Since the time when Shandao 善導 brought up the two approaches achieving samādhi (観念両宗), such two-fold structures had been a significant feature when interpreting the Guan Wuliangshou jing 観無量寿経 throughout the history of Pure Land Buddhism. This dialectical interpretation had imposed its influence on Japanese Pure Land Buddhism as well.
This paper examines Ken’i’s 顕意 work Kangyōsho kaijōki 観経疏楷定記, a commentary on Shandao’s Guanjing shu 観経疏, and further excavates the scene of the “Buddha-land Emerging from the Illuminant Pedestal” (光台現国), from which the Seizan 西山 sect uniquely interpreted and developed the “temporal and real” meaning of the “mindfulness of the Buddha” (念仏).
Ken’i constructed his interpretation of “mindfulness of the Buddha” based on the scene of the “Buddha-land Emerging from the Illuminant Pedestal.” In his argument, the essential teaching was modified to that of Śākya-Buddha and Amitābha-Buddha (二尊二教). The teaching of Śākya represents “mindfulness of the Buddha” by meditation, while the teaching of Amitābha represents reciting the Buddha’s name; the former demonstrates self-power (自力), the latter other-power (他力).
By investigating the relation among self-power, Buddha’s power (仏力) and the power of vow (願力), Ken’i not only successfully integrated the two approaches of “mindfulness of the Buddha”—meditation and recitation—but also surpassed the controversy concerning which is superior. Ultimately, he raised the agenda to the level of ontology—Buddha’s name is identical to his nature. From the viewpoint of the “complete and immediate single vehicle” (円頓一乗), a classification of doctrine of the Tiantai sect, it will be important to further examine the interaction between Ken’i’s thought and the Tiantai sect.
