1 Myth and History in Shin Buddhist Thought David Matsumoto Institute of Buddhist Studies February 2017 I. Introduction Myth and history represent central categories of thought, faith and life whether in seamless continuity or polar tension in many religious traditions throughout the world. Yet, I find it surprisingly challenging as a Shin Buddhist to address the issue in a satisfying way. For reasons that I will suggest, a consideration of the categories of myth and history represents a challenging scheme by which to address important questions of Shin Buddhist thought and faith. II. Myth and History: general considerations What is myth? As mythos, a myth is a narrative about significant events in human lives the creation and end of the cosmos, cultural heroes or questions of life and death. For some, myth offers a sacred, spiritual history and a foundation for present place, act and thought. It has been said that myths are not hard to detect; we know a myth when we hear one. However, when it comes to the study of myth, we are faced with the fact that it is very difficult to determine just what myth is. Myth is everything and nothing at the same time. It is the true story or a false one, revelation or deception, sacred or vulgar, real or fictional, symbol or tool, archetype or stereotype. It is either strongly structured and logical or emotional and pre-logical, traditional and primitive or part of contemporary ideology. Myth is about the gods, but often also the ancestors and sometimes certain men. It is charter, recurring theme, character type, received idea, half-truth, tale or just a plain lie. (Strenski, 1987: 1) There are many different theories, approaches, definitions and perspectives. A quick look at the perspectives of just four theorists from the 20th Century will demonstrate the broad range of ideas and concerns along which myth can be taken up. For instance,
2 Ernst Cassirer apprehends myth as a reflection on the reality of the subject; thus, the study of myth will examine the mental processes that create myth, instead of presupposed, real objects of myth. Myths are spiritual forms that contain within themselves the criteria for their truth and meaning. They are particular modes of mythic thinking and expression that can transcend experience and meet the needs of the age in which people live. Cassirer sought to grasp the single, coherent essence in myth, theorizing that myths are stories that have essentially to do with emotional unity, held together by the monistic principle of emotional unity. Bronislaw Malinowsky took a functional approach to myth. Myth is a charter, warrant and even a practical rule that provide guidance in action. It is a living reality in a primitive culture. Myth is not symbolic, but a direct expression of its subject; it is not an explanation but a narrative resurrection of a primeval reality. Myth fulfills an indispensable function in primitive culture: it expresses, enhances, and codifies belief; it safeguards and enforces morality; it vouches for the efficiency of ritual; and it contains practical rules for the guidance of man. Claude Lévi-Strauss offered a structural analysis of myth. A myth is a strongly structured, important story. Myths contain concealed messages, containing significant ideas, which have to be decoded through a detailed and comprehensive structural analysis. That method cannot be demonstrated by reference to one or a few examples; it must be a global, full length operation. Mircea Eliade proposed that all myths are in essence origin narratives. They are cosmogonic, pertaining to creation of the cosmos. Myths engage in a mythic return - they return to time before time, before the gods or ancestors created the world to sacred time in order to narrate sacred events. The aim of a religious person is to go beyond the natural/profane world of space and time and enter into the sacred space of eternal time. Myths act as sacraments of the imagination. (Strenski, 1987)
3 This brief glimpse of the thoughts of four theorists shows us that scholarly approaches to myths lie across a broad spectrum of thought and concern. On one hand, some approaches to myth equate it with some essential, universal religious truth, and tendency, which seems to have a strongly perennialist flavor. On the other hand, some scholars emphasize the processes, structures of power, and implications of social or political formation of myth. Focus is placed not so much on the myth but on the activity of mythmaking. (McCutcheon, 2000: 199) Moreover, the word in Japanese, shinwa or tales of the kami, which are offered within a context of origin, social and political foundations, may function well with some Western theories of myth, but perhaps less so when the topic turns to narratives in the Shin Buddhist world. What is the significance of history? History, as a category of thought, is also problematic for Buddhists, but for different reasons. Attention must first be given the question of what history could mean in Buddhism. While history in many of the world s religions is generally thought to consist of chronological or linear time, Arnold Toynbee famously declared that, in Buddhism history itself is considered to be cyclical, not chronological. To a large extent Jan Nattier agrees, stating that Buddhism is not a historical religion. (Nattier, 1991: 3) Even the Buddha s enlightenment the central event in Buddhist mythology is not viewed as a decisive historical event. The Buddha s awakening did not usher a new revelation into the world for the first time; rather, he discovered a timeless truth about the nature of reality, and that awakening, he taught, had happened before and would happen again. Having no creator-god theory, Buddhism posits karma (action or cause and effect) as that universal mechanism that keeps the phenomenal world operating in cycles of birth, death and rebirth, without beginning or end. (Lamb, 1994: 8)
4 At the same time, Buddhists and Hindhus are said to share an Indian sense of the incomprehensible vastness, in distance and time of the cosmos. Nattier points out, for instance, that the notion of endlessly recurring sequences of historical time, lasting for eons of kalpas underlie the early Buddhist sutras that issued prophecy of the inevitable decline and death of the Dharma. (Nattier, 1994) Nishitani Keiji, however, challenges Toynbee s interpretation of time in Buddhism. (Nishitani, 1982: 168-217) All religions that can be characterized as mythos share a view that time is recurrent and ahistorical. One can point to cycles in nature or in the events of human life. In that sense, a cyclical view of time and history might be seen as mythical. But the Buddhist conception of time is not purely ahistorical, for all religious traditions are located in history. Instead, says Nishitani, time in Buddhism might be described as circular, because all of its time systems are simultaneous, as well as rectilinear, since it is a continuum of individual nows within such simultaneity. And there must be an infinite openness at the bottom of time. Each now is new; there is no repetition for each now passes away. History is impermanent. Time comes out of the distant past and goes further into a future that ceaselessly opens up. The beginning and end of time lie directly beneath the present, its home ground, and from that home-ground comes an infinite openness beyond all time. That infinite openness has implications for history; it is both a field of unlimited, creative possibility and an infinite burden of unceasing newness. Karma is an awareness of our existence in which being and time are infinite burdens for us, while being the essence of time itself. The standpoint of karma is the fundamental form of human life in the ordinary world of history. All of our work belongs to this world of history. Our existence, our behavior, and our becoming all come about within a world-nexus that is unlimited
5 not only with regard to time but also with regard to space. In the standpoint of karma as well the nexus of being-doing-becoming comes about within time without beginning or end, while opening up the infinite openness of nihility directly beneath the present. The standpoint of karma, however, has to be abandoned to reach the standpoint of emptiness, a disengagement that signals a conversion from the standpoint of nihility to the standpoint of sunyata. (Nishitani, 1982: 222-255) III. Myth and History in Shin Buddhist Thought As we have seen, then, the categories of myth and history are not terribly simple to grasp or employ in the Buddhist context. With that in mind, however, I would like to share some significant narratives at work within the Pure Land scriptures and Shin Buddhist thought. I mention them, unsure of whether it would be better to characterize them as myths, metaphors or symbols. Some are clearly cosmogonic. Some are narratives that seek to reveal the truth of Shin apprehensions. Others address spiritual concerns about one s place in the world. Although I will briefly mention seven such narratives now, I would like to pay closer attention to the first two of them in my talk today. The first narrative is the most well-known in Pure Land Buddhism the story of the career of the Bodhisattva Dharmākara. Mythic in scope, origin and implication it likely captured the spiritual imaginations of Pure Land followers throughout the centuries. The Larger Sutra of Immeasurable Life presents the narrative, which begins with a buddha named Lokeśvararāja in whose presence was a king. Listening to the buddha s preaching of the Dharma, the king immediately gave rise to the mind aspiring for enlightenment. He abandoned his kingdom, relinquished his throne, and became a monk named Dharmākara. He came into the presence of the Lokeśvararāja, touched the Buddha s feet with his forehead, circumambulated
6 clockwise three times, dropped to his knees, pressed his palms together, and praised the Buddha in verse. Dharmākara then asked the Buddha to relate the teachings of the buddha lands, so that he might immediately attain perfect enlightenment in this world and remove the source of sufferings of birth-and-death. Lokeśvararāja then explained the two hundred and ten kotis of buddha lands for the bhiksu s sake, and manifested all the lands and allowed him to see them. Having heard what the Buddha taught and having seen all the lands with pure adornments, the bhiksu then made unsurpassed and unparalleled vows. Meditating for five kalpas, he comprehended the pure practices by which the innumerable, exquisite buddha lands were established. The Buddha then commanded the bhiksu to proclaim his vows before the entire assembly of bodhisattvas in the assembly. Dharmākara then expounded this forty-eight vows in detail. Each of the vows was presented in the form of a double-negative, in order to emphasis the resoluteness of his bodhi mind: If, when I attain buddhahood,, may I not realize perfect enlightenment. Among the forty-eight vows were those related to Buddha, those related to the Buddha-land, and those concerning beings in Buddha-land. The bhiksu, having expounded these vows, then uttered verses in confirmation of them. After he finished, the whole earth immediately trembled in the six ways and the heavenly beings rained exquisite flowers which scattered on the earth. Spontaneously, music arose in the sky. Having made these vows, Dharmākara single-heartedly devoted himself to adorning this exquisite land. He cultivated the immeasurable virtues of bodhisattva practices during the inconceivably long period of millions of kalpas. Always tranquil in samadhi, he had unhindered wisdom. His mind was neither false nor devious.
7 The bodhisattva Dharmākara attained buddhahood over ten kalpas in the past, and now exists in that land, which is one hundred thousand kotis of lands away from here in the west. The land has a name, Bliss. The land is marvelous and surpasses all comparisons with this world. The majestic light of the Buddha of Immeasurable Life is the best and most noble. The light of the other buddhas cannot compare with it. The life of the Buddha of Immeasurable Life is long, and it is impossible to express in numbers. Beings who attain birth in that land all enter the ranks of the truly settled, attain nonretrogression and realize great joy. This narrative was largely drawn from the Larger Sutra of (the Buddha of) Immeasurable Life T. Vol. 12, 265c-279a, translated by Dennis Hirota. (Skt. Sukhavati-vyūha sutra; Jp. Bussetsu Muryōju Kyō 仏説無量寿経 ; or, Daimuryōjukyō 大無量寿経 ) Also known as the Larger Sutra (Daikyō 大経 ), Sutra in Two Fascicles (Sōkankyō 双巻経 ), or, Larger Text (Daibon 大本 ). Traditionally, it has been said that this text was translated from Sanskrit into Chinese by Samghavarman, during Ts'ao-Wei dynasty. However, it is believed to have been translated by Buddhabhadra (359-429) and Baoyun (376-449), in 421. The second important narrative is one shared by all other Buddhist traditions. It is story told whenever the followers of a given Buddhist tradition read or hear the foundational scriptures of their school, Thus have I heard. The spiritual authority and grounding for one s teaching is implied by those words. The historical Śakyamuni Buddha expounded the teaching of truth, and that Dharma has been heard, accepted and transmitted to the devotees encountering that teaching today. As we will see, modern historical research concludes that in fact no extant sutra can be reliably traced back to the historical Buddha. But for countless Buddhist followers throughout the centuries, particularly those who follow the Mahayana and Pure Land Sutras, this narrative
8 has been considered to be a historical fact. Third, the Mahayana scriptures speak of countless Buddhas and countless Buddha-lands through the cosmos. Buddhist cosmology presents the conception of an infinite number of universes and innumerable Buddhas, more numerous than the sands of the River Ganges, are active in their enlightenment. (Lamb, 1994) Fourth, the Theory of the Dharma-ages presents a historical characterization of the degeneration of the Buddhist Path since the time of Sakyamuni Buddha. It might be said to represent a rendering of history as myth and of myth as history.while Jan Nattier points out the early sources of the teaching of the inevitable decline of the Dharma, Shinran draws chiefly from Daochou, rendition of the Dharma-ages theory that is presented in the Passages on the Land of Happiness. The most widely cited theory describes three periods: 1. Right dharma-age - a 500-year period after Sakyamuni's death in which true teaching, practice, realization continue to exist. 2. Semblance dharma-age the next 1,000-year period of time in which only true teaching & practice remain. 3. Last dharma-age - the next 10,000-year period in which Buddhist paths degenerate to such an extent that only true teaching remains. Shinran cites Daochou at length and then offers his own historical calculation that, we find that we are already 673 years into the last dharma-age. CWS, 244 Fifth, the Buddhist notion of transmigration within samsaric existence establishes the cosmological and soteriological framework within which Shinran s path of birth through nembutsu/shinjin operates. Even if the transmigration paradigm is historically accurate, some characterize it as a mythical, pre-scientific, and pre-logical way of considering the human condition. (Lamb, 1994). Our fundamental ignorance and the karmic actions that arise from it that binds us to cycles of birth-and-death. In Shin Buddhism in particular, this karmic anchoring to samsaric existence underlies the narrative of evil and the salvation of foolish, evil beings
9 through the power of Amida Buddha s Vow. Finally, brief mention must be made to the many legends, folk tales, stories (densetsu, setsuwa, engi) that have arisen within the communities of Shin followers. Frequently miraculous in nature, many of these tales often combine hagiographic praise of Shinran and other known figures with local customs and folk beliefs. Since there is no time today to consider all of these narratives, I would like discuss first the notion that the historical Sakyamuni Buddha was the expounder of the Larger Sutra and then the Dharmakara/Amida Buddha narrative. I will consider the manner in which the two narratives are in fact inter-related and mutually-transforming. I will then suggest that Shinran s treatment of both narratives raises the notion that upāya in two related senses - upāya as compassionate means and upāya as provisional means - might represent an approach that reveals a Shin Buddhist consideration of myth and history. My proposal will be that in Shinran upāya is positioned as a demythologizing myth in which upāya as compassionate means and upāya as provisional means represent the dynamic activity of enlightenment Amida Buddha s intentionality that is encountered actively on the Shin Buddhist path of practice. V. Shinran s demythologizing of Pure Land Buddhism Sakyamuni Buddha as the expounder of the Larger Sutra John Makransky reminds us that today s historical research allows us to understand that the historical Buddha Sakyamuni could not have been the expounder of any of the Mahayana sutras. The Mahayana Sutras began to appear at the beginning of the Common Era, at least four to five centuries after the death of Sakyamuni, and many were composed even later. In fact, it is generally recognized that Sakyamuni could not have been the direct source of any known sutra. Given that historical approach, Makransky is critical of sectarian Buddhists and scholars who
10 even today continue to maintain the myth that Sakyamuni authored the Mahayana texts. Mahayana sutras employ literary devices to mythologize history to place the sutra back into the time of Sakyamuni, who can inspire and certify it. The Buddha s authority and power come not just from the historical Buddha, but from the wisdom of enlightenment itself, realized by others in the sangha. This he calls the trans-historical Buddha a nondual awareness of dharmatā. The original expositor of the sutra is Dharmakāya the embodiment of the real nature of things in direct knowledge. This body has then been embodied by many historically and culturally conditioned persons as agents of awakening (rupakāya). This gives rise to the vast Mahayana doctrine of skillful means (upāya-kausalya). It includes the infinite scope of activities and methods through which buddhas and bodhisattvas communicate Dharma in precise ways appropriate to the capacities of all living beings. (Makransky, 2000: 113-115) The Larger Sutra was likely translated from an earlier Sanskrit text in 421 CE by Buddhabhadra and Baoyun. Yet, it is quite likely that Shinran was not aware of current historical research and believed wholeheartedly that the historical Sakyamuni did in fact and history expound the Larger Sutra. For him, there that was not a myth; rather, he likely considered it to be a historical certainty and of ultimate significance. In the Chapter on Teaching in his True Teaching, Practice and Realization of the Pure Land Way, Shinran begins his explication of the true teaching with the frame narrative of The Sutra of Immeasurable Life. There it relates that, as he sits before Sakyamuni, Ananda becomes amazed at the radiance and majesty of the Buddha's entire countenance. He thereupon rises from his seat and praises the Buddha's luminous appearance. He then states, Today, the World-honored one abides in the dharma most rare and wondrous. Today, the Great Hero abides where all Buddhas abide. Today, the World's Eye abides in the activity of guide and teacher. Today, the Preeminent one of the world abides in the supreme
11 enlightenment. Today, the Heaven-honored one puts into practice the virtue of all Tathagatas. The Buddhas of the past, future and present all think on one another. Do not you, the present Buddha, also think on all the other Buddhas now? Why does your commanding radiance shine forth with such brilliance? (CWS 7-8) Following another exchange in which Ananda assures the Buddha that the question was his own, Sakyamuni praises his wisdom and then declares, I have appeared in the world and expounded the teachings of the way to enlightenment, seeking to save the multitudes of living beings by blessing them with the benefit that is true and real. Rare is it to encounter and rare to behold a Tathagata, even in countless millions of kalpas. It is like the blossoming of the udumbara, which seldom occurs. This question you now ask will bring immense benefit; it will enlighten the minds of all devas and human beings. (CWS 8) After this exchange, Sakyamuni tells the story of Dharmākara's aspiration for enlightenment, establishment of Vows and performance of practices. In classic analysis, this narrative constitutes the central message of the sutra. Shinran, however, does not cite that portion of the text in his Chapter on Teaching. Instead, for him the crucial moment in the sutra is found in the opening exchange between Ananda and Śakyamuni. It is that frame narrative that leads Shinran to declare that the sutra is the true teaching received through Amida s directing of virtue. In the passage from The Sutra of Immeasurable Life Śakyamuni responds to Ananda's question, "Do not you, the present Buddha, also think on all the other Buddhas now?," in the affirmative, saying he has attained the essential quality of all Buddhas ("the place where all Buddhas abide"). The parallel passage from The Sutra of the Tathagata of Immeasurable Life includes a sentence (not cited by Shinran) that Śakyamuni has entered the great tranquility samadhi (daijakujō ). The Nirvana Sutra, fascicle 30, equates the great quiescence with great nirvana. (CWS 183). Past scholars have held that entry into the great tranquility samadhi means that all ignorance and passions have been completely eliminated. That is, all Buddhas have realized or manifested this nirvana. Hence, Śakyamuni now dwells in the realm of great nirvana, where all buddhas dwell. Here, Śakyamuni sees and knows what all buddhas in the past, present and future see and know (butsu butsu
12 sōnen). Thus, Śakyamuni enters into the great tranquility samadhi and becomes melded into the virtues of Amida Buddha, becoming one with Amida Buddha. Amida is manifested in the resplendent appearance of Sakyamuni thus is seen as a transformed Buddha, whose form is perceptible by beings. That the state perceived and praised by Ananda. For Shinran, as Śakyamuni expounds the Larger Sutra in history, Amida Buddha expounds the true teaching in a manner that surpasses all historical conditioning. For the Shin Buddhist follower who encounters the Larger Sutra, the myth of Śakyamuni s exposition is likewise transformed into a direct encounter with Amida Buddha s voice. In Makransky s terminology, Shinran points to the trans-historical Buddha that is the source of the vast Mahayana doctrine of skillful means. The Dharmākara Bodhisattva/ Amida Buddha narrative in Pure Land Buddhism The story in the Larger Sutra in which Dharmākara Bodhisattva becomes Amida Buddha follows a course envisioned by Mahayana Buddhist thought and practice. The Pure Land sutras open a window through which one can perceive an important dimension of Mahayana Buddhism: the point at which cosmology, the theory of spiritual self-cultivation and a mythology of hope meet. The story represents the transformation of self-effort into hope. In this belief system, there are two dimensions: a mythic content and a religious intention. (Gomez, 1996: 25-29) The narrative is marvelous. Mythic in imagery and dimension, it is capable of overturning a person s inclination to rely on self-will and effort in order to overcome suffering. It can awaken awe in the most ordinary person and give birth to a profound shift in aspiration and faith. See, for instance, the way in which the Contemplation Sutra instructs practitioners to engage in a range of
contemplations on Amida Buddha and his land. Among them is the ninth contemplation, which states in part, [N]ext envision the physical characteristics and the light of Amitāyus. Ananda, you should realize that his body is as glorious as a thousand million kotis of nuggets of gold from the Jambu River of the Yama Heaven and that his height is six hundred thousand kotis of nayutas of yojanas multiplied by the number of the sands of the Ganges. The white tuft of hair curling to the right between his eyebrows is five times as big as Mount Sumeru. and the Pure Land (Inagaki, 1994: 332-2) The Larger Sutra describes some of the adornments of the Pure Land in this way, Further, the halls, living quarters, palaces and storied pavilions, all adorned with the seven precious substances, appear miraculously of themselves. Covering them is a jewel-canopy composed of pearls, moon-radiant mani-jewels, and various other gems. Everywhere about the buildings, both inside and out, there are ponds for bathing ten yojanas, or twenty or thirty, up to one hundred thousand yojanas across. (CW 208-9) This brief exposure to the Dharmākara Amida Buddha narrative is sufficient, I believe, to open our eyes to the spiritual power that it must have had on the practice and lifestyle, as well as the mythical imagination of Pure Land followers. In contrast to such traditional Pure Land expressions, however, Shinran made a point not to draw upon the narratives found in the Pure Land sutras to, describe and explain Amida Buddha and Pure Land. Instead, he frequently referred to Amida and the Pure Land as light. 13 Reverently contemplating the true Buddha and the true land, I find that the Buddha is the Tathagata of inconceivable light and the land also is the land of immeasurable light. (CWS, 177) Moreover, Shinran, being grounded in Mahayana teaching of nondiscriminative wisdom, insisted on using Mahayana expressions, such as non-arising, impermanence, emancipation, unconditioned, great quiescence, tathagata, Buddha-nature and supreme nirvana in reference to Amida and the Pure Land. Mahāyāna foundations of Shinran s thought It is well-established that Shinran engaged in a reformulation of traditional Pure Land Buddhist forms of thought, practice and salvation. Grounded thoroughly in the radical duality and depth of awareness, as well as insight into the unfolding of nondiscriminative wisdom as
14 compassionate working in Mahāyāna, Shinran brought the promise of creative transformation and fulfillment to the Shin Buddhist follower. Upāya (Jp. hōben) is a key feature of the Mahāyāna Buddhist path. Upāya generally refers to something adulterated or superficial. But, upaya is not a synonym for falsehood. Rather it belongs, in its essence, to truth. The Buddhist notion of upāya, is commonly rendered as expedient means. In the general sense of the term, upāya is a reference to a teaching or manner of teaching that is not true and yet not false. Such a teaching or form of teaching is, instead, considered to be a provisional or expedient means that is utilized to transmit the true teaching effectively (gonke hōben). In other words, this expedient teaching is to be accepted, followed, or understood temporarily. It is then something to be discarded as one turns and enters the next gate or stage of religious maturity (zanyu genpai). Upāya could be false, provisional or ultimately true. In general, therefore, it appears to share some features in common with myth. Upāya in this generic sense has made its way into the English vernacular. We often hear people use such expressions as, All teachings are upāya, or say with a wink, Well, it s just an upāya, you know. Upāya is sometimes taken to mean a little white lie, like when we tell children that Santa Claus will know if they ve been naughty or nice. Of course, to say so is to lie, but it s an expedient lie in which the end justifies the means. Buddhist thought offers a broader perspective to this generic (and often misused) notion of upāya. From the Mahayana standpoint in particular, upâya becomes an expression, or manifestation, of the Buddha s wisdom and compassion, which is directed to the emancipation of beings (zengyō hōben). The most noted example of this idea of upāya-as-buddha-activity is found in the parable in Lotus Sutra, in which the children playing inside a burning house are lured out of it by been shown a deer-drawn cart and a goat-drawn cart. Upon exiting the house
15 they find only one cart drawn by a white ox. This parable is oft-cited by Mahayanists to explain that the sravaka and pratyeka-buddha vehicles, which were easy to grasp and understand, were first provided by the Buddha to ignorant beings as provisional paths that would lure them from their attachment to samsaric existence. Both paths, however, constituted skillful means, which were intended to bring all beings to the one great vehicle the Mahayana bodhisattva path. Shinran s writings reveal that he was quite aware of this notion of upāya-as-buddha-activity. It can also be gleaned from his work that he gave the notion of expedient means a uniquely Pure Land Buddhist spin by placing the theoretical foundation for the efficacy of upāya in the idea of the inter-penetration of dharma-body as suchness and dharma-body as compassionate means. In 1971 Bandō Shōjun explained that the Chinese Pure Land master T an-luan saw the harmonious unity of the thoughts of Non-being (Madhyamika prajna paramita philosophy based on the principle of sunyata) and Being (Yogacara or vijnaptimatrata philosophy based upon the principle of prajnapti or phenomenal being). He was instrumental in clarifying and systematizing of those two principles, contributing greatly to Pure Land thought and exerting great influence on Shinran. As a Yogacarin, Vasubandhu was inclined toward the concrete and substantive descriptions of the Pure Land in the Larger Sutra. This, says Bandō, is a form of mythology. Nagarjuna s Madhyamika philosophy refused to represent nirvana in positive or material form. Thus, T an-luan found himself having to deal with mythological expressions of Vasubandhu. Thus, it could be said that he performed the task of demythologizing the Pure Land so as to bring all those who are faced with this mythology into direct contact with its inner spiritual meaning on an experiential level. The so-called Pure Land is none other than a path which leads ultimately to Buddhahood; it is a supreme upāya. (Bandō, 1971: 81)
T an-luan here expresses the non-dual relationship between nirvana or the ultimate state of enlightenment and the so-called Pure Land. This is the character of Pure Land Buddhism to attempt to objectify (as upāya) what can never be objectified. Further, T an-luan applied his synthetic approach to another of Vasubandhu s teaching that of the twofold dharma-body. Shinran reintroduces the story of Dharmākara in order to reveal the soteriological implications of T anluan s notion is that the dharmabody as suchness (hosshō hosshin), which is inconceivable and formless, gives rise to the dharmabody as compassionate means (hōben hosshin), which manifests form in order to enable ignorant beings to encounter suchness. Dharma-nature is dharma-body. For this reason there are two kinds of dharma-body with regard to the Buddha. The first is called dharma-body as suchness and the second, dharma-body as compassionate means. Dharma-body as suchness has neither color nor form; thus, the mind cannot grasp it nor words describe it. From this oneness was manifested form, called dharma-body as compassionate means. Taking this form, the Buddha announced the name Bhiksu Dharmākara and established the Forty-eight great Vows that surpass conceptual understanding. Among these Vows are the Primal Vow of immeasurable light and the universal Vow of immeasurable life, and to the form manifesting these two Vows Bodhisattva Vasubandhu gave the title, "Tathagata of unhindered light filling the ten quarters." This Tathagata has fulfilled the Vows, which are the cause of that Buddhahood, and thus is called "Tathagata of the fulfilled body." This is none other than Amida Tathagata. "Fulfilled" means that the cause for enlightenment has been fulfilled. From the fulfilled body innumerable personified and accommodated bodies are manifested, radiating the unhindered light of wisdom throughout the countless worlds. Thus appearing in the form of light called "Tathagata of unhindered light filling the ten quarters," it is without color and without form; that is, it is identical with the dharma-body as suchness, dispelling the darkness of ignorance and unobstructed by karmic evil. For this reason it is called "unhindered light." "Unhindered" means that it is not obstructed by the karmic evil and blind passions of beings. Know, therefore, that Amida Buddha is light, and that light is the form taken by wisdom. (CWS 461) Shinran, moreover, employed the more generally recognized notion regarding the three bodies of the Buddha. He identifies Dharmākara and Amida Buddha as fulfilled bodies. As such they function as formless suchness that has arisen as form (light) and revealed a Name, in order to make themselves known to beings. 16
17 From this treasure ocean of oneness form was manifested, taking the name of Bodhisattva Dharmākara, who, through establishing the unhindered Vow as the cause, became Amida Buddha. For this reason Amida is the "Tathagata of fulfilled body." Amida has been called "Buddha of unhindered light filling the ten quarters." This Tathagata is also known as Namu-fukashigiko-butsu (Namu-Buddha of inconceivable light) and is the "dharma-body as compassionate means." "Compassionate means" refers to manifesting form, revealing a name, and making itself known to sentient beings. It refers to Amida Buddha. (CWS 486) Significantly, says Shinran, Amida is samboghakāya, the fulfilled body and many other transformed bodies Amida Tathāgata comes forth from suchness and manifests various bodies fulfilled, accommodated, and transformed. (CWS, 153) Here Shinran makes reference to traditional Pure Land imagery and narratives, which disclose that there exist transformed Buddha-bodies and lands. Revealed for beings who wish to engage in practices of self-will and calculated efforts on paths of self-cultivation, such imagery would represent provisional means, another sense of upāya, that would make the path of enlightenment possible for them. Upāya as demythologizing myth Shinran s insight into the multidimensional function of upāya represents a process of demythologization. As we have seen, for him the Dharmakara/Amida narrative was not the focal point that revealed the Larger Sutra to be the true teaching of the Shin Buddhist path. By declaring that narrative to be a myth, in effect an upāya as provisional means, he was able to valorize another narrative within the same sutra. That is, he found the truth of the Shin teaching the Larger Sutra itself within the Sakyamuni-Ananda narrative. For Shinran Sakyamumi came to manifest Amida Buddha within historical actuality. Hence, the Larger Sutra was itself the manifestation of immeasurable light and life within historical time, within the awakened heart of the individual. Here we must turn to Makransky s second critique. The failure on the part of Buddhist followers and scholar to engage in historical studies can lead to an absolutizing a mythical past in
18 which Sakyamuni taught in different ways because of the different capacities of beings. As a consequence, one comes to identify a particular teaching as true, while characterizing other teachings as lesser means, intended for persons of lesser capacities. This narrower understanding of skillful means is often used to legitimize and enhance sectarian absolutism. In response he calls for a more expansive perspective on upāya, grounded upon solid understanding of its historical and cultural context. (Makransky, 2000: 117-118) Does Shinran leave himself open to the critique that this is simply a narrower form of upaya that absolutizes a particular teaching? His scheme for the classification of all Buddhist teachings, in which the Paths of the Sages and Pure Land Paths of self-power are determined to be provisional paths that eventually lead a practice to entrust in the 18th Vow is certainly worthy of careful consideration in this light. I would like to submit that the purpose of Shinran s systems of religious classification was not simply an effort to declare the supremacy of the true essence of the Pure Land Way. Rather, it was intended, I believe, to give expression to the dynamic working of upāya as both compassionate means and skillful means to lead beings of various paths to the true Pure Land Path. At the same time, I would very much welcome a careful and respectful dialog with persons from other religions and other Buddhist traditions would be a fruitful opportunity to gain a fuller appreciation for Shinran s perspective on upāya. Acknowledging that my further consideration is necessary, allow me to suggest now that Shinran is engaged in a demythologization of both narratives through his treatment of both the vast and narrow sense of upāya. It has been argued that this approach was continued by Shin Buddhist thinkers in the modern period in their efforts to demythologize the principal Shin Buddhist narrative. Nonomura
19 Naotaro s criticism of the traditional Pure Land Buddhist perspectives was two-fold: first, he claimed that the ultimate intent of the Pure Land teaching is not to be born in Amida s Pure Land after death. Second, he claimed that the Pure Land scriptures offer nothing more that mythological expressions of the Buddha and Pure Land. Such expressions have no ontological reality, but are no more than means to lead beings to realize deep religious mind (jinshin or shinjin) here and now. Soga Ryōjin made the claim that Dharmākara is not simply a myth, but the symbol of Amida Buddha s vows of salvation that is actively at work within the human heart. The arising of faith is in itself the birth of Dharmākara within the human heart, which we discover in faith. (Soga, 2011) Kaneko Daiei addressed the question of the Pure Land by stating that it is not an existing place. Rather it is an idea, in the Kantian sense. A symbol of our deepest yearning to live in a world free of suffering. Amida Buddha and the Pure Land manifest in the self-awareness of the person of faith. (Kaneko, 1927) Shigaraki Takamaro has made the assertion that Amida Buddha developed in the process of immortalizing and idealizing of Sakyamuni Buddha. Also, Amida Buddha constitutes a religious symbol, as clarified in Nagarjuna s Mahaprajnaparamitopadesa (Daichidoron) and Paul Tillich s theology. (Shigaraki, 2001) In particular, I would like to point to Dennis Hirota s consideration of mythic narrative and the significance that it holds in the initial stage of a practicer s engagement with the Pure Land path. Shinran s interpretation of the Pure Land teaching is to articulate two distinct stages of a person s engagement of the path: an initial engagement whereby one enters the path bearing an internal dialectic: (1) a teleological mode of self-will and an interpersonal mode that is based on
20 the self-buddha duality; and (2) a mature phase of engagement in which the dualities are both negated and affirmed. One now perceives life as a locus of ongoing transformation and awakening. In the initial phase, a person s teleological movement toward the Pure Land is embraced within a larger teleology (that of Dharmākara becoming Amida), giving rise to the conception of an interpersonal relationship. Self-will is applied to reach the Pure Land by placing oneself in accord with Amida s will. Hirota writes, In this case, the narrative of Dharmākara -Amida functions as a myth that, as an account of events that take place in primordial time prior to all history, presents the origins of salvific features of the cosmos. The myth of Amida provides for an understanding of the Buddha and the Pure Land and the effectiveness of the nembutsu as the means for attaining it. At the same time, there is an implied continuity or contiguity with the history of this world. Again, as typical of such myths, the problem for the practice is to relate that time in the infinite past with the time of present existence. In mature or fulfilled engagement, which harbors a fusion of temporal existence and true reality (as shinjin), there arises an integration of the teleological and interpersonal modes of apprehension. Here, the narrative of the Primal Vow ceases to be grasped as an account of the primordial past as an anterior extension of this world, and comes to inform present existence with the disclosive quality by which the practicer lives in self-awareness of delusional attachment as awareness of truth. Shinran s understanding of the integrated structure of the apprehension of reality, Hirota states, may be considered in terms of his statements regarding two sources-or perhaps a twofold character-of shinjin. These correspond to two dimensions of reality (dharma-body) or Buddha. (Hirota, 2000)
21 Provisionality may or may not be an appropriate expression for this dynamic working of upâya, A being obsessed with self-power might initially accept a provisional path as his or her own true path, and thereafter pursue it whole-heartedly. However, as a product of the Buddha s skillful calculation, this provisional path is built, as it were, for self-destruction somewhere along the way. Somewhere in the process of its skillfully planned obsolescence, the path begins to reveal its limitations (as the depth of the practicer's blind passions and self-attachment also become revealed) with the practicer s experience of failure and frustration. As its limitations are (self-) revealed, the practicer will eventually move past it, knowing now that it is merely provisional and not ultimately effective. Thus, as it reveals its un-truth (its limitations), as well as the practicer's un-truth (deep self-attachment), the true import of the provisional path will be revealed, and it will realize its fulfillment as it moves the practicer beyond itself to the true path of Other Power. V. Entirely for the sake of myself alone - the coalescence of myth and history As I conclude this paper, I would like to return once more to the issue of religious time. In his article, The Problem of Time in Shinran, Nishitani Keiji writes that when Dharmākara set forth and fulfilled the 18th Vow Shinran s salvation was settled on the part of the Buddha. Rejecting the notions that such a statement is an example of either predestination or universalism, Nishitani explains that the Primal Vow manifests itself directly to each individual being within historical time, and each being becomes present in the time of the Vow s fulfillment through the power of the Vow turning itself over to him. This is the now in the true sense. Time is, he states, in its most fundamental nature, religious. And this nature of time emerges as present only through man s religious existence. In Shinran s religious experience, the historical time of his realization of shinjin is simultaneously
22 the time of the working of the power of the Primal Vow, which is simultaneous with its fulfillment. In Nishitani s insight, Shinran s existence, in its historical and geographic location, is extracted from all space and time and stands as the only person, alone in the universe. This means that Shinran s self-realization is always deepening as he traces back to the source the present more present than any particular present. There the Vow s fulfillment (the past to any past), the establishment of the Pure Land (the future for any future), and the time of the turning over of the power of the Primal Vow (the present at any point in the present) are all transcendentally one in the very body of Amida. In this now, Shinran is drawn to, grounded upon, and opened up by the Buddha s upāya and, at the coalescence of myth and historical actuality, he can only exclaim, How I am filled with gratitude for the Primal Vow, in which Amida resolved to save me, though I am burdened with such heavy karma! (Nishitani 1978:22-26, and CWS, 679.) References Texts Armstrong, Karen. A Short History of Myth. Edinburgh & New York: Canongate, 2005. Bond, Helen K., et al. ed. Religious Studies and Theology: An Introduction. New York: New York University Press, 2003. Dubuisson, Daniel. Twentieth Century Mythologies: Dumezil, Levi-Strauss, Eliade. Translated by Martha Cunninghan. London & Oakville: Equinox Publishing, 2006. Eliade, Mircea. Myth and Reality. New York & Evanston: Harper & Row, 1963. Fujita, Kōtatsu. Genshi Jōdokyō shisō no kenkyū. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1970. Gomez, Luis O. Land of Bliss: The Paradise of the Buddha of Measureless Light. Sanskrit and Chinese Versions of the Sukavativyuha Sutras. Honolulu: University of Hawai i Press, 1996. Hirota, Dennis, ed. Toward a Contemporary Understanding of Pure Land Buddhism: Creating a Shin Buddhist Theology in a Religiously Plural World. Albany: SUNY Press, 2000. Inagaki, Hisao. The Three Pure Land Sutras: A study and translation. Kyoto: Nagata bunshodo, 1994, 332-3. Jodo Shinshu Hongwanji-ha. The Collected Works of Shinran, vol 1. Translated by Dennis Hirota, et al. Kyoto: Hongwanji International Center, 1997. Kaneko, Daiei. Jōdo no kannen. Kyōto: Bun eidō, 1927. Leeming, David Adams. The World of Myth: An Anthology. New York & Oxford. Oxford University Press, 2014.
23 Nattier, Jan. Once Upon a Future Time: Studies in a Buddhist Prophecy of Decline. Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press, 1991. Nishitani, Keiji. Religion and Nothingness. Translated with an Introduction by Jan Van Bragt. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982. Nonomura, Naotaro. Jōdokyō hihan. Kyōto: Chūgai nippō shakan, 1980. Olson, Carl. Religious Studies: The Key Concepts. Oxon & New York: Routledge, 2011. Shigaraki, Takamaro. Heart of the Shin Buddhist Path: A Life of Awakening. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2013. Strenski, Ivan. Four Theories of Myth in Twentieth-Century History: Cassirer, Eliade, Levi-Strauss and Malinowsky. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1987. Ueda, Yoshifumi and Dennis Hirota. Shinran: An Introduction to His Thought. Kyōto: Hongwanji International Center, 1989. Articles Bandō, Shōjun. Shinran s Indebtedness to T an-luan. The Eastern Buddhist. New Series Vol. IV. No. 1, May 1971, 72-87. Barrett, Timothy. History. In Critical Terms for the Study of Buddhism. Edited by Donald S. Lopez. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2005, 124-142. Bolle, Kees W. 1987 and 2005. Myth: An Overview. In Encyclopedia of Religion. Second Edition. Editor in chief: Lindsay Jones. Farmington Hills: Thompson Gate, 2005, 6359-6371. Davies, Douglas. Introduction: Raising the Issues. In Myth and History. Edited by Jean Holm. London: Pinter Publishers Ltd, 1994, 1-7. Lamb, Christopher. Buddhism In Myth and History. Edited by Jean Holm. London: Pinter Publishers Ltd, 1994, 8-39. Makransky, John J. Historical Consciousness as an Offering to the Trans-Historical Buddha. In Buddhist Theology: Critical Reflections by Contemporary Buddhist Scholars. Edited by Roger R. Jackson and John J. Makransky. Surrey: Curzon, 2000, 111-135. McCutcheon, Russell T. Myth. In Guide to the Study of Religion. Edited by Willi Braun and Russell T. McCutcheon. London & New York: Cassell, 2000, 190-208 Nishitani, Keiji. The Problem of Time in Shinran. The Eastern Buddhist. New Series Vol. XI. No. 1, May 1978, 13-26. Nomura, Nobuo. A Myth of the Pure Land. In Memory and Imagination: Essays and Explorations in Buddhist Thought and Culture. Edited by Dr. Ronald Y. Nakasone Festschrift Committee. Kyoto: Nagata Bunshodo, 2010, 57-72. Omine, Akira. Shinjin is the Eternal Now. Translated by David Matsumoto. In Living in Amida s Universal Vow: Essays in Shin Buddhism. Edited by Alfred Bloom. Bloomington: World Wisdom, 2004, 73-76. Ricoeur, Paul. 1987. Myth and History. In Encyclopedia of Religion. Second Edition. Editor in chief: Lindsay Jones. Farmington Hills: Thompson Gate, 2005, 6371-6381. Satlow, Michael L. Tradition: the power of constraint. In The Cambridge Companion to Religious Studies. Edited by Robert A. Orsi. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Shigaraki, Takamaro. The Problem of the True and the False in Contemporary Shin Buddhist Studies: True Shin Buddhism and False Shin Buddhism. The Pacific World: Journal of the Institute of Buddhist Studies. Third Series Number 3, Fall 2001, 27-52. Soga, Ryōjin. A Savior on Earth: The Meaning of Dharmakara Bodhisattva s Advent. Translated by Jan Van Bragt. In Cultivating Spirituality: A Modern Shin Buddhist Anthology. Edited by Mark L. Blum and Robert F. Rhodes. Albany: SUNY Press, 2011. Soga, Ryōjin. Shinran s View of Buddhist History. Translated by Jan Van Bragt. In Cultivating Spirituality: A Modern Shin Buddhist Anthology. Edited by Mark L. Blum and Robert F. Rhodes. Albany: SUNY Press, 2011.