Namu Myoho Renge Kyo or Nam Myoho Renge Kyo?
An ongoing topic of discussion in Nichiren denominations is which is the correct way to chant; is it Nam or Namu that precedes Myoho Renge Kyo? Various folks have their various ideas backed up with various reasons. My reflection here will provide my belief and the bases for that belief. I think the discussion is important to have but not for many of the reasons that people frequently argue.
First I’d like to talk a little about Namu as Namaste from which it derives. Namu is actually two characters in Chinese consisting of Na and Mu written 南無. This Namu is not a prefix to Myoho Renge Kyo, the full title to the Lotus Sutra. It is not merely an appending of one word, Namaste, to the other words of the title. Instead, it is a relational marker, which ties us and our invocation of the title to the contents of the Lotus Sutra. As such, it is important, regardless of how we say it, to be mindful of the implication of its use in the Odaimoku we recite.
Namaste, the word from which Namu derives, has various meanings and I would like to discuss some of them here. One meaning or use of Namaste is as a greeting, another is as a term of respect, and it also has the implication, especially in the context of the Lotus Sutra, of devotion. Namaste/Namu as a greeting certainly applies in our use. When we open our mouth and our mind to chant Namu when we chant the Odaimoku we are greeting the Eternal Buddha. We should be opening our lives up even as we open our mouth, to greet with joy the teaching we are about to revere. Namu prepares us just as hello prepares us in our day-to-day interactions with the world.
Regarding the meaning implied by Namaste/Namu of respect, we offer our utmost respect for the teaching of the Eternal Buddha Myoho Renge Kyo. In this sense we empty ourselves so that we can absorb as much of the value of the Lotus Sutra as possible. From a societal perspective think of those you respect the most and how you try to empty yourself when in their presence so that you can learn as much as possible. When we do not respect someone we close ourselves up to them, we cut them off. So when we say Namu we should think of how we are opening up the core of our life to the Myoho Renge Kyo we will say next.
Namaste/Namu, as I mentioned, also implies devotion. So we have opened ourselves in greeting, we have emptied ourselves in respect, and now we take what has been given and embrace it. Devotion means that we not just believe it in theory, but in actuality with our entire being. We create disharmony in our lives when we do not actualize our theoretical understandings.
Recapping so far; we open our self up in greeting, we empty our self in respect, and we fill our self up with devotion. I am not sure you will necessarily see this exactly the same way as I do, that is fair. I do think though that this is an important issue when one thinks about Namu.
Now on to which way is correct; is it Nam, or Namu. First Namu, as I mentioned earlier is actually two characters, so technically there is no such word or character as nam, there is either na or namu. I won’t go into great length here to talk about some of the characteristics of spoken Japanese except to say that frequently a final vowel sound such as ‘u’ is unvoiced. I say unvoiced because Japanese people are adamant that the sound still exists. So, though we do not hear it to them it doesn’t go away, it still remains. From that perspective no matter how you end up saying it, it still remains Namu. And that is how we should hold it in our minds as well. We should never let go of the whole word Namu, regardless whether we voice the entire word or not.
I am a firm believer in chanting slowly and deliberately, which invites the pronunciation of the whole collection of characters Na Mu Myo Ho Ren Ge Kyo. As I stated above Namu is not a appended sound but a condition of our being. So with the mindfulness and deliberative intent of opening myself, emptying myself, and absorbing I try to take care of how I pronounce and view not just Myo Ho Ren Ge Kyo but also Namu. I do not believe we can genuinely and authentically say we ‘believe’ in or ‘revere’, or ‘respect’ something that we are going to rush on through. If I think about being in the presence of someone I respect and admire and wish to learn from, I am not in a rush, I am not looking at my watch, I am not counting the words they say. Instead I am cherishing each moment, wishing them to linger longer even.
I believe that chanting Odaimoku is not an activity of quantity but of quality. We should be thinking of how much of our lives we can fill with Odaimoku and not how much of our time.
So that is my view on slow deliberative chanting.
I will not say it is wrong to chant fast, but I will say it is wrong to chant sloppily, lazily, distractedly, if we can avoid it. Yes we will loose our focus, we will feel the tug of day to day life and distractions. This whole chanting thing is meditation and so just as we do when we are in silent meditation we do when chanting and that is to come back to the present, the focus whether it is breath or Odaimoku. But if we start out in a rush, in a hurry, or with mix objectives then it will be more difficult if not impossible to move to a more deliberate, contemplative practice that allows up to nurture and absorb the benefit of the Lotus Sutra.
Nichiren said time and again that each character of the Lotus Sutra is a golden Buddha. Imagine if you were to come into contact with the Buddha, how would you react, would you be casual? I cannot imagine that to be how you would be. Yet how casual do we allow ourselves to become when we chant Odaimoku or chant the sutra.
People frequently have all sorts of defenses or reasons for what they do, never really wishing to engage in a serious activity of self reflection. Some say things like “I’ve chanted this way for years….”, “it feels good”, “it is easier”, “it works” or any number of other defenses or barriers to self-reflection or self-improvement. I am not saying that at the end of the reflection the result would be any different but each of the above statements reveal nothing more than reflexive defensive mechanisms. They do not really take any ownership, they are casual and not deliberative in and of themselves. And that frankly is not Buddhism. How can we say we wish to engage in a mindfulness activity and practice and then not do so with ourselves.
So, whether you chant Na Myo Ho Ren Ge Kyo or Na Mu Myo Ho Ren Ge Kyo, you should realize first that it really is Na Mu even if you take a short cut. You should consider what is meant and what constitutes Namu. And you should consider your own quality of practice and be ever willing to improve and never willing to be complacent.
With Gassho,
Ryusho
