All issues
Volume 2005, Issue 215
Displaying 1-5 of 5 articles from this issue
- |<
- <
- 1
- >
- >|
-
In comparison with Hosso DoctrineNatsuki DOI2005 Volume 2005 Issue 215 Pages 1-28,134
Published: December 21, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: March 12, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSKobo Daishi Kukai treats the passages in Bodhiruci's translation of the Lankavatara-sutra on the “preaching of the *Dharmabuddha” (dharmata-desana; Bodhiruci trans.: fafo shuofa, _??__??__??__??_) as textu al evidence of his own interpretation of the preaching of the Dharmakaya (_??__??__??__??_) in his Ben kenmitsu nikyo ron (_??__??__??__??__??__??_). This concept of the “preaching of the *Dharmabuddha” in the Lankavatara-sutra was interpreted by the Faxiang and Hosso schools as meaning a “bodhisattva raising non-discriminating wisdom.” Kukai criticizes that interpretation, and offers his own. There are problems in Kukai's interpretation of the theory of the bodies of the Buddha, however, and concerning the point of a direct manifestation of awakened wisdom, his interpretation seems to be similar to Saicho's.
Kukai also claims that in the “preaching of the *Dharmabuddha” in the Lankauatara-sutra, preaching by insentient beings is also discussed. However, this point is not discussed even in the Huayan and Kegon schools. Gomyo (_??__??_), in his Daijo hosso kenjin sho (_??__??__??__??__??__??__??_), notes that “scholars of the day” teach the awakening of all beings and the awakening of inanimate beings based on Huayan and Kegon scholarship, and Kukai perhaps was one of them. In that sense, Kukai's Esoteric Buddhism may have been understood by the Hosso school of the time as being within the category of the single-vehicle teaching (_??__??__??_), which Kukai treated as the “teachings of the Dharmakaya body of other-enjoyment” (_??__??__??__??__??__??__??_).View full abstractDownload PDF (2268K) -
Tomohito HATANO2005 Volume 2005 Issue 215 Pages 29-54,133
Published: December 21, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: March 12, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSDaidenbo-in (_??__??__??__??_) of Koyasan became a temple independent of Kongobu-ji (_??__??__??__??_) as Kongobu-ji developed. After its independence, it remained in a relationship known as kyoza (_??__??_) with Kongobu-ji. The nature of that relationship is not clearly known.
Kakuban (_??__??_, 1095-1043), the abbot of Daidenbo-in, determined that in the clerical rankings of monks with appointments to both temples, the monks of Daidenbo-in would be in a superior position. This invited the antagonism of Kongobu-ji monks, and disputes continued at both temples until the move to Negoro (_??__??_).
The nature of the disputes between the two temples has been often understood as constituting actual armed combat. However, by examining the personnel composition of both temples, it is possible to locate many instances of monks serving in official capacities in both temples. Because of these dual appointments to both temples (_??__??__??__??_), out-right fighting between the two seems unlikely.
Future studies must approach the bilateral relations of the temples in light of these dual appointments and kyoza. The purpose of the present paper is to attempt an analysis of the dual appointments to both temples as a preliminary stage to that study.View full abstractDownload PDF (1848K) -
Hitoshi INUI2005 Volume 2005 Issue 215 Pages 55-80,132
Published: December 21, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: March 12, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSThe Lianhuabuxin niansong yigui (Jpn: Rengebushin nenju giki, _??__??__??__??__??__??__??__??_) is a fundamental ritual text of the Vajradhatu tradition transmitted to Tang China. Whether a translation or a composition of Amoghavajra, the single volume edition (Taisho no. 873) is best known. A two-volume edition also exists, with some minor differences compared to the one-volume text. This edition has never been made available, and scholars were forced to rely on secondary literature describing these differences. Fortunately, it was learned that the two-volume edition brought to Japan by one of the eight Japanese monks who traveled to Tang China, Zenrinji Shuei (_??__??__??__??__??_, 809-884) is preserved at To-ji Kanchi-in temple. The author produced a printed edition for the benefit of researchers. This is a continuation of the author's previous paper.View full abstractDownload PDF (1031K) -
based on Cittadhar “Hrdaya”-'s Mim manah pauKazumi YOSHIZAKI2005 Volume 2005 Issue 215 Pages L5-L28,131
Published: December 21, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: March 12, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSNewari merchants and artisans in Tibet commissioned to copy many Newari Buddhist manuscripts during their stay for their own business. The colophons of these manuscripts often note that merchants —the donors of the manuscripts— belonged to commercial associations in Tibet (palas). It appears that a pala was a particular form of guthi, being established to carry on trade with the Tibetans. There is much valuable information about the palas in Cittadhar Hrdaya's novel, Mim manah pau, written in the Newari language. According to this novel, there were Vajracarya priests in Lhasa to perform Newari-style rituals for the members of the pala. Vajrasattva-pala was the name of the associations of such Vajracaryas. It is thus reasonable to assume that the copyists of these manuscripts in Tibet were Vajracarya priests working in the palas. Ratnamuni Vajracarya was one of these men.View full abstractDownload PDF (1870K) -
Some Problems Concerning the Interpretation of Mutual Causal Relationship between Alayavijñana and PravrttivijñanaYasuhiro UENO2005 Volume 2005 Issue 215 Pages L29-L54,132
Published: December 21, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: March 12, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSSthiramati (_??__??_, ca. 510-570) interprets the theory of the mutual causal relationships between the alayavijñana and pravrttivijñana using the term nisyanda- and vipakavasana in his Madhyantavibhagatika and Pañcaskandhaprakaranavaibhasya. This interpretation, looked at from the use of the term vasana, was a common notion in the Yogacara-Vijñanavada of his time. However, Sthiramati's speaking of “two vasanas” distinguished by differences in their function whether in this life or the next may have been original to him. “Two vasanas” as a technical term is not found in the Yogacara literature prior to him, and therefore the theory of hetu- and phalaparinama in the Trimsikabhasya, which includes these two vasanas, should be considered his innovation, at least as far as the content of the theory.View full abstractDownload PDF (2191K)
- |<
- <
- 1
- >
- >|