Medieval Tendai Thought and the New Kamakura Buddhism - A Rec.pdf - Nichiren Shu - Bodhisattwa

Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 1995 22/1–2

Medieval Tendai Hongaku Thought

and the New Kamakura Buddhism

A Reconsideration

Jacqueline S TONE

Medieval Tendai original enlightenment thought ( hongaku shisõ ) had

its formative stage during roughly the twelfth through fourteenth centuries,

a period that precedes and then coincides with the emergence and early

growth of the so-called new Kamakura Buddhism. Scholars have long

assumed some connection between Tendai hongaku ideas and the doc-

trines of the new Buddhist schools, though the nature of that connection

has been disputed. This essay outlines the theories on this subject to date

and raises questions about how the problem has been formulated. It argues

for a more contextualized understanding of hongaku discourse that

locates it within both the speci³cs of the medieval Tendai tradition and the

broader historical setting.

N OTIONS OF “ ORIGINAL ENLIGHTENMENT ”( hongaku û·) informed the

mainstream of Japanese Tendai Buddhism from roughly the Insei

period (1086–1185) until about the Genroku through Kyõhõ eras

(1688–1735) of the Edo period. This is the period known in that tradi-

tion’s intellectual history as “medieval Tendai” ( chðko Tendai _òú × ;

H AZAMA 1948, pp. 1–2). Medieval Tendai ideas about original enlight-

enment are developed in a huge corpus, including records of oral

transmissions ( kuden S )), debate texts, ritual manuals, and commen-

taries. This literature presents a morass of bibliographical dif³culties.

Only a fraction of the relevant texts are available in printed editions.

Moreover, before the fourteenth century, documents related to hon-

gaku thought were not signed by their compilers but retrospectively

attributed to great Tendai masters of the past, such as Saichõ or

Genshin. Even after about 1300, when works of reliable attribution

begin to appear, one still ³nds those whose authorship is uncertain

(T AMURA 1973, p. 538). Thus dating and attribution are extremely

Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 22/1–2

dif³cult matters. Nonetheless, the painstaking efforts of modern

scholars have established a tentative chronology of important texts,

and it is now generally agreed that hongaku thought underwent its

most creative phase from roughly the twelfth through fourteenth cen-

turies (for the most detailed chronology to date, see T AMURA 1965, pp.

403–51; 1973, pp. 521–41.) This time frame begins somewhat before

and then coincides with the emergence of the so-called “new

Kamakura Buddhism.” The men regarded as the founders of the new

Kamakura schools—Eisai, Hõnen, Shinran, Dõgen and Nichiren—

began their careers as Tendai monks and studied on Mt. Hiei, where

hongaku thought was µourishing. Moreover, some of their ideas share

points of similarity with certain medieval Tendai hongaku texts, includ-

ing the primacy of faith, the direct accessibility of Buddhahood, and

optimism about the possibility of salvation for ignorant and evil per-

sons. The nature of the connection between Tendai hongaku thought

and the new Kamakura Buddhism has been debated heatedly. The

present article will also address this theme with the aim, not of provid-

ing a de³nitive answer, but of raising questions about how the prob-

lem has been formulated to date, in the hope of thus contributing to

future inquiry. First, however, it will be well to touch brieµy on the

chief term in this discussion and the dif³culties it presents as a schol-

arly category.

What is “Original Enlightenment Thought”?

The term “original enlightenment” (Chn. pen-chüeh , Kor. pon’gak ) has

its locus classicus in the Ta-sheng ch’i-hsin lun Ø ñ | = Ç or Awakening of

Faith in the Mah„y„na (T #1666, 32.575–83), where it refers to true

suchness considered under the aspect of conventional deluded con-

sciousness and thus denotes the potential for enlightenment in un-

enlightened beings. It is used in the Ch’i-hsin lun in contrast to

“acquired enlightenment” (Chn. shih-chüeh , Jpn. shikaku x·), the

process by which this innate potential for enlightenment is actualized.

In China and Korea, notions of original enlightenment developed pri-

marily within the Hua-yen tradition and also inµuenced Ch’an.

The ³rst Japanese Buddhist to engage the concept was Kðkai W}

(774–835), founder of the Japanese Shingon school. Kðkai quoted

extensively from the S®k Mahay®n-ron ö#ä Ç (T #1668,

32.591–668), an eighth-century Korean commentary on the Awakening

of Faith , appropriating its discourse of “original enlightenment” and

“nondual Mah„y„na” to the esoteric teachings. Developments in

Tendai esotericism ( taimitsu × O) from the time of the Japanese

S TONE : Tendai Hongaku Thought and Kamakura Buddhism

Tendai founder Saichõ è (767–822) were also crucial to the forma-

tion of medieval Tendai hongaku thought. A distinct tradition grounded

in the premise of original enlightenment emerged within Tendai in

the latter part of the Heian period. Though it was strongly inµuenced

by esotericism, Tendai hongaku doctrine was developed under the

rubric of “exoteric teachings” ( kengyõ ß î ) and associated speci³cally

with the Lotus Sðtra . The term “original enlightenment” in this medieval

Tendai context involves the claim, not merely that all beings have the

potential for enlightenment, but also that all beings are enlightened

inherently. Not only human beings, but even ants and crickets, moun-

tains and rivers, grasses and trees, are all innately Buddhas. Indeed,

the whole phenomenal world is the primordially enlightened Tath„gata.

Seen in their true light, all forms of daily conduct, even one’s delusive

thoughts, are, without transformation, the expressions of original

enlightenment. Not all medieval Tendai thinkers embraced this posi-

tion. The exegete Hõchibõ Shõshin µGÛãO (µ. late 12th, early

13th cent.), for example, criticized it as a denial of causality and a het-

erodox teaching (see Õ TANI 1991, pp. 228–37). Still, it appears to have

represented the medieval Tendai intellectual mainstream.

Medieval Tendai texts use the terms “original enlightenment,”

“original enlightenment teaching” ( hongakumon û·) or “original

enlightenment doctrine” ( hongaku hõmon û·À). “Original enlight-

enment thought,” however, is a modern category. The term was ³rst

popularized through studies by Shimaji Daitõ (1875–1927) published

in the 1920s. Introducing terminology that would echo through

decades of later scholarship, Shimaji characterized nondual original

enlightenment thought as “absolute af³rmation” of the phenomenal

world and “the climax of Buddhism as philosophy.”

The late Tamura Yoshirõ (1921–1989), who devoted much of his

scholarly career to the study of this doctrine, expanded upon Shimaji’s

characterization and attempted to de³ne “original enlightenment

thought” more precisely. It consists, says T AMURA , in two philosophical

moves (1983, pp. 123–26). First, the Mah„y„na idea of nonduality is

pushed to its ultimate conclusion. All existents, being empty of indepen-

dent self-nature, are seen as interpenetrating and mutually identi³ed.

This move negates any ontological difference between the ordinary

person and the Buddha, the mundane world and the Pure Land, self

and other, and so forth. All conventional distinctions of the phenomenal

world are thus collapsed in a breakthrough into an undifferentiated,

nondual realm. Second, on the basis of this insight into absolute non-

duality, one “returns,” as it were, to the phenomenal world, af³rming

its relative distinctions, just as they are, as expressions of ultimate non-

dual reality or original enlightenment. This second move is often

Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 22/1–2

expressed in such classic Mah„y„na terms as “the worldly passions are

precisely enlightenment” ( bonnõ soku bodai ñ ¬Ø) or “birth and

death are precisely nirv„«a” ( shõji soku nehan ´ Ãæ). Tamura’s

de³nition is heuristically useful and helps illuminate conceptual struc-

tures underlying a great number of texts.

Nonetheless, certain caveats are in order about the term “original

enlightenment thought.” Especially when supported by a very system-

atized de³nition such as Tamura’s, it may tend to suggest a uni³ed

body of material, thus obscuring the plurality of approaches, genres,

and subject matter of the writings informed by hongaku perspectives. 1

Medieval Tendai notions of hongaku are developed primarily in a

diverse body of texts known as orally transmitted doctrines ( kuden

hõmon S )À). Some of these texts explicitly treat the concept of

original enlightenment, while others present it only as a tacit premise

informing a discussion of other subjects, such as the Sannõ cult of Mt.

Hiei, initiation rituals, the perfect and sudden precepts, or topics of

religious debate. Oral transmission texts account for an estimated

twenty percent of the Tendai sect’s Eizan Library holdings (K OJIMA ,

K ODERA , and T AKE 1975, p. 372), and Eizan is only one of several

archives housing such documents. There are also works dealing with

original enlightenment that do not take the form of oral transmis-

sions. Subsuming all this material under the single rubric “original

enlightenment thought” works to obscure its heterogeneity.

A second problem lies in the notion of “original enlightenment” as

thought , which gives the impression of a primarily or even purely philo-

sophical enterprise, independent of practice, ritual, or institution.

Until quite recently, the discipline of Buddhist studies in both Japan

and the West tended to stress doctrine to the exclusion of other con-

cerns. In the case of medieval Tendai, this tendency has been exacer-

bated by the dif³culty of dating and attributing texts, which makes

their ideas particularly dif³cult to contextualize. There may also be

historical reasons why hongaku thought has so often been presented in

a chieµy philosophical light: S HIMAJI , who characterized it as the “cli-

max” of Buddhist philosophy in Japan, saw it as the perfect counter to

a criticism, evidently current in his day, that “Japan has religion but

no philosophy” (1926, pp. 189–91).

“Original enlightenment thought” is a convenient designation for

the range of concepts, interpretations, and doctrinal formulations

informed by hongaku ideas. In using it, however, we must bear in mind

that it was a multivalent discourse, and one embedded in speci³c lin-

eages, rituals, and institutional contexts.

1 I am indebted to Paul Groner for ³rst calling this to my attention.

S TONE : Tendai Hongaku Thought and Kamakura Buddhism

Theories about Hongaku Thought and the New Kamakura Buddhism

What was the relationship between Tendai original enlightenment dis-

course and the doctrines of the new Kamakura Buddhism? Rather

than attempting to detail the views of every scholar who has taken

part in this discussion or to present a precise chronology of their argu-

ments, we will summarize the major theories on this issue. At the risk

of some oversimpli³cation, these may be regarded as falling into three

basic positions, which for convenience’ sake we shall term “Tendai as

matrix,” “the radical break,” and “dialectical emergence.” In reality,

there is considerable shading and overlap, rather than an absolute dif-

ference, among the three.

The “Tendai as matrix” position sees Tendai hongaku thought as the

“womb” or intellectual matrix of the new schools of Kamakura

Buddhism. This idea was ³rst proposed by S HIMAJI Daitõ in a seminal

essay entitled “Nihon ko Tendai kenkyð no hitsuyõ o ronzu” [On the

necessity of studying ancient Japanese Tendai thought](1926). Up

until that time, the new Kamakura schools had been viewed chieµy as

sectarian traditions developing independently out of the activities of

hijiri ¸ or holy men outside the formal monastic establishment, or as

responses to fears about the degenerate Final Dharma age ( mappõ

=À). Shimaji’s proposal enabled them to be considered within a com-

mon, transsectarian intellectual framework. A pioneer in this ³eld,

Shimaji was among the ³rst to recognize that many texts attributed to

Saichõ and Genshin were apocryphal, but tended to accept as gen-

uine texts attributed to Tendai masters of the Insei period such as

Chðjin bc (1065–1138), attributions that later scholars have ques-

tioned. Thus he saw Tendai original enlightenment thought as having

developed much earlier than is now accepted. This chronology sup-

ported his suggestion that the new schools had emerged from the

matrix of mature hongaku thought.

While stressing the intellectual indebtedness of the new Kamakura

Buddhism to medieval Tendai hongaku thought, Shimaji nonetheless

found the new schools superior in terms of practice and ethics. He

perceived a certain moral danger in an idea that af³rmed all activities

of life, just as they are, as the acts of an originally inherent cosmic

Tath„gata. Hongaku doctrine, S HIMAJI suggested, had proceeded in two

directions: “One took form as the bright Kamakura Buddhism that

puri³ed original enlightenment thought, while the other sank to a

naturalistic, corrupt thought and brought about the deterioration of

Buddhism on Mt. Hiei” (1933, p. 473).

The second major theory, the “radical break,” arose largely in

response to Shimaji and his successors, and maintains that the new

Medieval Tendai Thought and the New Kamakura Buddhism - A Rec.pdf

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: