are Dharmakāya (the Dharma-body of the Buddha as the highest, cosmic body),48 Sambhogakāya (as celestial bodies known through meditation and devotional practices), and nirmānakāya (as the physical and corporeal bodies appearing historically in this world as enlightened human beings).49 This school of thought allowed later thinkers to view nenbutsu—the practice of calling the Name of Amida Buddha—as a “provisional name” which “frees humans from the limits of ordinary consciousness and calls them back to their original identities as buddhas.”50 Both Shinran and Hōnen refer to Nāgārjuna and Vasubandhu as their Indian “patriarchs.” In sum, Mahāyāna included the view of buddha as “cosmic processes” (the Buddha’s embodiments) and the idea of Bodhisattva.51
While Nāgārjuna and Vasubandhu built “a bridge between the Mahayana Bodhisattva and Pure Land ideals,” it was the Chinese Pure Land masters, who were “concerned about the practicality and accessibility of their religion, [and who] adapted the Pure Land tradition to broaden its appeal.”52 Shinran’s Chinese patriarchs start with Tanluan (Jpn. Donran, 476–542).53 Being cognizant of the tribulation of the age of mappō, he maintains the need for a clear differentiation between the “easy” practice (as a reliance on the power of Amida Buddha’s vows) and the “difficult” practice (as a reliance on one’s own power).54 To draw this differentiation, Tanluan articulated the difference between jiriki (self-power) and tariki (other-power) as the distinction between the “difficult” practice for the former and the “easy” practice for the latter which was a practice of entrusting oneself to the power of Amida’s Vow as the power outside oneself. In Tanluan’s view, jiriki reflected on human pride and ego’s influences and “brought the Pure Land tradition in line with the general Buddhist doctrine of no-ego; even he was claiming the usual Buddhist path was no longer effective.”55
Daochuo (Jpn.: Dōshaku, 562–645), the second of Shinran’s Chinese patriarchs, like Nāgārjuna and Tanluan, divided all the teachings of the Buddha into two categories: the path of sages (difficult path) and the path of the Pure Land (easy path). While Daochuo followed Tanluan’s argumentation, he made it even more pointed by directing his assertions upon the age of mappō and arguing that self-power (jiriki) is no longer conducive to attaining enlightenment and placing his emphasis on an “easy” path practice. Daochuo’s differentiation between jiriki and tariki was an assertion that tariki is the only true practice.
Shandao (Jpn.: Zendo, 613–681), Daochuo’s direct disciple added his focus on human nature as “karmically corrupted through the accumulation of negative propensities.”56 He supported Daochuo’s focus on the nenbutsu but also insisted on the importance of the state of one’s mind and argued that a proper attitude of entrusting oneself to Amida’s Vow revolves around “three mindful hearts”: sincerity, profundity, and a desire for rebirth in the Pure Land which result from right kinds of practice.57 He argued for ten soundings or voicings (as invocations of Amida’s name) rather than ten thoughts. (The nen of nenbutsu ordinarily means “holding in mind”; so Shandao was deliberately shifting the traditional emphasis). Shandao also emphasized repentance and considered all men (including himself) to be evil. However, as it was in the case of Tanluan, Shandao continued to assign the substantial role to self-power (jiriki) despite holding that because of human evilness the only appropriate practice is one of other-power (tariki). In Shandao’s and subsequently Hōnen’s thought, shinjn became perceived interchangeably with the nenbutsu.58
Genshin (942–1017) was Shinran’s first Japanese born patriarch of the Pure Land tradition. Genshin aimed to popularize the Shin Buddhism teachings by blending its monastic elements with elements suited for lay people. Genshin accepted the possibility that lay people can attain birth in the Pure Land through the process of vocalization of nenbutsu rather than contemplative nenbutsu. Specific to Genshin’s influence on Shinran’s thought, Shinran drew on his spirit of “deep self-reflection and sensitivity to defiling passions.”59 Genshin’s approach, however, was on instilling fear of hell.60 His way to the Pure Land required the “fivefold practice of nenbutsu”: worship of Amida and his land, praise as meditation and oral praise, mastering of the Buddhist teachings, meditation, and merit dedication.61 The most important practices, according to Genshin, were contemplative nenbutsu (meditation of Buddha’s marks and features) and invocational nenbutsu (calling upon Amida’s name).62
We note that the Seven Patriarchs are clearly marked by their differences in approaches and Nāgārjuna, Vasubandhu, Tanluan, and Genshin remained “practitioners of the path of the sages63 their whole lives long. The other-power doctrine’s link with their life looks extremely tenuous.”64 We also note that there is a tradition within Shin doctrinal studies from the Edo period that assigns a certain relative importance to these patriarchs by considering Nāgārjuna, Vasubandhu, and Tanluan to base their teachings on the Contemplation Sutra; and Daochuo, Shandao, Genshin, and Hōnen on the Vow from the Larger Sutra in which the Primal Vow was revealed.65 Hōnen was Shinran’s main influence as he indisputably impacted Shinran’s thought most significantly. Shinran viewed his encounter with Hōnen as the “encounter with the yoki hito (the ‘good person,’ or ‘master brings me grace’).”66
Hōnen
We turn here to a brief excursion into Hōnen’s life. Hōnen was a thirteen-year-old monk when he went to Mount Hiei to study the Tendai doctrines. At the age of seventeen, he moved to a holy site to a life of seclusion and stayed there until he turned twenty-four. He then moved to Kyoto to learn from the eminent monks of different Buddhist schools, but never felt that these teachings were meeting his spiritual needs. In Kyoto, he was faced with the contrast between the suffering of the common people and the magnificence of the Buddhist temples. Driven by his spiritual desire to reconcile this contrast, at the age of forty-three, started Jōdo Shū. Hōnen, advocated belief in the power of the Amida’s Vow and the recitation of Amida’s name (the practice of the nenbutsu) as the sole means for birth in Amida Buddha’s Pure Land.
The popularity of Hōnen’s nenbutsu teaching drew attention from the Buddhist establishment. In 1186, a leading Tendai monk Kenshin requested Hōnen to address some of his questions. A dialogue between Kenshin and Hōnen drew approximately 300 attendees. Hōnen claimed to win this debate. As a result of this debate, Hōnen’s approach spread throughout the country. Hōnen articulated the core of his nenbutsu practice in the Collection on Nenbutsu compiled in 1198. The purpose of this collection was to “clarify for the ignorant, weak, and karmically defiled the means of deliverance through recitation of nenbutsu, while at the same time confronting the established Buddhist schools of the Nara and Heian periods.”67
Hōnen’s teachings challenged the prevailing Tendai’s view of the Pure Land thought by articulating the nenbutsu practice as exclusive nenbutsu (senju nenbutsu), as an independent and self-sufficient path of Buddhist practice. He proposed a radical redefinition of Buddhist practice by removing the focus on austere meditation practices for gaining positive karmic effects. Hōnen was greatly influenced by Shandao, who, following Vasubandhu, maintained that in order to be reborn in the Pure Land, the recitation should always be accompanied by one’s mental state characterized by the three minds: the sincere mind (shijōshin), the profound mind (jinshin), and the mind that transfers all merit toward rebirth in the Pure Land (ekōhotsuganshin). For Hōnen, these three mental states became identical with the recitation itself. Hence reciting the name of Amida Buddha meant assuming the state of the three minds. Recognizing that at the age of the mappō humans are incapable of attaining enlightenment on their own, Hōnen consolidated all religious practice into the act of reciting Amida Buddha’s name. Since man cannot predict the moment of his death, Hōnen favored continuous recitation and connected recitation to one’s death. He recommended as many recitations as possible since for him, while it is true that one recitation or ten will equally bring about rebirth, its frequency increased the merit that one can accrue and ensure the rebirth in the Pure Land. Hōnen linked nenbutsu
