Tiantai Zhiyi’s most complete philosophy of the threefold truth and threefold contemplation is considered to have been formed during the period of the Three Major Treatises 三大部 （Mohe zhiguan 摩訶止觀 [T 1911], Fahua xianyi 法華玄義 [T 1716] and Fahua wenju 法華文句 [T 1718]; 585-594） after his descent from Mount Tiantai. However, Guanding’s 灌頂 Guanxin lunshu 観心論疏 （T 1921）, which is a commentary on Zhiyi’s Guanxin lun 観心論 （T 1920）, indicates that different forms of the threefold truth and threefold contemplation were practiced during the period of the Three Major Treatises. This all occurred after Zhiyi exposed the Three Major Treatises during the last years of his life （595-597）. Therefore, through a comparative study of the threefold contemplation in the Guanxin lunshu and the Sanguanyi 三観義, which were written at about the same time, this essay will clarify that the current threefold truth and threefold contemplation of the Three Major Treatises are based on the thought of Zhiyi in his final years.
The Four Kinds of Four Noble Truths 四種四諦 in Zhiyi’s works is always explained in relation to the Fourfold Doctrine of Conversion 化法四教, a special classification of teachings by Zhiyi. It is not only applied to each element in the Fourfold Doctrine of Conversion, but the meaning of the elements also differs based on the sūtra that he is quoted. This paper aims to investigate the meaning of Buddha-nature and tathāgatagarbha from the perspective of the Four Kinds of Four Nobles Truth.
In his Wangsheng lunzhu 往生論註, Tanluan 曇鸞 （476-542） mentions two categories of those who wish to be born in Amida’s Pure Land: that of birth in the uppermost rank （Jpn. jōbonshō 上品生）, and birth in the lowest grade of the lowest rank （Jpn. gebon geshō 下品下生）.
Among these, Tanluan discusses in detail the logic whereby birth in the lowest grade of the lowest rank is possible. This demonstrates the strong interest that Tanluan had in his birth.
However, the author believes that it is premature to conclude that Tanluan’s only purpose was to argue about birth in the lowest grade of the lowest rank for the following reasons:
1. The reference to birth in the lowest grade of the lowest rank in the Wangsheng lunzhu is only a part of the whole, and most of the Wangsheng lunzhu is a commentary on the Five Gates of Mindfulness 五念門, which is the practice of birth in the uppermost rank.
2. Tanluan recommends practicing the Five Gates of Mindfulness in the commentary section.
Therefore, by examining how birth in the uppermost rank is mentioned in the Wangsheng lunzhu, I aim to clarify in this study that Tanluan emphasized not only birth in the lowest grade of the lowest rank but also birth in the uppermost rank.
Daochuo 道綽, a monk of Pure Land affiliations in the Sui~Tang era, in his Anle ji 安楽集, referred to the ekavyūhasamādhi 一行三昧 from the Saptaśatikā Prajnāpāramitā as supporting evidence for his discussion of the Buddha mindfulness samādhi 念仏三昧 of the Guan Wuliangshou jing. He interpreted the ekavyūhasamādhi as one of the practices for birth in the Pure Land.
In contrast, in the same period Daoxin 道信, known as 4th preceptor of the Chan lineage, aimed to understand the dharmadhātu 法界 by practicing the ekavyūhasamādhi as a Chan technique. Between Daochuo and Daoxin there is thus a difference of interpretation of ekavyūhasamādhi.
Finally, to organize the descriptions of Daochuo and Daoxin, there is a possibility that Pure Land and Chan monks disputed with each other in the early 7th century.
In the literature in Chinese Buddhism from the Eastern Jin dynasty 東晋 until the Northern and Southern dynasties period, an important question was why purity and impurity could co-exist in Buddha Lands. In this paper, I consider the coexistence of both purity and impurity in Buddha Lands in Jizang’s 吉蔵 Jingming xuanlun 浄名玄論. In this late work, various Pure Land theories preached in many sūtras are organized. The doctrine was theorized based on the discussion in his early work Fahua xuanlun 法華玄論 and his middle work Huayan youyi 華厳遊意. In the background lies his experience over many years in annotating various Mahāyāna sūtras, such as the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra, Buddhāvataṃsakasūtra, and Vimalakīrtinirdeśa. Thus, his discussion of the coexistence of purity and impurity in Buddha Lands consists of three main works: Fahua xuanlun, Huayan youyi and Jingming xuanlun.
What kind of yoga practice did Xuanzang 玄奘 introduce to China? The clue to solving this question can be found in Chapter V “Discrimination of Yoga” 分別瑜伽品 of the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra 解深密經 translated by Xuanzang. This is because it describes the specific details of the “yoga practice based on Yogācāra thought” developed by the Indian Yogācāra. Its characteristics are as follows.
1. Chapter V says: The bodhisattva practices śamatha 止 and vipaśyanā 観 based on the Dharma （the teaching of Buddha expressed in words）, and understands that the image is a manifestation of his own mind, and then realizes the true nature （tathatā） of consciousness only.
2. It is said the object of vipaśyanā is the image （the teaching of Buddha expressed in words） and the object of śamatha is the mind that recognizes the image. By practicing śamatha and vipaśyanā together, the bodhisattva realizes the true nature （tathatā） of consciousness-only.
3. The “yogic experience” that the image （the teaching of Buddha expressed in words） will disappear but the teaching of Buddha will not disappear is explained by the “three natures 三性” ―that parikalpita will disappear but paratantra and pariniṣpanna will not disappear.
Thus, Chapter V of the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra implies that this new practice of śamatha and vipaśyanā is associated with Yogācāra thought. It is quite possible that this “yoga practice based on Yogācāra thought,” which was transmitted by Xuanzang, might have been practiced by the Chinese Yogācāra school.
The central status of the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya in East Asian Buddhism has been confirmed and elevated by Daoxuan’s 道宣 （596-667） seminal commentaries, represented by the Sifenlü shanfan buque xingshichao 四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔. It is no exaggeration to say that Daoxuan’s interpretation based on the translated Vinaya canon marks a watershed in the theorization and systemization of the Vinaya teaching. However, recent studies by Wang Lei point out that Vinaya commentaries during the Six Dynasties already contained key conceptual frameworks and original theories which are oftentimes attributed to Daoxuan. By analyzing the Sibulü bing lun yaoyongchao 四部律幷論要用抄, a commentary dated to around the sixth century preserved in the Dunhuang manuscript collections, this paper investigates the essential connection between early Vinaya thinking in its formative phase and Daoxuan’s commentaries. Regardless of Daoxuan’s own relatively negative evaluation of his predecessors, his overall vision of the Vinaya canon and exegetical principal have been shaped by previous works, including the compromising tendency to harmonize the distinction between the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna position, the handling of internal conflicts between different Vinaya texts, and the recognition of the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya’s unique quality as close to the Mahāyāna position. To advance the understanding of East Asian Buddhist monasticism, this paper calls for due attention to Dunhuang Vinaya commentaries and reevaluation of their continued influence on later generations.
Duli Xingyi 独立性易 （1596-1672, Dokuryū Shōeki, better known perhaps as Ōbaku Dokuryū） went to Japan during the transition between the Ming and Qing dynasties and became a monk. He has been, based on this, regarded as a typical Buddhist according to the existing scholarship. In a series of studies by Takai Kyōko 高井恭子, Duli Xingyi is also thought of as a thinker of the Syncretism of the Three Religions （三教一致）. In the present article, the author investigates the correspondence between Duli Xingyi and Zhu Shunshui 朱舜水 （also known as Zhu Zhiyu 朱之瑜; 1600-1682） stored in the Yanagawa Kobunshokan 柳川古文書館, and explores Zhu Shunshui’s reply to the letter which expresses Duli Xingyi’s opinion about the Syncretism of the Three Religions. The main content of this letter is Zhu Shunshui’s refutation of several arguments of Duli Xingyi. Therefore, this paper first investigates previous studies that regard Duli Xingyi as a thinker of Syncretism of the Three Religions. Further, based on a philological study of Zhu Shunshui’s reply, this paper determines Duli Xingyi’s propositions from Zhu Shunshui’s letter, so as to clarify Duli Xingyi’s criticism about the theory of the Syncretism of the Three Religions.
This paper focuses on the debates （rongi 論義） in the E’nichi kokōshō 恵日古光鈔 kept in the Tōdai-ji library, related to the Da banniepan jing shu 大般涅槃経疏 compiled by Jizang 吉蔵. The E’nichi kokōshō is assumed to have been compiled and transcribed by Shōshu 聖守 （1215-1287?）, a monk of the Sanron 三論 school. The purposes of this study are to: （1） extract a number of surviving fragments of the lost Da banniepan jing shu that are quoted in the E’nichi Koko kokōshō, and （2） decipher those surviving fragments to determine what topics the Sanron school debated. The study reveals that there are 59 quotations from the Da banniepan jing shu, 34 of which are surviving fragments. They also indicate that some of the quotations from the debates （rongi） were also shared in the Tendai school.
In Enchin’s 円珍 Hokkeron-ki 法華論記, an annotated edition of Vasubandhu’s 世親 Fahua lun 法華論, the text of the latter is quoted verbatim with annotations.
Two Chinese translations of the Fahua lun from the 6th century exist, one by Bodhiruci 菩提流支 and another by Ratnamati 勒那摩提, and it is thought that the version of the Fahua lun used in the Hokkeron-ki was one of these. There is still no consensus on the question of which translation was used by Enchin.
In this paper, we have comprehensively collated and summarized previous research on the version of the Fahua lun quoted in the Hokkeron-ki. The results of our research have enabled us to confirm that opinion is divided among scholars on this issue, and it is clear that it remains an unresolved research question. We discovered that the Fahua lun extracted from the text of the Hokkeron-ki has a different format from that quoted by Jizang 吉蔵 in his Fahua lunshu 法華論疏, and has differing characteristics from other extant versions of the text.
From the investigations conducted for this paper, it was not possible to determine the version of the text used by Enchin at this time, due to the fact that the Fahua lun quoted in the Hokkeron-ki at times corresponds only to Bodhiruci’s translation, and at times only to Ratnamati’s. However, we feel that there is significant value to be had in utilizing the distinctive text of the Fahua lun quoted in the Hokkeron-ki （as an early work created in the middle of the 9th century） for comparison with other texts in the bibliographical study of the Fahua lun.
This paper examines the citations from Enchin’s 円珍 （814-891） commentary Kan fugen bosatsu gyōbōgyō-ki 観普賢菩薩行法経記 and the influence of the Hongi 本記 on the text. First, the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra 妙法蓮華経 and texts of the Tiantai school 天台宗 were widely cited. In addition, various citations of texts of the Huayan school 華厳宗, the Lü school 律宗, and Daoye’s 道液 commentaries are found. All of them were often quoted in interpreting the meaning of words. In addition, there was little criticism of other schools. Finally, the quoted passages from the Hongi, which is considered a commentary on the Guan puxian pusa xingfa jing 観普賢菩薩行法経, are discussed. In one example, it was confirmed that the interpretation is based on the theory of the Hongi and is interpreted by Tiantai texts such as Mohe Zhiguan 摩訶止観. Therefore, The Kan fugen bosatsu gyōbōgyō-ki was created concerning the Hongi.
Research on the Kangakue 勧学会 has focused on middle-class aristocratic bureaucrats, but work on the Buddhist monks who participated in the Kangakue is scarce. It was young Buddhist monks from Hieizan who participated in the Kangakue. The most authoritative teacher of these young monks was Ensho 延昌, the head of the Tendai order. Ensho gathered the young monks in his Kangakudo 勧学堂 hall and held a ritual. These monks joined the Kangakue.
This paper considers how the quintessential term dhāraṇī was received in Pure Land Buddhism in Japan.
In Pure Land Buddhism, a doctrine which promotes the wish to be reborn in the Pure Land of Amitābha Buddha, dhāraṇī are not included in the original vow of the bodhisattva who became Amitābha. From where, then, did the dhāraṇī now used in Pure Land temples come from?
Many of the Jōdo tenets currently used have their origin in Tendai Esoteric Buddhism （Taimitsu）, as is evident from the Genji Monogatari, and a number of Buddhist texts.
From the middle of the Heian period onwards, there was a cross-over between the popular penetration of Pure Land Buddhism among common people and the acceptance of dhāraṇī by Hōnen.
A plaque preserved in the Byōdōin has written on it in a clockwise manner two dhāraṇī of Amida Buddha in Sanskrit script, and the associated ritual is connected to the rituals of visualization drawn from the tradition of Enchin.
It is said that Hōnen 法然 （1133-1212） became a disciple of Eikū 叡空 （?-1179） in the sixth year of Kyūan 久安 （1150） at the age of 18, a relationship that lasted for 29 years until Eikū’s death in the third year of Jishō 治承 （1179）. It is well known that during these 29 years of their master-disciple relationship, the two often discussed the significance of Kanshō 観称 in association with the action of attaining rebirth Ōjō no go 往生の業.
In this paper, the author aims to clarify when this discussion emerged between Eikū and Hōnen. Having read the Guanjing shu 観経疏 of Shandao 善導 （613-681） eight times, Hōnen had perceived the idea of “Ikkō senju ni kisu 一向専修に帰す,” in which he realized that Ōjō no go is nothing other than the practice of shōmyō 称名, the recitation of the name of Amitābha. The author concludes that their discussion about Kanshō emerged sometime after the fifth year of Jōan 承安 （1175）.
In Chapter IV of the Ketsujō ōjō shū 決定往生集, Chingai 珍海 lists two causes （種子 bīja） for determining jōdo ōjō or rebirth in the Pure Land, namely chūdō busshō 中道仏性 and shukuzen 宿善. Concerning the first, it is said that deliverance is possible by means of shōin 正因, true causes, which is chūdō busshō based on Sanron 三論 doctrine, and en 縁, causal conditions, such as listening to sūtras and giving rise to the aspiration to awakening （bodhicitta）. It’s also stated that it is possible to obtain rebirth in the Pure Land because of this theory of attaining Buddhahood. I think that what is described here as shōin refers to the buddha-nature of direct cause 正因仏性 explained by Jizang 吉蔵, and that en refers to the buddha-nature of indirect causes 縁因仏性, likewise explained by him. However, the simple description in the Ketsujō ōjō shū does not give a deep understanding of these relationships.
Therefore, through careful reading of the Sanron gensho mongiyō 三論玄疏文義要 and Sanron myōkyōshō 三論名教抄, which were also written by Chingai, I would like to consider its significance in rebirth in the Pure Land, clarifing the relationship between chūdō busshō and direct and indirect causes.
According to my survey, no study has yet to examine Kakunyo’s citations of the Kyōgyoshinshō in light of the overall trend of citations of Buddhist scriptures in Kakunyo’s works. In this study, first, I make a comprehensive survey of the numerous sūtras and commentaries cited in Kakunyo’s writings, classify them and examine the overall tendency of how they are cited. The core of the Buddhist scriptures cited in Kakunyo’s works consists of the Kyōgyōshinshō along with the Larger Sukhāvativyūha sūtra and Shandao’s writings. Kakunyo, who compiled his works in response to the requests of his disciples and sometimes dictated his words to his followers, quoted, read, and made comments on the Japanese and Chinese scriptural passages. Since Kakunyo’s purpose for writing shifted between biographical texts and doctrinal commentaries, the trend of his citations from the scripures changes depending on the type of writing. However, he was consistent in that his writings were based on citations from the Larger Sukhāvativyūha sūtra, Shandao’s Wangsheng lizan, and Shinran’s Kyōgōshinshō. This can be understood to mean that he made an effort to reposition Shinran’s Pure Land thought and his Kyōgōshinshō properly in the history of the development of Pure Land Buddhism.
This paper clarifies the two aspects of Kakunyo’s 覚如 idea of the “utterance of the nembutsu as the expression of gratitude 称名報恩”: a contrast between shinjin 信心 and nembutsu 称名, and a contrast between self-effort and Amida’s power. The former term is used for what is not the cause for Birth in Amida’s Pure Land, and the latter is used to distinguish between self-effort and Amida’s power. This paper points out that the latter, Amida’s power, is the important meaning of gratitude in Kakunyo’s writing.
The theory of the good teacher （zenchishiki 善知識） in the writings of Zonkaku （1290-1373） varies depending on when he wrote the texts. However, this fact has been overlooked in previous studies of Zonkaku’s thought, which have assumed that Zonkaku simply denied the idea of the spiritual power of a human master. In this paper, I examine Zonkaku’s writings in order to demonstrate how his thinking changed over time. The paper concludes that Zonkaku did not totally deny the idea of the good teacher as the enhanced spiritual status of a human master. In Zonkaku’s writings, we find a transformation in his understanding of the theory of the good teacher.
Kaneko Daiei 金子大栄 （1881-1976）, a Shin Buddhist priest and scholar of the Huayan sūtra 華厳経, presented innovative views on the samantabhadracaryā, which he saw as the core teaching of the Huayan sūtra. This paper examines his ideas on the ultimate embodiment of the samantabhadracaryā, which he discussed through his analyses of the story of the young practitioner Sudhana’s pilgrimage with various mentors （kalyāṇamitra）, described in the Huayan sūtra.
In his book, Various Issues in Buddhism （Bukkyō no shomondai 仏教の諸問題, 1934）, Kaneko discussed the completion of the samantabhadracaryā with a focus on female mentors, centered on nine goddesses, the Buddha’s former consort Gopā, and the Buddha’s mother Māyā. Kaneko, agreeing with the Chinese Huayan school patriarch Fazang 法蔵 （643-712）, regarded these female mentors as symbolizing compassion, thereby interpreting Sudhana’s pilgrimage as a journey to ultimately embody compassion. Kaneko emphasized the significance of the distant memories of the past lives of practice that the goddesses recount to Sudhana, and argued that they take us back to “the fond memories” of “the homeland of the soul.” This resonates with Kaneko’s view on “the unseen homeland of the soul,” a key concept in his controversial book, TheIdea of the Pure Land （Jōdo no kannen 浄土の観念, 1925）. This paper argues that “the homeland of the soul” can be interpreted as the original authentic state of our inner selves equal to the Buddha’s awakening which, although stained by worldly desires at present, is a state to which we yearn to return.
Śākyamuni, Zhiyi, Saichō and Nichiren are described as the “four teachers of the three countries,” Sangoku shishi 三国四師, in Nichiren’s Kenbutsu mirai-ki 顕仏未来記. This usage indicates that Nichiren understood himself to be an orthodox monk. What is the ground of his self-awareness? This paper aims to analyze the meaning of Sangoku shishi in Nichiren’s historical view.
The Rissho ankoku ron was written by Nichiren in the form of questions and answers between a traveler and a master, and there are two extant editions, known as the “abridged” and “expanded” editions. In the abridged version, 31 scriptures are cited （1 by the traveler and 30 by the master）, while in the expanded version, 56 scriptures are cited （5 by the traveler and 51 by the master）, a significant increase. The “expanded” rather than the “abridged” version is evidence that Nichiren’s faith in the Lotus Sūtra was strengthened and that he harshly denounced those who slandered and defamed the Lotus Sūtra. This is proof that Nichiren’s faith in the Lotus Sūtra had become even stronger.
In the Kanjin-honzon-shō, when the appearance of the honzon 本尊 （the principle image） is presented, the image of the Buddha entrusting the Lotus Sūtra to the bodhisattvas risen from the earth （jiyu 地涌） is referred to as the core of the image. In order to explain this appearance in detail, Nichiren explains it in terms of gojusandan 五重三段 （three sections for the preaching the life of the Buddha, three sections for the ten scrolls, three sections for the shaku-mon 迹門, three sections for the hon-mon 本門, and three sections for the hon-pō 本法）.
The significance of the gojusandan is that it reveals the three-stage portion of the hon-pō from among all the sūtras as the central portion of the sūtra 正宗分. In other words, the image of salvation in the Latter Days of the Law, to which the teaching of the Lotus Sūtra is entrusted, is the very image of the honzon that actively shows such salvation.
In 1931, Yamakawa Chiō 山川智応 （1879-1956） concluded that the original form of the kaō 花押 written by Nichiren 日蓮 was Siddham Sanskrit. About 90 years later, the idea of Yamakawa has become the established theory.
In this paper, I reject the preconceived notion that the kaō written by Nichiren is Siddham Sanskrit, and consider it from a different angle. That is, I look hard at the handwriting of the signature and the kaō of the Mandara-honzon written by Nichiren, and the kaō by Nichiren’s disciples and third generation followerss.
As a conclusion, I find that the kaō written by Nichiren may be based on a part of his name, namely the ren 蓮 of Nichiren, His method of writing may have been inherited by his disciples and third generation followers.
There are many unknown points about the date of completion of the Zaija kōshoshū 摧邪興正集, and the identity of its compiler Jitsue 実恵.
Jitsue says: Teachings of the Pure Land are not the cause of hell, they are the domain of the roots of good of the Mahāyāna. They are the country of the pure purity of the One Vehicle. To chant the name of Amitābha Buddha is a practice of the great wisdom of the Mahāyāna. They are the domain of the Ultimate One Vehicle.
The assertions of the Zaija kōshoshū are largely based on the doctrines of Shandao 善導.
Keizan Jōkin 瑩山紹瑾 laid the foundation for the development of the Sōto sect, establishing its rules in the Keizan Shingi 瑩山清規, which stipulates that the Sōdōki 僧堂記 was to be recited every morning. While the contents of the Sōdōki were unknown, I was able to find a surviving copy at the Jikōki 慈廣寺 temple. The text contains the precepts Dōgen 道元 received from Rujing 如浄. Some aspects are unclear as this is the only instance of these precepts being discovered; they state that monks should live in the mountains and valleys without getting closer to the king and ministers. However, in the late Middle Ages, the Sōto sect became more widespread throughout society and was approved by the imperial court. Feudal lords developed fields on the plains and built temples there; thus, the mountain-based existence stipulated in the precepts no longer fit the reality of the Sōto sect. This apparently resulted in precepts such as these no longer being recited. The daily recitation of other texts with Dōgen’s words, such as the Fukan Zazengi 普勧坐禅儀, continues to this day.
This paper examines the bibliography of the three versions of the Nichiyo shingishō 日用清規抄（The Records of Lectures by Shōun Seisan 笑雲清三） and clarifies the characteristics and relationships among them. These three books are, respectively, a manuscript in the Jingu Bunko 神宮文庫, a manuscript in the Imazu Bunko 今津文庫 of the Hanazono University Library, and a published book from the Edo period. The manuscript in the Jingu Bunko is the oldest, and was recorded by a participant in Seisan’s lecture on the Nichiyo shingi. The Imazu Bunko collection is a record of lectures given by a monk named Tanpaku Kōryō 淡泊光凉, who referred to the record of Seisan’s lectures. The Edo version is said to be the lecture transcripts of a monk named Betsuzan 別山, but the contents were published as a reorganized version of the Imazu Bunko version, and there are few differences in substance between it and the Imazu Bunko version.
This paper aims to reconsider Kanro Eisen’s 甘露英泉 philosophical position on the conflict that happened in Edo 江戸 period over the Zen Monastic Precepts, and the validity of the Sixteen Article Precepts 十六条戒 advocated by Dōgen 道元 based on the content analysis in his book Shira kozuisho 尸羅敲髄章.
During the Edo period, the Chan Monastic Precepts of the Ming dynasty flowed into Japan. Since the precepts of the Ming Dynasty had descended from the Dharmaguptaka-vinaya 四分律, it had far more precepts than the Sixteen Article Precepts.
Thereafter, many Sōtō 曹洞宗 monks were affected by and devoted themselves to Chinese Chan precepts. It also resulted in confusion over the rituals for the reception of the precepts.
Eisen worked hard to rectify the disorder in the Sōtō sect. He severely criticized the Chan precepts, which brought confusion to the monks who participated in the Ming monastic rituals for the reception of the precepts, and to the Sōtō sect monks who were influenced by the Chinese monastic precepts.
Eisen claimed that the Sixteen Article Precepts were the traditional precepts handed down from Śakyamuni to the Sōtō sect. Also he believed Eisai’s rituals for the reception of the precepts were the origin of the Zen Precepts based on the theory of “Propagation of Zen for the Protection of the Country” （kōzengokoku 興禅護国）.
I have earlier made clear that the visualized principal image of Cintāmaṇi in the visualization protocol of the Ippokai soriya-hō 一法界法 （Secrets of Rishukyō-bō 理趣経法）, was Mikan hōju 密観宝珠, which attracted attention in research on medieval hōju and was regarded as the principal image of the Nyoirin-Kannonhō 如意輪観音法.
Furthermore, from the standpoint of understanding that the Rishukyō-bō is the Hōju-hō 宝珠法, it was found that there was a case of secretly reading the Rishu-kyō （Adhyardhaśatikā prajñāpāramitā） during the Goshichinichi no mishi-hō 後七日御修法.
As this principal image had the character of being a symbol of Mahāvairocana of the non-duality of the Vajradhātu and Garbhadhātu, it was later adopted as the central object of worship when Kōshin 弘真 established the Sanzon Gōgyō-hō 三尊合行法.
The Sanzon Gōgyō-hō is even said to be among the achievements of Cintāmaṇi worship, and the shape of the Cintāmaṇi, which was established as the principal image of the Ippokai soriya-hō and likely influenced the Sanzon Gōgyō-hō, is pointed out.
Therefore, I think that the existence of the Rishukyō-bō as a Hōju-hō called Ippokai soriya-hō can be added as a topic of Cintāmaṇi worship.
After the arrival of Buddhism, shuzen 修善 （“cultivating good acts”） was encouraged in Japan and its merits were preached. In the Rikkokushi 六国史, compiled from the late eighth to the early tenth century, shuzen meant the reading of sūtras, making donations, enabling persons to take the tonsure, and so on. Also in the same text shuzen for the elimination of misfortune was sometimes combined with repentance for transgressions. However, in Fujiwara no Tadahira’s 藤原忠平 diary, Teishinkōki 貞信公記, it is not clear what Buddhist activities were conducted as shuzen, and some entries indicate that shuhō 修法 （esoteric Buddhist rituals） were considered as such. In contrast to the case in the Rikkokushi, I did not find any Teishinkōki entries indicating that repentance for transgressions was carried out as part of a set before or after shuzen. Moreover, there is an entry in the Teishinkōki about separately engaging in sūtra reading at the same time as shuzen. From this entry, we can infer that most of the shuzen in the Teishinkōki refer to shuhō, as is the case in Fujiwara no Michinaga’s 藤原道長 Midō kanpakuki 御堂関白記, rather than “Buddhist good acts” such as the reading of sūtras found in the Rikkokushi.
A ganmon 願文 is a vow made to the Buddha expressing one’s aspiration for enlightenment. This paper takes the ganmon written by Prince Kaneakira 兼明親王 and discusses how he tried to realize the idea of altruism based on the Lotus Sūtra 法華経.
This paper discusses the relationship between Benzaiten 弁才天, the accompanying fifteen attendants （Jugo-Dōji 十五童子）, and Tokuzen-Daiō 徳善大王 in Jisha-Engi 寺社縁起 （origin stories of temples and shrines）.
Comparison shows that the Engi of Minoo 箕面 have influenced various regions, but each tradition differs. In Tenkawa 天川, it is thought that the Minoo beliefs were transmitted when there were tales of evil dragon extermination, and Tokuzen-Daiō and Benzaiten were considered a couple, but Ryūju-bosatsu 龍樹菩薩 （Nāgārjuna） did not appear. At Mt. Sefuri 背振山, it is believed there were myths about the search for a child, and the Minoo beliefs gave rise to the parent-child relationship between Tokuzen-Daiō and the fifteen attendants and that Ryūju-bosatsu appeared. In Enoshima 江島, Tokuzen-Daiō and Ryūju-bosatsu are only mentioned by name and positioned as Benzaiten’s attendants.
In addition, the origin stories of Tenkawa and Mt. Sefuri （Enoshima is the exception） begin with the story of the gods and Buddha, whereas the origin story of Minoo begins with En-no-Gyōja’s 役行者 encounter with them. This difference may be related to whether or not the fifteen attendants and Tokuzen-Daiō were given the role of Benzaiten’s family members.
It is believed that texts such as the Keiran-shuyō-shū 渓嵐拾葉集 played a certain role by collecting and re-distributing various regions’ legends.
This paper is a report and consideration of research on the book Muyuuge 無憂華 written by Kujō Takeko 九條武子 （1887-1928）, a prominent female Buddhist who was active from the Taishō to the early Shōwa period. This fact notwithstanding, her famous work Muyuuge has not been studied so far, and basic information is missing. Investigation reveals that the Muyuuge serialized in newspapers was not completely reprinted in the book Muyuge. In addition, the content was basically Buddhist, and consequently after the war, the binding was completely different. In the Muyuge, Kujō does not assert her own faith, but expresses the faith of her heart through her favorite sentences, waka poems, lyrics, calligraphy, and photographs. A study suggests that Okamoto Kanoko 岡本かの子 （1889-1939） succeeded Kujō in this fusion of culture and religion, and it is necessary to examine whether the two are directly related.
Naka Kansuke 中勘助 （1885-1965） wrote war poetry at the beginning of the second Sino-Japanese War （1937-1945）. It depicts the exploits and honorable deaths in battle of Japanese soldiers. At the same time, he wrote the Tori-no-Monogatari 鳥の物語 which adopts elements from the Bible, Buddhist legends, and histories of famous temples and shrines, and describes moral themes. Therefore contradictions arise over the creative intent of his works.
In order to clarify these contradictions, this paper clarifies the method and theme of Naka Kansuke’s three Buddhist children’s poems of Jātaka origin, and discusses them together with one Buddhist children’s story from Tori no Monogatari written at the same time.
The plots of the stories in the poems have been simplified and abbreviated for children, relying not only on the original Jātaka but also on the Konjaku Monogatari shū and the Uji shui shū. The themes of the three Buddhist nursery rhyme poems and one Buddhist fairy tale discussed in this paper are the compassion and renunciation of animals in the face of human folly caught up in greed. The war poems were inspired by the war, the height of human folly, and the Buddhist children’s poems and Buddhist children’s stories were inspired by the war, the height of human folly, and were written at the same time. Naka Kansuke’s reliance on the Jātaka and his use of children’s literature and folktales made it possible to criticize people and human society during and immediately after the war.
The foremost characteristic of Japanese Buddhism is that it has established its identity in Japanese society based on a distinction of schools. Buddhist studies in Japan have largely been indifferent to this peculiarity, taking the characteristic to be applicable to Buddhism in general. This has led to the adoption by Japanese researchers of a rigidly standardized methodology in discussing Buddhism, even applying the same approaches to studies of Buddhism outside of Japan. For researches in this field to truly develop, implementation of fieldwork free from such biased traits and the choice of different paradigms suited to the subject matter are indispensable. This paper further points out that Buddhist studies published in Japan generally receive little attention abroad due to the distinctive use of the term “school” and the highly particular inter-relationship between schools, temples, and priests in Japanese Buddhism.
This paper is devoted to the study of the monk Fujishima Ryōon 藤島了穏 （1852-1918）. Fujishima was a member of the Japanese Buddhist denomination Jōdo Shinshū Honganji-ha. His activities during his seven years’ stay in France （from 1882 to 1889） are almost unknown, and have not yet been studied. Some Meiji period Buddhist publications, however, contain documents in which Fujishima explains his studies of European philosophy, as well as his interest in the relationship between politics and religion, particularly from 1888. This was before Inoue Enryō visited France （1888-1889）, a visit on which Fujishima accompanied him while he was visiting France and Continental Europe. After returning to Japan, Inoue published a Treatise on Religion and State in Japan （Nihon seikyō ron 日本政教論, 1889） in which he advocated for the adoption of a system of “recognized religions” in Japan, becoming the leader of the movement for establishing Buddhism as a “recognized religion （kōninkyō 公認教）.” This system was clearly inspired by the French religious system of that time, the Concordat system. Even though I have not found incontrovertible evidence, it is reasonable to think that during his visit Fujishima taught Inoue about the French religious system.
“Why do Buddhists engage in social activities?” The purpose of this study is to respond to this question and clarify the Buddhist doctrinal position on social activities. From the perspective of the study of Buddhist social welfare, we can examine these issues from the following three standpoints: Buddhist teaching as a philosophy for social welfare; Buddhist teaching as the motive for social activists; and Buddhist teaching as “technical support” for welfare.
The first uses Buddhism as the basic philosophy for providing social welfare to the recipient of the care. The second suggests that Buddhist teaching provides social activists with the motivation to act. The third proposes that Buddhist teaching can be used as spiritual and religious care in general. In order for Buddhists to practice social welfare activities according to the teaching, it is also important for Buddhists to develop interprofessional collaborations and build trust with communities.
This paper examines the background to the claims made in the discussion over “Whether the three bodies of auspicious deities （hereafter Zuisō sanjin） preach exoteric Buddhism” （Zuisō sanjin kenwa tokuka no koto 瑞相三身説顕歟事）, in the second volume of the Daisho shinanshō 大疏指南鈔, written by the Shingon monk Chōkaku 長覚 （1340-1416）.
Chōkaku held that Zuisō sanjin preached only esoteric Buddhism, which differs from the argument that Zuisō sanjin preached both exoteric and esoteric Buddhism, as asserted by Dōhan 道範 （1178-1252） and also taken into account by Chōkaku in his discussion.
Chōkaku premised his argument on the fact that Zuisō sanjin is a Buddha-body that preaches to those who have the ability of understanding the esoteric Buddhism teachings. And in the claim that Zuisō sanjin preaches both exoteric and esoteric Buddhism, the argument was based on the premise that ‘exoteric and esoteric Buddhism’ is a Buddha-body that does not limit the target of preaching, but preaches in accordance with the other person.
Chōkaku discussed Zuisō sanjin in reference to occasions when esoteric teachings are inherited, and avoided the three secret paths to enlightenment be preached to suit the hearers.
Hence, Chōkaku maintained that Zuisō sanjin preaches only esoteric Buddhism.
This paper examines six important quotations from the Zhiguan ji zhong Yiyi 止観記中異義 of Daosui 道邃 （ca. 735-811） in the Mohezhiguan fuxing jianglu 摩訶止観輔行講録 of Lingkong 霊空 （1652-1739）. The results show that all six quotations reject the view of the Zhiguan ji zhong Yiyi, and support the interpretation of the Zhiguan fuxing chuanhong jue 止観輔行伝弘決 of Zhanran 湛然 （711-782）. This suggests that Lingkong probably quotes the contents of the Zhiguan ji zhong Yiyi for the purpose of criticizing them, and follows the interpretation of Zhanran.
The *Mahāprajñāpāramitāsūtra was translated by Xuanzang （602-664）, who employed three variant Sanskrit texts and took great care to avoid mistakes. However, over the centuries, discrepancies in the Chinese characters occurred in different editions, and this continues to necessitate the collation of variant readings today. It should be understood that this kind of collation work had already begun during the period of manuscript production, which pre-dated the era of woodblock printing. This paper examines the collation project of scroll 79 of the *Mahāprajñāpāramitāsūtra carried out by Japanese scholar-monks in the Heian period. I demonstrate that the achievements of this project were significant and should be consulted in our modern collation work. Based on the omitted passages in scroll 79 identified by these early scholar-monks, I suggest that the scroll’s lineage could be divided into the following three branches: （1） the Nanatsudera issaikyō edition, Fangshan Stone-carved edition, and the Dongchan monastery edition; （2） the Kongō-ji issaikyō and the Kōshō-ji issaikyō editions; and （3） the Second edition of the Korean canon, the Zhonghua dazangjing, Sixi canon, Qisha canon, Puning canon and the Jiaxing canon edition.
The present paper concerns the institution of the Buddhist temple’s dining hall during the Tang dynasty through documents recorded by Vinaya teachers of the period. In past research, the existence of the dining hall in the Tang dynasty, which influenced Chan Buddhism in the Song and Yuan dynasties, has been mentioned, but there is no specific research on the topic. This article refers to material from three masters who lived in different times — Daoxuan （596-667）, Yixun （635-713）, and Jingxiao （?-927）— and concludes as follows: The canteen of the Tang Dynasty set up a large number of beds （床座）, their size being about 62.2 cm or 24.88 cms height. Orientation toward the east was thought to be important. Monks sat on these beds one by one, meditating and eating. Of course, these speculations are based only on litrary sources. Perhaps there were also other systems of temple canteens in the Tang Dynasty.
This paper reports research on the preface of the Chanlin beiyong qinggui 禅林備用清規. This is a document relevant to rules and regulations about systems and living norms in Chan Temples in the Yuan dynasty. It was compiled from the 15th Year of the Zhiyuan 至元 period（1278 AD） to the 4th year of the Zhida 至大 period （1311 AD） by Chan Master Zeshan Yixian 沢山弌咸 in the Lushan Donglin temple. Works such as the Lüyuan shigui 律苑事規 were created based on this. Furthermore the Chixiu Baizhang qinggui 勅修百丈清規, seen as a model of temple regulations, was finished after referring to this. Although listed in the Zokuzōkyō 続蔵経, the first half of the preface is missing, and it is believed that it was already incomplete when this Tripiṭaka Supplement was compiled.
There are several studies on the Chanlin beiyong qinggui. Nevertheless, studies on the preface do not exist, as far as the author of this paper knows. The preface listed in the Zokuzōkyō is not intact. This paper has revealed that the missing section of the Chanlin beiyong qinggui is still extant, and has studied the content and author of the preface, Yuan Jue 袁桷 （known also as the Lay Buddhist Qingrong 清容居士, 1266-1327）.
Foguo Weibai 仏国惟白, who lived at the end of the Northern Song dynasty, is the 7th Chan Master of the Yunmen Sect 雲門宗 and the 3rd Abbot of Fayun Temple 法雲寺 of Bianjing 汴京. His works Jianzhong jingguo xudenglu 建中靖国続灯録, Zhiyaolu 指要録, and Wenshu zhinan tuzan 文殊指南図讃 are extant. The Zhiyaolu, the oldest extant dictionary of the Buddhist canon based on the imperial edition of the Northern Song dynasty, is especially important. However, it can be said that there are few studies on the ideas reflected in the work of Weibai. This paper will attempt to elucidate his idea of repaying indebtedness, based on the paragraphs of “description of five benefits and five repayings” seen at the end of the eighth volume of the Zhiyaolu. After surveying the development of the idea in ancient China, the paper will point out the characteristics and influences of Weibai’s idea of the five indebtednesses.
Notes on the Brahmā’s Net sūtra （Fanwangjing ji 梵網経記）, written by the late-Tang dynasty Huayan 華厳 scholar Chuan’ao 伝奥, is an important work for understanding the development of Chinese philosophical thought regarding the precepts. However, previous research has been limited to bibliographic analysis, with no work done on the systems of thought contained within these texts. Here, I analyze the contents of the Notes on the Brahmā’s Net sūtra in order to shed light on Chuan’ao’s understanding of the precepts.
In the Explanatory Dictionary of Buddhist Texts （Bussho kaisetsu daijiten 仏書解説大辞典）, Ōno Hōdō suggested that Chuan’ao’s Notes on the Brahmā’s Net sūtra was based on Fazang’s 法蔵 Commentary on the Bodhisattva Precept Code in the Brahma’s Net sūtra （Fanwangjing pusa jiebunshu 梵網経菩薩戒本疏）. But a closer examination of the differences between the two works reveals that, despite similarities, there are inconsistencies between them that cannot be overlooked―inconsistencies that reveal Chuan’ao’s unique understanding of the precepts.
In this paper, I will investigate Chuan’ao’s theory of buddha-nature as seen in his Notes on the Brahmā’s Net sūtra. In this work, Chuan’ao invokes the Yogācāra school’s doctrines of buddha-nature and “potentiality” （zhongzi 種子, the metaphorical “seeds” that help explain the nature of “store consciousness”, or ālayavijñāna）, along with the doctrine of the tathāgatagarbha, in his interpretation of the Brahmā’s Net sūtra’s use of the term “buddha-nature” （foxing 仏性）.
According to Chuan’ao, all sentient beings have both “essential-nature” （lixing 理性） and “practice-nature” （xingxing 行性）. Essential-nature is the tathāgatagarbha, while practice-nature is the “root consciousness” （benshi 本識, an early term for “store consciousness”）. This “practice-nature” is in fact the precepts, and contained within the essential-nature. In addition, practice-nature has both the innate seeds （benyou wulou zhongzi 本有無漏種子） of the “naturally endowed lineage” （benxingzhu zhongxing 本性住種性） and the newly acquired seeds （xinxun wulou zhongzi 新熏無漏種子） of the “seed-nature developed from habituation” （xisuocheng zhongxing 習所成種性）, with the latter increasing the former.
These ideas are not found in typical Yogācāra writings. As such, I would like to compare them with Fazang’s interpretation in his Commentary on the Bodhisattva Precept Code in the Brahma’s Net sūtra. In so doing, I will identify the characteristics of precept doctrine derived from the Huayan school’s doctrine of the tathāgatagarbha, as well as elucidate the originality of Chuan’ao’s commentaries in his Notes on the Brahmā’s Net sūtra.
The doctrinal basis of the Pure land teaching of Zhuhong lay in the Huayan School, a fact long known to scholars. Previous studies have tended to investigate doctrinal inheritances from Huayan masters such as Chengguan and Zongmi, and consequently their differences have been covered. This paper suggests that there is a gap regarding ideas of purity and filth and acceptance or rejection between these Huayan masters and Zhuhong. The former are based on Huayan ideas of inherent awakening and Yogācāra ideas of the Pure Land. Zhuhong emphasized the Yogācāra Pure Land which was based on the idea of the real existence of Amitābha’s land, and thus we can point out that a real gap exists between the two kinds of ideas.
This paper discusses Zongmi’s concept of zhi 知 and his ideas of practice. Therefore, I point out the significance of Zongmi’s separation of zhi 知 and zhi 智 by grasping the relationship between zhi 知 as the content of sudden enlightenment and zhi 智 as the result of gradual training.
This paper shows that the Da Foding shoulengyan jing 大仏頂首楞厳経 and the Huayan jing in eighty volumes 八十華厳 in the Sixi canon 思渓蔵, are formatted in a special form, i.e. 15 characters per line, since they are based on the separately block-printed editions published by the Huayan Society 華厳結社 at Longxing Temple. The Longxing Temple （later renamed Dazhong Xiangfu Temple 大中祥符寺）, the base of the Huayan Society in Hangzhou, is known to have published and disseminated the Huayan jing in eighty volumes from the first year of Chunhua 淳化 （990） to the third year of Xianping 咸平 （1000） and the Da Foding shoulengyan jing in the Dazhong Xiangfu 大中祥符 period （1008-1016）. Although little known until now, the sūtras published by the Huayan Society of Longxing Temple had a significant impact not only on separately block-printed editions in civil society but also on the Sixi canon.
The development of Huayan studies during the late Tang, the Five Dynasties and the early Song was slow. Few scholars have paid attention to the masters who made great efforts and contributions to Huayan studies during this period. In particular, as opinions vary, no unanimous conclusion can yet be drawn on the religious genealogy of the Huayan lineage of masters between the Fifth Patriarch Zongmi （780-841） and the Ninth Patriarch Zixuan （965-1038）. That is to say, the identities of the Sixth, Seventh and Eighth patriarchs remain unclear. In particular, we still lack information on the Sixth Patriarch, who inherited great teachings from the famous Zongmi. It can be said that in order to re-examine the history of Huayan Buddhism it is very important to review the Sixth Patriarch of the Huayan school. This paper aims to systematically analyse the identity of the Sixth Patriarch.
The Chinese understanding of zhiguan 止観 adds a double meaning from śamatha and vipaśyanā and sthāna and upalakṣanā. At the same time, Chinese monks, in the process of organizing and interpreting Chinese translations of Buddhist texts, and through their unique understanding, have attempted to add new meanings to zhiguan again. Among these, the Chengshi lun may have provided the basic understanding of zhiguan in the Northern and Southern Dynasties, as it explains the interpretation of zhi and guan as corresponding to ding 定 and hui 慧, which is well known even today. The Dunhuang literature confirms that later Chinese monks inherited these ideas from the Chengshi lun and attempted to further organize and interpret zhiguan by combining them with more Mahāyāna-oriented doctrines, such as atyanta-śūnyatā, which was more prevalent at the time.
Dao’an’s 道安 （314-385 CE） relocation to Chang’an is an important historical event that marked the revival of translation activities among Buddhists in early medieval China. Earlier scholars such as Tang Yongtong, Erik Zürcher, and Ui Hakuju assumed that Dao’an’s relocation to Chang’an took place in the year 379. However, this hypothesis does not take into account the Jovian years recorded in the documents produced by Dao’an’s translation team in Chang’an. In this paper, by making use of such resources as the astronomy simulation software Stellarium, I show that the Jovian years recorded in the Dao’an team’s documents match the actual locations of Jupiter of the time, and argue that Dao’an’s relocation to Chang’an must have taken place in 378 rather than in 379.
According to Huijiao’s 慧皎 Gaoseng zhuan 高僧伝, Kang Senghui 康僧会 arrived at Jianye 建業 in 247, converted the political leaders Sun Quan 孫権 and Sun Hao 孫晧 to Buddhism, and built the first temple, Jianchu si 建初寺 in Jiangnan 江南. He was a monk who established the foundation of the later development of Jiangnan Buddhism.
At present, almost all Kang Senghui’s biographies are based on the Gaoseng zhuan. However, there are other documents tracing Kang Senghui’s life. In this paper, I classify them into three versions and compare the different accounts of when he reached Jianye. In the past, the Gaoseng zhuan was not necessarily always trusted. There are two theories of 247 and 241 for the date of his arrival in Jianye. There is one more theory of his arrival in 241 and meeting with Sun Quan in 247. The key points are the Poxie lun 破邪論 written to refute Taoism and the Wu Shu 呉書, being the authority on this point. Introducing the debate on the authenticity of the Wu Shu, I examine how to consider the two dates.