American Academy of Religion

The "Senchakush" in Japanese Religious History: The Founding of a Pure Land School Author(s): Allan A. Andrews Reviewed work(s): Source: Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Vol. 55, No. 3 (Autumn, 1987), pp. 473-499 Published by: Oxford University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1464067 . Accessed: 21/12/2011 16:32
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Oxford University Press and American Academy of Religion are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the American Academy of Religion.

http://www.jstor.org

Journal of the American Academy of Religion. LV/3

THE SENCHAKUSHUIN JAPANESE RELIGIOUS HISTORY: THE FOUNDING OF A PURE LAND SCHOOL
ALLAN A. ANDREWS

One of the most interesting and rewarding approaches to the history of religions is the study of times of transition. Of course, every historical moment is a moment of transition, but we refer to those times when the accumulated, unnoticed changes of decades or centuries burst forth in a powerful wave that submerges old forms and establishes in their place new religious ideas and institutions. These are trying times of decision, which challenge many to reexamine their faith and religious commitment. And they are thus times when the character of that faith, and its sources and implications, are more clearly revealed to the view of the historian. Such a time of religious transition took place in Japan at the close of the twelfth century under the leadership of H6nen-b6 Genkui(11331212). In 1198 H6nen authored a treatise, the Senchaku hongan nembutsu shA (Senchakushu or Senjakushu), "Assembled Passages on the Selected Nembutsu of the Original Vow," which crystallized centuries of religious change in Japan. In this work, H6nen sets out the radical positions that (1) the Pure Land way of rebirth after death into Amida Buddha's Pure Buddha-land is the only available salvation for those of his times, (2) the only act necessary for such salvation is invocational nembutsu-the utterance of Amida's name in sincere longing for Pure Land rebirth, and (3) this compassionate salvationis especially directed by Amida Buddha toward those who are spiritually deficient and materially deprived, i.e., the sinful and the poor. These teachings stand as a landmarkin the history of the popularizationof Buddhism in Japan. They encouraged a flood of Pure Land evangelism and led eventually to the institutionalization of the Pure Land movement in a number of sectarian groups.'
Allan A. Andrews is Associate Professor of Religion at the University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont 05405. 1 H6nen's teachings inspired the popularization of other forms of Buddhism as well.

474

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

These facts are fairly well known in the West. What is less well known is the delineation and documentation by H6nen in the Senchakushi of a Pure Land School of Buddha-dharma. H6nen was aware that his claims for the priority of the Pure Land way and the efficacy of nembutsu could not be taken seriously by his critics, or totally relied upon by his followers, unless he could demonstrate that these teachings were the authentic Buddhist doctrines of an ancient, orthodox, independent, and self-sufficient school of Buddha-dharma. Therefore, in the opening chapter of the Senchakushi H6nen asserts the existence of such a school, the "Pure Land School" (jddoshui),and then proceeds in time-honored fashion to legitimate this school by codifying its doctrines, setting out its scriptural canon, and specifying its patriarchallineage. In this way H6nen gave to the Pure Land movement, which had hitherto existed only as an amorphouspiety and marginal monastic cult, autonomy and orthodoxy within the mainstream of Japanese religious life.2 Moreover, H6nen's was the first attempt within the entire history of the Buddhist tradition to give to the Pure Land movement such autonomy and independent, equal status. Several continental thinkers had attempted to clearly differentiate Pure Land teachings and demonstrate their superiority, as we shall see below, but none had defined a Pure Land School. This study, therefore, examines the opening chapter of the Senchakushuiin order to arrive at a more adequate understanding of H6nen's achievements and of the significance of the Senchakushi within an important period of Japanese religious history.3 Let us begin with an overview of the age. The period of H6nen's evangelism, the late twelfth century, was a time of change in many areas of Japanese life. In the political arena a momentous shift of power was underway. After a bloody and destructive civil conflict, the Gempei Wars of 1180-1185, the rising military classes wrested control of the countryside and the direction of state affairs from the aristocracy. The imperial appointment of Minamoto Yoritomoin 1192 to the position of Sh6gun, officialmilitary ruler of the
On H6nen's influence on Nichiren and the popularization of Lotus faith, see Ienaga (1963:71-88). 2 This is not to say that H6nen himself initiated an organized religious community or sect. On this subject see treatment below of the term jodo shA. 3 Both Japanese and Western scholarship has emphasized H6nen's teachings on nembutsu to the neglect of his "foundational"concerns for the legitimation of a Pure Land School. See, for example, Ienaga et. al. (11:31-2), Matsunagaand Matsunaga(II: 6071), and Coates and Ishizuka (II: 340-348). Ohashi (1972:118-123) and Tamura (1972:251-253)discuss only H6nen's need for a line of patriarchs. J6doshfidenominational scholarshave understandablypaid more attention to H6nen's concern for a Pure Land School. See especially the helpful treatments by Ishii (1969:14, 52-53) and It6 (3037).

Andrews: Japanese Religious History

475

land, is a convenient demarcation of that shift. The Minamoto clan and their successors established a feudal administration at Kamakura, in what was then the Eastern hinterlands, and thereafter the provincial values and tastes of the military clans began to displace in national life the aristocraticideals and style of the capital. The New Buddhism A parallel change was taking place in religious life. The late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries saw a shift from an aristocratic style of Buddhism to forms more attractive to the military class and the folk. The Buddhism of the early and mid-Heian Period (ninth to eleventh centuries) can be characterized as monastic, utilitarian, and elitist. It centered upon extensive and powerful monastic orders, especially the Shingon and Tendai orders, founded by the state, patronized by the court, and led by younger sons of the aristocracy. The chief function of these orders was the spiritualprotection and promotion of the state and the assurance of its peace and prosperity. They had been founded for these purposes, and many of their rites and ceremonies were directed to these ends. The function of these orders was extended to the promotion of the well-being of aristocratic clans and individualsby means of rites of healing, purification,exorcism, and fertility. The patrons, clients, and leaders of these orders were aristocrats. The folk played little role in, and scarcely benefitted from, this Buddhism. The monastic orders did not consider evangelism an important function, and the folk encountered Buddhism mainly through the ministrations of wandering folk practitioners and renegade priests called shami and hijiri. By contrast, the new forms of Buddhism that developed in the late Heian Period (eleventh and twelfth centuries) were salvific, devotional, and of popular appeal. In a major shift in Japanese religious attitudes, many members of all classes began to abandon worldly goals and ambitions-power, prosperity, long life, and progeny-and to seek salvationfrom the sufferingsof this life and the expected infernal retribution of the next. Such emancipation and enlightenment had been the aspirationof Japan'sspiritual elite since the time of Sh6toku Taishi (573-621), but now for the first time a broad spectrum of Japanese society-laymen as well as clerics, women as well as men, and especially commoners, warriors, and the folk as well as the aristocracy-sought these goals of a personal and absolute spiritual fulfillment. The style of this new Buddhism was devotional. Amida Buddha (Amitabha/Amitayus)was prominent among its many objects of worship; but Miroku Bodhisattva (Maitreya), Jizo (Ksitigarbha),Kannon (Avalokitesvara),the Lotus Sutra and other sacralities-Shinto as well

476

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

as Buddhist-also claimed many devotees. These powers were adored as saviors and were worshiped with fervid faith and simple rites. The leaders of the new movements were dissident, charismatic priestssometimes evangelizers, sometimes recluses-who had abandoned their monasteries in search of a fuller commitment to their personal savior. Their followers included both clerics and laypersons, but in either case clerical status and monastic discipline came to be considered inessential to salvation. The quality of a devotee's faith and the fervor of its expression were the only requirements.4 H6nen 's Movement Among these many amorphous, popular religious movements, the Pure Land movement, which focused on the worship of Amida Buddha, was the first to rise into prominence and achieve, or claim, independent status. The worship of Amida Buddha had been brought to Japan as early as 640 C.E. (Shigematsu: 17-20; Inoue: 80-1). During the ninth century, Ennin (794-864) introduced nembutsu5 practice into Tendai liturgy. In the tenth century Genshin (942-1017) systemized and integrated nembutsu into Tendai doctrine (Andrews),and by the twelfth century nembutsu cultivation and piety were being popularized and disseminated by itinerant preachers such as Ry6nin (10721132), founder of the ytiz nembutsu movement. Genshin's teachings on the nature and proper cultivation of nembutsu, presented in his well read and highly respected work, Essentials of Pure Land Rebirth (Ojdyoshu, 985 C.E.), constituted the most widely held view of nembutsu among H6nen's contemporaries. Genshin's system comprised a rich cultus of nembutsu-centered worship and meditation adapted to all sorts of occasions and needs. It included several types of contemplative (envisualizing) nembutsu, invocational nembutsu (calling upon the name of Amida), nembutsu for special intensive sessions, and even nembutsu for the hour of death. Genshin recommended the simple invocational nembutsu only for those incapable of more rigorous and comprehensive meditative forms. He considered contemplative nembutsu, or nembutsu zammai (nembutsu samddhi4 These movements generated for the first time in Japan large scale voluntaristiccommunities. Bellah discusses this development, and Davis (31-33) locates these communities within the overall history of Japanese social differentiation. Foard (266-272) points out that the essential characteristicof these communities was their popular appeal. 5 From nen (Nelson, no. 424), "reflectupon," "have in mind," "thinkupon,"and butsu, "Buddha;" reverently to think upon, to meditate upon, and/or to call upon the name of a Buddha, bodhisattva, etc. Due largely to the reinterpretation brought about by H6nen, in modern usage the term means to invoke or call upon the name of Amida Buddhawith the phrase, "Namu("reverence to," "hallowedbe," "I take refuge in," etc.) Amida Butsu."

Andrews: Japanese Religious History

477

envisioning the physical appearance of Amida and meditating upon his enlightened mind) to be capable of bringing about full enlightenment immediately, and thus to be the highest and most effective form of nembutsu (Andrews: 101-02 and 119). For those familiar with Genshin's system of nembutsu and with his syncretistic, comprehensive approach to the religious life-that is to say, for most of H6nen's critics-nembutsu was seen as a valuable form of religious practice, essentially meditative, to be adapted to and cultivated together with other forms of spiritual discipline. Above all, in this traditional view, nembutsu-centered worship of Amida Buddha was not considered inimicable to the simultaneous worship of other Buddhas by means of other practices (Morrell: 22-26). The areas of conflict between H6nen and the contemporary Buddhist establishment were thus many and serious. First of all, H6nen insisted on total devotion to Amida Buddha to the complete exclusion of all other objects of worship, expressed in the cultivation of nembutsu to the exclusion of all other religious practices. Second, by nembutsu H6nen meant the popular practice of intoning the name of Amida with the fervid and incessant utterance, "Namu Amida Butsu"-"I take refuge in the boundless compassion of the Buddha of Limitless Light and Life"-rather than the clerical discipline of contemplating the appearance or essence of this Buddha. Establishment Buddhism saw this view of the religious life as simplistic at best and as dangerously misleading at worst. It also feared that the antinomian tendencies in his teachings would encourage vice and social rebellion.6 Moreover, H6nen's implicit rejection of the clerical role and monastic vocation as necessary or helpful for salvation surely posed a serious personal and institutional threat for conventional clergy. H6nen's claim to lead an authentic school of Buddha-dharma-the Pure Land School-also challenged the social and economic foundations of the established schools. They justifiably feared that his "nembutsu sect" would win over the nobility upon whose patronage they heavily relied, or even worse, that H6nen's teachings would convert and weaken their hold on the peasants working their agricultural estates.7 The popular appeal of H6nen's schismatic teachings there6 Honen rejected ethical conduct, or keeping the Buddhist precepts, as an effective spiritualstrategy on the grounds that strict ethical conduct was not practicalfor his age (Senchakushd,Ch. 3; Ohashi, 1971:105-06). Moreover, it is likely that some of H6nen's disciples took advantage of this position to justify their own ethical misconduct (Inoue: 325-26; Matsunagaand Matsunaga: 62-67). 7 The tax-freeestates of these establishedmonastic schools were the primarysources of their wealth and political power. In the rapidly changing and feudalizing society of the late twelfth century, the great monastic orders as absentee landlords had to contend with many powers, such as manorial bailiffs (azukaridokoroor sh6kan), local warrior

478

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

fore elicited vigorous resistance to his movement and especially to his attempt to establish it as a legitimate school of Buddha-dharma. H6nen's break with monastic Buddhism came in 1175, at the age of forty-two, when he abandoned the Tendai monastic center at Kurodani, where for twenty-five years he had pursued Genshin's nembutsu zammai (Samddhi by means of nembutsu), and established a simple retreat at Yoshimizu, in the foothill suburbs of the capitol. H6nen thus became one of those dissident priests who formed the leadership of the new Buddhism.8 Over the years a community of followers-mostly disillusioned priests and a few laypersons-gathered around him to hear his teachings and share in his devotions. Among these were several aristocrats,and especially one very powerful nobel, Kuj6 Kanezane (1149-1207), who from 1186 to 1196 held the highest civil office in the land, Regent to the Throne. H6nen composed the Senchakushu in response to a request from Kanezane for instruction in Pure Land principles. This was in 1198, just six years after Minamoto Yoritomo had been appointed Sh6gun. The Senchakushu As its title indicates, the Senchakush~iis a collection of scriptural passages, elucidated by H6nen's commentary, on the nembutsu, which H6nen asserts was selected by Amida Buddha in his eighteenth bodhilords, and administrativerepresentatives of the Shoganate (fito, land stewards),for the control of their estates and of the peasants who worked them. The religious prestige of the established schools and the allegiance of the peasants to the gods and buddhas of their clerical overlords were important for maintaining possession of these estates and their revenues. H6nen's gospel of exclusive reliance upon nembutsu not only threatened to cause a shift in the religious orientation of the peasants away from the objects of faith of the established schools, but a shift that would make the coercive religious authorityof the monastic orders irrelevant to the lives of the folk. In other words, if the goal of life was salvation and not worldly well-being, and if salvation was wholly dependent upon the compassionof Amida Buddha in response to the individual'scultivation of nembutsu, then there would be no need for the peasants to yield to the rent and corv6e exactions of their priestly masters in hope of gaining their mediation with the kami and buddhas or in fear of their imprecations and interdictions (Ienaga, et al.: II, 38; Tamura, 1959b:46-57). Tamura(1959b:59)points out, for example, that the great monasteries would interdict or impound land for which rents were in arrearswith talismans from their associatedshrines, such as sakaki branches or shimenawa. 8 H6nen's exact intentions in removing from Kurodanion Mt. Hiei to Otani in Kyoto and the degree to which he discontinued his affiliationwith the Tendai Order in 1175 are both matters of contention. The forty-eightvolume biographyof H6nen (Coates and Ishizuka: 184-85) and several other traditionalbiographiesstate that H6nen converted to the exclusive practice of nembutsu at this time, and denominationalscholarshipmaintains that H6nen thereby founded the J6doshfiDenomination. Other scholarspoint out that H6nen continued to observe the Tendai monastic precepts and that he probablydid not intend in 1175 to found an independent order, sect, or school (shti). For a summary of the arguments see Katsuki(173-220).

Andrews: Japanese Religious History

479

sattva-vow as the best practice for attaining rebirth into the Pure Land. Though the immediate occasion for the composition of the Senchakushuwas a request from Kuj6 Kanezane, it was hardly a spurof-the-moment creation. Into it Honen distilled half a lifetime of study and reflection.9 Its sixteen chapters set out the scripturalbasis for this Pure Land faith, delineate the character and benefits of this nembutsu, and provide guides to the faith and diligence with which it should be cultivated. In addition, as we have noted, the opening chapter of this work lays down the foundational principles of a Pure Land School of Buddhism. H6nen charged Kanezane and his other followers not to reveal the Senchakushtuto outsiders (Senchakush-, Ch. 16; Ohashi, 1971:162), and wisely so, for the bitter opposition of the established orders could be expected. Yet, even before the Senchakushu was discovered, H6nen's teachings and his movement were subjected first to concerted opposition and then to full scale persecution. In 1205 this opposition took the form of a petition submitted to the throne by monks of the K6fukuji Temple to suppress the "nembutsu school" on the grounds that it constituted a new and unauthorized Buddhist school, that its teachings were heretical, and that it caused conflict and disorder in the nation (Kamata and Tanaka: 31-42; Morrell: 20-36). Shortly thereafter, in 1206, two of H6nen's disciples indiscreetly conducted during the Cloistered Emperor Gotoba's absence an all night nembutsu service for several of Gotoba's ladies-in-waiting. The scandalized Emperor thereupon proscribed the exclusive cultivation of nembutsu, and ordered the immediate execution of the offending priests and the exile to distant provinces of H6nen and several of his chief disciples. H6nen was recalled in the eighth month of 1211, but died in the first month of 1212, at age seventy-nine, with the nembutsu on his lips and to signs of Pure Land rebirth.10 The fate of the Senchakusha resembled that of H6nen. A woodblock edition was published shortly after his death and, as could be expected, was thoroughly excoriated."1 In 1227 the printing blocks were seized and burned by marauding Tendai monks. Copies of earlier manuscripts survived, however, including one partially autographed by H-nen. Just as H6nen eventually became recognized
9 Some of the positions taken in the Senchakusha had already been developed at the time of H6nen's T6daiji lectures of 1190 (Ohashi, 1971:389-453). 10H6nen was eighty years old, by traditionalcount. The supernaturalsigns of rebirth purportedly occurring at H6nen's death are recounted in the Gorinja nikki (Ishii, 1955:868-73). For an account of the events precipitating H6nen's exile see Matsunaga and Matsunaga:62-68; and Ienaga et al.: II, 41-43. 11In for example the Saijarin of My6eb6 K6ben (1173-1282)(Kamataand Tanaka: 43-

106).

480

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

as one of the great saints of Japan, so the Senchakushd has since become one of Japan's revered scriptures. Chapter One of the Senchakushu The opening chapter of the Senchakushi is entitled, "Passagesin Which Meditation Master Tao-ch'o Establishes Two Dharma-gatesthe Pure Land Dharma-gate and the Dharma-gate of the Sages12-but Rejects the Dharma-gate of the Sages and Takes Refuge Correctly in the Pure Land Dharma-gate." Here, as we noted above, H6nen asserts the existence of aj6do shA, a Pure Land School, independent of, and equal in status to, the eight or ten ancient, official,and prestigious Buddhist schools of his day. Moreover, he documents in traditional Buddhist fashion the orthodoxy of this school by setting out its doctrinal principles, its scriptural canon, and its patriarchallineage. The chapter opens with a citation from the sixth century Chinese Pure Land master Tao-ch'o (562-645) that defines the two doctrinal categories of the Pure Land dharma-gate and the dharma-gate of the sages. These categories are central to H6nen's thinking, and we will return to them below. At the conclusion of his commentary on this citation, H6nen momentously asserts (Ohashi, 1971:89), "Now this Pure Land School.. .divides all the teachings into two dharma-gates, the dharma-gate of the sages and the Pure Land dharma-gate." This assertion is immediately challenged by his hypothetical interlocutor with the query (Ohashi, 1971:90): There have alwaysbeen the Kegon,Tendai,etcetera eight or nine schools,13 but withinthe PureLandtradition (i6dono ie) we haveneverheardof a school(shu). Whatauthorities are therefor the title, Pure LandSchool? H6nen responds, Thereare manyauthorities for the namePureLandSchool. For
example, in the Joyous Road to the Land of Peace and Bliss14 by 12A dharma-gate (h6mon) is a variety of Buddhist teaching or a set of doctrines. "Dharma-gateof the sages"(sh6d6 mon), is the way of wisdom, moralityand meditation of Buddhasand bodhisattvas. Shdja, for example, means highly advanced bodhisattvas (Nakamura: 726d). The term sh6nin, which I have translated "sages"in the citation from Yuan-hsiao, literallymeans (aside from its kun reading of hijiri) Buddhas,advanced bodhisattvasand arhats (Nakamura: 728d). Haneda (6-7) reconstructs the Sanskritof the term sh6nin (Chin.,sheng-jen) as dryajana,meaning arhatsand bodhisattvas,in contrast to prthagjana (bonbu; Chin.,fan-fu), sentient beings still bound in ignorance and transmigratingthrough the six paths. 13The six Nara schools, the two Heian schools, and probably the Daruma-shti or Zen School recently introduced by Eisai (Matsunagaand Matsunaga: 187-88). 14For easier readabilitywe have translatedall scripture titles. See Referencesfor Japanese, Chinese, and Sanskritforms.

Andrews: Japanese Religious History Yuan-hsiaoit says, "While the Pure Land School was originally intended for common sentient beings, it is available to sages also." In Tz'u-en'sStandard Interpretationson the WesternLand it mentions, "According to this School. .. ." Also in Chia-ts'ai's Treatise on the Pure Land we find, "This School is indeed the essential path." Authorities such as these leave no room for doubt. My intention here, however, is not to treat of the manner in which all the other schools establish their teachings. Rather, I would like briefly to set out the Pure Land School's [understanding of the] dharma-gate of the sages and the Pure Land dharmagate.15

481

Thus Hinen introduces and defends the title, "Pure Land School" (i6do shut). Both the incidental manner of its introduction and the justification of this title by means of continental precedents reflect H6nen's desire to demonstrate that the Pure Land School was not his own creation. If the Pure Land School had not existed in China, whither as all other Buddhist schools it had presumably been brought from India, then it could have no legitimate existence in Japan; legitimacy demanded a continental pedigree. Hinen's recourse to Yuanhsiao, Tz'u-en, and Chia-ts'ai are part of this strategy, and we will see below how Hinen buttresses this claim with a continental lineage of his own. Yet, there is considerable ambiguity as to what these authorities meant by "jdo shA," and indeed as to what H-nen himself meant by this term. The Meaning of the Term "Shi'" The term we have rendered "school", as in Pure Land School, is sh.'16 What did H nen mean by the term "shi"? This Sino-Japanese word has a long and complex history. Its earliest meaning was "ancestral tomb" or "temple". From this it derived several later meanings, including "origin" or "foundation," "essence" or "import," and "clan" or "lineage group" (Morohashi, 111:954). In China, schools of Buddhism were designated sht (Chin., tsung) probably because they centered on a temple, as did a clan, were structurally similar to a clan with their founders and their master-disciple relationships, and because they had a "foundation" or "import" consisting of their distinctive teachings. In Japan, the schools of Chinese Buddhism imported during the Asuka and Nara periods (552-794) were called shi, which in this case can be rendered accurately as "doctrinal school." These sh& con15 Yuan-hsiao (Gangy6, 617-c.700) was a Korean Hua-yen Master. Tz'u-en (Jion, 632682) was a disciple of Tripitaka Master Hsuan-tsang and is considered the founder of the Fa-tsang (Hoss6) School. Chia-ts'ai (Kazai, d. 648) was strongly influenced by Shan-tao and advocated the superiority of Pure Land faith and practice (Mochizuki: 212, 198, and 164 respectively). 16 Nelson, no. 1294.

482

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

sisted of scattered groups of priests studying and teaching the same doctrines, i.e., the same "essence" or "import" of the dharma, in the same lineage of transmission. Later when the Tendai and Shingon establishments appeared early in the Heian period (794-1192), they were called shA also. These, however, were more than just schools of doctrine. They developed into full-fledged monastic orders, and shA came to mean monastic establishment with, of course, a set of distinctive doctrines and a patriarchal lineage. To further complicate this lexicology, Hinen, as we have seen, and his successors,also called their movements sht, which is often rendered "sect." We can therefore distinguish four stages of development in SinoJapanese Buddhist institutions and in the meaning of the term sht. In stage 1 the term refers to scriptural tradition: those who study a particular scriptural corpus, and the essence or import of the dharma it conveys. This usage prevailed in China before the development of full-fledged Buddhist doctrinal schools and is probably what Yuanhsiao, Tz'u-en, and Chia-ts'ai meant by shu in the passages cited by H6nen above. In stage 2 the term means doctrinal school: those who study a particular set of codified doctrines in a lineage of patriarchs going back to a founder."7This stage of development and usage dominated the Nara period (710-794). In stage 3 the term denotes monastic order: the exclusive residence of the members of such a school in one or several affiliated temple-monasteries possessed of an institutionalized organizational structure. These institutions and this usage dominated the Heian period. Finally, in stage 4 the term means sect: a reformist, lay oriented group, whose founder has seceded from a monastic order. This type of Buddhist community and usage of the term sht were prevalent during the Kamakura (1185-1333) and Muromachi (1392-1568) periods of Japanese religious history. Of course, later stages were anticipated in earlier periods, and earlier types of communities persisted in large numbers into later periods.'8 H6nen's efforts in the Senchakushti to codify Pure Land doctrine and to document a Pure Land Buddhist scriptural canon and patriarchal lineage clearly demonstrate that with the term j6do shA he intended to establish and defend a doctrinal school as defined in stage 2 above. It is certain that he did not intend to found a monastic order
17 1 am indebted for this distinction between scriptural tradition and doctrinal school to a paper presented by Stanley Weinstein at the Japan-American Buddhist Studies Conference, Honolulu, July, 1985. 18In sociological terms, monastic orders of stage 3 were similar morphologically to Ernst Troeltsch's "church" type of religious institution, and stage 4 groups to Troeltsch's "sect" (Troeltsch, 1931). Foard points out (274-80) that other types of religious communities as well, i.e., devotional cults and itinerant orders, were important from the midHeian period through the middle ages.

Andrews: Japanese Religious History

483

like those that dominated the religious life of his times and so adamantly opposed his mission. A major impetus of his career was a rejection of monasticism, especially the corrupt and secularized orders of his day. Moreover, in the Senchakusht he explicitly rejects the quest for enlightenment through monastic renunciation and discipline. On the other hand, although Hinen's movement can be described as dissenting or reformist, and as lay-oriented, to interpret Hinen's term jddo sht as "Pure Land Sect" would be incorrect. By j6do sht H6nen meant not a new and reformed community, but an ancient and traditional one. His primary concern in Chapter One is to emphasize and clarify the continuity of his movement with the past. Second, "sect" implies an organized, even institutionalized group, and there is no evidence that H6nen intended to establish such an organizational entity. He did, however, provide the doctrinal foundations and the charismatic leadership on the basis of which his disciples founded several such sectarian groups. Thus, to interpret jddo sht here as "Pure Land Sect" is misleading and anachronistic.19 By j6do shA H6nen meant the following: the essential import or doctrines of a collection of true scriptures, passed down from the ancient pas by a line of inspired teachers, providing a sure guide to salvation through Pure Land rebirth, and the community of teachers and disciples--past and present-who followed and transmitted these truths in faith and worship. For the first time in the history of Buddhism, the Pure Land way was championed as an authentic, orthodox, autonomous and independent school of Buddha-dharma. Let us now examine H-nen's efforts to legitimize this "Pure Land School." H6nen's Doctrinal Analysis One essential of an authentic school of Buddha-dharma was a schema for differentiating among the plethora of Buddhist doctrines and establishing the superiority of one's own. The process of formulating such a hierarchical classification is known as doctrinal analysis (hangyd or kyds6 hanjyaku), and already in Honen's day it had an ancient and respected role in Buddhist history. For example, it was a cardinal principle of the Mahayana that the historical Buddha, Sakyamuni, taught various doctrines during his lifetime, some superior to others or more suitable for various aspirantsat different stages of spiritual growth. This is clearly enunciated in the Lotus Sutra, the fundamental scripture of H6nen's mother church, the Tendai.20 In accord
19 In a comprehensive survey of the meanings of shAt throughout Ho6nen's writings, Kaneko Kansai finds that he uses it in several senses, e.g., 'doctrinal school,' 'scriptural teaching,' 'essence,' but never as 'sect' or 'denomination' (shtiha, shtidan). 20 See especially Chapter Two of the Lotus (Hurvitz, 1976).

484

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

with this basic Mahayanaapproach to the richness of the dharma, all the schools of Chinese and Japanese Buddhism had sought to establish their own authenticity by basing themselves on a doctrinal analysis either borrowed or newly devised."2 Indeed, from his youth Honen had been thoroughly familiarwith the most elaborate system of doctrinal analysis to have been developed in China, the Tendai (i.e., T'ient'ai) system of four teachings deriving from five periods of the Buddha's career, culminating in the "RoundPerfect" teaching of the Lotus Sutra (Hurvitz, 1962:245-71). H6nen refers to this schema in Chapter One, but abandons it in favor of an alternative differentiating principle, that of the three ages of the dharma. The three ages of the dharma is a well-known Buddhist eschatological doctrine elaborated in several major suitrasand referred to in many more.22 It maintains that the teachings of a Buddha will pass through three stages: 1) An age of perfect dharma (shdb6),characterized by the true dharma clearly taught and understood and effectively followed, lasting for a period of one thousand years, 2) an age of semblance dharma (zdhd), characterized by loss of the inner spirit of the teachings and of monastic discipline, lasting also for one thousand years, and 3) an age of degenerate dharma (mappd),characterized by complete corruption of the teachings and monastic discipline and by a thorough inability of anyone to teach or follow the dharma effectively, lasting for ten thousand years.23 This age of degenerate dharma is accompanied by the so-called five defilements-frequent natural disasters, a proliferationof heresies, an excess of human passion,mental and physical deterioration and shortness of life span-which, according to this belief, make it virtually impossible for anyone, layman or cleric, to attain through individual effort emancipation from samsdra. Following these three ages of dharma it was held that there would be an age of extinction of dharma, which would last to the end of the cosmic cycle. At the conclusion of these four ages another Buddha would be born into the world of samsdra and the cycle of three ages of dharma would begin again. For H6nen this teaching of the three ages was more than just a doctrine. He and many of his contemporaries believed that they lived in a period of degenerate dharma. It was thought that the Buddha Sakyamunihad entered parinirvdna in 949 B.C.E., and thus the age of degenerate dharma had begun in 1052 C.E. (Inoue: 108-11). Current
21 Except the Ch'an (Zen) School. 22 H6nen cites Tao-ch'o, as we shall see below, who drew upon the Mahd samnipdta sutra (T. 397) for this doctrine, but it is referred to in for example the Larger Sukhdvat~, the Lotus, the Diamond and numerous other stitras as well. 23 This is the periodization adhered to by H6nen and his contemporaries. Another version assigned five-hundred years to shd6b (Nakamura: II,1284a).

Andrews: Japanese Religious History

485

events fully substantiated that view. In his lifetime H6nen experienced a protracted civil war during which the reigning emperor was

lost at sea and the great national cathedral, T6daiji,was razed. Natural disasters-famine, plague, fire and earthquake-abounded, and the clergy of the great temples had become a monastic rabble, armed and rebellious, who ravaged rival temples and threatened the imperial court itself.24 Thus, H6nen established a doctrinal analysis that was both based on this conviction and designed to meet the needs of such
an age.

The most thorough formulation of the role of Pure Land teachings in an age of degenerate dharma had been set out by the sixth century master Tao-ch'o in his Collected Passages on the Land of Peace and Bliss. H6nen opens Chapter One of the Senchakushti with this citation from that work (Ohashi, 1971:88-89): Question: Even though all sentient beings have the Buddhanature and during many long, cosmic eons ought to have encountered many Buddhas, why is it that we still transmigrate within this burning house of samsdra? Answer: According to the holy teachings of the Mahayina, we have not yet departed this burning house because we have not yet availed ourselves of either of the two excellent dharmas for dispelling samsdra. What are these two? They are [the dharma on] the path of the sages and [that on] Pure Land rebirth. In these times one of these, the path of the sages, is difficultto perfect because, first, the Great Sage25has long since passed on and, secondly, because its principles are profound and our understanding feeble. Thus we find in the Great Assemblage Full Moon Sutra, "Thoughmillions and millions of sentient beings will perform works and cultivate the way during the period of my degenerate dharma, not one will accomplish the goal."26We are now in the age of the degenerate dharma; ours is the evil world of the five defilements.27 Consequently, there remains only the one dharma-gate of the Pure Land way, and it is into this that we should all enter. Thus the Larger Sutra says, "If a sentient being, even one who has committed evil his whole life, should at the time of his death call upon my name continuously with ten nembutsu and not gain rebirth [into my Pure Land], then I will not accept com24 The Hdjjki of Kamo no Ch6mei gives an appalling account of contemporary disasters (Keene: 197-212). 25Sikyamuni, the historical Buddha. 26The speaker is Buddha. This is a paraphraseof several passages in the Sgdkyamuni such as T. 363b and 267a (Taish6shinshti daizd kyd, text no. 397, Vol. 13, XIII, 397, sattra p. 363, second column, etc.). Ohashi (1971: 88) erroneously extends this citation to the end of the next sentence. 27 Tao-ch'owas also convinced that he lived in an age of degenerate dharma (Ch'en: 298 and 345).

486

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

plete enlightenment."28 .... This is why the great compassion

of all the Buddhasurges us to take refuge in the Pure Land. Even if we have led a life of evil, if we but intentlyand with all our strength continuouslycultivate nembutsu,all of our bad be nullifiedand we will surelybe reborn karmawill naturally [into the Pure Land]. Why then do we all so heedlesslyfail to seek this goal? With this citation H6nen establishes a continental precedent for a principle that differentiates Pure Land doctrines from those of other schools by distinguishing between teachings intended for "sages," a spiritual elite, and those intended for benighted beings of the age of degenerate dharma. H6nen next reviews the doctrinal analyses of several other schools (i.e., "shi")-the five varieties of teaching of the Kegon School, the four teachings and five flavors of the dharma of the Lotus School (the Tendai Order), and the two teachings, i.e., the exoteric and esoteric, of the Shingon School. He concludes with the assertion examined above, "Now this Pure Land School, according to Tao-ch'o, divides all the teachings into two dharma-gates, the dharma-gate of the sages and the Pure Land dharma-gate." After his response to the query about precedents for the term, "Pure Land School,"he goes on to formulate an internal criterion, i.e., one other than the age for which those teachings were intended, for distinguishing teachings belonging to these two dharma-gates: Teachings of the dharma-gate of the sages entail many cosmic eons of cultivation of the so-called four vehicles or paths (those of disciples, solitary Buddhas,bodhisattvasand fully enlightened Buddhas) toward the attainment of their respective "four fruits" (arhatship, solitary Buddhahood, etc.). By contrast, the teachings of the Pure Land dharma-gate teach reliance on the vow of Amida Buddha seeking not arhatship or Buddhahood, but a speedy rebirth into the Pure Land. H6nen then classifies eight Mahayana schools-"the Shingon, Buddha-mind, Tendai, Kegon, Sanron, Hoss6, the School of the Commentary on the Ten Stages and that on the Compendium of the Mahayana"-and several "Hinayana"schools-"the Kusha,J6jitsu and the various ritsu schools"-as all belonging to the dharma-gate of the sages.29 Thus he establishes a doctrinal analysis that in the traditionally accepted fashion distinguishes types of doctrine and classifies
28 This is an interpretive paraphrase by Tao-ch'o of vow eighteen of the Sutra of the Buddha of Limitless Life (Larger Pure Land Sutra, T. 360; XII, 268a), the vow by means of which H6nen believed Amida Buddha had selected invocational nembutsu as the only act necessary for salvation. 29 The Buddha-mind (busshin) School is the Zen School. Schools on the Commentary on the Ten Stages and on the Compendium of the Mahayana flourished in Tao-ch'o's time and their doctrines are discussed in his Collected Passages on the Land of Peace and Bliss (Yamamoto: 36-49). On the traditional Japanese schools, see Saunders.

Andrews: Japanese Religious History

487

schools according to the character of their teachings. Moreover, this classification implies that the Pure Land School's teachings are superior, at least for an age of decadent dharma, to the teachings of all other schools. This claim of superiority is made explicit by means of one further
scriptural authority. H6nen cites the very prestigious Nagarjuna

Bodhisattva as quoted by the Chinese Pure Land master T'an-luan (476-542). "In Master T'an-luan'sCommentaryon the Shastra on Pure Land Rebirth," H6nen declares (Ohashi, 1971:91-92), "we find this
passage:" Instructingus kindly, NagarjunaBodhisattvawrites in his Shastra on the Ten Bodhisattva Stages,30"There are two paths available to the bodhisattva who is seeking to attain to the stage of nonretrogression, a difficultpath and an easy path. The difficultyof the difficultpath lies in seeking to attain to the stage of non-retrogression in a world of the five degenerations at a time when there is no Buddha. .... This is like making a laboriousjourney overland. While the easy path, simply by the karmic causationof faith in the Buddha and aspirationto be reborn into his Pure Land, is to ride on the Buddha's vow-power and thus to gain rebirth in that purified realm. To rely upon the Buddha'svow-power is to enter into the ranks of those rightly established in the Mahayana. To be so established is equivalent to the stage of non-retrogression. The easy path is as pleasant as riding in a boat."

Honen comments (Ohashi, 1971:92),

What is here called the difficult path is the dharma-gate of the sages, and the easy path is the Pure Land dharma-gate. Though the paired terms "difficultpath," "easy path" and "[dharma-gate of the] sages," "Pure Land [dharma-gate]"differ, their meanings are identical. .... This should be understood.

Thus H6nen asserts the superiority of the Pure Land way and further
authenticates his doctrinal analysis by recourse to an authority stretching back to the subcontinent of India and, in the minds of his contem-

poraries, almost to the time of the Buddha Sikyamuni himself. We should note, finally, that this claim of superiority,while imporpositioning of one's own school, based upon the qualities of its distinct
doctrines, at the apex of the hierarchy of all Buddhist schools. To summarize: H6nen has asserted, on the basis of rather dubious continental precedents (i.e., use of the term "jddo shi"" by Yuan-hsiao, tant for its own sake, is perhaps even more important in that it allows H6nen to meet one final requisite of a proper doctrinal analysis: the

et al.), the existence of a Pure Land School. In support of this conten-

30 Nagrjuna's authorship of this work has been called into question (Mizuno: 130), but of course H6nen and his contemporaries had no doubts on this point.

488

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

tion he has shaped a doctrinal analysisnot upon the traditionalbasis of stages in the life of SakyamuniBuddha, but upon the three ages of the dharma. Citing respected continental sources-Tao-ch'o and Tanluan-he has shown that the teachings of the Pure Land dharma-gate are clearly distinct in goal (Pure Land rebirth) and means (easy nembutsu) from the teachings of the dharma-gate of the sages, which seeks arhatship,bodhisattvahood or Buddhahood through arduous discipline over long periods of time. Moreover, by means of the prestigious Indian Buddhist authority Ndgarjuna,H6nen has claimed that for an age of degenerate dharma the teachings of the Pure Land School are superior to those of all other Schools. In this manner, H6nen has attempted to establish his Pure Land School as authentic, independent and, what is more, the first among equals. The Pure Land School's Canon Honen was well aware that another prerequisite of an authentic school of Buddha-dharmawas a scriptural canon, a corpus of Buddhasermons that reveal the doctrines differentiated by a school's doctrinal analysis. All schools of Buddhism claimed such a canon. In the opening chapter of the SenchakushuiH6nen claims one for the Pure Land School as well. He declares (Ohashi, 1971:91): ...the principalPure Land rebirthteachingsare the so-called Buddha of LimitlessLife, the Sutraof Contemplation on the Buddhaof Limitless Sutra. The one sasLife and the Amitabha
tra is Vasubandhu'sShastra on Pure Land Rebirth. We will call three sttras and one sadstra.The three stitras are the Sutra of the

these threesttras the PureLandThree PartCanon. This claim to a Pure Land canon is immediately challenged by a hypothetical interlocutor with, "Are there any precedents for the title, Three Part Canon?" H6nen responds (Ohashi, 1971:91), There are several: for example, 1) the Lotus Three Part Canon.., 2) the Mahaivairocana Three Part Canon.., (3) the ThreePartCanonfor the Protection of the Nation..., and4) the Three PartCanon... .31 Maitreya This list of precedents includes the canons of two of the major schools of the day, the Tendai School (the Lotus Three Part Canon) and the Shingon School (the Mahavairocana Three Part Canon). H6nen wished, no doubt, to establish his Pure Land School as their legitimate and independent equal. He concludes (Ohashi, 1971:91),
31 We have omitted the three scriptures that H6nen lists for each canon, for example, for the Lotus Canon, the Muryd gikyd (T. 276), the Hoke kyd (T. 262), and the Fugen kan

kyd (Kanfugen Bosatsu gydhd kyd, T. 277).

Andrews: Japanese Religious History

Our three stitras concern only Amida Buddha, and thus we have

489

called them the Pure LandThree PartCanon. These three on Landdharma-gate. H6nen thus claims for his school a scriptural canon to serve as an authentic source of his Pure Land dharma-gate. Like the chief schools of his day, H6nen's Pure Land School also has a three part canon of true Buddha-preachings. Moreover, H6nen's selection of these three sutras as a Pure Land canon is quite reasonable, for they had served as the primary sources of the Pure Land faith of H6nen and his predecessors. The Sutra of the Buddha of Limitless Life (i.e., Amida Buddha) reveals, for example, the original vows of Amida Buddha, including the all important eighteenth vow. The Sutra of Contemplation on the Buddha of Limitless Life clarified for H6nen the meaning and scope of the nembutsu of the eighteenth vow-revealing it to mean simple invocation or utterance of the name of Amida, and to include in its scope even the worst of sinners (Senchakushu, Ch. 3; Ohashi, 1971:108). And the Amitabha Sutra (the Amida or Smaller Sutra)is an abridged version of the Sutra of the Buddha of Limitless Life. These three scriptures had also been highly esteemed by H6nen's predecesbut it remained for H6nen to establish them sors in China and Japan,32 as the Pure Land Three Part Canon (i6do sambukyd), a formulation which had not heretofore existed.33 The Pure Land School's Patriarchal Lineage H6nen knew that there was one other prerequisite of an authentic Buddhist school: a patriarchalline of transmission. Such a patriarchal lineage extending a school's origins back to the Buddha or some preeminent bodhisattva or master was claimed by all schools without exception.34 H6nen concludes the opening chapter of the Senchakushu with this exchange (Ohashi, 1971:93):
Question: Each of the various schools of the path of the sages has a patriarchalline of transmission. For example, the patriarchal succession of the Tendai School is Hui-wen, Nan-yueh, T'ient'ai, Chang-an, Chih-wei, Hui-wei, Hsuan-lang, and Chan-jan. That of the Shingon School is Mahavairocana Tathagata,
32 Shan-tao designated the reading and recitation of only these three texts as one of the five correct practices for rebirth into the Pure Land (T. 1753: XXXVII, 272b, cited in Senchakusha, Ch. 2; Ohashi, 1971:94). 33 H6nen also lists several "incidental (Katawara) Pure Land rebirth teachings," works, which he says are primarily concerned with other topics, but teach about Pure Land rebirth as well, such as the Avatamsaka Sutra, the Lotus Sutra, etc. (Ohashi, 1971:91). 34 This seems to have been especially important in East Asian Buddhism because of the importance in East Asia of the extended family or clan which derived its authenticity and solidarity from ideas and practices of ancestor worship.

Amida are the correct and fundamental scriptures of the Pure

490

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

VajrasattvaBodhisattva, Nagarjuna,NMgabodhi, Vajrabodhiand Amoghavajra. And each of the other schools has its own line of transmission. Does what you are now calling the Pure Land School also have such a patriarchalline of transmission? Answer: Yes, like the schools of the path of sages the Pure Land School also has a patriarchal line of transmission. However, it varies in the Pure Land traditionsof Master Hui-yuanof Lu Shan Temple, of TripitakaMasterTz'u-min, and of Tao-ch'o and Shantao. Here we will present the patriarchalline of transmissionof the Tao-ch'o--Shan-taotradition (ikka),of which there are moreover two versions: 1) that of TripitakaMaster Bodhiruci, Master Hui-ch'ung, Master Tao-ch'ang, Master T'an-luan, Meditation Master Ta-hai,and Master Fa-shang(from the Collected Passages

on the Land of Peaceand Bliss);and 2) that of Tripitaka Master

Bodhiruci, Master T'an-luan,Meditation Master Tao-ch'o, Meditation Master Shan-tao,Master Huai-kan,and Master Shao-k'ang, (from the T'ang and Sung dynasties' Lives of Eminent Masters).

While Ho6nen may seem to have answered this question satisfactorily and to have provided a line of patriarchs, to his contemporaries this was probably the weakest point in his defense of a new school. All of the traditional eight schools had been established on the basis of a personal transmissionof the dharma, either by a missionarycoming to Japan, or a scholar-monkgoing to China and establishing a master-disciple relationship with a Chinese teacher. The Pure Land School could claim no such direct transmission.35 H6nen's enumeration of Pure Land patriarchsincludes no Japanese. Indeed, he cleverly omits from the lists of the patriarchs of the Tendai and Shingon schools presented in the above query any mention of their Japanese founding patriarchs, the famous and revered Saich6 (767-822) and Ktikai (774835) respectively, who had personally journeyed to the continent to receive direct transmission of their lineages. H6nen does the best he can in the face of this lacuna, and, perhaps substituting quantity for quality, he first offers three different Pure Land traditions (iddo no ie)-those of (1) Hui-yuan, (2) Tz'u-min, and (3) Tao-ch'o and Shan-tao-and then he sets out two versions of the Tao-ch'o-Shan-tao tradition's lineage as presumably the "patriarchal line of transmission"(shishi sdj6 no ketchi myaku, "teaching-transmission-bloodline")of his Pure Land School. Several questions naturally arise here. Why does he present two versions of the Tao-ch'o---Shantao lineage? And which of these latter two did H6nen prefer, or which is more accurate as the actual lineage of his movement? With these problems in mind let us examine these "three traditions" and "two versions."
35 The Kofukuji Petition makes this point emphatically (Kamata and Tanaka: 32-33; Morrell: 21-22).

Andrews: Japanese Religious History

491

Hui-yuan(Eon, 334-416) was considered in H6nen's time to be the grand patriarchof Pure Land Buddhism in East Asia. In 402 C.E. Huiyuan and one hundred and twenty-three of his followers took vows to be reborn into Amitdbha Buddha's Pure Land and together participated in bi-monthly Pure Land devotional services. This group became known as the White Lotus Society and served as a model for Pure Land devotional groups in both China and Japan. Though Huiyuan did not found an actual Pure Land movement or school, he remained a pre-eminent figure in East Asian Buddhist history with enormous prestige. Thus H6nen found it advantageous, no doubt, to include Hui-yuan among the spiritual progenitors of his school. Tz'u-min (Jimin Sanz6, 680-748) was the only Chinese Pure Land teacher to journey to India in search of the dharma. He returned in 719 to found a school that combined nembutsu practice with monastic discipline. He was awarded the title of Tripitaka Master, and after Hui-yuan was probably the most prestigious of continental Pure Land masters. Although neither Tz'u-min nor his movement had any influence upon him, H6nen probably thought it advantageous to relate this important figure also to his own Pure Land School. More difficultand important questions arise in relation to the Taoch'o-Shan-tao tradition. Why did H6nen present two lineages for this tradition, and within which did he place himself? First we should note that H6nen links Tao-ch'o and Shan-tao as representatives of a common tradition. This is historically accurate. They are the central figures in a movement that emphasized the universal availability of Pure Land salvation through simple practices and deep devotion. In this regard, they have much in common with H6nen, who offers, as we have seen, two versions of this tradition's lineage. The first is a list of worthies he found in Tao-ch'o's Collected Passages on the Land of Peace and Bliss: Bodhiruci, Hui-ch'ung, Tao-ch'ang, T'an-luan,Ta-hai and Fa-shang. Among these figures Bodhiruci and T'an-luan were important Pure Land teachers, as we shall see below. But there is no clear indication in extant records that Hui-ch'ung and the others participated in a Pure Land movement (Ohashi, 1972:437-40). H6nen seems to have claimed this "lineage" simply because it was presented in a work by Tao-ch'o. The second version was selected by H6nen from among the many entries in the T'ang and Sung Lives of Eminent Masters, two wellknown collections of Chinese Buddhist hagiography. This version lists Bodhiruci, T'an-luan, Tao-ch'o, Shan-tao, Huai-kan and Shao-k'ang. This is H6nen's true spiritual ancestry. Bodhiruci was one of Buddhism's great missionaries. He arrived in China in 508 and translated from Sanskritinto Chinese several important texts, including the Vasu-

492

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

bandhu Shastra on Pure Land Rebirth. It is also recorded that he converted T'an-luan to Pure Land faith. T'an-luan(Donran: 476-542) is one of the key figures in the evolution of Chinese Pure Land thought. He can be considered the founder of what Honen called the Tao-ch'o--Shan-tao tradition. He wrote an influential commentary on Vasubandhu's Shastra on Pure Land Rebirth and emphasized fervent devotion to Amitdbha Buddha as the best path to salvation for sentient beings of whatever capacity (Corless). Tao-ch'o(D6shaku, 562-645) was converted to the Pure Land path by the example of T'an-luan'slife and teachings. We have discussed above the important contributions he made to H6nen's thinking. Shan-tao (Zend6, 613-681) was a disciple of Tao-ch'o and the boldest thinker of this movement. It was he that first unequivocally asserted the certainty of Pure Land salvation by means of simple, invocational nembutsu. He wrote voluminously and evangelized avidly. He was a major influence on the popularization of Pure Land Buddhism in his time (Mochizuki: 180-88). Huai-kan (Ekan, d. ca.710) studied under Shan-tao and wrote an important work entitled Clarification of Pure Land Problems. Shaok'ang (Shoko, d.805) was inspired by Shan-tao'steaching to propagate Pure Land faith and was called a second Shan-taoby his contemporaries (Mochizuki: 227-41, 317-18). This latter version is the patriarchal lineage from which H6nen felt himself to be descended. His thought is shaped by this tradition, and in the Senchakushu he cites again and again the works it produced. The key figure here for H6nen was Shan-tao. H6nen derived from Shan-tao his central teaching of sole reliance upon the invocational nembutsu of the eighteenth vow and considered him to be an incarnation of Amida Buddha (Senchakushdi,Ch. 16; Ohashi, 1971: 158-62). H6nen may also have experienced a personal relation to Shan-tao. Several early biographies relate that sometime around his conversion to the Pure Land path and departure from Mt. Hiei in 1175 Honen had a dream in which Shan-tao appeared and praised him for teaching the exclusive cultivation of nembutsu.36 However skeptical we of this modern age may be about the validity of such an experience, Honen would have considered it a genuine revelation and an initiation into discipleship in a patriarchal lineage centering on Meditation Master Shan-tao. Like his conviction that he lived in the age of degenerate dharma and his consequent personal commitment to the Pure
36Tamura Ench6 (1972:248-56) is skeptical of the authenticity of this account and argues that it was concocted to place H6nen within a continental lineage, but Akamatsu Toshihide (204-05) argues for its reliability.

Andrews: Japanese Religious History

493

Land dharma-gate, H6nen surely felt much more than a mere intellecof the Pure tual participation in this "teaching-transmission-bloodline" Land School. Conclusions Pure Land Buddhism was introduced to Japan as state religion in the Asukaperiod (552-646) and reintroduced as a form of monastic discipline in the ninth century. In the following three centuries much of the aristocracy gradually incorporated Pure Land faith into its religious life, and it was also appropriatedin a variety of forms by the folk. Yet, despite its popularity, Pure Land faith, and especially faith in salvation for even the unworthy by means of calling upon the name of Amida Buddha, was considered by establishment Buddhism as of only marginal efficacy and doubtful orthodoxy; exclusive faith in calling upon the sacred name was regarded as heretical and dangerous. Honen spent his formative years as a novice in a provincial temple where he was heavily exposed, no doubt, to popular Pure Land faith.37 In 1145 at the age of twelve he was ordained as a monk into one of the most powerful institutions of establishment Buddhism, the Tendai order. After five years of study of Tendai doctrines he moved to the nearby Tendai monastic retreat at Kurodani. There, as we noted, he pursued for many years the monastic, meditative form of nembutsu. His conversion in 1175 to exclusive faith in Amida Buddha and to the sole practice of the nembutsu of calling on the Buddha's name took place under the influence of the continental Pure Land popularizer Shan-tao. Thereafter, in his teaching and writings, but most thoroughly in the Senchakushd, H6nen strove to demonstrate the foundations in Buddhist tradition of his faith, to clarify its principles and to disseminate its practice. In the opening chapter of the Senchakushi, as we have seen, H6nen affirms the Pure Land way to be an ancient and authentic school of Buddha-dharma with its own unique doctrines, true scriptures, and venerable patriarchs. The insistence on the orthodoxy and autonomy of the Pure Land way was based on H6nen's personal experience, but it was also in response to the needs of many of his contemporaries for assurance of the authenticity and self-sufficiency of this alternative spiritual path, a path open to all and requiring only simple faith and practice. Largely through H6nen's efforts in the Senchakusht, the Pure Land way soon became established to meet
37 Although there is no record of an encounter with Pure Land faith at that time, given its pervasiveness in this period it is hardly possible that H6nen did not in those years gain exposure to it; considering his later history, it is probable that the exposure was extensive. On H6nen's life, see Tamura (1972).

494

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

these needs, not only as a school of doctrine, but in several vigorous institutionalized forms as well.38 Thus, H6nen's proclamation of a Pure Land School can be seen as the inaugurationin Japanese religious history of a new age of popular Buddhism.

REFERENCES
Akamatsu,Toshihide 1966 Zoku Kamakura Bukky6 no kenkyt [Further studies on KamakuraBuddhism]. Kyoto: HeirakujiShoten. Amitabha Sutra Amida kyj (BussetsuAmida ky6);Fu-shuo O-mi-t'oching; Sukhdvatf vyaha ndma mahdydna satra; T. 366. Andrews, Allan A. 1973 The Teachings Essential for Rebirth: A Study of Genshin's Ojjydsha (A Monumenta Nipponica Monograph). Tokyo: Sophia University Press. Assembled Passages on the Selected Nembutsu of the Original Vow Senchakushai(Senchaku hongan nembutsu sha); T. 2608; by H6nen-b6 Genkfi. Bellah, Robert N. 1974 "The Contemporary Meaning of KamakuraBuddhism," Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 42, 3-17.

Brown, Delmer M. and Ichir6 Ishida 1979 The Future and the Past: A Translationand Study of the Gukanshj. Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress. Ch'en, Kenneth 1964 Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Clarificationof Pure Land Problems Gungi ron (ShakuJodo gungi ron);Shih Ching-t'uch'un-i lun; T. 1960; by Huai-kan. Coates, Harper Havelock and Ryugaku Ishizuka, trans. 1925 Honen the Buddhist Saint: His Life and Teachings Compiled by Imperial Order-Translation, Historical Introduction, Explanatory and Critical Notes. Kyoto: Society for the Publication of Sacred Books of the World.
38 I1 am of course referring to the several Jodoshfi groups, to the J6do Shinshfi and to the Jishfi.

Andrews: Japanese Religious History

Collected Passages on the Land of Peace and Bliss Anraku shti; An-lo chi; T. 1958; by Tao-ch'o.

495

Commentaryon the Shastra on Pure Land Rebirth Oj(j roncha (Muryojuky6ubadaisha ganshoge cha); Wuliang-shou-ching yu-p'o-t'i-she yuan-sheng-chieh chu; T. 1819; by T'an-luan. Commentaryon the Ten Stages Jiron (Jtijiky6ron);Shih-ti-ching lun; Dasabhdmi vydkhydna; T. 1522; attributed to Vasubandhu. Compendium of the Mahayana Sh6ron (Sh6daij6 ron bon); Mahdydna samgraha; She-tach'eng lun pen; T. 1592-94; attributed to Asanga. Corless, Roger Jonathan 1973 "T'an-Luan'sCommentary on the Pure Land Discourse: An Annotated Translation and Soteriological Analysis of the Wang-sheng-lunchu." Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Wisconsin. Davis, Winston Bradley 1977 TowardModernity: A Developmental Typology of Popular Religious Affiliations in Japan (Cornell University East Asia Papers, Number 12). Ithaca: Cornell China-Japan Program. Essentials of Pure Land Rebirth Ojj6ysha; T. 2682; by Genshin. Foard, James H. 1980 "In Search of a Lost Reformation,"Japanese Journal of Religious Studies, 7/4, 261-291.

Great Assemblage Full Moon Sutra Daisha gatsuz6 ky6 (Daih6dd daishta ky6 [or daijikkyj], Gatsuzd bun); section 15 of the Mahdvaipulya mahd samnipdtta satra; Ta-fang-teng ta-chi ching, Yueh-ts'ang fen; T. 397. Haneda, Nobuo 1979 "The Development of the Concept of Prthaghjana, Culminating in Shan-tao's Pure Land Thought: The Pure Land Theory of Salvation of the Inferior." Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison.

496

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

Chihi-i: An Introduction to the Life and Ideas of a Chinese Buddhist Monk. Bruselles: l'Institute Belge des Hautes E'tudes Chinoises. Scriptureof the Lotus Blossom of the Fine Dharma. New York: Columbia University Press. Chase Bukky6 shis6shi kenkyd [Studies in the History of Medieval Buddhist Thought]. Rev. ed. Kyoto: H6z6kan.

Hurvitz, Leon 1962

1976, trans. Ienaga, Sabur6 1963

Tamamuro,eds. lenaga, Sabur6,Toshihide Akamatsu,and Taijo6 1967-68 Nihon Bukky6 shi [A history of Japanese Buddhism]. 3 vols. Kyoto: H6z6kan. Inoue, Mitsusada 1975 Nihon J6doky6 seiritsushi no kenkyti [Studies in the history of the establishment of Japanese Pure Land Buddhism]. Rev. ed. Tokyo: YamakawaShuppansha. Ishida, Mitsuyuki 1976 Senchakusha kenkydjosetsu [Introductionto the study of the Senchaku shfu]. Kyoto: Hyakkaen. Ishii, Ky6d6, ed. 1955 1969 It6, Yuishin 1981 Sho6wa shinsha H6nen Sh6nin zensha [Sh6wa edition of the complete works of H6nen]. Tokyo: J6do Shfi Musho. Senchaku sha zenk6 [Commentaryon the Senchaku sha]. Kyoto: HeirakujiShoten. J6doshd no seiritsu to tenkai [The establishment and development of the Pure Land Denomination]. Tokyo: YoshikawaK6bunkan.

Joyous Road to the Land of Peace and Bliss Yishin anraku do; Yu-hsin an-lo-tao; T. 1965; by Yuanhsiao. Kamata,Shigeo and Hisao Tanaka, eds. 1971 KamakurakydtBukky6 (Nihon shis6 taikei 15) [Traditional KamakuraBuddhism (An Outline of Japanese thought, Vol. 15)]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten. Kaneko, Kansai 1978 "H6nen no shfi kannen ni tsuite" [Honen's view of "shi"], Nihon Bukkyd, 44, 1-20.

Andrews: Japanese Religious History

497

Katsuki,J6k6, ed. 1972 J6doshi kais6ki no kenkyti [Studies on the initial phase of the J6doshfi]. Kyoto: HeirakujiShoten. Keene, Donald 1955 Kofukuji Petition K6fukuji sdj6; by Jo6kei. Larger Sutra See Sutra of the Buddha of Limitless Life. Lives of Eminent Masters (of the T'ang and Sung Dynasties) T6s6 rydden: Two texts--the Zoku k6s6den,Hsu kao-seng chuan, T 2060; and the S6 kjs6 den, Sung Kao-seng chuan, T. 2061. Lotus of the TrueLaw Hoke ky6 (Myjh6 renge ky6); Miao-fa lien-hua ching; Saddharma pundarfka stitra; T. 262. Matsunaga,Alicia and Daigan Matsunaga 1976 Foundations of Japanese Buddhism, Vol. II, The Mass Movement. Los Angeles and Tokyo: Buddhist Books International. Mizuno, K6gen 1966 Anthology of Japanese Literature. New York: Grove Press.

Shin Butten kaidai jiten [New dictionary of Buddhist texts]. Tokyo: Shunjuisha.

Mochizuki, Shink6 1942 ChtigokuJ6do kydrishi [History of Pure Land doctrines in China]. Kyoto: H6z6kan. Morohashi,Tetsuji, ed. 1968 Daikanwa jiten [Chinese-Japanesecharacter dictionary], 13 vols. Tokyo: Daishukan Shoten. Morrell, Robert E. 1983 and the K6fukuji Petition," Japanese Journal of "Jo6kei Religious Studies, 10/ 1, 6-38. Nakamura,Hajime, ed. 1975 Bukky6go daijiten [Dictionary of Buddhist terms], 3 Vols. Tokyo: T6ky6 Shoseki KabushikiKaisha.

498

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

Nelson, Andrew N. 1966 The Modern Reader's Japanese-English Character Dictionary. Rev. ed. Rutland, Vermont and Tokyo, Japan: Charles E. Tuttle Co. Ohashi, Shunn6 [Toshio]. 1971, ed. H6nen-Ippen (Nihon shis6 taikei 10) [H6nen and Ippen (An Outline of Japanese thought, Vol. 10)]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten. 1972 H6nen: Sono kj6d to shis6 (Nihonjin no k6dd to shis6 1) [H6nen: His life and thought (The lives and thought of Japanese, Vol. I)]. Tokyo: Hy6ronsha. Saunders, E. Dale Buddhism in Japan, With an Outline of its Origins in In1964 dia. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Shastra on Pure Land Rebirth Ojjdron (Mury6juky6 ubadaisha); Wu-liang-shou-ching yu-p'o-t'i-she;Sukhdvatfvytiha upadeia; T. 1524; attributed to Vasubandhu. Shastra on the Ten Bodhisattva Stage Jiijij bibasha ron; Shih-chu p'i-p'o-sha lun; Dadabhtimika T. 1521; ascribed to Nagarjuna. vibhdsd sidstra; Shigematsu, Akihisa 1964 Nihon J6doky6 seiritsu katei no kenkyti [Studies on the process of establishment of Japanese Pure Land Buddhism]. Kyoto: HeirakujiShoten. Shinoda, Minoru 1960 The Founding of the Kamakura Shogunate, 1160-1185: With Selected Translations from the Azuma Kagami. New York: Columbia University Press.

Standard Interpretationson the WesternLand Saih6 y6ketsu (Saih6 y6ketsu shakugi tsdki); Hsi-fang yao-chueh shih-i t'ung-kuei; T. 1964; by K'uei-chi (Tz'uen). Sutra of Contemplation on the Buddha of Limitless Life Kangy6 (Bussetsu kan Murydjubutsuky6); Fo-shuo kuan Wu-liang-shou-foching; T. 365. Sutra of Inconceivable Truth Mury6gi ky6; Wu-liang-i ching; Ananta nirdeia; T. 276.

Andrews: Japanese Religious History

499

Sutra of the Buddha of Limitless Life Mury6ju ky6 (Bussetsu mury6ju kyd); Fo-shuo wu-liangshou ching; Sukhdvati vytiha stitra; T. 360. T 1924-32 Taish6shinshi daiz6ky6 [Taish6Period revised edition of the Chinese Buddhist Canon]. Ed. by TakakusaJunjir6. 100 vols. Tokyo: Taish6 Shinshuf Daizoky6 Kank6kai. H6nen (Jimbutsu s6sho 36) [H6nen (Biographical series, Vol. 36)]. Tokyo: YoshikawaK6bunkan. Nihon Bukky6 shis6shi kenkyti: J6dokyd hen [Studies in the history of Japanese Buddhism: Pure Land Buddhism]. Tokyo: HeirakujiShoten. H6nen Sh6nin den no kenkyti [Studies on the biographies of H6nen]. Revised edition. Kyoto: H6z6kan.

Tamura, Ench6 1959a 1959b 1972

Treatiseon the Pure Land J6do ron; Ching-t'u lun; T. 1963; by Chia-ts'ai. Troeltsch, Ernst 1931 Social Teachings of the Christian Churches. New York: The MacMillanCompany.

Yamamoto,Bukkotsu 1959 D6shaku ky6gaku no kenkyti [The religious thought of Tao-ch'o]. Kyoto: Nagata Bunshod6.