The “Selected Exegesis of the Illuminating Secret Commentary on the Five Chakras and the Nine Syllables” by Ryuyu (1773-1850) is the only exegesis written on “The Illuminating Secret Commentary on the Five Chakras and the Nine Syllables” by Kogyo Daishi Kakuban (1095–1144). The original handwritten manuscript, found in the Chisan Archives (Chishaku-in, Kyoto) on the bottom half of Page 239 of Scroll 1 in the “Texts Stored in the Chisan Repository,” is titled “An Exegesis of the Illuminating Secret Commentary on the Five Chakras and the Nine Syllables.” Published as Volume 5 of the “Collected Treatises of the Chisan School of Shingon Buddhism,” it includes five scrolls and five books.

　This study has contributed to the “Memoirs of Taisho University,” with the initial entry (No. 1 of Volume 85, March 2000) appearing as the “Selected Exegesis of the Illuminating Secret Commentary on the Five Chakras and the Nine Syllables.” To date, approximately three-fifths of the work has been released. Moreover, the compilation titled “Volume 1 of Research on the ‘Selected Exegesis of the Illuminating Secret Commentary on the Five Chakras and the Nine Syllables’ by Ryuyu” has been published as Series 12 of “Buddhist Cultural Theory” (Kawasaki Daishi Research Center, 2017); the present study is Volume 2 of the same title.

　The Daihanyae is a ceremony, which is held in Japan, in which monks perform group recitations (albeit abbreviated) of the “Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra” for the purpose of commemorating Genzo’s translation of 600 scrolls of the sūtra from Sanskrit into Chinese. These recitations were originally performed as Shingon rituals in Nara at the Todaiji, Kofukuji, and Yakushiji temples. The Daihanyae, which goes beyond sectarian bounds, is an important traditional ceremony in Tendai, Zen, and several other schools of Buddhism. This study is written from the perspective of ceremonies that include religious belief and, thus, goes no further than pointing out the issues and simply reflects the thoughts of the author. The subject matter of the study is the group recitations of the “Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra”; it examines this religious ceremony from several perspectives, delves into the development of Buddhism in Japan as a whole, and raises further issues for discussion.

　Regarding the sources of the Rokudai (six great elements) Setsu explained in the “Sokushin-gi” (Becoming a Buddha in this very Life), so far the metaphor of the godai (five universal material elements), related to the issaichi no gan (knowledge of everything in the universe) of the Godai Setsu and Rokudai Setsu of Kengyo (exoteric Buddhism), and the “Mahavairocana Sutra” and “Jushin Bonsho Gendan” have been discussed. However, in the “aji honpusho” (originally non-arising) verse, among others in the “Mahavairocana Sutra” and the “Guenbon,” the “Sokushin-gi” itself is cited as a source. This narrates when Mahavairocana or Nyorai Buddha himself spoke about the inner realization of his spiritual awakening, but this is shown by the goji no jigi of goji shingon (manzoku issaichi no gan [knowledge of everything in the universe] mei). This goji is arranged in the shintai gokasho of the ascetic in goji imu mikan and is used for the contemplation required for yoga or concentration practice with the Nyorai Buddha; at the same time, it is also divided by godai. This is the Dainichi Shino that contemplates with goji no jigi as inner realization with great consciousness, and this inner realization then becomes the godai. Nyorai Buddha’s establishment of hokai or the underlying principle of reality in the “Mahavairocana” and “Dainichikyosho” is to cause the rokudou (six realms) zuirui no mi (keshin [embodiment]) to appear, but Kukai interpreted it as the establishment of the world itself and converted it to sekai no nou and hokkai taisho (the essence of the dharma realm).

　According to the “Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna,” “storehouse consciousness” is comprised of blundering and awakening, categorized as acquired enlightenment (shikaku) and inherent enlightenment (hongaku), respectively. Acquired enlightenment is further classified into blundering and gradual enlightenment. The “Commentary on the Treatise on the Awakening of Faith in Mahāyāna” (Ch. Shi moheyan lun; Jp. Shakumakaenron) treats inherent enlightenment and acquired enlightenment as the wisdom of the proving-property (sadhanadharma) and introduce thusness (tathatā) and space (ākāsha) as the logic of the proposition to be proved (sādhya). Among these four, inherent and acquired enlightenment could be regarded as the body and use of wisdom and thusness and space as the body and use of logic. Also, the body and use of wisdom as awakening is divided into permanence (fuhen) and accordance (zuien), and inherent enlightenment as a permanent body is deemed as pure (seijō) inherent enlightenment, while the accordant body is deemed as pure-and-impure (zenjō) inherent enlightenment. Permanence as use is deemed as pure acquired enlightenment and accordance as use as pure-and-impure acquired enlightenment. Permanence and accordance are also opened up to thusness and space as logic, with permanence as body regarded as pure thusness and accordance of body as pure-and-impure thusness. Likewise, I will theorize that permanence as use is regarded as pure space and accordance as use as pure-and-impure space. In this report, while touching on the characteristics of the Shi moheyan lun, which promotes the interpretation of inherent enlightenment that considers possession of the dharma body to be inherent and regards awakening as the essence of the bodhisattva’s wisdom, I will also investigate the influence of the Shi moheyan lun on Kūkai’s teaching.

　When I was young, one of the sources I used when learning konrei-yomi (negoro-yomi) from my teacher was the Himitsu sanbu-kyō denshu kuketsu [Secret Oral Transmission of the Three Sutras]. The “three sutras” in question were the Dainichi-kyō (“Great Illuminator Sūtra”; Skt. Mahāvairocana Sūtra), the Kongō chōkyō (“Adamantine Pinnacle Sūtra”; Skt. Vajraśekhara Sūtra), and the Soshitsuji-kyō (“Excellent Accomplishment Sūtra”; Susiddhi Sūtra). As indicated at the end of the “Three Sutras” text:

Herein, when giving instruction in the differences arising, such as in the readings of chants in the Daizan and Konrei traditions, you should use Daigo as a guide.

With regard to selecting the genuine guiding marks (kunten) for the characters, you should use the preparations set out in the master’s instructions.

　In this work, I clearly show the difference between Daigo readings and Konrei readings. Also, I recall that observing Daigo readings in addition to Konrei readings when giving instruction was conveyed to me as being “standard practice.”

In this paper, I have annotated the Himitsu sanbu-kyō denshu kuketsu using Japanese word order (yomikudashi-bun) and have tried to keep the four voices and pronunciation as clear as possible.

　Unsho’s (1614–1693) work, the “Shakuron-keimo,” is a commentary on Shoken’s (1307–1392) work, the “Shakuron-daisanju,” a kind of catechism consisting of 100 dialogues. Although it is a commentary, Unsho rewrote 11 of the 100 dialogues in it. This article investigates Unsho’s interpretation of the “Shi-mo-he-yan-lun,” presenting the reasons for rewriting them and revealing that 2 of the 11 rewritten dialogues contain added dialogues and that, while the grounds of 4 rewritten dialogues have not shifted, 5 have. As for the reason to rewrite them, it appears that Unsho adhered to the teachings of the “Shi-mo-he-yan-lun” and its 3 commentaries even though he based his writings on the interpretations of Kukai and Raiyu (1226–1304). Therefore, he likely assumed that, as a text, the “Shi-mo-he-yan-lun” contained doctrines of real teachings, especially of the Kegon School.

　In this paper, I discuss the Rite of the Mystic King Daigensui (Daigen [sui]-hō), which is considered one of the great rites of this world. However, because I have not been initiated into the rite in question, there are some limitations to my discussion. I provide a brief overview of the monks Jōgyō and the bettō of Hōrin-ji temple, who imported the rite to Japan, using the Daigen hiki [The Secret Records of Daigen], which I have previously reprinted and reported upon, as well as other historical materials that have been rendered into print to date.

　In this discussion, I consider the musical modes of middle-length pieces (chūshoku) as seen in Rishukyō (“The Perfection of Wisdom in 150 Lines”; Skt. Adhyardhaśatikā Prajñāpāramitā) and Gokai (“Fivefold Repentance”) from the repertoire of classical shōmyō chanting of the Chizan school of esoteric Buddhism. The musical modes of middle-length pieces include flat-tone (heichō) and Oshiki-tone modes. The flat-tone middle-length mode is composed solely of contratonal tunings, while the Oshiki-tone middle-length mode (named after one of the 12 tones of the Chinese octave) consists of both contratonal tunings and a simple ryosen tuning from the seven-tone gagaku scale. The flat-tone middle-length mode consists of the alternation of articulation between flat-tone tunings, while the Oshiki-tone middle-length mode consists of the alternation of articulation between Oshiki-tone tunings and a simple Ichikotsu tuning. I believe the flat-tone middle-length mode is called “flat-tone contratonal music” (heichō han’onkyoku) while the Oshiki-tone middle-length mode is called “Oshiki middle-length music” (ōshiki chūkyoku). I believe that the Oshiki-tone middle-length mode, in terms of contratonal music, is Ichikotsu contratonal music. Below, I undertake a detailed discussion of middle-length modes.

　For this workshop, I have prepared a recension and reading in the Japanese style of the Shido kudenshō [“Digest of the Oral Teachings on the Four Crossings”], which is a record of the received teachings on the Four Crossings transmitted to the monk Kenshin in the Kōchō era (mid-thirteenth century) by the monk Kyōjun, who was a learned priest at Daigo-ji temple. In this discussion, I introduce a recension and commentary on the nyorai shin-e (with great wisdom sword, great law conch, and lotus throne), which is part of the third volume of the “Taizō-kai kudenshō” [Digest of the Oral Teachings on the Womb-Realm] (hereinafter, “the Digest”), a record of the oral transmission of teachings about the womb-realm. To begin, I addressed the lack of correspondence between the Genzu Mandala and the Kōshidai and then prepared a recension, reading, and commentary of a part of the third volume of the Digest. When preparing my commentary, I made references to Ryūyo’s Denju yōi [Teaching Essentials]. The nyorai shin-e is supposed to be mastered prior to the views of fixed settlement (bodily esoterism), right remembrance (oral esoterism), or the wheel of words (mental esoterism). In the Kōshidai, to facilitate the introduction of these views, students are required to first master the nyorai shin-e to purify their own “three activities” (i.e., of action, speech, and thought), to fully equip themselves with the Buddha’s “three mysteries” (i.e., the Buddha’s body, speech, and mind) and to become one with the Buddha through the practice of recitation.

　The high-ranking Kamakura-period priest Myōe Shōnin (also known as Kōben) (1173–1232) grounded his scholarship in Kegon Buddhism. The Kegon School places great emphasis on the Kishinron (“The Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna”; Skt. Mahāyāna śraddhotpādaśāstra), so it is only natural that the Kishinron would be reflected in Myōe’s work. Nevertheless, few studies have dealt with this matter directly.

　Maekawa Ken’ichi focuses on Myōe’s view of the two kinds of selflessness—of persons and of dharmas (ninbō nikū)—a topic that is also shared by the concerns of this paper. However, several aspects remain unclear with regard to the overall impact that the Kishinron had on Myōe. Therefore, I furthered my research by undertaking a comparative investigation with the actual text of the Kishinron.

　It was confirmed that Myōe drew on a passage at the beginning of the Kishinron as scriptural authority for the renunciation of fame and profit (myōri). This view of renunciation was rigorously positioned at the headwaters of Myōe’s philosophy and constituted a base for his development from the bodhi mind or aspiration to Buddhahood to the worship of the Three Treasures (i.e., the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha).

　In other words, his interpretation of renunciation led directly to proof of the twin forms of selflessness (i.e., no permanent ego and no permanent individuality) and developed into a view of a great thusness (ichidai shinnyo) that subsumed both the bodhi mind and the Three Treasures.

　The Sanshu sokushinjōbutsu seii [“Correct Intentions for the Three Types of Attaining Living Buddhahood”] is a debate that considers which of the three types of Living Buddhahood expounded in a variant of the Sokushinjōbutsu-gi represents the correct understanding of Living Buddhahood. However, because all three types of Living Buddhahood are explained in this variant text, some have raised doubts about the significance of this debate.

　The debate on “which of the three types of Living Buddhahood is correct” cannot be found in the works of several masters such as Saisen, Shippan, Kakuban, or Dōhan. However, the debate on the question of “to which of the three types of Living Buddhahood does our own school’s specific version of Living Buddhahood correspond” can be found from around the time of Dōhan.

　Next, the problem of the relative merits of the types of Living Buddhahood in variants of the Sokushinjōbutsu-gi and in the two chapters and eight verses of the authentic version of the Sokushinjōbutsu-gi is taken up in the writing of the monk Raiyu, which is where we can find an opportunity leading to an awareness of the current problem.

　Thus, it is conceivable that the Sanshu sokushinjōbutsu seii began to be discussed around the time of Raiyu in the form of the emergence of a critical awareness of Buddhist schools’ ideas about their own specific types of Living Buddhahood.

　Although debates on the Shi moheyan lun continue to be staged at Mount Kōya (Nanzan) as part of memorial services till today, very little comprehensive academic research has been carried out on the subject. While Buddhist debates (rongi) distinguish Shingon doctrine from the doctrines of other Buddhist schools as well as the obligations of the priesthoods of the various sects and temples of Shingon esoteric Buddhism, based on catechisms, for example, they are also a type of learning system for learning details about the doctrine of one’s own school through these catechisms.

　The debate with which my paper is concerned, known as “hōjin-hōdo [Saṃbhogakāya and the Pure Land],” is one among the Shakuron saihō rongi jūjō [Ten Western Debates on the Shi moheyan lun] and addresses the question of whether the Pure Land of Amitabha is a hōjin-hōdo, that is, a Pure Land of “reward bodies” (saṃbhogakāya) or a keshin-kedo, that is, a transformation realm of transformation bodies. The theory of busshin-butsudo (“Buddha-body” [Buddhakāya] in the “Buddha-realm”) has already been discussed in Chinese Buddhist circles and in Japan, as well; the Jōdo school argues for hōshin-hōdo, while the Tendai school argues for keshin-kedo.

　Even at the Shingon school, both the old and new interpretations stipulate the body and environment of the Pure Land of Amitabha as hōjin-hōdo. However, it seems this may stem from a reliance on the Jōdo doctrine or the Shi moheyan lun itself, and it is also conceivable that this argument is a rebuttal against the Tendai school.

　Dosha-kaji is the esoteric ritual wherein the chanting of mantras empowers sands. In Japan, this ritual is widely performed by using the Kōmyō-mantra.

　In this paper, by referring to previous studies on rituals in India and China, I discuss Myōebō-Kōben, who propagated the practice of Dosha-kaji in Japan. Additionally, I consider Myōebō-Kōben’s understanding of the ritual and its methods as expressed in his writings. Results clearly revealed a unique understanding of the selection of sands, methods of the Dosha-kaji ritual, and ways for laypeople to have sands with them—all based on canonical literature. Myōebō-Kōben was also discovered to have employed the thoughts of Kūkai when explaining the essence of Dosha-kaji ritual.

　This study examines how Godai’in Annen’s interpretation of jisho (self-nature) sho of the Kongo Horokaku Issai Yuga Yugi Kyo Dai Shichihi Shosetsu (Sutra of All Yogas and Yogis of the Pavilion with the Vajra-Top Dai Shichihi Shosetsu) was transmitted orally and how in later years it was developed by the scholars of Tomitsu and Taimitsu, forms of esoteric Buddhism of the Shingon and Tendai sects, respectively. It was found that Annen himself did not attribute jinja-waku (illusions innumerable as particles of dust or sand) to jisho-sho and did not use the expression san-waku (three categories of illusion) in the interpretation of jisho-sho. However, Jitsuun, a student of Tomitsu adopted Annen’s doctrine in his own work without citing Annen and presented jisho-sho in relation to san-waku. Furthermore, Jitsuken and Michinori of Tomitsu followed Jitsuun’s interpretation and added the additional information that “Annen expressed it as kenji-waku (illusions of thoughts and desires) and mumyo-waku (illusions about the true nature of existence) of the san-waku.” While Jien maintained a limited interpretation of the gampon mumyo (fundamental darkness) in relation to jisho-sho, Chogo accepted Annen’s teachings but asserted that kenji-waku (illusions of thoughts and desires) and mumyo-waku (illusions about the true nature of existence) were san-waku. Chogo’s description, thus, is a result of the influence of Chuso of Taimitsu.

　The Shingon monk Jiun (1718–1804), who was active in the late Edo period, achieved prominence as a scholar of Siddam studies and worked toward the revival of the precepts. A prodigious scholar, he devoted himself to doctrinal matters, for instance, by advocating the correct dharma and vinaya as they were understood at the time of Shakyamuni’s life in this world, as well as using the Ten Good Precepts that Kūkai brought from Tang China as the essence of the precepts to preach the path of becoming a person for priest and layperson alike; Shintō was also a part of that project. Toward the end of his life, as he neared his seventies, he became particularly devoted to the study of Shintō classics such as the Kojiki and Nihon shoki.

　The generative (nōsashō) (wish-fulfilling) jewel directly conveyed by Master Huiguo to Kūkai (774–835) during the latter’s visit to Tang China was used in the Ritual of the Latter Seven Days (goshichinichi no mishiho) observed at Shingon-in temple in 834. As a result, esoteric incantations using the wish-fulfilling jewel, such as the Prayer for the Spiritual Protection of the State (chingo kokka shigan), the Peace of the Emperor (gyokutai annon), and the Prayer Service for the Fertility of the Five Cereals (gokoku hōjō no shigan hō-e) became more widespread. Moreover, after his visit to Tang China, Kūkai was commanded by Emperor Saga to copy the “Image of the Ten Treasures” (tokusa no kandakara-zu) at Ise Jingū and, in particular, to regard the longevity gems (ikutama) among these Shintō treasures as also being generative jewels.

　In this paper, based on the “Image of the Ten Treasures” transmitted in Unden Shintō from Jiun’s kikigaki and other works, I want to examine Jiun’s “Mandala of the Two Realms”-style interpretation, which melds Japan’s mythical deities with Taoism, the I Ching, Confucianism, and the yin–yang wuxing doctrine (in’yō gogyō-setsu), and to think about his views on the wish-fulfilling jewel toward the end of his life.

　Myoe-bo Koben (1173–1232) of the Toganosan Kosan-ji Temple is considered to have established a practical system based on esoteric thought that retained the Kegon doctrine in its center. In this paper, we consider Kishinron-Honsho-Choshuki and Kishinron Bekki Choshuki, which are verbatim records of interpretations of the Daijokishinron or Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana, written by disciples of Myoe, and examine how the interpretations of Shingon Esoteric Buddhism relate to them. These are only commentaries on Daijokishinron-giki and Bekki. The contents of the lectures delivered by Myoe and Kikai are reflected in the text and have been a subject of interest for some time as works that present the actual condition of how the Kegon doctrine was inherited by the Kosan-ji Temple. However, there are also mediations by risshi or isshiin Buddhist priests, who may be Shingon monks of Koyasan Temple; it is also possible to see references to the Shingon perspectives and the relation between Kegon and Shingon. It seems that Myoe attempted to combine Shingon and Kegon, and it is possible to understand the negotiations of the mutual influence of the lineage of thought by following movements among those involved in detail.

　This article examines how the Shi moheyan lun (Jp. Shakuron) was received by Kūkai and his circle. In the context of Shingon esoteric Buddhism, the Shi moheyan lun is positioned as a key classic, one that has been subjected to vigorous study from the aspect of doctrine. While there are certainly records of its transmission in teachings in the past, these tend to make very little mention of esoteric practice (jisō); in recent years, it would appear that this text has come to be recognized as a classic used exclusively for esoteric teaching (kyōsō). Furthermore, we can also confirm a research trend that is attempting to separate the Shi moheyan lun from Shingon esoteric Buddhism to discuss it in the same doctrinal terms. This study re-examines the understanding of Shi moheyan lun by Kūkai and later scholars. Furthermore, while deciphering the practical aspects such as the kind of “official seal” of the flow of the dharma (hōryū) in the context of esoteric practice, I emphasize that the Shi moheyan lun was intimately linked with both esoteric practice and esoteric teaching and occupied an important position even among the classics of the basis of Shingon esoteric Buddhism.

　In this paper, I discuss the Daishakudōi-ron, which constitutes an issue for discussing the “founder” in the context of Japanese esoteric Buddhism and considers the nature of the relation between Dainichi Nyorai (Mahāvairocana) and Shaka (Shakyamuni). This discourse constitutes a debate over whether Dainichi Nyorai and Shaka should be considered the same body or separate bodies. In the past, Tendai esotericism (Taimitsu) has considered them to be the same body, while Shingon esotericism (Tōmitsu) has argued that they should be considered separate bodies.

　After revisiting the descriptions of Tōmitsu scholars, however, it was found that a considerable number of views differed from the conventional wisdom that “Tōmitsu takes the separate bodies position.” In other words, only a small fraction of Tōmitsu scholars supported the separate-body position, while most scholars argued for the same-body position.

　Accordingly, this paper rejects the purportedly conventional view that “Tōmitsu supports the argument that Dainichi Nyorai and Shaka should be considered as separate bodies.”

　While Shōken, alongside Raiyu, is an important learned monk in the context of the doctrinal history of Shingi Shingon, very little research has been carried out concerning Shōken in comparison to Raiyu. Moreover, in the context of the study of the Shingon sectarian doctrine, Shōken remains situated as Raiyu’s doctrinal successor. Certainly, Shōken’s academic tradition carries on Raiyu’s teaching, but some areas are evident in which his interpretations differ from those of Raiyu, and some doctrine exists that is unique to Shōken. This paper takes up Shōken’s compilation of the Jishō seppō jūhachi-dan [Eighteen Sermons on Achieving Enlightenment Unaided], and in addition to considering the characteristic features of Shōken’s scholasticism, it also touches on the significance of Shōken in the history of the Shingi Shingon doctrine. Although Shōken’s scholasticism was fundamentally based on that of Raiyu, in several occasions, he advances his own views as well. Even so, the most distinctive characteristic is how he has managed to organize and summarize Raiyu’s complicated discussions in an easily comprehensible fashion. In such circumstances, Shōken organized, systematized, and added new interpretations to Raiyu’s teachings, which had been immature as doctrine, to bring them to completion. Retracing the history of Shingi Shingon doctrine in this regard has thus confirmed the significance of Shōken therein.

　This paper examines Tsun-shéng-i-kuei 尊勝儀軌, traditionally regarded as translated by Śubhakarasiṃha. However, the following problems exist with Tsun-shéng-i-kuei 尊勝儀軌 about formation. 1) Tsun-shéng-i-kuei 尊勝儀軌 is not recorded in K’ai-yuan-lu 開元録 and Chēn-yuan-lu 貞元録. 2) There is an article that cannot be considered a translation. 3) Tsun-shéng-i-kuei 尊勝儀軌 is not clear about which article was used.

　This paper proposes to clarify the third problem, focusing on Jīn gāng dǐng jìng 金剛頂経 by comparing Jīn gāng dǐng jìng 金剛頂経 and Tsun-shéng-i-kuei 尊勝儀軌. A conclusion was stated by describing Jīn gāng dǐng jìng 金剛頂経 as adopted by Tsun-shéng-i-kuei 尊勝儀軌

　This paper attempts to define the meaning of the term “Shingon-Mon (The Gate of Mantra)” as part of “Nyu-Shingon-Mon Ju-Shin (Going Through the Gate of Mantra and Settling on the Heart),” which is the title of the first chapter in “The Notes and Comments for the Vairocana Sutra.” In the first chapter, Shingon-Mon primarily explains the following three dogmatic concepts: “Tongaku-Jobtsu-Jinzū-Jo (a supernatural vehicle that carries passengers to enlightenment in a moment),” “Hotsu-Bodai-Shin (awakening the reality of living beings’ hearts by themselves),” and “Ku-Gan (the way of realizing that all things naturally lack their own ātman but exist only on causes and conditions).” Based on notes related to these concepts, the investigation was able to make a supposition about the theme.

　The notes proclaim that “Shingon-mon” is “Nyu-Maṇḍala-Gyobo-Giki (the tantra that teaches the ritual’s proper ways by which a master leads his apprentices to proper Shingon practice or even to the Buddha).” This primarily consists of “Sammitsu-Mon (a way of the esoteric Buddhist practice that consists of mudra, matra, and samādhi)” and other various factors (e.g., the way of making the altar also known as Maṇḍala), which leads any living being to enlightenment in a moment only if they follow and practice according to what the tantra says, or Ku-Gan, which is a kind of code such as “Jū-En-Jo-Ku (the way of avoiding a biased view of the reality of all things, consisting of 10 metaphors)” substantiated by the Buddha and proven by all of his realization. Furthermore, “Nyu-Shingon-Mon (practicing Shingon-mon)” means practicing according to the tantra with Ku-Gan.

　The purpose of this research was to use the reprint of “Rinjudaiziyousestu” by Zyogon (1639–1702) in Kyoto University’s holdings to check and compare its content with the death manners of another Shingon sect, thereby finding the features of “Rinjudaiziyousestu.”

　The first chapter details the paper’s overall purpose, i.e., exploring “Rinjudaiziyousestu,” written in 1693 and now is in Kyoto University’s holding.

　The second chapter contains the history of Zyogon, the founder of Yushima Reiunji and the Shinanjouzhi way. He was a member of and popularized the Shingon sect during the Edo period.

　The third chapter presents bibliographic information on this text, which combines “Rinjudaizhiyouinokoto” and “Jomasestu.”

　The fourth chapter states the history of the death manners of the Shingon sect. The text is the same age as Joku’s (1693–1775) “Joubutuzishin” and is considered valuable as historical material for the Shingon sect’s death manners during the Edo period.

　The fifth chapter explores the text’s 16-part structure. Specifically, it examines “Give the Daikongourindarani,” “Give the mantra of Fudo Myo O,” and “Attitude to adopt previous to one’s death manners.”

　After careful consideration, we were able to understand not only the original manners but also the death manners of the Shingon sect in “Rinjudaiziyousestu.”

　The Trisamayarājatantra-ṭīkā (Pan-20), a Sanskrit Buddhist text preserved at the National Archives of Nepal, is a palm-leaf manuscript consisting of 34 leaves. But since it also includes the Ḍākinīvajrapañjarapañjikā tattvaviṣadā and a ritual manual belonging to the Cakrasaṃvara cycle, the Trisamayarājatantra-ṭīkā itself covers only 14 leaves. It is presumably a commentary on the Trisamayavyūharāja-tantra (TVR), an early Tantric scripture included in the Tibetan canon. However, in parts it gives a word-for-word commentary, while other parts do not tally with the TVR over several chapters, and there is a possibility that the base texts of the TVR and this manuscript were different. In addition, in the course of analyzing its contents, some valuable quotations were discovered from texts of the middle phase of Tantric Buddhism of which the original Sanskrit texts have not yet been discovered, including the Vairocanābhisaṃbodhi-sūtra, the Jingangding yuga zhong lüechu niansong jing 金剛頂瑜伽中略出念誦經, and the “Mahāsamayayoga” of the Jingangding jing yuga shibahui zhigui 金剛頂經瑜伽十八會指歸. In particular, it was found that just under half of the original Sanskrit of the “Trisamaya” chapter of the Vairocanābhisaṃbodhi-sūtra can be recovered from this manuscript.

　The Luyipada school was the leading school of Cakrasaṃvaratantra, and the Saskya sect also preserved its traditions and transmitted them from India into Tibet. On reviewing the Luyipada-school-related literature transmitted by this sect, it was found that some items are included that are considered to be original interpretations for which no authority can be sought in Indo-Tibetan compilations or literature. One such work is entitled “The Three Kinds of Messenger.” It discusses the nature of mandalas and their contemplation using already established Indian rules that classify esteem into three types: that which stems from Shingon, that which stems from land, and that which is inherent. In this paper, while following the assertions of Sa skya paṇḍi ta Kun dgaḥ rgyal mtshan (Sakya Pandita Kunga Gyeltsen), whose main points are summarized briefly, I clarify the details of “The Three Kinds of Messenger” theory with a qualified teacher from the Saskya sect with additional reference to authorities such as Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen (Grags pa rgyal mtshan) and Sachen Kunga Nyingpo.

　As is well-known, Buddhism is concerned with solving the problem of human suffering; the fact that Buddhist theories hold a solution for this has been reaffirmed only recently. This is the recognition that human existence is a state of suffering. Therefore, as a matter of doctrine, the Buddha teaches that life is a series of afflictions. Fundamental countermeasures are also expounded in Tathāgatagarbha Thought (nyoraizō shisō) in Mahāyāna Buddhism. Moreover, modern society is also fraught with other difficulties, such as the fact that children cannot always be born even when they are wanted. These, too, I consider to be problems of the human mind. Herein is something that has been regarded as the eighth sense (alaya-vijnana – a consciousness forming the base of all human existence) by Western researchers. In other words, whereas the former studies the world of human consciousness as the world of what Freud called the world of the “unconscious” – the seventh sense (manas-vijnana – a defiled mental consciousness, which gives rise to the perception of self) – the latter also studies alaya-vijnana (deep consciousness). In other words, the world of suffering is a matter of the mind, and we perceive both the existence of suffering and the existence of comfort together as external stimuli from the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, faith, and wisdom (knowledge). Therefore, I consider the world of the human mind, based on the principles of Buddhism, in correspondence to the idea of the circle of life, focusing on reincarnation and the idea of the four stages of existence, namely birth, life, death, and limbo.

　Although there are numerous studies on Buddhism, there is limited research about Maldivien Buddhism, which lasted until 1153 AD; the reason for this remains unknown. In 2008, 2010, and 2013, our Tokyo team traveled to the Maldives to explore world religion. Maldivien Buddhism is important for the study of Buddhist evangelizing because it involves a simple model of Buddhist economy (capitalism). In 2012, extremists broke into the national museum in Malé, but, fortunately, we had photographed the museum’s exhibits in 2008. From now on, however, study of Maldivien Buddhism will require excavation of the islands. Hopefully someone would study the Maldivien Buddhism and unknown areas’ Buddhism. We’ll get certain results of Buddhism study.

　This paper presents a new critical edition and annotated Japanese translation of the section of the āveśa rituals which are prescribed in the Vajradhātumahāmaṇḍala chapter of the First kalpa (Mahāyānābhisamaya) of the Sarvatathāgatatattvasaṃgraha. The edition and translation are based upon the Sanskrit manuscript preserved in Kaiser Library, Kathmandu, and other related texts. In addition, this paper also presents new information about the Kaiser Library manuscript.

　The five precepts for lay practice that continue to be preached from the āgama or nikāya have, as time progresses, superseded the frame of applying only to lay people to be applied to priests as well and are expounded to both laypeople and priests alike. Descriptions of how the all-too-obvious premise that the five precepts had to do with lay practitioners have broken down in some cases have also been seen by later generations, and the transitions undergone by the five precepts within the long history of Buddhism are surprisingly far from simple. How might Kōbō Daishi have perceived the five precepts as they underwent such transitions? A strict and meticulous view of the precepts lies at the root of Daishi’s teachings.

　Daishi’s view of the precepts did not excise the various commandments such as those pertaining to hearing, self-enlightenment, and bodhisattvas but worked out the secret precepts of the samaya precepts (rules to be strictly observed before full ordination in the esoteric sects) while subsuming all others. However, in this article, I survey and discuss the nature of the position that these five precepts, which have been expounded since the beginning of Buddhism, occupy in Daishi’s teaching, from the āgama or nikāya to the scriptures and commentaries of esoteric Buddhism.

　In this paper, with the aim of investigating the doctrinal background of the Śrāvakabhūmi, I compared the accounts of aśubhabhāvanā with those in āgamas and abhidharma texts and in dhyāna sūtras, focusing especially on the following 4 topics: 36 kinds of impure body, 10 kinds of corpse, 4 types of graveyards, and internal-external contemplation.

　Consequently, it became clear that the Śrāvakabhūmi quotes the Smṛtyupasthānasūtra in the Madhyamikāgama, and when it includes detailed explanations and enumerates numbers and types, it uses phrases similar to those in the Samyuktāgama, Saṅgītiparyāya, Dharmaskandha, and Mahāvibhāṣā.

　As has been indicated, the framework of the fivefold contemplation, including aśubhabhāvanā, is based on dhyāna sūtras, but the contents are, such as the other four contemplations, dissimilar to those texts. Rather, the Śrāvakabhūmi takes up some sentences of āgamas and develops its own theories while reinforcing them with the same words and phrases as the early abhidharma texts.

　Much of esoteric Buddhist scripture positions itself as Mahāyāna. The word tantra, which generally refers to esoteric Buddhist scripture, has the sense of “connection” (Skt. Prabandha). Esoteric Buddhist scriptures are systematically arranged both as a whole and individually. The verbal concept of tantra includes later expressions that lead to classification of Buddhist Tantras.

　The Mahāvairocanābhisaṃbodhi-tantra also positions itself as Mahāyāna. The Buddhaguhya’s Commentary on the Vairocanābhisaṃbodhi-tantra posits two divisions of bodhisattvas in Mahāyāna, namely those principally concerned with the practice of perfection (pāramitā) and those principally concerned with mantra practice. The method of Mahāyāna’s mantra practice (mahāyānaṃ mantracaryānayaṃ) is positioned as the supreme teaching (yānavaraṃ). The three ascetic discourses of Srāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, and Mahāyāna are distributed according to the level of realization of emptiness. Compared to the elaborate catechisms of Japan’s Shingon school of esoteric Buddhism, Buddhaguhya suggested extremely simple definitions. The ultimate goal of Mahāyāna’s mantra practice is an emphasis on the dharma body, which is also the ultimate goal and ideological characteristic of esoteric Buddhism. The concept of the dharma body is also defined as the realization of the emptiness or unreality of all things (sarvadharma-śūnyatā). The Vairocanābhisaṃbodhi-tantra consistently advocates the philosophy of emptiness that is at the root of Mahāyāna Buddhism.

　The Dainichi-kyō expounds that the Hall of Ākāśagarbha in the Womb-Realm Mandala consists of the six bodhisattvas Ākāśagarbha, Gaganāmala, Gaganamati, Viśuddhamati, Cāritramati, and Sthiramati. However, in the “Mitsu’in-hon [Secret Seal Chapter]” and “Himitsu mandara-hon [Secret Mandala Chapter]” or when comparing Chinese and Tibetan translations, the flag system of the bodhisattvas differs. For this reason, in the Womb-Realm Four-Part Commentary (Taizō shibu giki, made up of the Setsudai giki, the Kōdai giki, the Genpō-ji giki, and the Seiryū-ji giki), to resolve this contradiction, three more bodhisattvas are added (Shutsugenchi, Renge’in, and Shurengesho) for a total of nine bodhisattvas.

　In this paper, while drawing on a comparison of the main text of the Dainichi-kyō and the Taizō shibu giki, with additional reference to the Taizō bonji shingon brought to Japan by Kōbō Daishi and iconographic materials such as the “Taizō zuzō [Drawings of the Womb-World Mandala]” and “Daihi taizō sanmaya mandara [Great Compassion Womb-World Symbol Mandala],” I sort out the inconsistencies between Shingon and the nine bodhisattvas seals in the materials and, based on the data, check on the status of the various taizō-hō transmitted to Japan and provide information to contribute to the practice of taizō-hō.

　The Shi moheyan lun, which is a commentary on the Daijō Kishinron (“The Awakening of Faith in Mahāyāna”; Ch. Dasheng qixin lun), refers to the Kishinron in both its title and its text as “moheyan lun” (i.e., “Treatise on Mahāyāna”) and demonstrates the Shi moheyan lun’s unique understanding of moheyan (i.e., “Mahāyāna”). To clarify this, I examine interpretations of the Shi moheyan lun by the priests Huiyuan, Wonhyo, Fazang, Tankuang, Daehyeon, Zongmi, and Zhenjie in relation to passages in the Kishinron in which the term “moheyan” is used. I found that commentaries other that the Shi moheyan lun show a common tendency to replace “moheyan” (Jp. makaen) with “da sheng” (Jp. daijō). However, the parts where the Shi moheyan lun uses the former term do so without any change. This is because moheyan [intelligence] is privileged over da sheng [dullness], and in moheyan, the scope has been expanded to include newly coined concepts of non-dual Mahāyāna and jūrokusen nippō. Therefore, this means that the Shi moheyan lun argues that the Kishinron explains a broader and more magnificent “moheyan” (i.e., “Mahāyāna”) than is encompassed by the term “da sheng” (Jp. daijō), which is why the work was entitled Shi moheyan lun rather than Shi dasheng qixin lun.

　First, in this study, a translator estimates the activity generation of Ye shes rdo rje, and from that translation, I estimate that, by the 8th century, Ye shes rdo rje had already played an active part, showing a fourfold tantra grouping framework at an early stage. Presumably, Ye shes rdo rje wrote the long-existing group of ritual rules called “the 108 method,” and it is believed that Ye shes rdo rje’s writing had authority.

　Furthermore, the thought that closely resembled the Buddhaguhya is evident in the mention of the tantra grouping framework and “the six gods.” Judging from a written postscript, Ye shes rdo rje is thought to have played a dynamic part before the Buddhaguhya and might have affected the thought of the following ages. In future research, I intend to trace Ye shes rdo rje’s influence sequentially.

　The Da cheng zhong guan shi lun 大乗中観釈論 (DZL) is a commentary on the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK) written by Sthiramatim, a scholar of the Yogācāra School. The DZL is considered a significant text because it is a commentary interpreted by Sthiramati, who is counted as one of the eight great annotators of the MMK by the Prajñāpradīpaṭīkā and the Akutobhayā (ABh). However, the DZL is preserved only in Chinese translation, completed by Wei jing 惟淨 and Fa hu 法護, and preceding studies on it are insufficient because of the translation’s inadequacy. Nonetheless, several peculiar similarities are found between the DZL and other commentaries. Therefore in this paper, I shall discuss such similarities by comparing each of the commentaries.

　In this paper, I investigated the nature of the esteem accorded to the Vajrābhiṣekamaṇḍala (“Diamond Initiation Mandala”; Jp. Kongō kanjō mandara) in the Vajrapāṇyabhiṣekatantra (VPA) and to the World-Honored One Great Wheel (seson daitenrin) depicted in the center of the composition by comparing it with the Dainichi-kyō (Skt. Mahāvairocana Sūtra) and examining the contents of the scriptures. The face bears a striking similarity to that of the World-Honored One Vairocana in the Dainichi-kyō “Tenjirin mandara gyōhon,” and following this point of view, the World-Honored One Great Wheel could be said to be Vairocana. When we focus on the positioning of World-Honored One Great Wheel in the context of the VPA, he can be read as a being accorded the highest esteem in all respects, and in view of this positioning as well, it seems that we can regard the World-Honored One Great Wheel as Vairocana. Finally, I examined the nature of the Wheel King (tenrinsha). In the VPA, the secret doctrine and vajra scepter are transmitted from master to disciple as from Shaka to Samantabhadra (Jp. Fugen) to Mañjuśrī (Jp. Monju). This can then be interchanged with Vairocana to Vajrapani to Myōsenkongō. In the Vajrābhiṣekamaṇḍala, Samantabhadra and Mañjuśrī are positioned above and below the World-Honored One Great Wheel, and in the composition, Vajrapani and Myōsenkongō are arranged on his right and left. Thus, when we compare the transmission of doctrine and vajra scepter as well as the arrangement of the mandala, we could say that the World-Honored One Great Wheel is Vairocana.