The term “dhatuvada” (j. kitai-setsu) was invented by Dr. Shiro Matsumoto in order to develop his critical examination of Buddhist thought in general. In this paper, I would like to claim that Shinran's view of buddhakaya is not applicable to the notion of Matsumoto's “dhatuvada”. For that purpose, I classified the view of buddhakaya from three standpoints, i. e., 1) buddhakaya as the ultimate reality, 2) Buddha's saving work as manifested in Buddha's Name and Buddha-body, 3) buddhakaya as immanent in all beings. In Shinran's view of buddhakaya, the second standpoint is most prominent, the first being mentioned only in relation to the second, and the third standpoint is totally ignored.
Matsumoto does not admit the second standpoint, but identifies it with the first or third one. Shinran's view of buddhakaya, however, is mainly based on it. Especially the notion of sambhogakaya, or Amida Buddha as the fulfillment of his causal Vow, is crucial. This sambhogakaya is not such a Buddha-body transformed tentatively from dharmakaya, as Matsumoto states, but rather a manifestation of Amida's saving work on all sentient beings.
Concerning the third standpoint stated above, Buddha-nature is not that which beings originally possess, but is endowed to them through Other Power of Amida.