Systematizing Tantric Practices - Essay Example

SYSTEMIZING TANTRIC PRACTICES IN JAPANESE BUDDHISM Premise The history of Buddhism spans almost 2,500 years from its origin in India with Siddhartha Gautama (c. 480-400 BCE), through its spread to most parts of Asia and, in the twentieth century, to the West. While its fortunes have waxed and waned over the ages, over half of the present world population live in areas where Buddhism is, or has been, a dominant cultural force. These vast teachings were never written down in the life-time of the great Buddha. The credit for this goes to his spiritual heirs i.e. the Indian Buddhists. After the Buddha's death (perhaps in the 5th or 4th century BCE), it is said that 500 of the Buddha's enlightened disciples came together and recited all the sermons (sutras) and precepts (vinaya) that the Buddha had taught. This recitation was passed down as an oral tradition until the first century BCE when the Pali Canon was first recorded in Sri Lanka. The various schools of Buddhist thought were broadly categorized as the Southern school and the Northern school. The Southern schools also referred to the Theravadin schools, relating to the Individual Vehicle or Hinayana and prevalent more in Sri Lanka, Burma and Thailand. The Northern Schools corresponded to the Universal Vehicle or Mahayana and developed in and spread to China, Japan, Mongolia and Tibet. In the Mahayana there is the Perfection Vehicle or Paramitayana, which is also known as the sutra system and the Adamantine Vehicle or Vajrayana. Vajrayana is also known as Tantrayana through practice of the four classes of tantras which are 1) Action or Kriya, 2) Performance or Carya, 3) Yoga or Anuttara and 4) Mahaanuttara or Highest Yoga tantra. Advent of Buddhism in Japan To some extent, Japanese Buddhism can be thought of as a series of imports from China. The arrival of Buddhism in Japan has three main characteristics. Firstly, it did not come to Japan on a popular level, but was only accepted by the imperial court and then disseminated in the country from the top. Secondly, Buddhism was often associated with magic powers, and was used by the court as a means of preventing or curing disease, bringing rain and abundant crops etc. Thirdly, Buddhism did not replace the indigenous kami, but always recognized their existence and power. Nara Period. The initial period, later known as the Nara period, saw the introduction onto Japanese soil of the six great Chinese schools, including the Hua-Yen and Lu, which became respectively the Kegon and Ritsu in Japanese. However, the Buddhism of this early period was not a practical religion, being more the domain of learned priests. This led to the growth of "people's priests" Their practice was a combination of Buddhist and Taoist elements, and the incorporation of shamanistic features of the indigenous religion. Heian Period (794-1185). The comprehensive syntheses of the Chinese doctrine by Saicho and Kukai, two systems of teaching and practice were created. Saicho founded the Tendai School, whose essential doctrine was the teaching in the Lotus Sutra that the possibility of salvation is given to all. Kukai propounded a doctrine known as the True Word, Shingon. Esoteric practices were very influential to the point that they dominated the Heian period. Kamakura Period (1185-1333) The Tendai and Shingon schools declined, and more earthy democratic movements such as Zen and the devotional schools advanced. The first of the three great traditions of Kamakura Buddhism was the doctrine of the Pure Land. Genku (1133-1212), better known as Honen concentrated on an intensified religious feeling which found expression in the simple invocation of the name Namu-Amida-Butsu, stamped by unshakeable faith in rebirth into Amida's paradise. Honen's successor, Shinran-Shonin (1173-1262) founded the True Sect of the Pure Land, Jodo-shinshu. He explained that the doctrine, practice, belief and realization are all given by Amida Buddha and that nothing depends on one's "own power" (jiriki). Instead, everything depends on the "power of the other" (tariki), namely that of the Buddha Amida. Zen Buddhism, first created by the Tendai monk Eisai (1141-1215), teaches that man can come to deliverance and Enlightenment only from his own strength (jiriki). A second Chinese school of Zen, the Ts'ao-tung (Soto in Japanese), was introduced to Japan by Dogen (1200-1253). The foundation of Dogen's Zen is the constantly emphasized principle that practice does not lead to Enlightenment, but is carried out in the state of being enlightened; otherwise it is not practice. The final great reformer and sect-founder of the Kamakura period was Nichiren (1222-82). Nichiren thought that for the simple ordinary person, Tendai dogma and the reading of the Lotus Sutra were too difficult. He proclaimed that the title, Myoho-renge-kyo, was the essence of the whole sutra, and that it was in fact identical with the state of Enlightenment of Shakyamuni Buddha. It was therefore sufficient to utter the title and find oneself in the state of highest enlightenment. Later Periods The demise of the Kamakura regime signaled the end of the truly creative phase of Japanese Buddhism. A slide into stagnation occurred, which was to broadly last until the end of the nineteenth century. In the 14th and 15th centuries Rinzai Zen sect led to the creation of what is known as the "Culture of the Five Mountains" which constitutes the summit of Japanese Zen culture. The Tokugawa Shogunate encouraged the Buddhist clergy of the sects in scholarly pursuits, hoping thereby to divert them from politics. By the second half of the seventeenth century, editions of the Buddhist canon appeared, the most influential being that by Tetsugen of the new Obaku-shu sect. Hakuin (1685-1768) is considered to be the restorer of the Rinzai sect in modern times. He revived the use of the koan, statements of Zen masters that are used as problems set to novices in Zen monasteries. INITIAL RECORDING OF BUDDHA'S TEACHINGS Our knowledge of the teachings of the Buddha is based on several canons of scripture, which derive from the early Sangha's oral transmission of bodies of teachings agreed on at several councils. These canons gradually diverged as different floating oral traditions were drawn on, and systematizing texts peculiar to each school were added. The Theravadin 'Pali Canon', preserved in the Pali language, is the most complete extant early canon, and contains some of the earliest material. Most of its teachings are in fact the common property of all Buddhist schools, being simply the teachings which the Theravadins preserved from the early common stock. The Mahayana, though, added much to this stock. While parts of the Pali Canon clearly originated after the time of the Buddha, much must derive from his teachings. There is an overall harmony to the Canon, suggesting 'authorship' of its system of thought by one mind. The early canons contain a section on Vinaya, or monastic discipline, and one on Sutras or 'discourses' of the Buddha, and some contain one on Abhidharma or 'further teachings', which systematizes the Sutra-teachings in the form of detailed analyses of human experience. The main teachings of Buddhism are contained in the Sutras, which in the Pali Canon are divided into five Nikayas or 'Collections'. The Pali Canon was one of the earliest to be written down, in Sri Lanka in around 80 BCE, after which little, if any, new material was added to it. The extensive non-canonical Pali literature includes additional Abhidharma works, historical chronicles, and many volumes of commentaries. An extremely clear introduction to many points of Buddhist doctrine is the Milindapanha , a first century CE text which purports to record conversations between a Buddhist monk and Milinda (c. 155-130 BCE), a king of Greek ancestry. Mahayana texts were composed from around the first century BCE, originating as written works in a hybrid form of Sanskrit rather than as oral compositions. While many are Sutras attributed to the Buddha, their form and content clearly show that they were later restatements and extensions of the Buddha's message. The main sources for our understanding of Mahayana teachings are the very extensive Chinese and Tibetan Buddhist Canons. While most of the Pali Canon has been translated into English; only selected texts from these have been translated into Western languages, though much progress is being made. GENESIS OF TANTRIC PRACTICES IN JAPANESE BUDDHISM Esoteric practices, known as Tantrism, were present in Buddhism even in the Nara and Heian periods. In Japanese these are known as Mikkyo. Some of these practices were meant for the protection of the state and some were meant as individual practices to gain various siddhi. Since these practices were opposite to the Buddhist ideal of renunciation and stressed material gains it was Tantric in nature. The Nara Mikkyo is known as Zomitsu and has been criticized by later Shingon scholars for being "unsystematic" and "fragmentary". In sharp contrast is the Junmitsu, which is considered to be pure, systematic and mature esoteric teachings. Junmitsu was introduced in Japan by Kokai. The Mikky daijiten defines junmitsu as a synonym for rybu mikky, a form of Mikky that combines the doctrines and practices of the Womb (taiz ) system and the Diamond or Vajra (kong) system. Junmitsu is believed to be the direct expression of the enlightenment of Dainichi Nyorai , the personification of the Dharmakaya (MD, p. 1108). Zmitsu is synonymous with zbu mikky, that is, everything in Mikky that cannot be reduced to junmitsu. It comprises conditioned doctrines and rituals propounded by Dainichi Nyorai's three communicational and transformational bodies and as such is explicitly inferior to rybu. There are two kinds of Buddhist teachings, esoteric and exoteric. Esoteric teachings are secret teachings that are given to selected students. Exoteric teachings are never secret. Before you can receive an esoteric teaching you must undergo a special ceremony to empower you to receive it. Esoteric Buddhism is also called tantra, it features symbolic gestures called mudras, it has mystic syllables called dharanis, and repetitious sounds called mantras. Dainichi Buddha secretly gave esoteric teachings to various famous teachers, one of whom was Nagarjuna. Shakyamuni Buddha taught exoteric teachings openly to everyone. In 1254, after declaring his faith in "The Lotus Sutra" publicly (On April 28, 1253 CE) Nichiren created a document that dealt with Fudo and Aizen. It includes drawings of these two Kings of Knowledge, mantras that deal with them and inscriptions where Nichiren identifies himself "As belonging to the twenty third generation of a lineage directly descended from "Maha-Vairocana Buddha" or Dainichi. ("Criticism and Appropriation" Lucia Dolce, 1999) Buddhist temples and religious organizations were controlled by the state. As late as 885 I found famous Buddhist teachers petitioning the royal court for land grants to help support their monasteries. The state controlled the number of priests any order could have and approved the candidates beforehand. Monastic officials were court appointed, and promotions with corresponding titles were issued at the pleasure of the ruler. Japan considered itself a Buddhist country, but the religion personally affected few people outside the priesthood. One of the reasons for this change was the arrival of two 'new' schools of Buddhist thought. Saicho (B. 767-822 CE), or Dengyo founded the Tendai sect in 806 CE and Kukai (B 774-835 CE), or Kobo founded the Shingon or 'True word' school in 809 CE. They had an unusual relationship; Saicho was a student of Kukai's teaching long after both were heads of their respective schools because Kukai had more exposure to esoteric training when he was in China. Many of the books Saicho used were copied from Kukai's library. Mr. Toshio wrote extensively about this period of development in Japanese Buddhism. When examining the schools of this era he concludes that they, "Did not exist alongside each other in a reciprocally opposing, mutually exclusive relationship, as is commonly believed today, but rather comprised a mildly competitive religious order resting on a shared base. This base was composed of thaumaturgic beliefs, practices for pacifying spirits, and (from the doctrinal standpoint) the esoteric teachings. Esoteric Buddhism was thus recognized by all eight schools as the universal and absolute truth, upon which the schools expounded their distinctive doctrines." ("The Development of the Kenmitsu System as Japan's Medieval Orthodoxy," 1996) The word Mr. Toshio created to describe this development of Japanese Buddhist thought was 'Kenmitsu'. 'Ken' indicates exoteric, rational, 'revealed' truth while 'mitsu' means something secret and psychological. The Mixture of exoteric and esoteric into 'Kenmitsu' helped bring into being a personalized form of Buddhist practice in the tenth century. So the ninth century was a time where all the schools of Japanese Buddhism became unified under the banner of Kenmitsu, with, at that time, very little 'Ken', it was mostly 'mitsu'. Oya Takujo wrote, "In the end they all merged into the current of esoteric Buddhism, producing three branches: Tendai esotericism (called Taimitsu), Shingon Esotericism, (Tomitsu) and Nara Esotericism." THE KENMITSU IDEOLOGY The ideology of kenmitsu was introduced by Kkai in his Ben kenmitsu niky ron as a means of defining the polar relation between the Shingon esoteric system and preexisting teachings, which he considered superficial and provisional. In this respect Kkai reversed traditional hermeneutical criteria, turning what was "evident" (ken teachings that are clear and self-evident without problems of interpretation) into something "superficial," and what was "hidden" or "not immediately evident" (mitsu , teachings related to a certain intention of the Buddha and therefore apparently unclear and requiring interpretation) into something "profound and true." Kkai's understanding of the term kenmitsu came to be widely accepted, and after the late Heian period was commonly used to designate the whole Buddhist system (although Kkai's redistribution of doctrines and practices was rooted in the old idea of the existence of a secret transmission of the true teachings and rituals of the Buddha- an East Asian counterpart of the European hermetic mysteries). In this manner, Kkai opened the way for a definition of the Mikky discursive field as comprising that which the other doctrines do not teach, that which the other schools ignore and leave unsaid. The silence of the Buddha marked the boundaries of Shingon intervention. The real kenmitsu matrix of the Shingon school emerged during the late Heian period with the appearance of a new literary genre: the treatises on the distinction between ken and mitsu by such great scholars and religious figures as Saisen (1025-1115), Jitsuhan (-1144), and Kakuban (1095-1143). Generally ignored by scholars today, these men were directly responsible for the creation of medieval Mikky. The word kenmitsu, meaning "exoteric-esoteric," refers to the body of beliefs and practices that bound medieval religion together as a coherent and comprehensive worldview. The scope of this worldview went beyond the parameters commonly ascribed to Buddhism, for it included beliefs and practices associated with kami, which today are categorized as Shinto. Under this kenmitsu umbrella, separate lineages or schools were recognized-the number of Buddhist schools was traditionally set at eight (Tendai, Shingon, and the six Nara schools)-and they each developed their own exoteric teachings, doctrinal systems that rationalized and under-girded religious practices. But they were all united in their common recognition of the efficacy of esoteric beliefs and practices (mikky ). Esoteric teachings were first popularized in Japan by Kkai (774-835) who founded the Shingon school, but the Tendai school, founded by Saich (767-822), later developed and elaborated them, and brought them to maturity in the ninth century. These esoteric teachings pervaded virtually all religious institutions of the age, and were supported by and harmonized with their individual exoteric doctrines. Though there were countless variations of esoteric and exoteric teachings-Tendai being the foremost-collectively they constituted the single worldview that Kuroda called kenmitsu Buddhism. It was this system of Buddhism, Kuroda claimed, that was the orthodoxy of medieval times, persisting in varying degrees into the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The orthodox structure of medieval religion encompassed both esoteric practice and exoteric doctrine, but the esoteric dimension was commonly recognized as superior. One thing that made it dominant was the power that esoteric teachings were thought to embody. Buddhism offered, of course, a path to enlightenment, but it did so amid a vast spirit world that was part and parcel of medieval life. In navigating one's way through this world-avoiding harm and seeking advantage in both spiritual and worldly affairs- people availed themselves of the magical and mysterious powers of esoteric ritual. Esotericism's capacity to avert danger and secure benefit was considered especially great because it was seen as the product of the universal teachings of Mahayana Buddhism, thus putting it far beyond the spells of a local miracle worker or shaman. These esoteric practices w ere employed particularly to pacify ominous or vengeful spirits who had been wronged in life and died in misfortune. Cults of ominous spirits proliferated in Japan during the ninth and tenth centuries, coalescing especially around court officials who died in disgrace amid political intrigue. Esoteric ritual, which had attained widespread acceptance by then, became a standard means of pacifying spirits of the dead and transforming them into beneficent and heroic spirits. In short, it provided a mechanism for domesticating the spirit world. One of the early uses of the nenbutsu-chanting the name of the Buddha Amida-was simply to calm and succor the spirits of the dead. Hence esoteric practices worked hand in hand with spirit cults to confirm the validity of kenmitsu Buddhism. Kuroda emphasized that kenmitsu Buddhism should be seen not only as a comprehensive religious worldview but also as a unifying ideology for the medieval state. The mechanism through which this religion-state linkage occurred was the doctrine that the imperial law (b) and the Buddhist teachings (bupp ) were mutually dependent and supporting. From early in Japan's history, Buddhism was widely perceived as a "protector of the state" (chingo kokka), but the b-bupp doctrine, which took shape around the eleventh century, implied a more complex and integrated relationship, such as that between the two wings of a bird or the two wheels of a cart. The Buddhist teachings were said to spread by means of the imperial law, and the imperial law to prosper through the support of Buddhism. The two were considered to be intertwined, and to flourish in conjunction with each other. Without one, the other was incomplete. Kenmitsu Buddhism actively embraced the role of ideological partner of the state, and generated much of the doctrinal rationale for it, as well as for the legitimating of imperial rule. Kenmitsu Buddhism functioned in the medieval setting not simply as a source of ideological justification, but also as one of the institutional pillars of society. KURODA TOSHIO'S THEORY OF THE KENMITSU TAISEI Kuroda Toshio's Theory of the kenmitsu taisei (exoteric/esoteric system) has long occupied an important position in the historical study of Japanese Buddhism. The kenmitsu taisei theory attempts to synthesize the various developmental phases of Japanese Buddhism. The kenmitsu taisei theory is rather ambiguous, and it can be risky to use it without a thorough understanding of its content. Kuroda was a committed Marxist dedicated to social change in Japan. He was one of the last of the progressive intellectual giants of postwar Japan. The kenmitsu taisei theory was proposed as a critique of the New Buddhism-centered view. That transcendental evaluations have gone largely unchallenged is one of the most serious problems in postwar Japanese historical scholarship. They believed that the processes of Japanese modernization were unbalanced during the period between the Meiji Restoration and World War II, and needed correction if Japan was to be rebuilt along truly modern lines. This "progressive" stance influenced views of religious history, making it easier, for example, to judge the Pure Land teachings of figures like Hnen and Shinran as more modern and thus more advanced than other expressions of Buddhism. Positioning such teachings at the center of New Buddhism was the logical result. When doubts arose about the progressive view in the 1970s, Kuroda proposed the kenmitsu taisei theory in an attempt to open a new approach to Buddhist historical interpretation. Reflecting Kuroda's basic Marxist orientation, the theory brilliantly caught the intellectual currents of the times, though it retained certain elements of the New Buddhism-centered view (such as a belief in the superiority of Hnen and Shinran). Although Kuroda first proposed the kenmitsu taisei theory 1975, he had for quite some time been concerned with the methodological problems involved in the study of intellectual and religious history. His main work in this area appeared in the form of two articles, A Note On The Methodology Of Intellectual History first published in 1960 and Methods And Achievements In The Study Of Buddhist History first published in 1962. Although these articles present a more dogmatic standpoint than that taken in later work, they display certain elements that would find fuller expression in the kenmitsu taisei theory. In the former article Kuroda asserts that a scientific methodology for the historical study of thought and culture has yet to be established, and proposes a large-scale hermeneutic approach that would objectively locate religious ideas within the totality of history. His kenmitsu taisei theory of later years may be seen as an attempt to implement this proposal. In the latter article Kuroda identifies four approaches to the study of Buddhist history: sectarian studies, Buddhist studies, orthodox historical studies, and folklore studies. After examining the background of these four approaches he identifies their respective problems, and then once again asserts the necessity for a comprehensive methodology that deals with the history of Buddhism as part of religious and intellectual history. He adds that this is possible only if we apply objective categories that reveal the relation between this history and contemporary social constructs. This too he attempted to actualize in his kenmitsu taisei theory. Kuroda introduced the kenmitsu taisei theory in his book Nihon chsei no kokka to shky (1975). The kenmitsu taisei theory is not easy to understand, resulting as it did from Kuroda's struggle to transform the old historical paradigm. Many basic concepts appear to shift in meaning from one article to the next, and the distinctions between such key terms as kenmitsu taisei, kenmitsu Buddhism, and kenmitsu shugi (exo-esotericism) are often blurred. Generally speaking, kenmitsu Buddhism is a higher category, with exo-esotericism and the kenmitsu taisei forming subdivisions of it; exo-esotericism comprises the ideological or logical aspect, while the kenmitsu taisei comprises the institutional aspect. According to Kuroda, exo-esotericism is a system of logic that interprets Buddhism-and indeed all religion-from the standpoints of exotericism and esotericism, and attempts to understand it in terms of the relationship between the two. Kuroda does not place exotericism and esotericism on the same level, however, saying that exo-esotericism developed within a framework that accepted the absolute superiority of the esoteric aspect. Indeed, exo-esotericism might be characterized as a distinctively Japanese form of esotericism. The kenmitsu taisei-the institutional aspect-emerged as a result of the connection between the government authorities and the kenmitsu-based sects. This system gained influence through the support of the large temples of Nara and Mt Hiei, which comprised important elements of the medieval kenmon taisei (ruling elites) power structure. Thus the kenmitsu taisei was by no means a mere conceptual or cultural construct, but formed a solid order in its own right with a secular presence backed by governmental power and associated social groups . In Kuroda's opinion, exo-esotericism emerged and developed in the ninth century and reached maturity in both its doctrinal and organizational aspects during the tenth century. The kenmitsu taisei, in contrast, began to take form towards the end of the tenth century and became an established system in the latter half of the eleventh century. The revival movements that emerged in the late twelfth century formed a heterodox-reformist challenge to the orthodoxy, but did not seriously shake the foundations of the old system. It was only with the conflicts of the mid-fifteenth to mid-sixteenth-century sengoku jidai (warring states period) and the consequent breakdown in the medieval power structure that the kenmitsu taisei finally lost its historical vitality. As even this quite brief summary shows, the kenmitsu taisei theory opened a much wider perspective on the established Buddhism of the medieval ages. Previously relegated to a secondary role by the proponents of the New Buddhism-centered view, "Old Buddhism" was suddenly shown to have had a great richness of its own. As TAIRA points out , the kenmitsu taisei theory ushered in a new era in the study of medieval religious history. Buddhism is now viewed not as an isolated system but as an aspect of medieval society as a whole. Serious scholarship presently examines medieval Buddhism in association with government and social organizations as well as such areas as architecture, visual art, poetry, music, drama, and the tea ceremony. Even in the field of Buddhist history proper there has been a great broadening of outlook to include subjects like temple history, esoteric ritual, the precepts, and kami worship, which are now seen as elements in an organically interrelated system. These and other effects of the kenmitsu taisei theory are now well known, and are explained quite clearly in Taira's article. In the remainder of this article I would thus like to discuss Kuroda's theory from a quite different perspective, one that attempts to clarify his basic premises through the analysis of certain unresolved problems. The principal problem concerns Kuroda's assumption that exoesotericism is really a form of esotericism. As indicated above, in Kuroda's theory the term kenmitsu does not signify an equal combination of mitsu (esotericism) and ken (exotericism), but rather a mitsu that incorporates ken. It should be noted first that what Kuroda intended by the term mikky (esotericism) is not always certain, since, citing the difficulty of the concept, he refrains from attempts at definition . Kuroda's reason for wishing to emphasize esoterism may nevertheless be surmised. Esotericism provided the central element that brought Buddhism into contact with Japanese society: esoteric rituals for the prosperity of the state linked kenmitsu Buddhism to the ruling authorities, and the esoteric acceptance of rites allowed Buddhism to incorporate popular religious practices. Esotericism was thus the element that enabled Buddhism to affiliate itself with the state authorities on the one hand and with the common people on the other. It was esotericism's uncritical acceptance of everything that allowed kenmitsu Buddhism to become the ideology of the medieval establishment. And it was through the esoteric elements of Buddhism that the authorities ruled the common people. Kuroda's stress on esotericism may thus be seen as an expression of his underlying view of history. And indeed, one cannot ignore the fact that esotericism provided a basis that shaped the development of Japanese Buddhism. Nevertheless, it seems a bit simplistic to characterize all of kenmitsu Buddhism in terms of this tradition. As KURODA himself notes, "Kenmitsu is not a new term but one that was commonly used during medieval times" , when it indicated both esotericism and exotericism as distinct and viable traditions. The exoteric teachings of the various sects followed their own independent processes of development; though related to the esoteric teachings, they were not subsumed under them. It is precisely because of the mutual development of the exoteric and esoteric aspects that the kenmitsu taisei - and kenmitsu Buddhism as a whole-emerged as such a dynamic force. An examination of the development of kenmitsu Buddhism might help clarify the point. According to Kuroda, kenmitsu Buddhism had its beginnings in the early Heian era when, he explains, Buddhism was consolidated through the medium of esotericism during the period between the introduction of Kkai's thought and the completion of the Tendai esoteric system (taimitsu ). Kuroda, however, does not clearly situate the Buddhism of this time as either a form of ancient Buddhism or as an early version of medieval Buddhism. Such ambiguity forms a significant weakness in his theory, for doctrinally speaking this was a time of critical importance in the development of Japanese Buddhism (kodai ), one in which its fundamental ideas took form . It is also questionable whether one can characterize the Buddhism of this period as largely esoteric-even a figure like Annen (841-889/98), who is thought to have brought the taimitsu system to completion, wrote several important works on exoteric subjects . The view that Buddhism consolidated under the esoteric teachings is arguable as well, although there was indeed some moving together of the various sects following the debates of the late eighth century. Questions also arise concerning Kuroda's view that the Pure Land Buddhism and hijiri Buddhism of the mid- and late-Heian period were expressions of esoteric Buddhism. It is true that most currents of the Pure Land tradition in this era tended toward esotericism, and that representative Pure Land figures like Genshin (942-1017) do not deny esoteric Buddhism. Nevertheless, the Pure Land Buddhism presented in Genshin's famous jysh has few esoteric elements, which is all the more remarkable in view of the esoteric nature of the taimitsu thought that preceded him. The kenmitsu taisei theory provided scholars with a new paradigm, one broad enough in scope to open a wide range of new research possibilities. Like all such theories, however, it is limited in its capacity to explain the complexities of history. Nevertheless, the kenmitsu concept provides important hints for the study of medieval Buddhism, and can be effectively employed as a methodological category for considering issues relating to medieval religious history. REFERENCES IENAGA Sabur 1955 Chusei Bukky shis-shit. Revised edition. Kyoto: INOUE Mitsusada 1956 Nihon Jdo-ky seiritsu-shi no kenky . Tokyo: Yamakawa Shuppansha. KURODA Toshio 1975 Nihon chsei no kokka to shky. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten. 1953 Kamakura Bukky ni okeru ikk senju to honji suijaku . Shirin 39/5. (reprinted in Kuroda Toshio chosakush 4, pp. 254-82) 1957 Gukansh to Jinn Shtki: Chsei no rekishikan . In Nihon rekishi kza 8. Tokyo: Tky Daigaku Shuppankai. 1959 Gukansh and Jinn Shtki: Observations on medieval historiography. In New Light on Early and Medieval Japanese Historiography, John A. Harrison, ed., pp. 19-41. Gainesville: University of Florida Press. SUEKI Fumihiko 1996 Kenmitsu taisei ron no saikent In Kodai kara chsei e no tenkanki ni okeru Bukky no sgteki kenky-Inseiki o chshin to shite Hayami Tasuku ed., Heisei nananendo kagaku kenkyhi hojokin (Sg kenky A) Kenky seika hkokusho Read More