not extant, and what is held to be the oldest extant copy is held to have been produced by Nichiji (?-1406), the 6th head priest of Taiseki-ji. But that copy lacks any signature or seal indicating the person who produced it, and it bears no date. In addition, handwriting comparisons make it doubtful that it was written in Nichiji's hand. For these reasons, it is difficult to view this copy as having been produced by Nichiji.

Furthermore, the term "received by a single person" is seen nowhere in the extant writings of Nikko (Nichiren's immediate successor). In documents pertaining to the doctrinal history the Nichiren Shoshu head temple Taiseki-ji, that term first appears in a work attributed to the 14th-century priest Nichijun, titled Oral Teaching on "The Mystic Principle of the True Cause" (Hon'in-myo Sho Guketsu).

This work, however, contains a reference to the "Nichiren School" (Nichiren Shu), a term that has been in use only since 1536 (the fifth year of the Tenbun era). This was when, in the aftermath of a religious conflict known as the Tenbun disturbance, groups associated with Nichiren's teachings were officially forbidden from referring to themselves as the Lotus School (Hokke Shu), as they had done until that time. This casts doubt upon the view that Oral Teaching on "The Mystic Principle of the True Cause" was produced by Nichijun in the 14th century. Rather, it suggests it was written later, perhaps around the mid-16th century.

Also, there is another view regarding the passage at the end of the The Mystic Principle of the True Cause. Some scholars believe that this passage was taken from Oral Teaching on "The Mystic Principle of the True Cause," where it originally appeared, and appended to the end of the The Mystic Principle of the True Cause during copying. If we accept this explanation, then it is a passage that was added sometime around the middle of the 16th century or after.

In Collected Notes on Private Matters (Ruijukanshu Shi) written in 1488, Sakyo Nikkyo (1428-?) , a disciple of the ninth high priest, Nichiu, excerpts the final passage of the The Mystic Principle of the True Cause, but the portion Nichiren Shoshu quotes, which should fall within that excerpt, is missing. Sakyo's excerpt ends with the date "the eleventh day of the tenth month of the fifth year of Koan, of the cyclical sign Mizunoe-ushi," which closes the letter. From this it is clear that, as of the end of the 15th century, the passage "The principles of the great significance of the lifeblood and the object of worship are the documents transmitted from Nichiren to each of the successive head priests, and are the bequeathal received by only a single person, indicating the bequeathal inside the Treasure Tower of Taho Buddha" did not exist within the text of the The Mystic Principle of the True Cause.

2. Transcription and Conferral of the Gohonzon

Next, regarding the authority and ability to transcribe the object of devotion, the Gohonzon, resting with the high priest alone as Nichiren Shoshu claims, let us briefly weigh the validity of this assertion against historical fact. According to Nichiren Shoshu, the high priest alone posseses the authority to transcribe the object of devotion. But examining the early history of the Nikko lineage, it is clear that this has not always been the case.

Priests such as Nissen and Nichiro, direct disciples of Nikko Shonin, as well as Nichimyo, Nichidai, and Nichiman of Sado, none of whom were high priests of the school, in fact transcribed Gohonzon.

And while Nichizon (a disciple of the Nichimoku, and a founder of the Yobo-ji temple in Kyoto in 1308) did not transcribe the Gohonzon himself, he had a woodblock made of a Gohonzon inscribed by Nichimoku for the purpose of reproducing it as prints. In addition, his disciple Nichidai transcribed the Gohonzon.

According to Essentials of the Fuji School and Detailed Biography of Nikko Shonin of the Fuji School by the 59th high priest of T aiseki-ji, Nichiko Hori, while Nikko Shonin was still alive, the priest Nikke transcribed seven Gohonzon, and Nissen transcribed one. From the time of the fourth high priest Nichido, through the sixth high priest, Nichiji, the following priests, none of whom were high priests, transcribed the following number of Gohonzons (shown in parentheses): Nikke (1), Nissen (3), Nichigo (8), Nichimyou (2), Nichidai (1), Nichidai (written with a different character) (1), etc. Thus, it is clearly recorded that in the Fuji school, now called Nichiren Shoshu, priests other than those holding the position of high priest have indeed transcribed the Gohonzon. Furthermore, there is no document or evidence of any sort to indicate that this sort of practice constituted a problem.

Again, it is clear that the phrase "bequeathal [of the lifeblood] received by only a single person" existed nowhere during the time of Nichiren Daishonin, Nikko Shonin, or Nichimoku Shonin. Instead, it appears to have originated sometime during the time of the ninth high priest, Nichiu, or his disciple Nikkyo; that is, sometime in latter part of the 15th century or thereafter. Nikkyo was entrusted with the guardianship of Nitchin, who was only 14 years old when he became the 12th head priest of Taiseki-ji. Nikkyo, with such a young high priest in office, must have seen it necessary to strengthen and solidify the high priests and his own authority within the priesthood, and to systematize the practice of using priests as religious intermediaries for funerals and other rituals. It is not hard to conclude that he formulated the concept of a "bequeathal received by only a single person" in order to support these goals.

Nichiren Buddhism has as its purpose ending the misery of all human beings and leading them to genuine happiness. As such, it bases itself first and foremost on the lifeblood, or heritage, of faith. As the centuries passed, the priests of the Fuji school formulated this secretive and authoritarian dogma of a "bequeathal to just a single person," which deviates from the original spirit and purpose of the Daishonin's teachings. At some point, the priesthood even went so far as to insert that dogma into copies of this writing attributed to Nichiren himself, falsely attempting to pass it off as a teaching of the Daishonin.

In the midst of an era in which the "Pure Law" of Nichiren Daishonin had becomne "obscured and lost" within the very school that purported to protect his teachings, the Soka Gakkai emerged. In struggling to spread the Daishonin's teachings far and wide, the Soka Gakkai has always made Nichiren Daishonin and his writings its foundation. In this way, it is contributing to the genuine happiness of millions of people around the world. Our hope is that we can help even one more Hokkeko member awaken to the error of the doctrines of "the absolute authority of the high priest" and "a bequeathal received by just a single person" and again walk along the great path of kosen-rufu together with the Soka Gakkai, which is directly connected in both spirit and practice to Nichiren Daishonin.

References:

• The Essentials of the Fuji School by Nichiko Hori.
• The Development of the Doctrine of the Absolute Authority of the High Priest and a Criticism of that Doctrine by Masahiro Kobayashi (Published in Journal of Oriental Studies, Vol. 32, no. 2; 1993).
• The Mythology of Nichiren Soshu by Yumo Matsuoka, Ronso Press, 2006.