On the Classification of Buddhist Doctrines in Shingon Lepekhova E. S.9 Abstract This study is concerned with the classification of Buddhist doctrines in the compositions of Kukai (Kobo-daishi, 774‑835)―the founder of Japan’s Shingon Buddhist school. During my comparative analysis of the classification of Buddhist doctrines at other Japanese Buddhist schools (Risshu, Hosso and Kegon), I put forward the assumption that the system of classification of Buddhist doctrines in Shingon differed from other Buddhist schools. Shingon’s doctrines specified the position of various Buddhist schools within the Buddhist world, expressed in its depiction of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas in mandalas, which are objects of ritual worship in Shingon. Key words: Kukai (Kobo-Daishi), Risshu, Hosso, Kegon, Shingon. Lepekhova E. S. is a senior research fellow, PhD in philology, Institute of Oriental Studies Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia. ([email protected]) International Journal of Buddhist Thought & Culturer February 2012, vol. 18, pp. 47-62. ⓒ 2012 International Association for Buddhist Thought & Culture The day of submission: 2011.12.14 / Completion of review: 2012.1.4 / Final decision for acceptance: 2012.1.13 48 Lepekhova E. S.: On the Classification of Buddhist Doctrines in Shingons I. The Classification of Buddhist Doctrines in Japanese Buddhist schools in the 8th and 9th Centuries Classification of Buddhist doctrines is an integral part and one of the main characteristics of Buddhist philosophy. As a rule, a main objective of this classification is to illustrate the superiority of certain Buddhist doctrines over others through detailed analysis and discussion. The various descriptions of these Buddhist doctrine’s in various sources gave modern researchers the opportunity to study Buddhist philosophy. However, in analyzing them, it is possible to see not only specific differences between mutual perceptions and criticisms, but it also reveals some doctrinal aspects not emphasized earlier. In this respect, the study of the classification of Buddhist schools in Japan in the 8th and 9th centuries is especially interesting. Six Buddhist schools in Japan were organized at the end of the 7th century but prior to the 8th century. They are known as the “six schools of the Nara period” (Nanto Rokushu 南都六宗). They were: Sanron-shu (三論 宗) which taught madhyamika; Hosso-shu (法相宗) which taught yogacara; Kegon-shu (華嚴宗) which specialized in avatamsaka; Kusya-shu (倶舎宗), the school of abhidharma; Jojitsu-shu (成実宗), which was affiliated with the Sanron school and was based on the traditions of satyasiddhi; and Ritsu-shu (律宗) which interpreted vinaya. Later, at the end of the 8th century and beginning of the 9th, two other Buddhist schools appeared in Japan: Tendai-shu (天台宗) and Shingon-shu (真言宗). The doctrines of Tendai-shu were based on verses from the Lotus Sutra (Saddharma-pundarika sutra, Hokke-kyo 法華経), and the Shingon-shu school taught the esoteric Buddhism of Vajrayana. The appearance of Vajrayana had a special meaning for Japanese Buddhism as new forms of Vedic and Hinduism taught in Tantric Buddhism merged with it. Like Tendai-shu, Shingon proclaimed that everyone is capable of becoming a Buddha. But, for the first time in Japanese Buddhist history, the Shingon doctrine also taught that enlightenment can be attained in one’s current life by means of magic rituals (Sokushin Jobutsu 即身成仏). International Journal of Buddhist Thought & Culture 49 It is natural that the study of all the various Buddhist doctrines present in Japan at that time was the educational basis in these schools, and an important part of this education was the classification of Buddhist doctrines established by the various schools. For example, the Hosso-shu Buddhists classified Buddhist schools by dividing Sakyamuni Buddha’s sermons into three distinct periods. In the first period, Buddha taught the doctrine of Dharma and the theory of causality, which then became the dogma of Kusya-shu (abhidharma). In the second period, Buddha taught his disciples that “all Dharmas are empty.” Therefore, according to Hosso-shu classification, the doctrine of this period is that of the Sanron school (madhyamika). In the third period, Buddha taught about overcoming the extremes of the first two periods, which is the basis of Hosso doctrine (yogacara) (Doju 1899, 13). In the Ritsu system, the doctrines of the Nara schools were classified according to so-called “regulating doctrines,” i.e., vows and precepts. The doctrines of Buddhist schools were classified according to their vows: 1) doctrines in which vows regulate Dharmas of feelings, i.e., Kusya-shu; 2) doctrines in which vows are based on changing Dharmas, or Jojitsu-shu; 3) the perfect doctrine which comprehends the essence of vows―Hosso-shu (Shakuryu 1899, 21). In Kegon-shu, the doctrines of Buddhist schools are classified according to the “four shapes of the Dharma world.” The “Dharma world” is the basic philosophical foundation of Kegon. In this world, phenomena (ji 事) and the absolute (ri 理) both appear simultaneously. This appearance is the testament to the presence of the primary nature of the Buddha in the Dharma world (Kavano 1899, 16). The classification of the “Dharma world’s forms” was developed in Kegon doctrine to reflect the basic identities of ji and ri: 1) Ji-hokkai 事法界—the phenomenal world in which all phenomena are divided. 2) Ri-hokkai 理法界—the world of absolute reality in which the 50 Lepekhova E. S.: On the Classification of Buddhist Doctrines in Shingons true meaning of phenomena is comprehended. 3) Ji-ri muge hokkai 事理無礙法界—the world in which phenomenon and the absolute are undivided. 4) Ji-ji muge hokkai 事事無礙法界—the world in which the identity of a phenomenon and the absolute is comprehended. According to Kegon doctrine, the doctrines of the following schools correspond to the four principal views of the Dharma world: Ji-hokkai is described in the doctrines of Hinayana: Ri-hokkai—Sanron and Hosso, Ji-ri muge hokkai—Tendai-shu, Ji-ji muge hokkai—Kegon-shu (Ui 1941, 160‑61). Kavano H. supposed that this classification system revealed a main aspect of Kegon doctrine: there are no oppositions between subjects and phenomena in a phenomenal reality. Phenomena are all identical and can interpenetrate each other. The relationship between the absolute and any phenomenon are characterized in the same way (Kavano 1899, 17). Another researcher, J. Chang, believes that this classification of Buddhist schools reveals a basic difference between Kegon doctrine and the doctrines of Sanron and Hosso. He believes the system of the “four shapes of the Dharma world” was taught to overcome the “negative” dialectic of Sanron-shu and the idealism of Hosso-shu. In Kegon-shu, the definition of “absolute” or “emptiness” (shunya) was interpreted positively as “completeness and generality,” unlike in Sanron. As to the characteristics of phenomena in the Kegon doctrine, it was considered as the identity and distinction of all objects at the same time, while in Hosso doctrine, phenomenal life was reduced exclusively to the signs of seven vijnyana (Chang 1971, 183). II. The Classification of Buddhist Doctrines in Shingon-shu In Shingon, Buddhism was divided into esoteric (Mikkyo 密教) and exoteric (Kenkyo 顯教). An exoteric doctrine is similar to “conditional truth” in madhyamika: it helps in the initial stage of comprehension of the “hollowness” of the phenomenal world, but it doesn’t give full enlightenment. In esoteric Buddhism, the “secret doctrine” (Mikkyo 密教) helps one to understand their own Buddha nature. International Journal of Buddhist Thought & Culture 51 A more detailed classification of Buddhist doctrines is presented in the compositions of Kukai (空海, Kobo-daishi 弘法大師, 774‑835)―the founder of Singon-shu in Japan. In his treatise The Secret Key to the Prajnya-paramita hridaya-sutra (Hannya shingyo hiken 般若心経祕鍵), Kukai described the doctrines of the six Nara schools as “Five Vehicles.” He merged the Risshu and Jojitsu schools into the “Vehicle of Two Ways,” referring to the Hinayanist maintenance of their doctrines. According to Kukai, each school represents the activity (or samadhi) of various Tantric Buddhas and deities. In Kukai’s system, the doctrine of Kegon is the samadhi of the Creating Tathagata, or Bodhisattva Samantabhadra (Kukai 1999a, 91). In his opinion, the school’s doctrine of undivided phenomenon (ri) and the absolute (ji) completely corresponds to the nature of Samantabhadra. Sanron-shu is an emanation of Bodhisattva Manjushri (Tathagata, free from all groundless reasoning). As Kukai shows, the assertions of madhyamika theorists that “all Dharmas are initially empty,” which is the basis of Sanron, illustrate well the moment when Manjushri’s sharp sword of wisdom cut through all errors and defilements (ibid., 91). The yogacara school of Hosso is actually the samadhi of Bodhisattva Maitreya, and the law of cause and effect studied in Hosso is a display of his great compassion. Arguing on distinctions between essence and visibility, it denies the duality of the world of form, declaring that there is only consciousness (ibid.). Kukai also says that Ritsu and Jojitsu are the samadhi of the Shravakas and Pratyeka Buddhas respectively. Considered a branch of Sanron, Jojitsu-shu’s philosophy of “real-life Dharmas” corresponds to the spirit of the Pratyeka Buddhas, and according to Kukai, “The Vehicle of Shravakas” represents the doctrines of Ritsu which systematizes regulations for Buddhist monks and nuns (ibid., 93). Tendai-shu, designated by Kukai as the school of a “United Way,” represents the samadhi of Avalokiteshvara (Tathagata, which nature is pure). It teaches all sentient beings that the Three Vehicles merge into the One Vehicle, whose way is as pure as a lotus flower which grows in mud (ibid.). 52 Lepekhova E. S.: On the Classification of Buddhist Doctrines in Shingons In another Kukai composition, The Precious Key to a Secret Treasury (Hizouhōuron 祕藏寶論) the doctrines of the Buddhist schools are likened to the various medicines which the “King of Healing” (Buddha) applies to heal the afflictions of sentient beings.