Stories of the Lotus Sutra - 1 - Foreword and Introduction

[Bion]

Welcome, friends

As we begin, I’d like to invite you to visit our Study Page, where you’ll find useful information about this book club, how to participate, and how to make the most of it. You'll also find some suggested questions for reflection, though you’re always welcome and encouraged to come up with your own.

---

• First reading assignment

During this first week, please read: Foreword by Rafe Martin and the Introduction by Gene Reeves

---

After you read these once, slowly, If something resonates, lingers, or troubles you — let it. You might make some notes in the moment, then spend some time with the text and your reflections. Your notes will also be useful in case you can only participate in the live Zoom meetings. Try to notice what stays with you after you close the book. Whenever you're prepared, come and share your thoughts with the group on the forum. You are not expected to deliver an essay or a very elaborate comment. Be yourself, and also, please be mindful of the rest of the group.

• Our first book club Zoom meeting will take place on Saturday, January 31st and you can find the local times for it on the Practice Calendar

Enjoy the reading and discussion. I can't wait to read your comments

Gassho
sat lah

[Chikyou]

Hey Bion,

As I don’t yet have a copy of the Lotus sutra (either digital or hard copy) and on reading the introduction, I see that this is more of a commentary than a translation, I feel I should ask: What is the most recommended translation (or, if that’s not easy to answer, are there any I should avoid?) Gene of course recommends his own translation, and since we’re reading his commentary I will likely grab his translation as well if there’s not some reason why I shouldn’t.

Gassho,
SatLah,
Chikyō

[Bion]

Hey Bion,

As I don’t yet have a copy of the Lotus sutra (either digital or hard copy) and on reading the introduction, I see that this is more of a commentary than a translation, I feel I should ask: What is the most recommended translation (or, if that’s not easy to answer, are there any I should avoid?) Gene of course recommends his own translation, and since we’re reading his commentary I will likely grab his translation as well if there’s not some reason why I shouldn’t.

Gassho,
SatLah,
Chikyō

His is a pretty good choice, really. The language is modern and easy and it´s probably more understandable... It's the one I've read, recently, too. Totally recommend it

Gassho
sat lah

[Tensei]

Hello everyone,

First, Bion and everyone at Treeleaf - thank you for organizing this! Over the past few months, I've been thinking about engaging in some more sutra study, so the timing couldn't be better.

Second, I have some thoughts on the Foreware by Rafe Martin. I really enjoyed his commentary on the 'stories' contained in the Lotus Sutra. Since starting the Illiad last year (I'm still only half way... there are too many boats), I've spent some time thinking about storytelling. A current hypothesis is that Homer might not have been a person, but a role, like a bard. Does that change our appreciation of the story? I don't think so.

Jundo Roshi brought up something similar in a zazenkai discussion a few months back when we were talking about the tales of Bodhidharma. The more fantastical elements of these stories don't negate the truth they contain. This notion was crystallized for me in the recent movie "Wake Up Dead Man," of all places. Spoilers for an early scene in the movie below:

In response to Benoit Blanc's speech on the issues associated with the Church and the false veneer of history of the modern chapel, Father Jud said:

"You're right. It's storytelling. This church isn't medieval. We're in the middle of New York. It has more in common with Disneyland than Notre Dame. And the rites, the rituals, the costumes...all of it. You're right. It's storytelling. I guess the question is - do these stories convince us of a lie, or do they resonate with something deep inside us that is profoundly true, that we can't express any other way, except storytelling?"

I'm looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts on the Forward!

Gassho,
Tensei
satlah

[Tenryu]

Thank you, Tensei, for opening the buffet - perfect timing, and beautifully laid out. I’m glad to come along with a small dish of my own.

Your reflections on storytelling really resonated with me, especially the question of whether knowing how a story came into being changes its power. The Homer-as-a-role image feels very close to how I’ve been reading Rafe Martin’s foreword: not asking whether the stories are factual, but noticing what they stir and awaken.

As I read the foreword and introduction, I kept slowing down. Not to analyze, but to notice how the emphasis seems to be on what these stories do to us - how they touch something already present: a sense of connection, responsibility, and shared life. Your Father Jud quote put words to that beautifully: stories as a way of expressing something deeply true that can’t be reached in any other form.

I’m also sitting with that delicate balance both Martin and Reeves point to - taking the stories seriously, without taking them too literally. That feels especially alive for me reading the Lotus Sutra within our Zen practice, where I want to stay open to being affected without fixing meanings too quickly.

Thank you again for starting us off so thoughtfully. I’m really looking forward to hearing how others are meeting these opening pages, and to continuing the conversation together.

Gasshō,
Tenryū
st and lah

[Shinsoku]

Tensei,

That movie feels very on point for the Lotus Sutra. Also like the interesting tidbit about Homer. I agree that whether something is literally “true” or not doesn’t seem to be the main issue.

My takeaway from Martin’s foreword is this - I don’t think he is asking us to convince ourselves of a lie but rather to notice that we are already living inside stories of our own making. Our ideas about profit, ownership, and separation are imaginative constructions too, and they’re ones that seem to create a lot of suffering.

So, I think that when the Lotus Sutra leans into myth and fantasy, it doesn’t feel like it’s trying to replace reality with something fake, but that it is meeting us in the same inner space where our suffering is already being created and offering a different way of seeing. Like the swimmer visualizing the perfect stroke.

I also like the idea that imagination isn’t opposed to truth. It feels more like a natural faculty of consciousness itself, our sixth sense in a way, that can either trap us in delusion or help us glimpse something deeper. So maybe the question isn’t whether the stories are lies or truths but whether they loosen the grip of the stories that keep us suffering.

Gassho,
Shinsoku
st/lah

[Bob-Midwest]

I was drawn to this book study because of the emphasis on stories, which if like the parables of Jesus, could be useful teachings tools for me.
And the message in the introduction that the sutra is designed to reorient our lives, not give us more ideas, theory, knowledge.
The older I get - 62 now - the more I get from stories, poetry and other short messages, as opposed to long, heady discourses.
Ready to dive in with you all.

Bob
sat. lah

[Bion]

Thank you, all, for sitting on these reflections for a bit, and now coming to share your thoughts. Lovely introduction, Tensei . I think you've offered something that we've all responded to! Loved Shinsoku 's comment too, about understanding that we live inside stories of our own making! As Tenryu points out, I also feel a great goal, for anyone diving into the Lotus Sutra is to learn how to take it seriously but not literally.

Gassho
sat lah

[Seiraku]

Ah, Tenryu I was just going to mention the same thought on "taking the stories seriously, without taking them too literally" that stood out to me. I've definitely taken some stories too seriously in the past.

Also, I could say I had a little tension reading this since I usually skip over forwards and introductions to get to the "actual book." It was helpful to read at the same time though.

Gassho,
Seiraku
Satlah

[Shokai]

My impression is that Rafe Martin has written a Foreword to this book that is no less than magical. I've had both this book and Reeves' Lotus Sutra for over two years, and I've been scanning the sutra without opening this one. Now that I've read this Foreword, my interest is re-ignited. I especially like that he pointed out that, "The Lotus Sutra is a skillful devise left by the great teacher Shakyamuni Buddha" to help our imaginations work "to open a gateway to ourselves, and what we actually are and so might be: a great engine of awakened activity to benefit all beings."
It is that and Gene Reeves' entreaty; "The Lotu Sutra uses a variety of stories, including it's famous parables, to draw us into its world, a world in which, if we truly enter it, we are likely to be transformed. It is a book of enchantment. a story book." And, "All of these stories essentially say to the hearer or reader, "you too" "And the teaching that Buddha Nature is universal... I think is the core purpose of the Lotus Sutra."..."the always present possibility and power of awakening which is kind of a flowering, in each one of us"; that has enriched my curiosity and fired up my motivation to commit to this book reading.

Thank you Bion for undertaking this project.
gassho. Shokai

[Bion]

It is that and Gene Reeves' entreaty; "The Lotu Sutra uses a variety of stories, including it's famous parables, to draw us into its world, a world in which, if we truly enter it, we are likely to be transformed. It is a book of enchantment. a story book."

This bit here, reminds me of the often-used phrase "throw ourselves into something" ... eg. the practice, zazen, the house of the Buddha, everyday actions, etc. I think that's an essential point for one not to be too critical of the super fantastical stories or historically innacurate claims of the sutra. One need to willingly "truly enter" the world created by these stories, and then, something happens.
Thanks for jumping in, Shokai!

Also, I could say I had a little tension reading this since I usually skip over forwards and introductions to get to the "actual book." It was helpful to read at the same time though.

Ha! Yeah...

Gassho
sat lah

[Hosui]

I’ve always been mindful (and intrigued) as to why the Lotus Sutra is so self-referential, applauding its own message, style, and importance. And so, with these biases, I came at the Foreword and Introduction looking for mention of that. I didn’t find this explicitly, which was a surprise as I’d like to approach this study group to explore the ‘purpose’ of what appears to me as self-referentiality - I could be wrong of course. From what I can see this early on, to Shokai point, “the always present possibility and power of awakening…” is us being the Lotus Sutra in that “kind of flowering…”, literally, hence the referentiality. Let’s see. Like Bob-Midwest, I’m also 62 and better appreciate stories, how they afford an oblique approach to the so-called familiar.

Gassho
Hosui
sat/lah

[Bion]

I’ve always been mindful (and intrigued) as to why the Lotus Sutra is so self-referential, applauding its own message, style, and importance. And so, with these biases, I came at the Foreword and Introduction looking for mention of that. I didn’t find this explicitly,

I totally undestand why Reeves or Martin don't get into that right in the foreword or introduction. One needs to rely on quite a bit of historical information regarding the development of Mahayana buddhism to place the Lotus Sutra in an appropriate context. It might seem like this Sutra had always been of utmost importance, but it wasn's so at all. It was ignored for quite some time, and only circulated in some circles. Other bodhisattvayana sutras were far more influential for a time. The Lotus sutra introduces a number of ideas that were brand new for Mahayana thought in many circles and it took some time for its ideas to catch on. However, a lot of what it offers provided much needed support for ideas that needed it, so it took on a life of its own. Regarding its habit of self-referencing, Kotei always uses the analogy of those chain letters folks used to send, where you had to resend them to 20 others, or bad things would happen. In the time the Sutra started to become influential, there was a flourishing cult of sutras and stupas, which is why, the Lotus continually encouraging others to copy and share it, makes sense.

Great point you raise, however, Hosui, and later on in the commentaries, Reeves also touches on some of this.

Gassho
sat lah

[Shinsoku]

The No Words Book Club
meets in the Lotus Sutra.
A cricket chirrups.


Gassho,
Shinsoku
st/lah

[Tairin]

Firstly, Wow Bion ! It is clear you’ve put a lot of effort into preparing this reading. You have set the bar high for any future book club reading.

So far so good. I like the emphasis on the stories rather than a lot of philosophical ramblings. I like the emphasis on experience and personalization rather than approaching the text as just an academic study.

I lIke stories. I like reading them and trying to draw out some sort of experience. I like what Bob-Midwest said about parallels to the parables in the Bible. I like reading Koans for a similar reason. In fact I am currently working through the Gateless Gate on my own. I don’t read Koans with some expectation of satori. I am mostly interested in the stories and any sort of insight I might gleen. I definitely appreciate the commentaries, as they help with my understanding.

I am looking forward to digging in more with all of you


Tairin
sat today and lah