Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 1996 23/3–4
The Development of the Kenmitsu System
As Japan’s Medieval Orthodoxy
KURODA Toshio
Translated by James C. DOBBINS
Medieval Japan was dominated by a religious system, the so-called kenmitsu
system, which provided a cohesive ideological structure for its social
and political order. It arose against the backdrop of the medieval estate system
and the emerging peasant class. The core of the kenmitsu system was
esoteric beliefs and practices, around which the different exoteric doctrines
of Tendai and other schools coalesced. Esoteric practices were thought to
embody the truths of Mah„y„na Buddhism, but also to provide thaumaturgic
means to control the ominous spirit world recognized by society.
The teachings and practices of Pure Land Buddhism were born out of this
system, and the Tendai doctrine of original enlightenment (hongaku) was
an archetypal expression of it. The kenmitsu worldview provided the ideological
basis for the medieval Japanese state, and was integrated into its
system of rule.
THE KENMITSU TAISEI ßO¿£ (exoteric-esoteric system) indicates, as a
concept, the distinctive religious system that was recognized as orthodox
in medieval Japan. It is a concept directly related to the unique
character of religion in the medieval period, as well as to the unique
character of the medieval state (kokka ³B). The purpose of the present
essay on the development of the kenmitsu taisei is to consider the
fundamental structure of this linkage between religion and the
Japanese state, and the historical perspectives of that structure. In the
medieval period, religion and the state were viewed as entities that
* This article is a translation of the ³rst thirty-³ve pages (the introduction and part 1) of
Kuroda Toshio’s essay “Chðsei ni okeru kenmitsu taisei no tenkai” _›rPWšßO¿£uûˆ
(reprinted in KURODA 1994, pp. 45–182). Part 4 of this long essay is translated below (pp.
353–85) as “The Discourse on the ‘Land of Kami’ (Shinkoku) in Medieval Japan.”
should exist in a relationship of mutual identity, not as essentially different
things that should interact within a framework of opposition.
The kenmitsu taisei operated on the level of such mutual identity. What
this means, therefore, is that our consideration of this system is
speci³cally an inquiry into the relationship between religion and the
state.
The primary task of this essay is to reveal the medieval Japanese
state’s mystical and mysterious side that was derived from religion,
and to explore its characteristics. In discussions of the state it is common
to take up such matters as power, organization, and law, and
there are natural reasons for doing so. But in the medieval Japanese
state these were not the only matters of importance—there are excellent
reasons for noting in particular the religious side of things as
well.
Another task of this essay is to keep in mind issues relating to the
intellectual history of Japanese religion. That is, I would like to consider
the question of religion—or rather, of religious ideas—from the
standpoint of their relationship to authority as it was exercised in the
actual social order of the medieval period. This relationship provides
us with a important key for understanding Japan’s religious history in
a relatively objective way, one that is little inµuenced by the subjective
images that present-day sectarian historians superimpose upon the
past. Such an approach helps free us from current doctrinal and devotional
perspectives on history, perspectives related to the two major
changes that occurred in Japanese religion subsequent to the medieval
period: ³rst, the of³cial recognition of independent Buddhist sects in
early modern times and the consequent systematization of sectarian
doctrines; and second, the separation of Shinto from Buddhism and
the rise of State Shinto in the modern era. These developments must
not precondition our understanding of medieval religion, nor should
they act as standards for evaluating it. Rather, medieval religion must
be grasped using models that are most appropriate to the medieval
age itself. This may seem obvious, but the fact is that even recent
research by no means does this. The reason is that the task of liberating
religious and intellectual history from doctrinal perceptions is neither
easy nor self-evident.
One thing I must note in advance is that my argument presupposes
the “estate-system society” (shõensei shakai vÓ£çl) and the “system
of ruling elites” (kenmon taisei Ï–¿£), concepts that I have explained
in earlier articles on the nature of society and the state in medieval
Japan. There are, of course, a variety of other scholarly perspectives
on these issues, perspectives from which the discussions in this essay
234 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
will no doubt appear extremely one-sided and arbitrary. To a certain
extent, this is unavoidable. I myself believe that it is possible to
acknowledge the truth of the facts presented here in their own right,
without directly relating them to historical de³nitions of the period.
Nonetheless, in my overall organization and analysis I have consciously
sought to examine the links of medieval religion to shõen society and
the kenmon system.
This essay was originally intended to cover the entire medieval period,
with a number of sections on the relationship between the state and
religion throughout medieval times. I believe that the kenmitsu system
faced its ³nal demise, a kind of closing of the books, with the appearance
of the shðkyõ ikki ;îs¤ (religious uprisings) in late medieval
times, so that a bigger picture extending to that point is called for. I
have stopped short, however, sketching only a few main issues relating
to the period up to the Nanbokuchõ period (1336–1392), the time of
the Northern and Southern Courts in the mid-medieval era. One reason
for this is that I have not yet ³nished groundwork for a consideration
of the various issues relating to the kenmitsu taisei in later
medieval times. More importantly, though, my overall research on the
late medieval state is, practically speaking, still in its initial stages. I will
thus refrain from addressing matters of religion and the state in the
latter half of the medieval period until my preparations are a bit more
complete.
Founding the Kenmitsu System—The Rise of the Orthodox Establishment
The Heian period (794–1185), spanning nearly four-hundred years,
had a rich religious history with a wide variety of developments, of
which the founding of the Tendai and Shingon schools was ³rst and
foremost. The topic of this section is the overall history of this period,
though I do not intend to go into great depth. Also, although it would
of course be best to introduce the considerable scholarship relating to
the development of Heian Buddhism, including Pure Land Buddhism,
to do so in any detail would be impossible. For the purposes of this
essay I will focus on the formation during the Heian period of the
body of religious doctrine that gave rise to the ideological system I call
the kenmitsu taisei, a system that claimed orthodox status and was totally
fused with the authority of the medieval state. I will elucidate in condensed
form the basis and process of its formation, and briefly examine
its character and signi³cance.
My intention is not, however, to treat the religious history of the
Heian period as a mere preparation for that of the Kamakura period
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 235
(1185–1333). As mentioned above, I believe that we must reject this
frequently adopted perspective and the associated interpretations
based on the sectarian histories of the present-day Buddhist schools.
Instead, we should seek to grasp in a comprehensive way the kenmitsu
taisei as it existed in its own time. For this purpose we must identify
what was important, from the perspective of intellectual history, in the
transition from ancient to medieval Japan, and determine the ways in
which this transformation constituted an emancipation of the spirit.
This, I believe, must be our fundamental point of departure.
Issues in Intellectual History During the Transition Period
From Ancient to Medieval Times
The ancient Japanese state underwent slow change over the four-century
Heian period as it moved toward the medieval state system. Since
our understanding of the historical signi³cance of this transition
relates to our view of the nature and characteristics of both the
ancient and the medieval state, a variety of perspectives are possible.
Here I would like to present my own views, organizing them into the
following three points that, in a sense, acknowledge the presuppositions
of our intellectual historical stance.1
The ³rst point is that this transition signi³ed the disintegration of
the Asian-style community structure that had been at the foundations
of society, and of the ancient autocratic state (kodai sensei kokka òÖ
飳B) that had developed on this foundation. The distinctive qualities
displayed by the ancient Japanese state all reveal it to be an
ancient Asian-style social order. These features include the organization
and principles of control of its communities, which were dominated
by local chiefs and powerful families; the central and local
administrative organizations, which performed household censuses on
villages and concentrated authority in the imperial bureaus, provinces,
counties, villages, and hamlets; and the hierarchical power structure,
which extended from powerful local families all the way up to the
emperor. All of these structures, in their various ways, ultimately broke
down.
The second point to take up is the signi³cance of the newly emerging
peasant class. Since the key feature of the transition from the
ancient to the medieval period was the feudalization of society, the rise
of independent, small-scale farming was the most important element
1 For my views on the transition from the ancient to the medieval period in Japan, see
my essays “Shõensei shakai” (KURODA 1995b, pp. 129–316) and “Nihon chðsei no hokensei
no tokushitsu” (KURODA 1995b, pp. 363–410).
236 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
for de³ning the nature of social development. In the case of Japan,
independent, small-scale farming came into being with the formation
of a new agricultural class centering on the hyakushõ ߥ (peasants),
who emerged from the kõmin NW (commoners) of the ancient period.
Within this new group, however, there were both the gõmin «W (the
“powerful people,” who later evolved into the zaichi ryõshu $Giü,
the resident lords of the shõen estates), and their diametric opposites,
the saimin úW (the “destitute people”), who were later incorporated
into the patriarchal system of control in the form of slaves (dorei G‹)
or serfs (nõdo ÷G). Thus the patriarchal systems of slavery and serfdom
developed from within this framework. It was on the basis of
such developments that independence ³rst became possible for the
peasants. But fundamentally the production structure found in the
estate system, which held sway over the independent peasantry,
should be seen as dominant.
The third point to be made concerns the measures taken by the
state to maintain and reorganize its system of control, and the deepening
contradiction and deterioration that occurred as a result. For
example, the Ritsuryõ aristocrats and their descendants, while personally
shifting their economic base to the estate system and its revenues,
had to preserve the of³cial categories of peasantry (hyakushõ) and
public land (kõden N,), and strive to maintain bureaucratic government
through the activities of “superior of³cials” (ryõri d3) in the
form of rule by the imperial regents (sekkan ÚF). The national system
of government and the shõen system of the aristocracy, notwithstanding
various surface contradictions and confusions, stood in a
basic relationship of mutual support. This relationship did not result
from any active, positive viewpoint that they held in common, but
rather from passive interaction as they responded primarily to the
growth of the peasantry as independent, small-scale farmers. Because
their policies shifted from one direction to another in accordance
with the trends of the times, an inevitable confusion and deterioration
occurred in politics and culture, both at the political center and in
the outlying districts.
If these three features are taken to characterize Japan’s transition
from the ancient to the medieval period, what issues does this transition
raise from the perspective of intellectual history? This will be our
next concern.
The ³rst thing to consider in this respect is what new outlooks, as
well as what supporting forms of thought, emerged from the diverse
activities of the various classes during the transitional period. What, in
other words, were the outlooks (ishiki [Æ), thoughts (shii „Z), wishes
(ganbõ XÝ), dreams (gensõ å`), and religious beliefs (shinkõ =þ) of
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 237
the people as expressed in their economic activities and social and
private lives, as well as in their reactions to the authorities of the old
and the new orders? The crucial element here is found, I believe, in
the people’s opposition, both in outlook and in thought, to the
ancient thaumaturgic bonds represented by the political authorities of
the ancient Asian-style community (from clan head to emperor), and
in their liberation from these bonds. The opposition to which I refer
was not of the bold (and rather exceptional) type in which a people
rises up in rebellion against the rule of a powerful state. Rather, it
consisted of a gradual move away from the almost primitive ignorance
that pervaded daily life and the activities of economic production; of
the acquisition of an active and independent role in the conduct of
business; of an overcoming of the social and spiritual weakness that
prevented individuals from surviving so much as a day if separated
from the ancient community organization and its emotive bonds; and
of an escape from the blind struggle for existence wherein people
feared the emperor as they might a deity and labored like worker bees
under the rule of the social authorities. It consisted, in short, of the
liberation and elevation of the human spirit.
Nonetheless, the formation of the peasant class was not a onedirectional
advance in the status of the farming populace, for it
occurred in the context of the rise of the powerful gõmin group and
the decline of the destitute saimin group. Hence, although I have
described the transition as a spiritual liberation from the constraints
of earlier authority and ideas, it is important to note that it was a liberation
achieved only with the harsh realization that society cannot
avoid the instabilities of change and decline. The process of liberation
from ignorance always involves a struggle against uncertainty; thus a
psychologically inevitable part of the transitional process was the
emergence of various paths for attaining liberation from the sufferings
and fears of this life, and the formation of images of a longed-for
world. Even when such aspirations took a religious form, I believe
they must be analyzed with the realization that they did not start out
as transhistorical, abstract phenomena addressing the universal problems
of human existence, but that they developed in response to
speci³c historical and ideological concerns.2
Secondly, we must note that paralleling the above-mentioned intellectual
advances on the part of the ordinary people was the emergence
of a crisis mentality within the aristocratic class and a corresponding
238 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
2 Concerning the distinctive features of the consciousness of the common people during
this period, astute insights have been presented by literary historians. See, for example,
MASUDA 1960.
initiative by the state to reorganize ideology and control religion—an
initiative born of the ruling class’s struggle to remain in power. The
aristocrats, as the ruling class within the ancient state structure, were
more conservative, generally speaking, than the people they ruled.
Nevertheless, amidst the disintegration of the ancient state and Asianstyle
community, the collapse of social functions, and breakdown of
presumptions regarding privileged bloodlines (uji ’, the ³ctive structure
on which aristocratic rule was built), the aristocrats were thrown
into a state of crisis regarding their own existence that overshadowed
even their reactionary response to the actions of the ordinary people.
The increase in this crisis mentality at the individual, social, and government
levels was reµected in the political intrigues and secret plots
of the mid-eighth to tenth centuries, in the decline of numerous aristocratic
families, and in the psychological inclination toward an
urban, personal sense of introspection and prose (see ISHIMODA 1943).
The feeling of crisis led, on the one hand, to such structural changes
as a new political ideology (expressed in the early tenth-century political
reforms of the Engi era and in the appearance of “superior
of³cials” [ryõri]) and a reorganization of religion around concepts
like spiritual protection for the state (chingo kokka ¥D³B). On the
other hand, it stimulated serious introspection and rigorous intellectual
questioning among the various levels of aristocrats who monopolized
knowledge and learning and possessed re³ned political and
intellectual skills. Attempts to comprehend the so-called imperial culture
of the Heian period on the basis of the leisured lives of the aristocrats,
or of the various new phenomena associated with the emergence of
the lower classes, ignore the complexity and rigor of intellectual history,
as well as the distinctive character of this transitional period.
There is a third point relating to the previous two, a point particularly
relevant to the theme of this article. This is the fact that during
this period there inevitably emerged an increased cognizance of the
link between religion and the state. The ancient autocratic state had
constituted an all-embracing entity from which no person had a separate,
autonomous existence. Although from the reign of Empress
Suiko (554–628) the conµicts and contradictions of autocratic rule
had gradually led to the formulation of legal and religious restrictions
regarding the state, these were still rooted in the self-perceptions of
the Asian-style community structure and its leaders. From the ninth
century, however, conditions underwent a fundamental change as the
ancient autocratic state disintegrated and the medieval state emerged.
At this point, both the aristocracy and the common people had to
confront the question of what the nation was; regardless of one’s
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 239
social position, it was no longer possible to dwell comfortably in the
all-encompassing state of the ancient era. In a sense, this was the ³rst
time in history that an “objective” consideration of the state became
necessary. Unlike the ancient period, in which the existence of the
emperor was considered synonymous with that of the state and the
state was manifested in all spheres of life, the transitional period witnessed
the beginnings of the paradoxical medieval attitude in which
attempts to limit state control, or even attack it, led to deepened
inquiry into the state’s true meaning.3
Such objective reµections
emerged principally with religion as a mediating agent and intellectual
methodology. Though there were other modes of thinking—
Confucianism, for instance—that were capable of performing this
role, in actuality the conditions for their autonomous emergence had
not yet appeared in Japan. Religion, in contrast, found its raison
d’être in this role. Furthermore, to reiterate a previous point, this
inquiry into the nature of the state was a historically inevitable development
emerging from the respective needs of the ruling and the
ruled—i.e., the crisis mentality of the aristocracy and the de³ance and
hopes of the common people. It was thus an inquiry that transcended
class and encompassed a wide variety of positions, including some that
were in direct opposition. In this way both religion and the state
re³ned their thought and logic to the point where they underwent
the qualitative change to the medieval religion-state relationship.
In a general, chronological analysis one can go on forever identifying
questions regarding the transition from the ancient to the
medieval period. If one is concerned with the fundamental issues
relating to religion and the state, however, the three points outlined
above are of central concern.
Overcoming the Ancient Thaumaturgic Bonds
In the section above I have attempted to identify the fundamental
intellectual issues connected with the period of transition from
ancient to medieval times. Below I would like to consider brieµy the
intellectual trends in religion during the ninth and tenth centuries.
First I will examine the popular opposition to the thaumaturgic bonds
promoted by the ancient authorities. For this purpose I turn to the
Nihon ryõiki Õû‘bz [A record of miraculous tales of Japan], which
240 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
3 In the past people have been prone to see only the institutional incompleteness of the
medieval state and not to notice the paradoxical linkages mentioned here. Consequently,
there has been a tendency to overlook those threads in medieval intellectual and governmental
history that led to these speci³c questions.
reµects the condition of religion and the common people in the late
eighth and early ninth centuries.4
Previous studies have examined the Nihon ryõiki from a variety of
perspectives. One is that passages of the Nihon ryõiki reµect the growth
of powerful local families and individuals like county of³cials (gunji
us), as well as of a “wealthy and powerful local class” (fugõsõ )«])
(see TAKATORI 1967 and KAWANE 1971). There are scholarly differences
in interpretation, but basically the Nihon ryõiki depicts the fugõsõ as a
powerful, patriarchally structured class drawing its wealth from the
control of slave labor and the possession of moveable property such as
grain and seedlings, coins, and agricultural tools, and from large-scale
loans and land management. Its compiler, Kyõkai “w (8th–9th
cent.), regarded such trends in society as inevitable, and using this
material as his basis he propounded the doctrine of karmic rewards in
this life. For now I will set aside attempts to situate the fugõsõ in the
class structure and de³ne its historical signi³cance. Rather, I will simply
draw attention to the fact that the Nihon ryõiki presents multiple
depictions of the class divisions between the common people (kõmin)
and the “wealthy elite” (fðki ){), referred to variously in this period
as fugõ no tomogara )«u8 (wealthy and powerful comrades), inpu no
tami s)uW (prosperous and wealthy people), fumin )W (wealthy
people), gõmin «W (powerful people), etc.
Along with accounts of the rich the Nihon ryõiki portrays the lives of
the contemporary laboring populace and describes the joys and sorrows
of the common people. Among the destitute people depicted are
a mother and her children who are too poor to obtain food (I-13, 24;
III-11); an impoverished widow who scavenges for fallen stalks of grain
in the autumn (I-33); and two ³sherman, an adult male and a young
boy, who “receive an annual payment in wages” and who “are driven
to work both day and night” (III-25). In many cases these indigent
people are not personally subordinate to any particular household
head, and they commonly belong to broken families. Also described
are an orphan girl who loses her fortune after her wealthy and powerful
parents die (II-34), and extremely poor women who gain good fortune
and great wealth (II-28, 42). Such episodes appear again and
again in this work as examples of how, despite everyone’s dreams of
wealth and rank, the unfathomable vicissitudes of life continue,
accompanied by anxiety and unusual occurrences. The historical reality
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 241
4 References to the Nihon ryõiki below are from the edition by ENDÕ and KASUGA (1967).
The text consists of three fascicles, with thirteen stories in the ³rst fascicle, twenty-four stories
in the second fascicle, and eleven stories in the third fascicle. References below cite the
fascicle and story number: e.g., I-13 refers to story number 13 in the ³rst fascicle. For an
English translation of this text see NAKAMURA 1973.
underlying these events was none other than the transition of the
ancient commoner class (kõmin) to the various levels of the medieval
peasant class (hyakushõ), with some individuals emerging as wealthy
and others as destitute. The Nihon ryõiki interprets these overall developments
from the Buddhist standpoint of causality (inga ƒF)—not,
of course, in order to sanction such vicissitudes, but to stress, by utilizing
people’s fear of misfortune and uncertainty, the inescapability of
karmic effects (genpõ ê³). The work is not an attempt to explain in
Buddhist terms the rise of the fugõsõ and portray its members as the
new supporters of society; its aim, rather, is to disseminate the doctrine
of causality through a portrayal of the severity, the misfortune,
the joys, and the sorrows of the world at the time of the transition to
the medieval era.
The Nihon ryõiki’s teachings, however, are based on more than just
descriptions of the vicissitudes of life. The work also urges a reorientation
in values and thinking. The preface to the ³rst fascicle says, in a
section on demonstrating cause and effect, “How could one show deference
only to the traditions and records of other countries, and not
believe in or tremble before the extraordinary events in our own
land?” (ENDÕ and KASUGA 1967, p. 55). That is, from a recognition of
the inevitability of karmic effects there arises an awareness of “our
land” (jido ÀF), in the sense that the universal principles revealed in
the Buddhist teachings penetrate “our land” too. There is, admittedly,
a certain national consciousness in this awareness of “our land,” since
it is referred to in contrast with other lands, but the primary emphasis
of the statement itself is on the notion of an all-penetrating universal
truth. When in another passage the Nihon ryõiki says, “Paragons of
good appear even in this remote land during our auspicious age” (III-
19), it is stressing that the effects of karmic causes appear unfailingly
even in this small, peripheral land. What it is not doing is preaching a
theory of uniqueness (i.e., that Buddhist truths have a unique way of
manifesting themselves in Japan), as in, for instance, the Kamakuraperiod
discourse on Japan as the “land of the kami” (shinkoku shisõ
P³„`).5
Thus the historical identity of the Nihon ryõiki should be
seen in its recognition of the universality of Buddhist truth, and in its
perception that the vicissitudes of both the rich and the poor are simply
expressions of this truth.
242 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
5 See, for instance, the Shasekishð ÜÍT, fasc. 1, pt. 1, Tale on Kõken (1110–1193) of the
Miidera temple (for English translation see MORRELL 1985, pp. 76–79). On shinkoku shisõ see
my essay “Chðsei kokka to shinkoku shisõ” in KURODA 1995a, pp. 3–82, which deals with this
question and explains it brieµy. [See also the articles in this issue, “The Discourse on the
‘Land of Kami’ (Shinkoku) in Medieval Japan” and “Religion, Ideology of Domination, and
Nationalism: Kuroda Toshio on the Discourse of Shinkoku.”]
Next I would like to consider the sense of fear that people felt
toward the inescapable workings of karma. This fear is reµected in the
Nihon ryõiki’s descriptions of the mysterious thaumaturgic powers of
the three treasures of Buddhism (Buddha, dharma, and sa½gha), as
in the above-mentioned “How could one…not believe in or tremble
before the extraordinary events?”, or, “A sense of shame arose in
them, and there was no end to their fright” (II-9, ENDÕ and KASUGA
1967, p. 205). What is expressed here is neither logic nor reverential
praise, but fear of a transcendent thaumaturgic power. In this connection
we should note the relationship of such power to the authority of
the emperor, who in the ancient period stood as an absolute, transcendent
entity. In one tale, entitled “On Taking Refuge in the Three
Treasures, Honoring the Clerical Community, Having Sutras Recited,
and Attaining Karmic Results in the Present” (I-32), this relationship
is described in the following archetypal way. Emperor Shõmu
(701–756) was hunting in the upper county of Sõ when a deer ran
into a peasant’s house in a village there. Not knowing whose deer it
was, the householder killed and ate it. Later the emperor, hearing
this, sent agents to have the people of the household arrested. “At
that time more than ten men and women all met with this tribulation.
In body they trembled, and in heart they were frightened, for they
had no one to fall back on. Their only thought was what, if not the
supernatural power of the three treasures, could possibly save them
from this profound tribulation” (ENDÕ and KASUGA 1967, pp. 149–51).
Upon taking refuge in the sixteen-foot Buddha of the Daian-ji temple
and reciting sutras, they received a general amnesty on the felicitous
occasion of an imperial prince’s birth.
The emperor’s authority, as reµected in this story, was de³nitely a
“tribulation” (nan Ê) to be feared, something transcending right and
wrong. Here we can see a distinct psychological characteristic of the
ancient Asian-style community structure and the authority of the autocratic
ruler that was rooted in it. I believe that the feelings of the people
toward the three treasures, wherein they “could not help but
believe in or tremble before” the Buddha, dharma, and sa½gha, were
more or less of the same type as those felt toward the emperor. It was
this ancient-style fear that prompted people to put faith in the
Buddhist teachings. But precisely because of this, as we can see in the
story, the Buddhist teachings came to be recognized as a force that
could deliver people from the power of the emperor. On the one
hand, the emperor is portrayed in the Nihon ryõiki as a ³gure with the
capacity to control thunder: “How could even the god of thunder not
accept the emperor’s invitation?” (I-1; ENDÕ and KASUGA 1967, p. 65)
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 243
On the other hand, he is relegated to a position of lesser strength
before the Buddhist teachings, which are absolute and universal principles.
Even though “all things in the emperor’s country are things
belonging to the country’s emperor,” and “events occur at the sovereign
pleasure of the country’s emperor,” still he was not regarded as
absolute compared to Buddhism, as reµected in the statement, “A
Buddhist meditation master accomplished in both wisdom and practice,
when he reincarnated as a human, was born as the son of the
emperor” (III-39; ENDÕ and KASUGA 1967, p. 289–91). Thus the
ancient feeling of fear toward the emperor served as a medium
through which the absolute authority of the Buddhist teachings was
recognized, as a result of which the power of the emperor became rel-
ativized.
These conditions may have been gestating from as early as the time
of Emperor Shõmu, who bowed down before the Great Buddha of
Nara and declared himself “a slave of the three treasures.” But it
should be noted that by the time of the Nihon ryõiki these feelings penetrated
the lives of the common people too and were comprehended
in terms of concrete events. From this time there also began to appear
a natural shift in social standards concerning what is noble and what
is lowly (kisen {(), or exalted and reviled (sonpi ¨¦). Already in the
Nihon ryõiki the secular authority of the emperor no longer set the
standard for judging the noble—the Buddhist teachings had emerged
as a superior standard. Along with such conventional expressions as “a
novice priest of lowly appearance” and “a lowly beast” (II-1, 40), there
are statements that reµect Buddhist criteria for distinguishing the
high and the low, as in the reference to “a lowly heart that does not
reµect on karmic causes” (III-15; ENDÕ and KASUGA 1967, p. 359).
Although at this point in history the concepts, found later in the
medieval class structure, of the sen ( (lowly) and the hinin À^ (outcasts)
had not yet developed,6
standards of authority and status were
already undergoing a reorientation through the universal principles
of Buddhism, as Buddhism utilized the authority of the autocratic
ruler, the people’s sense of fear, and the unenlightened feelings characteristic
of the ancient Asian-style community structure for the purposes
of proselytization.
Although the noble and the low were differentiated on the basis of
both secular and religious standards, there was an overlap in the two
standards owing to the fact that the concepts of “noble” and “low”
played an important role in expressing the strati³ed nature of society
and the religious character of authority in both the ancient and the
6 See my essay “Chðsei no mibunsei to hisen kannen” (KURODA 1995c, pp. 185–233).
244 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
medieval period. In ancient times, when the secular and the religious
were not yet separate, the authority of the emperor stood at the pinnacle
of this value system. In this connection it is important to note
that throughout the entire Nihon ryõiki the differentiation between
the “sagely” (sei ¸) and the “unenlightened” (bon þ) is far more
signi³cant than that between the noble and the lowly, reµecting a different
value system. The distinction between the sagely and the unenlightened—a
purely Buddhist distinction, of course—emerged as
more important than the secular social distinction between the noble
and the lowly. This is the reason that the Nihon ryõiki asks so emphatically,
“How could one not believe in and tremble before [karmic causes]?”
This distinction is also responsible for the concept of the
“hidden sage” (onshin no shõnin ŒXu¸^), as in another passage
from the Nihon ryõiki where the seventh-century Prince Regent
Shõtoku Taishi (574–622), encountering a beggar by the side of the
road to Kataoka, comments, “The sage [i.e., Shõtoku Taishi] recognizes
the sagely; the unenlightened person does not. The unenlightened
person, with the physical eye, sees only a lowly person. The sage,
with the supernatural eye, sees the hidden person” (I-4; ENDÕ and
KASUGA 1967, p. 79). The Nihon ryõiki also records the story of Prince
Nagaya, who, by striking a mendicant novice priest on the head,
brought on his own downfall and suicide. “One should not hesitate to
fear a member wearing the Buddhist robes, even if he is lowly in
appearance, for the hidden person of a sage is united with him therein”
(II-1; ENDÕ and KASUGA 1967, p. 175). In other words, such a person
might not be a sage in outward appearance, but might
nevertheless be able to exhibit mysterious thaumaturgic powers.
Important guises that these hidden sages might assume were those
of self-ordained novice clerics (jido no shami ÀEuÜ¡) or mendicant
religious practitioners, both of whom were seekers of enlightenment
in the mundane world. The Nihon ryõiki states, “Even if [the person
right before you] is a self-ordained Buddhist master, look at him with
a heart of forbearance and insight, for hidden sages mingle with the
unenlightened” (III-33; ENDÕ and KASUGA 1967, p. 415). Among those
in this category were people who lived amongst the worldly, lent
money, and kept a wife and family (III-4), and wealthy people who
established and resided in clan temples (III-23). There were also
many beggars, mendicants, and physically deformed people, including
a woman whom “ignorant and worldly people referred to derisively
as ‘Monkey Sage’ (saruhijiri ʸ)” (III-19). Still others appear to have
been connected with village worship halls or private temples built by
villagers (III-17, 28).
From these examples an image emerges of various classes of itinerants
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 245
who were displaced as the ancient community structure dissolved.
Commonly they were called shami Ü¡ (novice clerics) or shõnin/hijiri
¸^ (sages), and among them were some who had been influenced by
Buddhism, such as the aforementioned self-ordained shami. There
were also many who undoubtedly had no connection with Buddhism,
such as thaumaturges of folk religion, the ³nancially ruined, the disabled,
and the deranged. The Nihon ryõiki, however, interprets popular
thaumaturgic beliefs and practices too as embodiments of the
Buddhist teachings. Such things con³rm that the notions of “sage”
and “unenlightened” were being applied to the deepest realities of
society. We can also discern therein the foundations of shinbutsu shðgõ
P[H§ thought (the identi³cation of the kami with the buddhas),
which later gave rise to mountain asceticism (sangaku shugen [À@à)
and beliefs in ominous spirits (goryõ shinkõ :‘=þ). It is important to
note that the incarnated sage was recognized in many guises, not just
in exalted ³gures such as Shõtoku Taishi or the great Nara priest
Gyõki ‘_ (668–749).7
Nevertheless, this shift in values, wherein the lowly was equated to
the unenlightened, can be detected in only one example, that of the
hidden sage. Such limited evidence reµects a certain weakness on the
part of the common people, an inability to assert their spiritual independence
or to conceive of themselves as active agents. Or, to put it
more accurately, this image of the common people was the only one
that the Nihon ryõiki was capable of. The question, however, is whether
this was an accurate expression of the overall consciousness of the
people during this period. It goes without saying that it was not. This
is demonstrated by the very rise of the gõmin elite, frequently referred
to in the Nihon ryõiki. Strictly speaking, the work looks upon this elite
neither positively nor negatively. Yet the very existence of the gõmin
indicates that the common people, both rich and poor, desired to be
independent agents acting on the basis of their own will and desire—
if such drives toward selfhood and autonomy were absent no one
would have made the efforts necessary to achieve wealth and power.
However, there is no reason why Kyõkai, the compiler of the Nihon
ryõiki, should have developed this point in any logical way, considering
his doctrinal standpoint from within Nara Buddhism.
Uni³cation of Religion under Esoteric Buddhism
A far more positive response to the ninth-century common people’s
246 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
7 UI Hakuju (1951, p. 11), points out regarding the Nihon ryõiki’s portrayal of Gyõki as a
bodhisattva, “It was previously thought that this was linked to the honji suijaku theory.”
desire to overcome the ancient thaumaturgic bonds and perceive
themselves as independent agents was the founding of the Tendai
school by Saichõ è˜ (767–822) and the Shingon school by Kðkai
W} (774–835). What contemporary intellectual trends did the development
of Heian Buddhism, originating in Saichõ’s and Kðkai’s
schools, signify? Here I would like to summarize what I feel to be their
fundamental characteristics.
The ³rst point to make is that both Saichõ and Kðkai advocated a
Mah„y„na Buddhist perspective. As has been noted elsewhere (see
TAKATORI 1955), Mah„y„na ³t the needs of the social classes seeking
liberation and independence, especially the provincial commoner
classes from the gõmin on down. Saichõ’s doctrine that “all sentient
beings have the Buddha nature,” and Kðkai’s concept of the “inseparability
of the sage and the unenlightened,” though already well established
on the Asian continent, had an enormous historical
signi³cance in Japan owing to their congruity with the most pressing
intellectual themes of the period. The question of what place
Mah„y„na Buddhism held in ancient Asian society and what role it
played in various social constructs is, of course, quite large and complex.
But in Japan Mah„y„na developed in close and inseparable connection
with the disintegration of the ancient autocratic state. From
the standpoint of the common people, it appears to have performed
the function of transforming their aspirations into religious doctrine.
Saichõ’s and Kðkai’s thought, however, was not simply a proxy for
the consciousness of lower-class commoners, much less an agent of
confrontation with the ruling authorities. It is true that each ³gure in
his own way opposed Nara Buddhism, which since the previous age
had been united with state authority. Not only did they work for new,
independent religious organizations and develop systematic classi³cations
of doctrine (kyõsõ hanjaku îo|ö), but they also created
“schools” (shð ;) in a new sense—that is, religious organizations centering
around master-disciple lineages rather than around doctrinal
³elds of study, as in the earlier six schools of Nara Buddhism. But we
should not overestimate Saichõ’s and Kðkai’s goals, thinking they
intended to make religion and its thought completely independent of
state authority. On the contrary, both of them petitioned the state to
sponsor priests in their schools, and by imperial consent they each
received two new priests annually (nenbun dosha æ_Eé). Even the
Mah„y„na ordination platform that Saichõ wished to establish at
Enryaku-ji, and over which he clashed so much with the Nara temples,
was ³nally established, after Saichõ’s death, only through imperial
decree. In short, both Saichõ and Kðkai sought to build their schools
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 247
within the framework of state authority, and relied upon it for
approval. This characteristic was quite straightforwardly expressed in
their thought from the very founding of their schools, in their emphasis
on protection of the state (chingo kokka).
It would be wrong to take chingo kokka as a posture that compromises
one’s religious stature by offering unreserved service to the authorities.
It is one thing to glorify unconditionally the country’s sovereign
and power holders, and to propound an unvarnished rationale in
direct service to them. But the Mah„y„na concept of “bene³ting self
and bene³ting others” (jiri rita À22¬) gives rise to the idea of promoting
peace and protecting the state in the sense of defending the
people. Thus we should not perceive the concept of chingo kokka as
indicative only of an obedient servant trailing behind the existing
powers. Nonetheless, the writings of Saichõ and Kðkai show a pronounced
tendency to emphasize chingo kokka in the sense of aggrandizing
the power of the sovereign and the state system of rule,
although they also include the sense of defending the people (see
MATSUNAGA 1969, p. 191). Although the desire of the people below for
autonomy provided Saichõ and Kðkai with a groundwork for developing
their theories of Mah„y„na Buddhism, at the same time neither
Saichõ nor Kðkai claimed superiority for religious authority over secular
authority. And, as just noted, both ³gures sought the rulers’
approval of religion as an entity bene³cial to the state and unilaterally
de³ned religion as an agent in service to state power.
The grounds for this attitude lay in the particular historical conditions
that existed in Japan during this period, not in some general
tendency of Mah„y„na Buddhism. At this stage of impending transition
from the disintegrating Asian-style community structure to the
medieval period the illusion of the unassailable character of state
authority was still ³rmly rooted, as can be seen from the enactment of
the political “reforms” of Emperor Kanmu’s reign. In addition, there
was at this time a strong assertion of the particular social and political
relationships of power lodged in the reactionary response of the ruling
class. Hence Saichõ’s stress on chingo kokka should not be regarded
as simply a compromise of Mah„y„na’s lofty ideas. Rather, whether
because of the climate of the times or the attitudes of the people
involved, it should be seen from the outset as the only thing possible
under the circumstances.
In addition to the rise of chingo kokka thought out of Mah„y„na
Buddhism, another feature of Heian Buddhism that should be noted
is the rapid development of mikkyõ Oî (the esoteric teachings) from
the early Heian period.
248 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
Even in the period when Saichõ and Kðkai were active the fact that
Kðkai had a deeper understanding of mikkyõ than Saichõ did was one
factor contributing to his success in the rivalry between the two. After
Saichõ’s death the Tendai priests Ennin Ò_ (794-864) and Enchin
Ò£ (814–891) traveled to China, where they studied the latest esoteric
teachings. Upon their return to Japan they strove to develop an
independent mikkyõ tradition in the Tendai school. Ennin in his classi³cation
of the teachings propounded the doctrine of the “One
Great Perfect Teaching” (ichidaiengyõ sØÒî), consisting ³rst of an
absolute standpoint (zettaikan áÅ?) wherein all separate, dependent
entities disappear—i.e., wherein the distinctions between all forms of
Buddhist thought and belief are transcended and the absolute value
of each is recognized without preference—but also of a relative standpoint
(sõtaikan oÅ?) wherein separate, dependent entities are again
recognized. Based on this perspective, Ennin made a distinction
between the exoteric teachings (kengyõ ßî) and the esoteric teachings
(mikkyõ), and a further distinction between practice (ji ª) and
principle (ri 7) within the esoteric teachings. The exoteric teachings
consist of the teachings of the three vehicles (i.e., lower Mah„y„na),
while the esoteric teachings consist of those of the single vehicle (i.e.,
higher Mah„y„na). Within the esoteric teachings there was also a differentiation
made between sutras such as the Lotus, which embody
only esoteric principle (rimitsu 7O), and those such as the Dainichi,
which encompass both esoteric practice and esoteric principle (jiri
gumitsu ª7HO). This last category was considered the highest.
Enchin, likewise working from the doctrine of the One Great Perfect
Teaching, went on to advocate the superiority of mikkyõ and the inferiority
of kengyõ. This interpretive trend continued, reaching maturity in
the theories of Tendai esotericism (taimitsu ×O) formulated by
Annen H5 (841–889?). Annen, who also based his thought on the
doctrine of the One Great Perfect Teaching, organized and classi³ed
Buddhism in all its forms, integrating them into a grand system with
four concise categories: one Buddha, one period, one place, and one
teaching. Annen proposed the term shingonshð, “mantra school,” to
describe it all. The doctrine of the One Great Perfect Teaching, which
can be traced back to I-hsing s‘ (673–727) in China, was inherited
equally by all esoteric Buddhist thought, including Kðkai’s doctrine of
the “nine forms of exoteric teaching and the tenth (and highest) esoteric
teaching” (kuken jðmitsu GßYO; SHIMAJI 1964, p. 361). The fact
that Ennin, Enchin, and Annen all based their thought on the doctrine
of the One Great Perfect Teaching may also be seen as a sign of
their fundamental orientation toward the esoteric teachings.
The Tendai school, however, was not the only sect devoted to esoKURODA:
The Development of the Kenmitsu System 249
teric Buddhism. From the time that Kðkai established the Shingon-in
subtemple at Tõdai-ji, Nara Buddhism too displayed a strong esoteric
inclination. I will not go into this topic in detail here, but it is necessary
to note that although Tendai, Shingon, and Nara Buddhism, as
the three great religious powers of the early Heian period, inevitably
fell into conµict, there was at the same time a similarity in their development.
As ÕYA Tokujõ comments,
In the end they all merged into the current of esoteric
Buddhism, producing three branches—Tendai esotericism
(taimitsu), Shingon esotericism (tõmitsu XO), and Nara esotericism
(nanmitsu ÇO, if I may call it that ).… Heian belief
and practice became almost totally esoteric, for life could be
preserved through mikkyõ’s endorsement. (1929)
Nor was this phenomenon of esotericization limited to Buddhism.
The practice of identifying the kami with the buddhas, which began
in the eighth century, µourished all the more in the ninth. In the
process the worship of Shinto spirits (jingi sðhai P•‡0) was
inevitably esotericized, and such things as mountain asceticism (sangaku
tosõ [Àj7) became part of esoteric practice. Also, Onmyõdõ
‹îŠ (the yin-yang tradition) created a social atmosphere of superstitious
concepts that stimulated the popularization of esoteric incantations
and prayers (kaji kitõ ;³tô), thus playing an important role in
the formation of one area of esoteric practice (see MURAYAMA 1960).
Within this trend toward esotericization, where did the individuality
of the respective schools lie? What, for instance, characterized the
Tendai school as Tendai? Tendai was not, as is generally thought
today, a body of immutable doctrine established by Saichõ. Rather, as
can be seen in the doctrinal classi³cations developed and brought to
maturity by Ennin, Enchin, and Annen, it was based on the transmission
of forms of doctrinal argumentation centered on the perfect
teachings of the Lotus (Hokke engyõ ÀTÒî), but at the same time it
propounded the “four-fold transmission” (shishusõjõ v)o¾) of the
perfect Lotus, of esotericism, of meditation, and of the precepts (en
mitsu zen kai ÒO7w), with a particular emphasis on the unity of the
perfect Lotus and the esoteric teachings. In this sense taimitsu, Tendai
esotericism, refers to the distinctive form of doctrine and practice
found in the esotericism that developed within the Tendai’s religious
establishment on Mt. Hiei, an esotericism predicated on the view that
Lotus thought and the esoteric teachings are not heterogeneous but
exist in harmony. Based on this, what is distinctive about Tendai esotericism
is that the concepts and rationale found in its classi³cation of
the teachings depend on Tendai’s ³ve fundamental interpretive
250 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
principles (gojð gengi 2bé–) as well as the doctrines (soshitsuji-hõ
MÒGÀ) transmitted to Japan via the esoteric sutra known as the
Soshitsuji-kyõ (see SHIMAJI 1964, p. 376; SHIMIZUDANI 1929, p. 222, and
1972, p. 349).
In short, it was not that there was a pure and immutable body of
Tendai Lotus thought onto which the esoteric teachings were grafted
and later µourished. Rather, a unique form of the esoteric teaching
endowed with the features of Tendai Lotus thought—speci³cally, that
found in its doctrinal dimensions at the time Annen lived—emerged
and reached full maturity. The Tendai school’s individuality lies here.
Nevertheless, the school de³nitely did undergo a process of esotericization.
Within the sphere of esoteric thought, Shingon esotericism
(tõmitsu) recognized only jiri gumitsu, the esoteric that encompasses
both practice and principle, whereas Tendai esotericism included
both jiri gumitsu and rimitsu, the esoteric of principle only. This was
one of the distinguishing features of Tendai esotericism. But in the
end, the decisive characteristic of esoteric Buddhism, whether Tendai
or Shingon, was the supreme value placed upon esoteric practice (jimitsu
or mikkyõ jisõ Oîªo)—that is, upon actual praxis found in religious
techniques and ritualized forms (see SHIMAJI 1964, p. 377).
Practice was valued so highly because esoteric Buddhism saw it as
expressing fully its doctrinal ideal of an all-encompassing af³rmation
that transcends differentiation. Annen, who applied the doctrine of
the One Great Perfect Teaching on the grandest and most extensive
scale and who developed a system for unifying all religion, incorporated
the so-called exoteric teachings into that system. But at the same
time he dared to call the system the “mantra school” (shingonshð),
based on a new standard of values where esoteric practice (jimitsu)
was considered supreme.
In summary, I believe the fundamental nature of the interactions
between the various religious traditions during the ninth and tenth
centuries was for all religions to be subsumed or uni³ed under esotericism
as the ultimate, underlying principle. The custom of intersectarian
studies (kyõgaku no kenshð î¿uÂ@) that prevailed in the
various Buddhist schools was thus predicated on a belief in the
absolute superiority of the esoteric teachings. In shinbutsu shðgõ thought
(whether in the concept of gohõ zenshin DÀ3P or shinjin ridatsu
PX?õ),8
the identi³cation of the kami with the buddhas presupposed
the subservience of the former to the latter—it was de³nitely
not a relationship in which the kami stood on an equal footing with
8 Gohõ zenjin refers to good kami who protect the Buddhist teachings; shinshin ridatsu is
the notion that Buddhism liberates the kami from their present incarnations.
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 251
the buddhas.
Thus the religious history of the early Heian period, broadly
viewed, can be described as a process where all religions and schools
were subsumed under the esoteric teachings and formed a uni³ed system.
Put in another way, a distinctive form of esoteric thought, containing
constitutive elements peculiar to Japan—in short, a Japanese
form of esoteric Buddhism—came into existence.
The Basis for the Establishment of a Japanese Form of Esoteric Buddhism
As indicated above, all Japanese religion moved toward a state of uni³cation
under esoteric Buddhism, but the esoteric teachings that developed
in Japan were not identical in philosophy or essential characteristics
to the esotericism handed down from the time of Indian Buddhism.
Rather, the Japanese teachings had their own special concrete features.
Here I would like to explore what social and intellectual conditions
underlaid their formation.
The ³rst thing to note about this Japanese form of esoteric Buddhism
is that, apart from mountain and forest asceticism (sanrin tosõ), which
remained unchanged from ancient times, “prayers and thaumaturgic
methods representing degenerate applications of esoteric practices”
were prevalent even within the original sphere of esoteric ritual (see
SHIMAJI 1964, p. 383). These “prayers and thaumaturgic methods”
included practices aimed at producing rain, safeguarding childbirth,
healing diseases, defeating enemy countries, subjugating rebels, and
attaining bliss in this world and the next, and it was widely assumed in
society that such things represented the original purpose of the esoteric
Buddhist teachings. Also, unique religious practices were developed
for use as preparatory exercises on the occasion of esoteric
initiations (kanjõ !™). These exercises have been identi³ed as one
example of departures from the original esoteric teachings (see
SHIMAJI 1964, p. 409). Such activities should not be seen as representative
of the original, standard form of esoteric Buddhism, for they were
tinged with superstitious qualities that differ from the fundamental
thought of Buddhism. They were closer in character to Japan’s
ancient religious asceticism. The successive masters of the Tendai
school tended to emphasize the dimension of praxis in esoteric
Buddhism, and developed a classi³cation of teachings that de-emphasized,
relatively speaking, the perfect Lotus teaching, which Saichõ
had advanced as the highest ideal. They did so not because the theories
of esoteric Buddhism were superior to those of other teachings,
but because such prayers and thaumaturgic methods were in demand
252 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
in society at that period, and because Tendai’s relevance as a school
was in question if it did not respond to this demand. The signi³cance
of the taimitsu theories is that they were the product of the Tendai
school’s attempts to show doctrinal correspondences to prayers and
thaumaturgic methods.
The next thing to note is that the prayers and thaumaturgic methods
performed in the name of esoteric Buddhism were linked to the
chingo kokka (protection of the state) theory described earlier, which
strongly connoted service to the ruling powers. Speci³cally, the means
of protecting the state were none other than prayers and thaumaturgic
methods. To the extent that such methods were considered the
actualization of the Mah„y„na Buddhist ideal, the state itself was
inevitably placed in a position where, for the purposes of rule, it had
to ³ll a religious and thaumaturgic role even as it focused on the wishes
of the people. Although it is impossible without examining the
exact contents of these esoteric prayers to grasp in depth their logical
structure as an ideology, for now all we need to recognize is that esotericization
did not stop simply at matters relating to the respective
Buddhist schools, but extended to ones of the state as well.
What, then, was the social basis for the rise and development of a
Japanese form of esotericism with these distinctive features? The customs
of the aristocracy and its superstitious view of life are frequently
cited as the reasons for the efµorescence of esoteric Buddhism in the
Heian period, but we must not assume that they were the sole factors.
One important avenue for exploring this issue is the belief in ominous
spirits (goryõ shinkõ), which pervaded town and country in the
ninth to tenth centuries.9
A typical example of such beliefs was that
the spirit (goryõ) of a notable person who had met an untimely death
amid political intrigue would cause epidemics; rituals would thus be
performed to pacify the spirit (chinkon ¥Ó) and quell the misfortune
(jõsai Øó). Such beliefs originally arose among the common people.
It is true there were special circumstances underlying goryõ shinkõ,
linked to the dark political rivalries within the aristocracy during the
early Heian period. But as a form of cultic belief it had af³nities, as
alluded to earlier, with such practices as pacifying spirits (chinkon), dispatching
the dead (sõsõ w|), nullifying wrongdoings (metsuzai n&),
and inviting good fortune (shõfuku ÀS), all performed by thaumaturges
among the common people of this period.
The ³rst documentary evidence of goryõ shinkõ appears in a refer-
9 See the articles in KYÕTO DAIGAKU BUNGAKUBU DOKUSHIKAI 1959, e.g., by Shibata
Minoru, “Gion goryõe: Sono seiritsu to igi”; Iwaki Takatoshi, “Goryõ shinkõ no hassei”; and
Takatori Masao, “Goryõe no seiritsu to shoki Heiankyõ no jðmin.”
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 253
ence to a goryõe :‘l, or spirit ceremony, dated the ³fth month of
863 (5th year of Jõgan). This was the last year of Ennin’s life, and also
the time when Shingon esotericism, which went into decline after
Kðkai, was ³nally beginning to show new life. The goryõe performed
then, at the imperial site in Kyoto known as the Shinsen’en, already
showed Buddhist inµuence and the involvement of the aristocracy.
The Buddhist sutras chanted on this occasion included the Konkõmyõkyõ
DMg™ [Golden light sutra] and the Hannyashingyõ “øD™
[Heart sutra], scriptures often used for quelling calamity and beseeching
good fortune, and also for protecting the state. Thus in this
instance we can see a clear and unifying link between Buddhism, the
state, and the thaumaturgic ceremonies of the common people. The
goryõ were usually looked upon by the common people as evil spirits
(akuryõ 1‘), individuals who, upon death, invaded and disrupted
daily life. But they were the product of a consciousness separate from
that found in the traditional festivals and rites (saishi øú) of the
ancient Asian-style community structure, as exempli³ed by the cult of
the “Chinese deity” (karakami +P) mentioned in the Nihon ryõiki (II-
5), to whom oxen were sacri³ced in worship. That is, these were not
simply individual vengeful spirits (onryõ Ø‘), but were typically
linked to political intrigues of the state, and thus received recognition
and popularization far beyond the scope of any local cult. What this
means, to put it another way, is that calamities and disasters in general
were seen as related to the course of state events. Hence these spirits,
commensurate with their degree of recognition and popularization,
had to be subjugated through worship on a broader basis—that of the
state, transcending the localized festivals and spirit rites of the ancient
period. For that reason Buddhism was necessary. What Buddhism
offered in this context was not, of course, advanced philosophical
principles but rather, at a much more mundane level, thaumaturgic
powers. But this thaumaturgy was not submerged in a natural, localized
community structure as before. Instead, it had a generalized and
translocal character, linking it broadly to the good or ill fortunes of
individuals caught up in the process of urbanization as the ancient
community structure disintegrated.
The thaumaturgic cult of the paci³cation of spirits outlined above
was the most suitable soil for esoteric Buddhism to grow in. Buddhism,
however, did not simply con³gure thaumaturgic methods to social
demands, but also ennobled them with the Mah„y„na Buddhist ideal
of protecting the land and the people. Although these practices did,
in part, involve a low-level thaumaturgic mentality deriving from the
common people’s circumstances, as seen above in the world of the
254 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
Nihon ryõiki, at the same time they were undergirded by the new aspirations
of the peasants for independent, small-scale operations of
their own. Such thaumaturgic practices are exempli³ed in the cult of
the Shidara kami, a “foreign deity” worshiped with singing and dancing
in order to eradicate epidemic (see SHIBATA 1966 and TODA 1967).
We must note, however, that these ominous-spirit cults were organized
from the top down by the ruling class. Thus esoteric Buddhism’s
prayers for the protection of the state also found a basis as religious
ideology in this context.
The attempts by masters of esoteric doctrine in the various schools
to develop complex classi³catory systems of Buddhist doctrine may be
seen as efforts to formulate a rationale for organizing and unifying
the chaotic thaumaturgic teachings that prevailed during this period
of transition. To investigate this rationale from just the perspective of
Buddhist studies or the history of philosophy is itself quite an undertaking.
All the more so the tasks, at present barely underway, of analyzing
the true condition of Japanese esotericism, of understanding
the historical circumstances that rendered its development inevitable,
of plumbing the depths of its doctrine, and of grasping the workings
and tensions of its thought.
Pure Land Buddhism and Esoteric Buddhism
In contrast to the ninth century, which, as discussed above, was characterized
by the uni³cation of the various forms of Japanese religion
under esoteric Buddhism, the tenth century was distinguished by the
growth of Pure Land Buddhism. I would now like to consider the relationship
between the two, addressing particularly the question of
whether Pure Land Buddhism arose as an alternative to, and as something
qualitatively different from, esoteric Buddhism.
Generally, Pure Land Buddhism became popular in the period
from the height of the Fujiwara regency in the tenth century to the
rule of the retired emperors (Insei Š©) in the twelfth century.
Among the reasons commonly given for its rise are the spread of
mappõ =À thought and the increase in social and political instability.
Political confusion, the ineffectuality of the aristocratic class, and public
disorders are all said to have stimulated ideas of “abandoning the
tainted world” (onri edo Ñ?JF) and “longing for the Pure Land”
(gongu jõdo 5¼þF). Scholars have identi³ed differences in outlook
and intellectual inclination between the social classes, thus explaining
the widely contrasting approaches to Pure Land Buddhism’s central
practice of nenbutsu, ranging from the aristocracy’s aesthetic meditaKURODA:
The Development of the Kenmitsu System 255
tive visualizations to the common people’s thaumaturgic or frenzied
calling of Amida’s name. They also cite the activities of the hijiri ¸,
the wandering holy men who symbolized liberation from the formal
Buddhism of the temples and whose presence indicated a broad-based
popular support for Pure Land Buddhism.10
Doctrinal explanations for the rise of the nenbutsu emphasize its linear
development from jõgyõ zanmai ø‘X* (the Tendai constantpractice
meditation retreat) to the fudan nenbutsu #?ç[ (the
continual nenbutsu chant), and from there to the thought of the great
Pure Land classic, the Õjõyõshð ð´êT. This perception of the nenbutsu’s
lineal evolution is the result, ³rst, of efforts by the inµuential
modern schools of the senju nenbutsu é@ç[ (exclusive nenbutsu) tradition
to trace their roots in doctrinal history. It is also the result, however,
of the Tendai sect’s doctrinalization of nenbutsu thought,
particularly in the context of its promotion of Ryõgen dè (912–985)
as the restorer (chðkõ _ö) of the Tendai school on Mt. Hiei. This is
why, despite the fact that the nenbutsu is known to have also prospered
outside of Mt. Hiei in the Nara temples and the Shingon monastic
complex on Mt. Kõya, and despite the knowledge that esoteric
Buddhism was of great signi³cance in providing a soil for the nenbutsu
to µourish in, the dominant view remains that the Pure Land teachings
developed in a direct line extending from Tendai doctrine to the
senju nenbutsu. If it is true, though, that Mt. Hiei is where the Pure
Land teachings thrived the most, it is all the more important to determine
how they emerged within the broad, unifying inµuence of esoteric
Buddhism described in the previous section.
It is standard to trace the origins of the nenbutsu on Mt. Hiei to the
jõgyõ zanmai meditation retreat, one of the four types of meditation
retreat described in the Chinese T’ien-t’ai treatise, the Mo-ho chih-kuan
#äŒ?. But in fact the nenbutsu ³rst began on Mt. Hiei when Ennin
introduced the fudan nenbutsu in 866 (Jõgan 8). The fudan nenbutsu,
which was performed at the Constant Practice Meditation Hall (Jõgyõ
Zanmaidõ) established by Ennin on Mt. Hie, was adopted from the
³ve-tone, chorus-chanting method of nenbutsu (goe nenbutsu 2l
ç[) that originated at the Mt. Wu-t’ai 2×[ monastic complex in
China, where the tendency to syncretize teachings was strong. In function,
the fudan nenbutsu has been described as a religious method of
repentance and nulli³cation of wrongdoings (metsuzai zange n&Ht)
(see SONODA 1969). Thus the implementation of the fudan nenbutsu as
10 Works dealing with this topic are numerous. Among the ones I should mention are
HORI 1953, INOUE 1956 and 1971, and articles contained in the “Kodaihen” section of
FUJISHIMA and MIYAZAKI 1969.
256 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
Tendai’s constant practice meditation retreat was tantamount to
implementing a method of metsuzai zange as Tendai’s gate of practice,
a gate that properly should have consisted of Tendai shikan Œ? meditation.
Clearly, this must have been the product of Tendai’s entry into
a religious climate of pacifying spirits, nullifying wrongdoings, dispatching
the dead, and quelling misfortune, a climate that inspired
Ennin to create Tendai esotericism.
Kðya W˜ (903–972), an itinerant holy man known as the “marketplace
hijiri” who spread the nenbutsu among the people, is described
as having originally been a thaumaturgic religious ³gure who paci³ed
and dispatched spirits of the dead. He can therefore be clearly situated
within the process of religious development that emerged from the
common people’s concern with thaumaturgy and the paci³cation of
ominous spirits. Buddhist scholars have pointed out that Kðya’s nenbutsu
was never just a thaumaturgic practice, but was grounded in the
true nature of the nenbutsu as a Mah„y„na Bodhisattva practice
(FUTABA 1969). In considering Kðya, however, no one proposes that
thaumaturgic methods, in and of themselves, evolved into nenbutsu
practice. In the background were new developments in aristocratic
society, all based on the pervasive esoteric thought. Speci³cally, there
was a shift in ritual format, from “sutra reading by day and mantra
recitation at night” to “religious lectures by day and nenbutsu at night.”
For example, the Kangakue ð¿l (Association for the encouragement
of learning) and the Nijðgo Zanmaie ÌY2X*l (Twenty-³ve member
meditation association), based in Sakamoto at the foot of Mt. Hiei
and inµuenced by Kðya’s propagation of the nenbutsu, studied the
Lotus Sutra before midday and practiced the nenbutsu in the afternoon.
Following the nenbutsu they performed the Kõmyõ Shingon
MgOí (Pervasive light mantra) and the Kaji Dosha ;³FÞ (Earth
incantation), which were said to be ef³cacious in nullifying wrongdoings
and transferring merit to others (metsuzai tsuizen n&«3)(see
HAYAMI 1968 and 1969). Thus Kðya’s world already recognized a connection
extending from the thaumaturgic methods of pacifying spirits
through the mantra to the nenbutsu. Kðya used these as a base in disseminating
the nenbutsu in the opposite direction, to the common
people. In his wake there was explosive development among the populace
of the nenbutsu known as the “hometown nenbutsu” (kyõri ø=
nenbutsu). This in turn stimulated the development of the Kangakue,
composed of middle-level aristocratic literati and clerics from Mt.
Hiei, and, by extension, inspired one cleric among them, Genshin, to
compile the Õjõyõshð.
Concerning Genshin è= (942–1017) and his Pure Land teachings,
it is commonly said that he sought to revive the Lotus teachings of
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 257
Tendai and de³ne a Tendai format for the nenbutsu, and even that he
leaned toward discarding the esoteric mantra as a practice (see ISHIDA
1970). I believe, however, that it is necessary to understand Genshin
in relation to his master Ryõgen, who with his considerable political
inµuence revived the fortunes of Mt. Hiei and ushered in a period of
Tendai efµorescence. Ryõgen’s thinking was grounded ³rmly in the
idea of the unity of exoteric and esoteric teachings (kenmitsu itchi
ßOsO)(see SHIMAJI 1964). The prosperity of Mt. Hiei’s temples and
doctrines under him comprised a form of Tendai self-assertion, all
predicated on exoteric-esoteric unity. Ryõgen’s disciple Genshin also
worked from this assumption. Typically, Genshin’s nenbutsu is considered
to function totally within the framework of a Tendai perspective,
in contrast to the later senju nenbutsu or Shingon nenbutsu (see ISHIDA
1962, p. 130). But to put Genshin’s contribution more positively, he
took the nenbutsu, which up to that time had been thaumaturgic and
not clearly distinguished from the mantra, and gave it doctrinal
underpinnings as a nenbutsu of meditative visualization (kanjin ?D
nenbutsu), grounded in Tendai shikan meditation. In doing so, he carried
forward the Tendai school’s doctrinal self-assertion within the system
of exoteric-esoteric unity. Genshin and Kakuun ·± (953–1007)
developed Tendai doctrine in a meditative (kanjin) direction, and
came to be viewed as the patriarchs of Tendai’s Eshin and Danna
branches respectively. Subsequently, Kakuchõ ·• (953/960?–1034),
who studied for a time under Genshin, succeeded Ryõgen in the
Tendai lineage of esoteric teachings of the Kazan branch T[H. He
founded the “River lineage” (Kawa-ryð ëH) of Tendai esoteric practice,
which mediated the exoteric with the esoteric. Kõkei y‰
(977–1049), who was closely linked to Kakuun, established the “Valley
lineage” (Tani-ryð úH), which specialized exclusively in esoteric practices
and further advanced Tendai esotericism. The Tendai features of
Genshin’s Õjõyõshð should be situated in the context of these developments.
Thus it is problematic to describe the “nenbutsu of Mt. Hiei”
(yama no nenbutsu [uç[), including that of Genshin’s Pure Land
teachings, as dismissive of the esoteric teachings. Even Genshin’s nenbutsu
of meditative visualization cannot be understood in a comprehensive
way if de³ned only in terms of its differences with the
thaumaturgic “hometown nenbutsu”11
of the common people.12
11 Concerning the “communal” character of the “hometown nenbutsu” and its link to
“hometown life,” see the chapter “Kyõri no nenbutsu” in SHIBATA 1966. It is dif³cult to ascertain
the exact nature of the community structure among the common people in this period,
but for now suf³ce it to say that it had signi³cance for how the nenbutsu was practiced by the
people.
12 AKAMATSU (1966) points out that Kakuchõ’s nenbutsu was linked to village life in Izumi.
258 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
The emergence of the hijiri, in the medieval sense of the term, was
a particularly noteworthy event in the history of Pure Land Buddhism
subsequent to Kðya. The word hijiri appears frequently from ancient
times on, and expressions like the “hidden sage” (onshin no shõnin
ŒXu¸^) and the “incarnated sage” (keshin no hijiri 5Xu¸) in
works like the Nihon ryõiki are often regarded as signifying the same
thing as the medieval hijiri. But in these instances the word refers to
an individual or a being with thaumaturgic powers who transcends the
unenlightened, and it therefore differs from its medieval counterpart.
The term hijiri in the medieval context indicated a distinctive lifestyle
reµected in clothing, behavior, and dwelling places, as found in the
examples of the “itinerant hijiri” (yugyõ hijiri Ê‘¸) and the Mt. Kõya
hijiri. In some cases, the word was even used to convey the idea of living
an unmarried life in the style of a monk.13
This was not the case in
the ancient period, when the outward appearance of a religious practitioner
(gyõja ‘é) or miracle-worker (genja àé) as a novice cleric
(shami) or a mendicant (kotsujiki F7) did not speci³cally identify that
person as a hijiri; rather, one was recognized as such only after being
revealed to the world as a “hidden hijiri” or the “incarnation of a
hijiri.” Instances of the various Chinese characters used for hijiri (e.g.,
sei ¸, sen ä) in works prior to the ninth century all seem to convey
this meaning.14
The medieval sense of the word hijiri developed in the
tenth and eleventh century, in tandem with the efµorescence of the
nenbutsu. Examples can be found in the Konjaku monogatarishð: “There
is something known as an Amida hijiri,” and, “The Amida hijiri is a
priest who walks about.”15
Thus, it refers, as in the example of Kðya, to
a life of religious practice and good works in the form of spreading
the nenbutsu among the common people, while forsaking both secular
and monastic life without being explicitly anti-secular or anti-monastic.
This usage probably arose because the ³gure of the hijiri (in the
ancient and original sense of the word) made such a strong impression
on people through the example of Kðya. From his time there was
a dramatic increase in the number of “Amida hijiri who walked about”
and styled themselves in that fashion. The causes of this may be
sought in the tensions and contradictions of tenth-century society, as
13 See, for example, “Shõnin densetsu no kotoba,” in Wago tõroku ÉBaÆ, fasc. 5, in
Jõdoshð zensho þF;6– 9, p. 609 (JÕDO-SHÐ KAISHÐ HAPPYAKUNEN KINEN KEISAN JUNBIKYOKU
1973), and Shasekishð, fasc. 4, no. 4 (see MORRELL 1985, pp. 145–46).
14 See the entry for Saikõ 1 (854), 7th month, 22nd day, “Dankoku hijiri,” in the Montoku
jitsuroku k”×Æ. Also, see instances of the word hijiri (or shõnin) in Ruijð sandaikyaku
{´XÖ°, entries for Kõnin 3 (812), 9th month, 26th day; Jõkan 10 (868), 5th month, 15th
day; and Kanbyõ 9 (897), 6th month, 23rd day.
15 Konjaku monogatarishð ÄË]BT, fasc. 29, no. 9. See also ITÕ 1969.
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 259
expressed in such things as litigation by county of³cials (gunji) and
peasants; the expanding importance of segmented agricultural and
residential lands; the exclusion of middle- and lower-level aristocrats
from positions of inµuence owing to an increased emphasis on pedigree
in the aristocracy; and the isolation of the urban population.
Despite the essential differences between the various classes, they all
resembled each other in their isolation, self-reliance, and insecurity.
This is what drove people to the nenbutsu and, in turn, to the practices
of the hijiri. The reason, however, that such social conµicts led to this
result was that well-developed esoteric nenbutsu practices were by that
time ³rmly rooted among the people. In addition, clerics may have
felt less of an urgency at this time to study scriptural commentaries
and treatises and grapple with unsolved doctrinal and logical questions,
since the various religious traditions had already been doctrinally
uni³ed under esoteric Buddhism—as seen, for instance, in the One
Great Perfect Teaching doctrine in Tendai esotericism.
Hence the emergence of the medieval hijiri signi³ed the maturing
of the nenbutsu as one form of religious thought under the unifying
inµuence of esoteric Buddhism. It is clear, nonetheless, that the
efµorescence of Pure Land teachings—which might be described as a
second stage in the esoteric uni³cation process, since they were predicated
on the practice of the nenbutsu rather than the performance of
mantra—were the outcome of an initiative of the Tendai tradition
speci³cally. In the wake of this achievement, hijiri eventually appeared
in Nara Buddhism and the Shingon school as well, and each heralded
a nenbutsu invested with the characteristics of their own school. From
this time on in the Tendai school, there was an apparent shift from a
doctrinal (kyõsõ îo) orientation to a meditative (kanjin) one, and
from an orientation toward written works (bunken kÒ) to one toward
oral transmissions (kuden S))(see HAZAMA 1948, vol. 2, pp. 1–10).
The efµorescence of hijiri and the rapid increase in their number not
only accommodated this shift in Mt. Hiei’s sectarian atmosphere, but
in fact provoked it—the change would not have been possible if not
for the hijiri ³gure, who distanced himself from the monastery’s sutra
repository where doctrinal activity occurred.
One other very important dimension of the hijiri movement is that
it encouraged self-assertion and a critical spirit among self-reliant individuals.
Although the nenbutsu assemblages and associations and the
hijiri groups residing at bessho ƒ‹ (religious outposts detached from
major temples) were united by shared religious regulations and a
strong sense of common bond, it must not be overlooked that these
groups were fundamentally different from natural communities in
260 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
that they were composed of self-aware individuals.16
People who originally
became hijiri to cultivate good works and develop religious techniques
distanced themselves from both the secular and monastic
settings of daily life, and in so doing developed the potential to
become critical of both the secular and the monastic. And, in fact,
critics did emerge from within these groups. Nonetheless, I should
emphasize that this does not mean that Pure Land Buddhism ³rst arose
as a movement opposing esoteric Buddhism. On the contrary, it was a
Tendai creation realized within esoteric Buddhism’s process of unifying
religions.
Essential Characteristics of the Kenmitsu System
Considering the conditions, described above, under which Pure Land
Buddhism developed, it must be concluded that the so-called eight
schools (hasshð k;) of Buddhism in the Heian period 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 relationship between the various kenmitsu (exoteric-esoteric)
teachings was logically systematized through a classi³cation based on
both the transcendence of distinctions (zettaikan) (e.g., the concepts
of the “One Great Perfect Teaching” [ichidaiengyõ] and “nine forms of
exoteric teaching and the tenth [and highest] esoteric teaching”
[kuken jðmitsu]) and the recognition of distinctions (sõtaikan) (e.g.,
the concepts of “exoteric and esoteric” [kenmitsu], “practice and principle”
[jiri], and “one vehicle and three vehicles” [ichijõ sanjõ sñ
Xñ]). But at both the ultimate and pragmatic level these teachings
were seen in terms of the combination of the exoteric and the esoteric,
whether this relationship was one of “superiority and inferiority”
(shõretsu §—), “mutual dependence” (sõgo izon o3S¦), “unity” (itchi
sO), or “perfect syncretization” (ennyð ÒÎ).
Thus the word kenmitsu came to express the totality of Buddhism.
Described in terms of stages of development, the ninth century was
16 The problem mentioned in note 11 above—i.e., the dif³culty in knowing the nature
of the community structure among the common people of this period—is relevant in this
instance also.
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 261
when the idea of religious unity based on esoteric Buddhism was initially
advanced, and the primary issue was the relative superiority or
inferiority of the exoteric and esoteric teachings. From the tenth century,
amidst the development of Pure Land Buddhism, the Tendai
school took the lead in developing a system that, in the eleventh century,
con³rmed the exoteric and esoteric as coexistent entities—
either as uni³ed, as perfectly syncretized, or as mutually dependent.
This system is referred to in this article as the kenmitsu taisei, with the
word “system” signifying not a system of law or administrative control,
but rather an ideological order. The logic and trends of thought characteristic
of this system I refer to as “kenmitsu ideology” (kenmitsu shugi
ßOü–).
Esoteric Buddhism, characterized by a strong inclination toward
prayers and thaumaturgic techniques, occupied the key position in
this system and provided the basis for the respective school’s doctrines.
The Shingon school, for instance, grounded such doctrines in
Kðkai’s classi³cation of teachings and in practices from the Ono and
Hirosawa branches and subbranches, and boasted of Shingon esotericism’s
exclusive powers. Meanwhile the Tendai school developed its
unique taimitsu esotericism of practice and principle (jiri), as well as
Tendai doctrines and meditations predicated on the unity of the perfect
Lotus teachings and esoteric Buddhism. The principles that constituted
the kenmitsu ideology existed not so much as ³xed doctrine
within each school, but rather as arguments that permeated and pervaded
the teachings of various branches, lineages, or individuals
through the custom of intersectarian studies (kengaku ¿).
Kenmitsu ideology in its most archetypal form is found in the
Tendai doctrinal tradition known as hongaku shisõ û·„` (original
enlightenment thought), which ³rst developed in substantive form
during the Insei period (11th–12th cent.). Today Tendai hongaku
thought is presented as one branch in the development of Tendai
doctrine, and in a certain respect such an explanation has a sound
basis. But for our purposes we need to examine what rationale shaped
and directed Japanese Tendai in the direction of hongaku doctrine.17
The idea of original enlightenment ³rst appeared in the Ta-ch’eng
ch’i-hsin lun Øñ|=Ç [Treatise on the awakening of Mah„y„na faith],
and can also be found in rather developed form in the commentary
on it, the Shih Mo-ho-yen lun ö#ä−Ç [Commentary on the
17 There are many works that address the topic of Tendai’s hongaku thought, such as
SHIMAJI 1926. More recent studies include TAMURA 1965, TADA 1973, and ISHIDA 1967. There
are, of course, many points remaining in this section that are still not suf³ciently understood.
I am particularly indebted to the study of Tamura Yoshirõ.
262 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
Mah„y„na Treatise]. In China, however, hongaku was not originally
emphasized in Tendai doctrine. Instead, it commonly appeared in
Kegon doctrine, which stood in contrast to Tendai and was frequently
at odds with it. Nevertheless, it would be wrong to think that there was
no basis in Tendai doctrine for expounding hongaku thought. Kegon
doctrine in fact inµuenced Chinese Tendai over time. For instance,
the Tendai patriarch Chan-jan ó5 (711–782) cited from the Awakening
of Faith the concept that the absolute conforms to causation (shinnyo
zuien OØ„â) and is manifested in this world, an idea consonant with
the hongaku doctrine. Later, the Tendai priest Chih-li Fˆ (960–1028)
actually used the word hongaku in his writings. But Saichõ, who transmitted
Chinese Tendai doctrine to Japan, did not address the topic of
hongaku himself.
Hongaku thought in Japan was ³rst emphasized in Kðkai’s works.
Kðkai attached great importance to the Shih Mo-ho-yen lun, the commentary
on the Awakening of Faith, citing it frequently in his own writings,
and he considered the Shingon school to be grounded in the
doctrine of “inherently existing, original enlightenment” (honnu hongaku
ûÀû·). Subsequently, Shingon esotericism asserted the idea of
“attaining Buddhahood in this very body” (sokushin jõbutsu “X¨[),
which presupposes a hongaku perspective. In the Japanese Tendai
school, we should note ³rst that Enchin cited in his Kõen Hokkegi
“ÜÀT– [Exposition on the meaning of the Lotus] a verse taken
from the Renge sanmaikyõ ¥TX*™ [Lotus meditation sðtra], known
later as the “Verse in Praise of Original Enlightenment” (Hongakusan
û·S). Enchin was, of course, the one who propounded the superiority
of the esoteric teachings and the inferiority of the perfect Lotus
teachings. Next, Annen, the great systematizer of taimitsu doctrine
who completed the process of esotericizing the Tendai school, cited
both the Renge sammaikyõ and the Shih Mo-ho-yen lun, and emphasized
the doctrine of the nondualism of manifested things, a standpoint
compatible with hongaku since the absolute is manifested as the basis
of things (rikenpon 7ßû). It is worth noting here that from the start
esoteric Buddhism and Kegon doctrine had strong af³nities. In Japan
too, emphasis on hongaku thought was a particular feature of the esoteric
line of development.18
Ryõgen, aided by powerful kenmon families like that of Minister of
the Right Fujiwara no Morosuke nã‚£ (908–960), brought unprecedented
prosperity to Tendai through his efforts to restore the perfect
18 In the conclusion of his seminal article, SHIMAJI points out: “The two great stars of hongaku
thought in the Heian period were the great master Kðkai of Shingon’s tõmitsu esotericism,
and Godai-in Annen of Mt. Hiei’s taimitsu esotericism” (1926).
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 263
Lotus teachings and his education of such outstanding disciples as
Genshin, Kakuun, Jinzen c7 (943–990), and Kakuchõ. Ryõgen ushered
in a pronounced orientation toward the nenbutsu and meditative
thought (kanjin shugi) in the doctrinal atmosphere of the Tendai
school. Ryõgen and Genshin were represented in later periods as the
authors of certain treatises on hongaku doctrine, but this was completely
under false pretenses; moreover, their nenbutsu was one of
Tendai meditative visualization, and contained almost no hongaku
thought. Ryõgen’s restoration of Mt. Hiei’s temples and his advancement
of its doctrinal studies should thus be viewed as a display of the
Tendai Lotus aspect of the school.
However, as pointed out earlier, the nenbutsu at this time actually
spread as a thaumaturgic practice for pacifying spirits, serving as a
substitute for mantra and the Kaji Dosha (Earth incantation). In addition,
Ryõgen’s religious heirs supported in their doctrines the views of
Annen, and carried forward the development of Tendai esoteric practices.
Thus esoteric Buddhism was by no means removed from the
Tendai scene. Looked at in a comprehensive way, Tendai’s meditative
orientation was essentially the school’s distinctive response, framed in
a Tendai idiom, to esoteric beliefs and thaumaturgic practices for
pacifying spirits, all within a current of mappõ thought. Tendai hongaku
doctrine, which subsequently appeared within this meditative orientation,
was not ultimately disconnected from ³gures like Ryõgen and
Genshin. In the end, the hongaku doctrine can be described as a type
of esoteric Buddhism that developed in the wake of Ryõgen’s epochal
meditative orientation. It even adopted the Shingon school’s custom
of oral transmissions (kuden), and borrowed Tendai doctrine and
logic as its mode of expression, as in its use of the teaching of the original
and the manifested dimensions of the Lotus (Hokke no honjaku
nimon ÀTuû)Ì–).
In the abstract, hongaku thought is not generally associated with
esoteric Buddhism. It has therefore been described as, “from the
standpoint of form and function, thought that syncretizes the exoteric
and esoteric, but, from the standpoint of essential message, thought
that elucidates original enlightenment,” and thus as “an absolute theory
of the concrete, and a form of thought absolutely af³rming things”
(SHIMAJI 1926, p. 188). But, seen from its actual process of development,
hongaku thought marked the high point of the esotericization
of Tendai. In its actual manifestations, it comprised a body of rituals
and a brand of thought that af³rmed absolutely the present world,
equivalent to the Shingon esoteric principle of attaining Buddhahood
in this very body (see FUJITA 1934). We could go so far as to describe
264 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
hongaku thought as esoteric Buddhism, in both essential concept and
actual practice, operating under the title of Tendai.19
In that sense,
therefore, we can perceive in hongaku thought one archetypal form of
the kenmitsu ideology.
At this point let us summarize the central characteristics of the kenmitsu
taisei:
1 The kenmitsu taisei uni³ed all religions through esoteric Buddhism
on a foundation of thaumaturgic techniques for pacifying
spirits.
2 Within it arose the respective schools’ individual doctrines, esoteric
practices, and teachings on the syncretization of exoteric
and esoteric thought.
3 The eight schools (hasshð), as the institutional embodiment of
kenmitsu, were recognized by secular society as orthodox, and
constituted a type of religious establishment.
Tendai’s hongaku thought was the archetype of kenmitsu ideology, and
the Tendai school was the most representative agent of the kenmitsu
system—that is, the school holding the most power and authority in
medieval times—precisely because it displayed the above three characteristics
more fully than other schools.
The structure of kenmitsu thought from this stage on was something
quite distinctive to Japan in East Asian Buddhist history,20
and was a
reµection of the particular intellectual circumstances of the age—an
age in which Buddhism, and by extension all religion, came to be
known by the term kenmitsu. The ken of kenmitsu, meaning “exoteric,”
conveyed the idea of something revealed (kenji ß½), and was rational
in its orientation. In contrast, mitsu, “esoteric,” indicated something
secret (himitsu ¸O), and was psychological in its orientation. Although
19 Here it is necessary to note, from the other side, how Tendai esotericism was practiced.
If we de³ne esoteric Buddhism in a narrow and limited sense, there may be grounds
for treating the hongaku doctrine separately from esoteric Buddhism, even as Tendai esotericism
existed. But if we change our perspective so that we see these movements in their
entirety, we realize that Tendai doctrine generally was transformed into one type or strand
of esoteric Buddhism amid all the esoteric trends of the Tendai school on Mt. Hiei. In that
sense, the Tendai hongaku doctrine can be described as esoteric. It is a dif³cult problem
how to de³ne the concept and scope of esoteric Buddhism. There is one line of thinking
that would de³ne it narrowly so that prayers and thaumaturgic techniques, and also sadõ
mikkyõ ÙŠOî (“left-handed esotericism,” a form of Tantric esotericism that incorporated
sexual rituals), would be excluded from “orthodox” esoteric Buddhism. There is also a viewpoint
that sees the Lamaist teachings as a particular expression of esoteric Buddhism. This
may have some validity historically and in actual events.
20 Concerning this point, there is again a need to compare Japanese with Tibetan
Buddhism, which displays relatively similar patterns.
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 265
mitsu was the dominant and de³ning element, it was in the area left to
ken (though this was sometimes little more than an adornment) that
the unique and de³ning characteristics of a distinctly Japanese type of
esoteric Buddhism took form, and that later developments in
Japanese Buddhism emerged. In other words, it was because of the
dominance and pervasiveness of esoteric Buddhism that the exoteric
teachings ³rst gave rise to the nenbutsu, subsequently generated the
honji suijaku ûGs) doctrine,21
and eventually spawned the Kamakura
schools of “New Buddhism.” The character and historical
signi³cance of each of these developments is different and must be
analyzed in its own right. Nonetheless, the kenmitsu system stood
behind them all, maintaining its vitality throughout the medieval period
and forming the traditional and authoritative ideology.
If we survey the process by which the kenmitsu system was established,
we can divide it into stages, and through them can understand
most accurately this system as an ideology. As pointed out previously,
the ³rst stage was the uni³cation of all religion based on esoteric
Buddhism in the ninth century. The second stage was the development
of Pure Land Buddhism in the tenth century, as a product of
the Tendai school’s own self-assertion amid the esotericization of all
religion. The third stage occurred in the eleventh century with the
rise of strains of thought focusing on the mutual dependence of imperial
law (õbõ ÷À) and Buddhist teachings (buppõ [À), a topic requiring
further examination.22
This stage corresponded to the period
when Tendai’s hongaku doctrine began to develop. At this stage the
kenmitsu system was not limited to simply a religious system and ideology,
but had established a bond and union with state authority, and in
this sense had become ³rmly ³xed as medieval Japan’s religious
orthodoxy.
REFERENCES
AKAMATSU Toshihide ÓÇpD
1966 Zoku Kamakura Bukkyõ no kenkyð ¡àV[îuÓÁ. Kyoto:
Heirakuji Shoten.
ENDÕ Yoshimoto æn?_ and KASUGA Kazuo rÕÉC, eds.
1967 Nihon ryõiki Õû‘bz. Nihon Koten Bungaku Taikei 70. Tokyo:
Iwanami Shoten.
21 The doctrine that the kami’s fundamental identity (honji) is that of the Buddha, and
their manifested form (suijaku) is that of kami.
22 See the article “The Imperial Law and the Buddhist Law” in the present issue, pp.
271–85.
266 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
FUJISHIMA Tatsurõ nSòµ and MIYAZAKI Enjun ·2Ò†, eds.
1969 Nihon Jõdokyõshi no kenkyð ÕûþFîtuÓÁ. Kyoto: Heirakuji
Shoten.
FUJITA Kairyð n,}O
1934 Nihon Tendai ni okeru sokushin jõbutsu shisõ Õûú×rêWš
“X¨[„`. Shðkyõ kenkyð, n.s, 11/3.
FUTABA Kenkõ ÌèÊ¡
1969 Kðya Jõdokyõ ni tsuite W˜þFîrkJm. In FUJISHIMA and
MIYAZAKI 1969.
HAYAMI Tasuku ™v X
1968 Kðya shutsugen o meguru shomondai W˜mꤌVš™“Û. In
Fukyõsha to minshu to no taiwa +îéoWLouÁÊ, Nihon
Shðkyõshi Kenkyðkai Õû;îtÓÁl, ed. Kyoto: Hõzõkan.
1969 Kõmyõ shingon to shoki Jõdokyõ MgOíoŠkþFî. In Nihon
ni okeru shakai to shðkyõ ÕûrPWšçlo;î, Kasahara Kazuo
ÅãsC, ed. Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kõbunkan.
HAZAMA Jikõ b ²e
1948 Nihon Bukkyõ no kaiten to sono kichõ Õû[îuˆûodu_“. 2
vols. Tokyo: Sanseidõ.
HORI Ichirõ ø sÁ
1953 Waga kuni minkan shinkõshi no kenkyð aR³WD=þtuÓÁ,
Shðkyõshihen ;îtŠ. Tokyo: Sõgensha.
INOUE Mitsusada mîMÌ
1956 Nihon Jõdokyõ seiritsushi no kenkyð ÕûþFî¨CtuÓÁ. Tokyo:
Yamakawa Shuppan.
1971 Nihon kodai no kokka to Bukkyõ ÕûòÖu³Bo[î. Tokyo:
Iwanami Shoten.
ISHIDA Mitsuyuki Í,Xî
1962 Jõdokyõ kyõrishi þFîî7t. Kyoto: Heirakuji Shoten.
ISHIDA Mizumaro Í,…C
1967 Jõdokyõ no tenkai þFîuûˆ. Tokyo: Shunjðsha.
1970 Õjõyõshð no shisõshiteki igi ð´êTu„`tí[–. In Genshin
è=, Ishida Mizumaro, ed., pp. 427–95. Nihon Shisõ Taikei 6,
Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
ISHIMODA Shõ ͪ, ±
1943 Utsubo monogatari ni tsuite no oboegaki: Kizoku shakai no
jojishi to shite no ”§˜]BrkJmu·–—{Ÿçlu›ª¡
o^mu. Rekishigaku kenkyð 115–16.
ITÕ Yuishin QnµO
1969 Amida no hijiri ni tsuite: Minkan Jõdokyõ e no isshiten %¡¼u¸
rkJm—WDþFîƒusœ(. In FUJISHIMA and MIYAZAKI 1969.
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 267
JÕDO-SHÐ KAISHÐ HAPPYAKUNEN KINEN KEISAN JUNBIKYOKU þF;ˆ;
kßæzç‰g}Ä&, ed.
1973 Jõdoshð zensho þF;6– 9. Tokyo: Sankibõ Busshorin.
KAWANE Yoshiyasu I3ôr
1971 “Kokufð bunka” no rekishiteki ichi ³Kk5u•tíRN. In
Chðsei hõkensei seiritsushi ron _›IÉ£¨CtÇ, Kawane
Yoshiyasu, ed., pp. 334–65. Tokyo: Tõkyõ Daigaku Shuppan Kai.
KURODA Toshio ¸,pÍ
1975 Nihon chðsei no kokka to shðkyõ Õû_›u³Bo;î. Tokyo:
Iwanami Shoten.
1994 Kenmitsu taisei ron ßO¿£Ç. Kuroda Toshio chosakushð
¸,pÍq6T 2. Kyoto: Hõzõkan.
1995a Shinkoku shisõ to senju nenbutsu P³„`oé@ç[. Kuroda Toshio
chosakushð 4. Kyoto: Hõzõkan.
1995b Chðsei shõen ron _›vÓÇ. Kuroda Toshio chosakushð 5. Kyoto:
Hõzõkan.
1995c Chðsei kyõdõtai ron; Mibun-sei ron _›ß|¿Ç%X_£Ç. Kuroda
Toshio chosakushð 6. Kyoto: Hõzõkan.
KYÕTO DAIGAKU BUNGAKUBU DOKUSHIKAI Ù@Ø¿k¿Hœtl, ed.
1959 Kokushi ronshð ³tÇT. Kyoto: Dokushikai.
MASUDA Katsumi Ê,§Ë
1960 Setsuwa no sekai ßÊu›ƒ. In Setsuwa bungaku to emaki
ßÊk¿o…ñ, Koten to sono jidai òøodu´Ö 5. Tokyo: San’ichi
Shobõ.
MATSUNAGA Yðkei ǘÀ‰
1969 Mikkyõ no rekishi Oîu•t. S„ra Sõsho 19. Kyoto: Heirakuji
Shoten.
MORRELL, Robert E.
1985 Sand & Pebbles (Shasekishð): The Tales of Mujð Ichien, A Voice for
Pluralism in Kamakura Buddhism. Albany: State University of New
York Press.
MURAYAMA Shðichi ª[@s
1960 Jõdai no onmyõdõ îÖu‹îŠ. In Seikatsu to shðkyõ ´Ïo;î,
Kokumin seikatsushi kenkyð ³W´ÏtÓÁ 4, Itõ Tazaburõ
QX−XÁ, ed. Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kõbunkan.
NAKAMURA, Kyõko Motomichi, tr.
1973 Miraculous Stories from the Japanese Buddhist Tradition: The Nihon
Ryõiki of the Monk Kyõkai. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
ÕYA Tokujõ Ø%”ô
1929 Heian-chõ ni okeru sandai seiryoku no kõsõ to chõwa rH†
rêWšXؤjuhmo“É. In Nihon Bukkyõshi no kenkyð Õû
268 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23/3–4
[îtuÓÁ 2, Õya Tokujõ, ed. Kyoto: Hõzõkan.
SHIBATA Minoru Û,×
1966 Chðsei shomin shinkõ no kenkyð _›“W=þuÓÁ. Tokyo:
Kadokawa.
SHIMAJI Daitõ SGØf
1926 Nihon ko Tendai kenkyð no hitsuyõ o ronzu Õûòú×ÓÁu
×ê¤Ça. Shisõ 60: 174–92.
1964 Tendai kyõgaku shi ú×î¿t. Gendai Bukkyõ Meicho Zenshð 9.
Tokyo: Ryõbunkan.
SHIMIZUDANI Kyõjun ²vúìˆ
1929 Tendai no mikkyõ ú×uOî. Tokyo: Sankibõ.
1972 Tendai mikkyõ no seiritsu ni kan suru kenkyð ú×Oîu¨Cr
F`šÓÁ. Tokyo: Bun’ichi Shuppan.
SONODA Kõyð å,¡Î
1969 Yama no nenbutsu: Sono kigen to seikaku [uç[—du|èo
§°. In FUJISHIMA and MIYAZAKI 1969.
TADA Kõryð −,RN et al., eds.
1973 Tendai hongaku ron ú×ûÓÇ. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
TAKATORI Masao ¢þ±C
1955 Nihon ni okeru meshia undõ ÕûrPWšé¿§±{. Nihon shi
kenkyð 24.
1967 Nara-Heian shoki ni okeru kanji no kyõdan to minkan Bukkyõ
¹d% rHŠkrPWšö±uî:o WD[î. In Soshiki to dendõ
L3o)Š, Nihon shðkyõshi kenkyð Õû;îtÓÁ 1, Nihon
Shðkyõshi Kenkyðkai Õû;îtÓÁl, ed. Kyoto: Hõzõkan.
TAMURA Yoshirõ ,ªÆµ
1965 Kamakura shin-Bukkyõ shisõ no kenkyð àVG[î„`uÓÁ. Kyoto:
Heirakuji Shoten.
TODA Yoshimi ú,Æ×
1967 Chðsei bunka keisei no zentei _›k5†¨u2Ø. In Nihon
ryõshusei seiritsushi no kenkyð Õûiü£¨CtuÓÁ. Tokyo:
Iwanami Shoten.
UI Hakuju ”mL3
1951 Nihon Bukkyõ gaishi Õû[î–t. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
KURODA: The Development of the Kenmitsu System 269