of Pure Land Buddhism in Medieval Japan (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2004).
17. Doukhan, Emmanuel Levinas, 5.
Introducing Shinran and Maimonides
Shinran
Born in 1173 as Hino Arinori,1 Shinran belonged to a once aristocratic family, which eventually fell from political favor.2 The course of Shinran’s life directly affected the development of his thought, and his life can be analyzed through the lens of four distinct periods. Except for his childhood, he lived during the Kamakura period hence the first period of Shinran’s life falls between 1181 and 1201. At the age of nine, Shinran became a Tendai monk and studied on Mount Hiei. During this study, Shinran was an ordinary temple monk (dōsō), exposed to the Tendai system’s major doctrines as well as Pure Land thoughts of such Tendai masters as Ennin, Ryōgen, and Genshin. In addition, he was influenced by a prevalent religious consciousness in society known as the veneration of Prince Shōtoku (574–622),3 who was traditionally credited with the formal adoption of Buddhism in Japan and was seen as a manifestation of the Bodhisattva 4 of compassion: Avalokites̕vara (Jpn.: Kannon) and who in effect also preserved the link to Shinto’s concept of kami.5
The second period falls between 1201 and 1207. At the age of 29, despite being significantly influenced by the Shōtoki consciousness as well as the Tendai teachings of the Pure Land, Shinran left Mt. Hiei. After a period of spiritual turmoil, he joined Hōnen (1133–1212), the religious reformer and founder of the first independent branch of Japanese Shin Buddhism (Jōdo shū) and his Pure Land movement. This period ended dramatically in 1207, when Hōnen and his disciples, including Shinran, were exiled. The third period, 1207 to 1245, consists of two periods of exile: an imposed exile, which lasted until 1214 and a self-imposed exile, which lasted until 1245.
From 1207 to 1214, Shinran lived in Echigo where he broke the monastic tradition by marrying and raising a family. It is during this time that he became especially cognizant of the perils of life and started a self-conscious exploration of human nature with its passions and instincts. He developed a highly skeptical view of the traditional Tendai principle of attaining enlightenment by foregoing the “life of passion.”6 Shinran’s appreciation of the non-dualistic principles of not dichotomizing the religious life and lay life as two separate realms grew in tandem with his skepticism of Tendai principles. He not only recognized the inadequacy of the reliance on self-power (jiriki)7 but also perceived self-power as being fruitless and misleading. Instead, he turned to Other-power (tariki), the Power of Amida’s Primal Vow, which he defined as power “free from any form of calculation.”8 The exile had stripped Shinran of his ordination names, Shakku and Zenshin, and he choose the name Gutoku9 (“the foolish stubble-head”). The name denotes Shinran’s sense of awareness of deep self-attachment and recognition of his self-centeredness and wrongdoing. In 1214 the exile was lifted but instead of returning to Kyoto, Shinran chose a self-imposed exile and moved to another rural area, Kantō area. During this period, Shinran built a substantial following among the common people and established places for worship, dōjōs, where his followers gathered to listen to his teachings.
The overall exilic period was the most significant time in Shinran’s life for the crystallization of his thought. During this period, he became further disillusioned with both Buddhist institutional power and institutionalized societal power. In Kantō, Shinran began writing his magnum opus commonly called in Japanese Kyōgyōshinshō (Teaching, Practice, Faith, and Realization).10 In Kyōgyōshinshō, Shinran provides not only a systematic exposition of the various Pure Land texts but also compiles his own interpretation of Pure Land tradition. In his Postscript to Kyōgyōshinshō, Shinran shares his desire to retain his exilic identity and to remain separate from monastic institution.11 Here he calls himself Toku (“stubble-haired”) and thus does not identify himself as a monk. By saying he was not a monk, he divorced himself from the temporal power of the Buddhist tradition in Japan, and by saying he was not a layperson (“nor one in worldly life”), he distanced himself from the nobility or warriors but also highlighted his exilic identity. These words clearly articulated his political views as well as by stating his displeasure with the lack of ethical treatment of Hōnen’s followers.
In 1235, he returned to Kyoto, where he spent the rest of his life. Ironically, his return to Kyoto resulted from an imminent threat of persecution for teaching the exclusive practice of nenbutsu, senju nenbutsu but now in the countryside. However, during the fourth and the last period of his life from 1235 to 1262, Shinran continued teaching and explicating his ideas in various writings as well as in correspondence with his disciples. Shinran’s correspondence carries specific significance since it allows us a glimpse into his personality. It testifies not only to Shinran’s commitment to the teachings of Pure Land but also exemplifies his efforts to ensure that these teachings are not misinterpreted and wrongly accused of any antinomian charges. Shinran died in 1262.
Let us turn briefly to Shinran’s cultural background to understand Shinran’s thought better. It is important to acknowledge that early Japanese thinkers were characterized by their ability to syncretize the outside influences of Confucianism and Buddhism by adapting these influences to their own specific cultural factors: the indigenous tradition of Shinto. We already mentioned the impact of Prince Shōtoku’s role on Shinran’s thought and the fact that Shinran’s first monastic community was Tendai Buddhism. Tendai Buddhism was founded by Saichō (767–822), who was a competitor of Kūkai (774–835), the founder of the Shingon tradition known for its esoterism and its focus on the Buddha called Dainichi.12 Tendai Buddhism combined elements of both esoteric and exoteric Buddhism. Buddhism became deeply ingrained into Japanese society, during the Heian period (794–1185), via the support of the aristocrats and clergy. During the Heian period, “the ideal relationship between politics and religion was expressed in the statement: ‘The Imperial law and the Buddhist law are the two wheels of the cart’: the mutual support of these two well-balanced forces would assure the power and prosperity of both.”13 With the advent of the Kamakura period (1185–1333) much devastation and suffering occurred. Shinran’s mentor Hōnen and Shinran himself, both trained as Tendai monks, responded to this decline with their interpretation of the human condition, offering their own Pure Land solution. We recall that in various schools of East Asian Buddhism for Pure land practices, it was common to invoke the name of Amida Buddha by using the practice called nenbutsu (calling the name of Amida Buddha) or contemplate on Amida Buddha’s Land. In 1175, Hōnen established Shin Buddhism (Jōdo shū school), which later was further radicalized and transformed by Shinran. Before addressing any specifics of Pure Land tradition, for our purposes it is important to understand the period to which this tradition responded, specifically, the so-called degenerated age of mappō.
Mappō
The Kamakura period with all its devastation and suffering represented the crisis of the age, the degenerated age of mappō, characterized by the increased distance from the teachings and practices of the Buddha. We recall that relatively early in its history, Buddhism developed the idea of three periods of Buddhist law: the Period of Righteous law (Shōbo), the Period of the Counterfeit Law (Zōbo) and the Period of the Decay of Law (mappō).14 The Japanese concept of mappō denotes the third and eschatologically decisive period in the history of Buddha’s Dharma. It is also known as the period of Final Dharma during which enlightenment becomes unattainable. This declining period stems from the growing deficiencies of the Buddhist community (sangha), including the increased corruption of its leaders and the belief that the traditional teachings are no longer relevant to the needs of religious people. Given its eschatological undertones, mappō reflects the belief in the end of times as the end of the world itself. The impotence of imperial rule, the decline of the aristocracy, various natural and man-made calamities seemed to confirm
