Commonalities between Buddha-nature and the “Rule of Law”

October 5, 2025
Apologies for the late post.
I’ll be posting new content articles
in the future.

Buddha-nature exists in all phenomena
in all phenomenal worlds and manages
all phenomena. Furthermore, it manages
all treasures within all phenomenal worlds.
It is a Treasure Trove of treasures.
However, Buddha-nature does not use
these treasures for any purpose of its own
volition.

This is because Buddha-nature is also Law.
Generally, Law, regardless of what Law it is,
does not use the powers and what it
possesses and manages for its own
purposes.
(Buddha-nature is the main body of the
Law of Origin, so it sometimes appears
as Law.)
Therefore, because Buddha-nature is
also Law, it does not use the things, powers,
and treasures it manages, for the purposes
of its own benefit.
Therefore, we can rest assured.

This is the same as the “Rule of Law.”
In this article, I will talk about the concept
of the Rule of Law.

In Democratic Nations that adopt 
the “Rule of Law,” the Nation’s Laws or
Constitution govern all matters of the
country and society as a whole.
More specifically speaking, the basic
concept of the “Rule of Law” in
a Democratic Society is as follows:

“Society’s Laws” or “A Country’s Constitution”
manage a country’s and society’s systems,
and almost everything related to people’s
authorities.
That is the “Rule of Law,” that is, 
“A Social System governed and managed
by Law.”
In that case, what exactly does the
“Rule of Law” manage?
That is the State Power, the Securing of
the Rights and Freedoms of People and
Citizens, etc. In this case, State Power refers
to Legislative, Executive, and Judicial
Powers.

In other words, a country’s laws manage
these three branches of powers, and
through those powers, they manage
and dominate the entire country.
And they prevent the Power from being
arbitrarily abused by a select few.
Also, in doing so, they guarantee
the Rights, Freedoms, and Security of
citizens. And they aim to realize a fair
and just society.
That is “The Rule of Law.”

The prototype of this idea of the
“Rule of Law” can be found as far back
as the writings of the Ancient Greek
philosopher Plato.

In his book “Laws,” Plato emphasizes
the importance of a state being governed
by law and of its citizens voluntarily
obeying that law, and he presents the idea
that rule by man should be eliminated and
that law should be the foundation of
governance.
*
In the Middle Ages, in the 13th century,
the medieval English philosopher
Henry Bracton expressed the idea that
royal power was subject to the law, saying,
“Even the king is under God and the law.”

In the 17th century, Edward Coke of
England quoted Bracton’s words,
asserting that “The king is also under
the law,” and resisted Absolute
Monarchy.

In the 18th century,Montesquieu of
France presented the idea of the
Separation of Powers in his book
“The Spirit of the Laws,” and
demonstrated the importance of
a political system based on the
Rule of Law.

However, it was Albert V. Dicy 
(19th-century Britain) who concretely
established a definition of the
“Rule of Law” in the modern sense.
In his “Introduction to the Study of
Constitutional Law,” he stated that
the Rule of Law is a fundamental
principle of the British Constitution.
He then specifically defined the
“Rule of Law” in the following three
points:

① The absolute primacy of ordinary law:
     The rule of arbitrary power is abolished
      and the law has absolute supremacy
       over all powers.

② Equality before the law:
      All people are equal under the law.

③ The importance of general legal
     principles in the constitution:

Of these, the approach of ③ is also
known as “Concrete Rights,” which states
that fundamental laws such as the
Constitution are “formed through the
accumulation of ordinary Court
Decisions on specific disputes.”
In other words, Constitutional Rights
are not simply defined by letters, but
are made concrete and clarified
through a series of Court Cases. 
The background to this is a uniquely
British philosophy that emphasizes 
Experience.

In Britain, emphasis was placed on
a “Practical Approach unique to English
law” in interpreting and applying the law, 
in which law was developed in
accordance with past cases and actual
social conditions, rather than deriving it
from abstract principles or innate ideas.
This stands in contrast to the systematic,
rational way of thinking of Continental
Europe.

To be continued