Modern Nichirenist Discourses on Life and JØsei Toda’s
Buddhist Thought

Ken’ichi Maegawa

1. IntroductionT

ODA JØsei’s essay entitled “Seimei-ron (The Philosophy of Life
Force)” was published in the first issue of Daibyakurenge (GreatWhite Lotus), organ periodical of SØka Gakkai (July, 1949 issue). It is
not oversimplified to say that this essay determined the philosophicalorientation of postwar SØka Gakkai. The concept of life has been thereafter one of the main cores of the SØka Gakkai’s doctrine to date.
In this essay, Toda expounded that life is eternal from past to future
and the life refers to the very existence of people as they are. “Nichiren,”he said, “was not a sage but just an ordinary person who only reached
the second stage of six stages of Tiantai Buddhism, but he expounded
and revealed the eternity of life and the immanence of Buddha. It meansthat what we are is nothing but timeless original being.”1 He also maintains that the universe itself is a life and our individual lives after deathwould fuse into the life of the universe.2
But Toda is not the first thinker that accepted the concept of life on
the ground of Nichiren Buddhism. Before the end of the Second World
War, some nationalistic Nichiren Buddhists who are usually called“Nichirenists” actively advocated the concept of life. Nonetheless,though they used the same word, Toda’s connotation of “life” is definitely different from that of Nichirenists. In this paper, I would like toattempt to illuminate the characteristics of Toda’s views on life throughcomparison to those of Nichirenists.

2. YAMAKAWA Chiō (1879–1956)
As far as I researched, YAMAKAWA ChiØ was the first Nichirenist thatwrote on the concept of life. His book Nichiren-shugi to Genzai ShØrai
(Nichirenism and its view on the present and the future, ShinchØ-sha,
Tokyo, 1917) includes the chapter entitled “The four major attributes oflife (The universe is one great life).”3 There he said, “It is Buddha who isa great person, a person who has expanded absoluteness of life to its
144MODERN NICHIRENIST DISCOURSES ON LIFE

145

ultimate limit, perfectly assimilated the entire universe to his pure spirituality, made absolute life of the whole universe his own life, experienced the complete oneness of self and the universe, and realized three
thousand possible realms in a single life-moment. He is a great person
who, through his own experience, revealed the true lives of all humanity.
Ultimately we can identify Buddha with the true life of the entire universe. … The sixteenth chapter (“Life Span of the Thus Come One”) of
the Lotus Sutra reveals the original Buddha as the absolute entity of thiscosmic life” (op.cit., pp. 174–175). By this identification of the cosmic
life with the original Buddha, he also interpreted the Three Great Secret
Laws of Nichiren Buddhism as shown below:
The object of devotion (honzon) of the Hon-mon (the latter half of the
Lotus Sutra): spiritual (symbolic) expression of cosmic life
The title (daimoku) of the Hon-mon: individual expression of cosmic life
The high sanctuary (kaidan) of the Hon-mon: social expression of cosmic
life

Yamakawa also expressed “the absoluteness (of life)” as “spiritualexpansion” (op.cit., p. 165). In short, he thought that it is the original
Buddha whose essential entity is all-encompassing and assimilating cosmic life. “The life of an individual person,” he said, “is a temporary
manifestation of the cosmic life” (op.cit., p. 175). He maintains that
individual life of each person “becomes a child of Shakyamuni. … [it]becomes one with Shakyamuni and thus becomes one with the Mystic
Law that is inseparable with Shakyamuni” (op.cit., pp. 175–6) by taking
faith in the original Buddha. Yamakawa said “Becoming a buddha without bodily transformation means oneness of individual life and absolutelife” (op.cit., p. 178). From the standpoint of an individual person, thismeans its integration with the original Buddha that is the cosmic life
itself.
Although Yamakawa said “I would like to publish the further detail of
this theory on later date” (op.cit., p. 1), we cannot find his publication ofsuch a detailed theory. Nonetheless Yamakawa’s theory contains all thepossible features of Nichirenist view on life, so his pioneering roleseems large.4

3. SATOMI Kishio (1897–1974)
SATOMI Kishio inherited the Nichirenist view on life whose basic idea
was outlined by Yamakawa. But it leaves some room for examination

146

MODERN NICHIRENIST DISCOURSES ON LIFE

whether their arguments are directly related because Satomi made no
mention of Yamakawa’s view. Nonetheless, it is a fact that they sharebasic points in common.
Satomi seems to have changed his understanding of the concept oflife as his theory developed.5 In his HokekyØ no KenkyË (A Study on the
Lotus Sutra, Heirakuji Shoten, Kyoto, 1924), he said “What is a Buddha? He is nothing but the purest form and/or the highest ideal of life
phenomena. He is the typical character that is the standard of perfectionof life for all the individual lives. … What is the original Buddha? He is
the absolute essence of life that not only permeates all individual lives
but is the source of them. To put it differently, it is nothing but a namewhich we attribute to the cosmic life in its entirety as a person” (op.cit.,p. 356). The characteristic of Satomi’s thought in this stage is hisemphasis on personhood of the original Buddha as is seen in the above
quotation. In this regard, he said “All humanity must look up to Shakyamuni as an absolute state and the highest standard for perfection ofhumanity and they should be assimilated to it” (op.cit., p. 567). He also
called such religious life as “a life perfection movement” (op.cit., p.
574). As is seen in his usage of a term, “life-personhood” (op.cit., p.
566), it can be understood that the word “life” here indicates individuallife that is identifiable with personhood.
However, in his Hoero Nichiren (“Roar, Nichiren!”, ShunjË-sha,
Tokyo, 1931)6, he writes as follows, “When we regard the original Buddha as a system of life, it wouldn’t be surprising at all even if it becomes
grass or tree” (op.cit., p. 120). “The original Buddha is originally a term
to express life. And the life is, generally speaking, a beginningless andendless entity. Its lowest level manifestation is plants and animals, while
its higher manifestation is humanity” (op.cit., p. 127). “Original Buddha
can be said to be an all-encompassing life system in terms of mechanical view on nature, the law expressed as MyØhØ-renge-kyØ which is anexpression of the law of life in terms of the ideal of law, conscious
grasping of ourselves and its altruistic practice in terms of the view thatregards personhood as end, and Shakyamuni and Nichiren in terms of
moral view on religion” (op.cit., p. 129). From these observations, it
might be perceived that Satomi shifted his focus from individual life to
the system of life that underlies the individual life. Though we shouldneed further research to understand why this change had happened,7 we
can conclude that the Satomi’s view on life landed on the same point as
Yamakawa’s as a consequence.
The influence of Satomi’s view on life can be seen in various intellectuals. For example, his father TANAKA Chigaku (1861–1939), founderMODERN NICHIRENIST DISCOURSES ON LIFE

147

of KokuchË-kai, said “The doctrine of the Shakyamuni’s original
enlightenment in the distant past is revealed and then the eternal and
immutable great life is manifested; it is called the original Buddha. In
other words, a true entity of Buddha is thus manifested. … It is theabsolute existence and the great life of the universe.”8 It is also pointed
out that ISHIWARA Kanji (1889–1949), one of the officers primarily
responsible for the Manchurian Incident, was influenced by Satomi andsupported his view on cosmic life.9
The influence of Nichirenist discourses on life was not limited to followers of KokuchË-kai and those of similar groups. For instance, we canfind HORIGOME Taiei (Nichijun, 1898–1959)’s acceptance of the concept of life10. In his “Shinjienu Hitobito e (To those who cannot
believe),” he said “Only those who perceive the eternity of life will beable to transcend the transmigration with differences and limitations andthe transmigration with change and advance; and only those who havedirectly reached enlightenment to the world of original Buddha oftathatå (suchness, the absolute reality) will be possible to emancipate
themselves from human sufferings.”11 He also said “When one becomeswakened to the fact that human being is originally life itself, there
should be no necessity to put forth an extra effort to live” (op. cit., p.
692), “Life which underlies art, science and ethic is in itself the entity of
religion” (op. cit., p. 694). Though not in direct expressions, the “life”
referred to here seems to be equated to Buddhist concepts such as theoriginal Buddha and/or tathatå.12

4. KOBAYASHI Ichirō (1876–1944)
Now I would like to examine KOBAYASHI IchirØ (1876-1944) whose
idea was directly related to that of Toda (although Horigome was also
deeply connected to Toda). Kobayashi was a scholar of philosophy andliterature. He served in positions including lecturer at the Imperial University of Tokyo and professor at Nichiren-shË Daigakurin (seminary formonks of the Nichiren Sect, present RisshØ University) and ChËØ University. He was a lay believer of Nichiren Buddhism and served as acentral figure of Hokke-kai (assembly of the Lotus Sutra), a lay believers’ organization of Nichiren Buddhism. The Hokke-kai clearly distinguished itself from ultranationalistic tendencies held by KokuchË-kai
led by Tanaka Chigaku, promoting moderate practice of Nichiren Buddhism whose main membership were intellectuals. Kobayashi’s
HokekyØ Dai-kØza (Enlarged Lectures on the Lotus Sutra, 1935–1936)
was published from Heibon-sha. The publication was said to be a major

148

MODERN NICHIRENIST DISCOURSES ON LIFE

project that would determine the future of the publishing company andachieved a great success.13 His published lectures on the Lotus Sutra
were originally based on the dictation of the lectures he had delivered
and therefore written in very plain language. Though some doctrinal
concepts are taken up in the lectures, they are also explained in extremely simple terms. Such plain approach is highly appreciated even today.
He often referred to topics other than Buddhism in the lectures. Becauseof this, the overall coloring of the book is highly educational based on
general learning. For the purpose of comparing his works against Toda’s
works, I would like to quote Kobayashi’s lecture on a passage “this, myland, remains safe and tranquil, constantly filled with heavenly andhuman beings (“Wo ci tu an-wen. Tian-ren chang chong-man” inKumåraj¥va’s translation )” from the Life Span chapter of the Lotus
Sutra:“My land” does not refer to the land where you are at. It refers to theworld seen from Buddha’s eyes and the world in Buddha’s mind. …
According to the Buddha’s view, if the mind of all humanity becomes
pure, the world will be truly peaceful. When that state is realized,
regardless of any changes in the boundaries surrounding us, under any
circumstances, we will not be influenced or bothered by them. … Thisrefers to the world of those whose minds are purified. (vol. 7, pp.
247–248)

It is worth noticing that Kobayashi regards the law that “governs allthings in the universe” as being “life.” On this point, we will elaborate
later comparing his idea of “life” with that of Toda.
Kobayashi said that:
We express such overarching life using the term Buddha. Nevertheless,the Buddha should never be considered as an existence far apart fromourselves. It is a matter of course that the Buddha is far higher than our
mortal daily lives. Having said that, being higher than us does not mean
the Buddha is far removed from ourselves. I think we are all embracedby the Buddha’s encompassing power and the protection rendered bythat power makes it possible for us to exist (vol. 7, pp. 83–84).

Further, Kobayashi also calls this “overarching life” as original Buddha.
In the case of Kobayashi, like Yamakawa and Satomi, “we” are the existence that is to be embraced by the original Buddha, an overarching life,and he does not emphasize the point that “we” ourselves are nothing but“life.” We can find herein the uniqueness of Toda.

MODERN NICHIRENIST DISCOURSES ON LIFE

149

5. Jōsei Toda’s Lectures on the Lotus Sutra
Toda started his lectures on the Lotus Sutra from January 1946, after his
release from prison. After his inauguration as the second SØka Gakkai
president on May 3, 1951, he delivered lectures on the “Expedient
Means” and “Life Span” Chapters of the Lotus Sutra as the lectures forbeginners’ classes of the SØka Gakkai Study Department. The lectures
were so popular that the audience was said to be overflowing out of thevenue. The record of the lectures was published serially in SØkaGakkai’s organ periodical Daibyakurenge (from the 60th issue throughthe 65th issue and from the 68th issue through the 73rd issue). Based on
the installments, HØbenbon JuryØbon Seikai (Comprehensive lectureson the Expedient Means and Life Span chapters) was published in 1958.
Toda graduated from ChËØ University, where he studied ethics andphilosophy under Kobayashi. He also read Kobayashi’s lectures on the
Lotus Sutra.14 However Toda was critical about the Kobayashi’s lecturescommenting “His understanding of the Lotus Sutra is by any standard
Confucian ideas, failing to elucidate Buddha.”15 The Toda’s comment on
Kobayashi’s lectures as being Confucian can be understood as his criticism to Kobayashi’s interpretation based on educational and cultural
outlook. As is stated by Toda himself, the largest difference between
their views can be found in their perceptions of Buddha. However,before going into that subject, I would like to examine the general characteristics of Toda’s lectures.
Though omitted in the book edition, “(laughter)” insertion appears
very often in the lectures in the Daibyakurenge serialization text, indicating there were obviously a lot of laughter from the audience during
the lectures. Such sense of humor setting the audience laughing is one of
the characteristics of Toda’s lectures on the Lotus Sutra. This did notcome simply from amusing way of his talk but rather from his vivid
description of ordinary people’s lives that he conveyed with spontaneous
humor. For a comparison with Kobayashi, I would like to show a Toda’s
lecture on the same section as quoted above:“This, my land, remains safe and tranquil”—your house where theGohonzon (object of devotion) is enshrined is “this, my land, remains
safe and tranquil,” so it must remain safe and tranquil. It shouldn’t be“All is consumed in a great fire.” And it also says “constantly filled withheavenly and human beings”—it must be constantly filled with people
whose life condition is that of heavenly beings and tranquil people. But
if you have its opposite, you will be in big trouble: the wife is sulky, the150

MODERN NICHIRENIST DISCOURSES ON LIFE

husband angry, and children crying. If you have occasional visitors at
your house, all of them are debt collectors. Isn’t it far from being “constantly filled with heavenly and human beings”, is it?16

While in the Kobayashi’s lecture cited earlier “This, my land, remains
safe and tranquil” is interpreted as a pure world perceived by Buddha,
according to the Toda’s interpretation the same passage of the sutra is allabout our own (common mortal’s) ordinary lives.
Toda’s lectures are said to have unique feature of “reading what is
hidden in the depth of the sutra.” This is a way to re-read the Lotus Sutra
as expressions of Nichiren’s behavior and ideas. In the commentaries of
the Lotus Sutra of other sects which belong to Nichiren Buddhism, too,
the Lotus Sutra is interpreted in line with Nichiren’s intention. However
this only remains as a process of adding new interpretations based on
the interpretation made in Chinese commentaries such as Zhi-yi’s Fahua wen-ju (The Words and Phrases of the Lotus Sutra). No major difference is seen in the process applied in the Nichiren ShØshË’s doctrinal
method on which Toda based his interpretation. However, Toda’s lectures were given from a perspective different from such kind of interpretations. He not only gained direct understanding of the Lotus Sutra as an
expression of Nichiren’s ideas, but also went on to interpret it as a relevant expression of believers’ daily lives as is seen in the aforementioned
quote. The profound enlightenment Toda had attained in the prison had
deep impact on this approach.
Toda writes about his own experience of enlightenment in the prison
in his novel, The Human Revolution:17“The Buddha is life itself!”
When Gan (a central character of the novel modeled after Toda)
exclaimed in front of the table, a powerful sound of his clapping hands
in excitement resounded in the room that had been still and silent
infused with cold like a frozen seabed.
“The Buddha is an expression of life! It exists not outside our lives but
within our own lives. Nay, it exists outside, too. That is an entity of cosmic life!”18

From the standpoint of his view on life that Toda had realized in prison,
the Buddha is nothing but a life inherent in individual human being.19
This view may look seemingly similar to Kobayashi Ichiro’s and other
Nichirenists’ views on life but is actually quite different from theirnotions. Those Nichirenists held a view that Buddha is a cosmic life that

MODERN NICHIRENIST DISCOURSES ON LIFE

151

subsumes individual persons. On the contrary, in Toda’s view, Buddha isnothing but life inherent in an individual person and its external embodiment is cosmic life. According to this logic, the Lotus Sutra is interpreted as the sutra that not only expounds on Nichiren who is interpreted as
the original Buddha in the doctrine of Nichiren ShØshË and SØkaGakkai, but also precisely elucidates our own lives. Although this view
can be also found in the discourses of Nichiren himself 20 and the Ongi
kuden (Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings),21 Toda gave a clear
picture of this view through the medium of the concept of life. This is
the most unique feature of Toda’s lectures on the Lotus Sutra. Because adramatic transformation of ordinary people’s identity is shown there: atransformation from a passive stance that ordinary people are to be
saved by Buddha to a revelation that ordinary people are Buddhas themselves, highlighting their independent, spontaneous attitude. It can besaid that herein lies the secret of Toda’s lectures’ success in attracting
many people and that his lectures on the Lotus Sutra have a very unique,distinctive place in the history of interpretations of the Lotus Sutra.

Conclusion
Despite the basic commonality between Nichirenists and JØsei Toda intheir views to see Buddha as life, yet there is a great discrepancy in theiractual understandings. Their differences derive from the priority oremphasis they placed in their concepts of Buddha being equal to life. In
prewar Nichirenists’ view, the concept of life when they say it is equal
to Buddha, it indicates cosmic life as original Buddha; they did not necessarily placed importance on the fact that the life exists inherently
within individual lives. On the contrary, Toda placed importance on thefact that the life is first and foremost the life inherent in individual lives
thus emphasizing that each and everyone is Buddha.
From the perspective of social thought, Nichirenists’ notion to see theoriginal Buddha equal to life has a high affinity for totalitarian view ofsociety due to its centrality of comprehensive cosmic life. In fact, manyof the Nichirenists are known to be fervent nationalists.22 On the other
hand Toda’s view on life that stressed individual lives is an idea thatreadily conformed to the context of postwar regime that upheld the doctrine of popular sovereignty. While we cannot find in the prewar
Nichirenists’ ideas a thought content to give top priority to and respectfor human survival that should derive from their religious conviction,23
Toda declared, “we, the citizens of the world, have an inviolable right tolive.”24 Their difference may be said to have resulted from their diver-

152

MODERN NICHIRENIST DISCOURSES ON LIFE

gence in the underlying structure of their respective views on life.

This essay is based on a presentation, “Interpretations of the Lotus
Sutra in modern Japan,” made at the Institute of World Religions, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, on October 14th, 2009.

Notes
1
TODA JØsei, Toda JØsei ZenshË (The Collected Works of JØsei Toda), Seikyo
Shimbunsha, 1983, Tokyo, vol. 3, p. 14.
2With regard to his enlightenment in the prison, Toda only said, “I had a very mystic
experience and there appeared the unfathomable feeling I had never known” (Toda JØsei
ZenshË, vol. 3, p. 7).
3
The four major attributes of life consist of continuance, expansivity, autonomy andabsoluteness. These attributes are said to respond respectively to a desire to live, a desire
for reproduction, a desire for freedom and a desire to assimilate.
4
After Nichiren-shugi to Genzai ShØrai, Yamakawa publishued Warera no Shin no
Eisei (Our true eternal life, TengyØ MinpØ-sha, Tokyo, 1923), which includes the similar view on life. However, that is just a short essay and therefore it is hard to call it adetailed description of his view. In addition, we cannot know why Yamakawa took
interest in the concept of life.
5
Satomi said he first elaborated his discourses on life in his Nichiren ShØnin Seitenno Shin-kaishaku (A new interpretation of Nichiren’s sacred texts, TengyØ MinpØ-sha,
Tokyo, 1920). This book is not available now for the author to read. Satomi’s first book,
Nichiren-shugi no Shin-kenkyË (A new study on Nichirenism, KokuchË SangyØ Shoseki-bu, Tokyo, 1919) did not mention the concept of life. This book is a publication of his
graduation thesis presented to Waseda University.
6
This book is a retitled edition of Nichiren wa yomigaeru (Nichiren revives), Kokutai-kagaku-sha, Kyoto, 1929.
7
His studying abroad may have influenced his thought.
8“Honge no Shin (Faith of the disciples of the True Buddha),” a lecture in 1932.
Tanaka Chigaku, Nichiren-shugi no ShinkØ (Nichirenist Faith), Shinsekai-sha, Tokyo,
1965, p. 83.
9
MATSUOKA Mikio, Nichiren BukkyØ no Shakai-shisØ-teki Tenkai (The Development of Nichiren Buddhism as a Social Thought: A Religious Ideology in Modern
Japan), University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo, 2005, pp. 124–5, pp. 135–6.
10
Horigome became the 65th patriarch of Nichiren ShØshË. He was one of a few
monks who supported Toda and SØka Gakkai.
11
Nichijun ShØnin ZenshË (The Collected Works of Rev. Nichijun), vol. 2, NichirenshØshË Bussho Kanko-kai, Tokyo, 1960, p. 691.
12
Horigome also studied at Waseda University as Satomi did, but it is not known
whether they were in the relation to influence one another.
13
Kobayashi’s life and achievements are reported in Kobayashi Ichiro Sensei no

MODERN NICHIRENIST DISCOURSES ON LIFE

153

Omoide (In Memoriam Prof. Kobayashi), a collection of essays, included in vol. 12 of
the new edition of HokekyØ Dai-kØza (Nisshin Shuppan, Tokyo, 1965). Quotes from
HokekyØ Dai-kØza hereinafter are from its first edition published by Heibon-sha.
14“Since I studied ethics and philosophy under Prof. Kobayashi at ChËØ University, I
am not supposed to criticize his lectures on the Lotus Sutra. For it is said that a disciple
should not criticize his mentor. But, however repeatedly I read them, I have to say his
lectures do not make sense at all.” Toda, Shitsumon-kai ShË (Answers to questions, Soka
Gakkai, 1963, Tokyo), p. 172. Toda JØsei ZenshË (1982), vol. 2, p. 200. On the relationship between Kobayashi and Toda, see ŌNISHI Katsuaki, “Nichiren-kei Shin-shËkyØ ni
okeru Seimei-shugi-teki KyËsai-kan no Seisei, Tenkai, Hen’yØ (Genesis, Expansion,and Transfiguration of the Vitalistic Conception of Salvation among Nichiren-affiliated
New Religions),” TØyØgaku-kenkyË (Toyo University Oriental Studies), No. 47, March,
2010, pp. 219–223.
15
Toda, Shitsumon-kai ShË., p. 172.
16
Daibyakurenge, 65th issue, pp. 16–17. Toda JØsei ZenshË (1985), vol. 5, p. 420.
17
Toda’s enlightenment was based on the passage of Wu-liang yi jing (the Sutra of
Immeasurable Meaning), beginning “His body (the entity of the Buddha) neither existing nor not existing, neither caused nor conditioned, neither self nor other.” This illustrates that the Toda made his view on life independently from other Nichirenists’ views
including that of Kobayashi’s. Because Nichirenists’ notion of life was developedaround the notion of original Buddha in the Life Span chapter of the Lotus Sutra.
18JØsei Toda, ShØsetsu Ningen Kakumei (Human Revolution: A Novel), vol. 2, 1972,
Seikyo Shimbun-sha, Tokyo, paperback edition, p. 238.
19
The following statements aptly demonstrate where Toda placed the emphasis in his
usage of the word, “life.” “The Gohonzon exists within the life of each person …
whether we believe it or not, the Gohonzon is inherent in our lives.” “Nichiren Daishonin expounded that the entity of ‘Nam-myØhØ-renge-kyØ’ encompasses that which activates and motivates everything. That same motivating force also exists within our own
lives. What we should do is to manifest it” (“Mirai no KØfuku no Tameni [For the sakeof happiness in the future],” a lecture in 1953, Toda JØsei ZenshË, 1984, vol. 4, p. 70).
20
The view can be seen in passages such as, “Shakyamuni Buddha, who has attained
perfect enlightenment, is our own flesh and blood. His practices and the resulting virtues
are our bones and marrow” (“The Object of Devotion for Observing the Mind Established in the Fifth Five-Hundred-Year Period after the Thus Come One’s Passing,” The
Writings of Nichiren Daishonin, SØka Gakkai, Tokyo, 1999, p. 365), and “the storehouse of the eighty-four thousand teachings represents a day-to-day record of one’s own
existence” (“The Unanimous Declaration by the Buddhas of the Three Existences
regarding the Classification of the Teachings and Which Are to Be Abandoned andWhich Upheld,” The Writings of Nichiren Daishonin Volume II, SØka Gakkai, Tokyo,
2006, p. 843).
21
In a passage for example it reads, “Now it is the understanding of Nichiren and his
followers that, generally speaking, the term ‘Thus Come One’ refers to all living beings.
More specifically, it refers to the disciples and lay supporters of Nichiren” (The Recordof the Orally Transmitted Teachings, trans. by Burton Watson, SØka Gakkai, Tokyo,
2004, p. 124).
22
Although Kobayashi held a line against Tanaka and other KokuchË-kai followers,
he also authored a book such as KØkoku Seishin KØza (Lectures on the national spirituality of the Empire of Japan, 1941–43).

154

MODERN NICHIRENIST DISCOURSES ON LIFE

Matsuoka, op. cit., p. 313.
“Gensuibaku-shiyØsha wa shikei ni (Declaration Calling for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons),” a speech in 1957, Toda Josei ZenshË (1984), vol. 4, p. 566. On the later
development and transfiguration of the concept “life” in the doctrine of SØka Gakkai,
see Ōnishi, op. cit., pp. 215–217.
23
24