Like Shinran and his fellow Buddhists of Japan's Kamakura period, we
live in an age of the loss of meaning. As we have noted earlier, such an
age is referred to in Buddhism as mappo, the last age in the decline and
disappearance of the Dharma. It is an age when revered and powerful
symbols of the past no longer inspire a sense of wholeness and meaning
for great hosts of people. There survive, in such an age, few if any
symbols or myths which really grasp the imagination and stir conviction
and determination in a person. Despite the difference in time and place,
we today face problems similar to those of the Kamakura Buddhists, among
whom Shinran was a major figure.
To appreciate Shinran, and Kamakura Buddhism, we need, therefore, to
dwell for a moment on history. For it is from history, and the examples
of conviction and commitment it provides, that we draw our own
direction, and find guidance in making our contemporary decisions. When
we see the way in which earlier individuals faced the problem of their
existence, we can better appreciate the character of their thought. This
is certainly true in the case of Buddhism and of those Buddhist schools
that emerged during the Kamakura times. Despite the recent interest
shown by Westerners in such Buddhist traditions as Zen, other Buddhist
schools, particularly those of Kamakura, have suffered a loss of
religious and intellectual prestige in our modern period. We are in an
age of reconstruction and reinterpretations of existential meaning and
religious resources.
In order to achieve this, it is necessary to return to origins, to
the time when the movement started, and begin to grasp the issues and
problems of that time in both a historic and religious perspective.
The Kamakura period of Japanese Buddhism is unique. It was during
this period that the reforming element which we earlier perceived in
Buddhism broke forth into a flowering of movements, each with its own
character and basis in Buddhist tradition. There was here a meeting of
the time and of diverse personalities, each stimulated in his own
special way to give rise to interpretations of Buddhism which at once
were creative, and also carried the tradition to new heights.
In recent years, there has been much discussion concerning the
question as to whether Kamakura Buddhism was really a reformation in
Japanese Buddhism. We cannot go into the issues of such a debate here,
but if we allow for the distinction between the life and teachings of
the founders and the development of the institutions claiming to
represent them, we can accept as a premise that the basis of true
reformation was present in the new schools of this period. This trend is
especially true in the cases of Shinran and Nichiren (1222-82), who
developed schools and teachings not before seen in Buddhism. Honen (1133-1212) and Dogen (1200-53), though they had features which mark
them also as belonging to this creative period, can be viewed, to a
degree, as extensions of Chinese schools into Japan. Other important
teachers of this period are Ippen (1239-89), a Pure Land proponent
and Myoe (1173-1232) who attempted to revive adherence to traditional
disciplines in Nara.
The new schools of Kamakura Buddhism were spawned in a period of
prolonged social crisis, a period which began in late Heian times
(perhaps from the eleventh century) when the tremors of turbulence began
to be felt in the capital, Kyoto, behind which loomed Mt. Hiei, the
monastic capital and major center of Heian Buddhism. The year 1052
generally came to be regarded in Japanese Buddhist history as the
beginning of mappo. From that time on, the conflict between the capital
nobility of the Emperor's Court and the provincial warriors of the many
powerful regional clan families intensified. Eventually, the Taira clan
became the dominant force in the capital, and established a
dictatorship. When the Taira became accustomed to their new power and
began to enjoy it too much, the Minamoto laid the basis for their
eventual rise to power. The Gempei wars ended with the tragic battle of
Dan-no-Ura and the drowning of the boy Emperor Antoku.
At this point, in
1185, the Kamakura period is usually considered to begin. However, all
did not then become peaceful. The court continued to conspire to get
back its power and these activities led to the Shokyu rebellion in 1222.
Later, in the 13th century, the prospect of invasions of the Mongols
from their positions of power on the Chinese mainland, added to the
sense of turmoil in the island nation of Japan. Along with internal
political struggles and the external threat of invasions, there were
frequent plagues, famines and earthquakes, all adding to the miseries
and anxieties of the people. In such times, the traditional religious
institutions, which were largely dominated by the nobility, proved
unable to provide consolation for the masses. The times called for new
leadership, for new insights to meet the spiritual needs of the people.
Most religious traditions, when they are freed from the domination
and manipulation of the ruling classes of the society, break forth in a
new freedom of the spirit. Their inherent universality, and their drive
for truth comes forth. Although we may not enjoy or desire such times of
upheaval in social or personal life, they are good for the spirit for
they challenge us to seek deeper into our beings for the truth that
sustains life. The Kamakura period spurred such a breakthrough in Japan,
so that Buddhism achieved new spiritual heights and, at the same time,
offered itself to the people in a way it had not been able to when it
was monopolized by the aristocracy, and functioned merely to serve the
interests of the state or clan.
When we view Kamakura Buddhism in that context, we can see it was an
exciting development, perhaps the most stimulating and significant since
the time of Buddha himself, or the development of Mahayana. This may
seem an extreme statement, but in Kamakura Buddhism we discover
individuals searching on their own to find meaning in a tradition they
had known for centuries. We have forms of Buddhism emerging, without any
assistance of the state which had introduced it as a court religion in
the 6th century. The new developments of Kamakura Buddhism were in every
sense free expressions of the spirit. It is difficult today to
comprehend the decisions Shinran and his contemporaries made, the
convictions they staked their lives on, the inner forces that drove them
out of comfort and complacency on Mt. Hiei to lives of suffering and
difficulty among the people.
Honen, Shinran, and Nichiren suffered persecution and banishment from
the capital, while Dogen virtually imposed punishment on himself. In
their responses to history, each of these Kamakura Buddhist teachers was
reacting to the conditions of his time in his own personal way. Each
developed teachings which reflected his own inner condition and ideal.
Each was dissatisfied with contemporary Buddhism and, like the Buddha
himself, made the difficult personal wrench of leaving behind their
lives to seek out a new way. It is interesting that even today the
Tendai school maintains it is the mother of Kamakura Buddhism, since all
the major teachers received their training as Tendai monks on Mt. Hiei.
Along with their training as monks, they absorbed spiritual influences
from Tendai teaching which strengthened their decision. However, they
all felt impelled to reject Tendai as an institution because they saw
that it was too enmeshed in the political and social evils of the age to
provide true spiritual guidance for them.
Earlier Tendai teaching had brought all forms of Buddhism together in
a grand eclectic synthesis. One could study all major trends of Buddhism
on Hiei. There was Zen, Pure Land, Shingon (Esoteric Buddhism, Mikkyo)
and Tendai. Everything had its honored place as one of many means
provided by the Buddha for the liberation of beings. However, the
teachers of Kamakura broke through this eclecticism. Each chose the
particular aspect which appeared to him as the essential and sole basis
for true enlightenment. Honen focused on the Nembutsu. Shinran followed
this trend and buttressed it with his understanding of faith. Ippen,
also a Pure Land teacher, roamed the country, offering the Nembutsu to
all people he met. Dogen selected Zen, while Nichiren claimed to revive
Tendai in its purity and singleness of devotion to the Lotus Sutra. Myoe
Shonin of Nara represented a conservative attempt to revive the precepts
and monkish order.
A problem that always has to be faced in religion is that the pursuit
of truth, even though it is universal truth, tends to create division,
while more pragmatic religious approaches are more relative and
tolerant. Several important features bound the Kamakura teachers who
left Tendai to found new schools. Their new schools were all
voluntaristic -- they were joined by a decision on the part of the
devotee, in contrast to the traditional communal-clan based religion of
the time. The new schools were also individualistic in providing a way
of liberation. Unlike the court Buddhism of the Heian age, they did not
appeal to political leaders to help implement and spread their teaching.
All were spiritual in the sense that the primary consideration was to
follow Buddhism. They were committed to the truth of Buddhism as the
fundamental issue. This was in sharp contrast with the view of the
traditional Buddhist schools of that time that Buddhism's main task was
to protect Japan (actually the Emperor [mikado]) by warding off
disasters or securing blessings. Curing illness and making it rain were
important motives in the sponsorship of Buddhist ceremonies by the state
and nobility.
In approaching the masses, the new Kamakura schools were all simple.
They attempted to clarify the essential teaching of Buddhism beyond the
scholasticism and technical language of the monastic schools, to bring
the Buddha's teaching to everyone, in every walk of life. Not only was
there this simplification in teaching, there was similar simplification
in practice. These were laymen's religions, and laymen had to work hard
for their living. The peasant, the hunter, the fisherman, the merchant,
had little time for the complicated and arduous disciplines of the
monasteries. Honen advocated the simple recitation of Nembutsu and
Nichiren urged the recitation of the title of the Lotus Sutra as
practice that was sufficient in itself. Shinran followed Honen in
reciting the Nembutsu as a sole practice, while Dogen held up the ideal
of practicing Zazen (sitting meditation) alone. The new teachers and
their teachings were universal in their appeal. No one was excluded from
the hope of salvation. A great humanism and a desire for human welfare
lay behind all these movements. No matter what class, no matter how rich
or poor, no matter how ignorant or weak, Buddha's compassion could reach
all.
Lastly, although it may possibly be regarded as a negative factor,
each new movement was sectarian in tendency. The Mahayana concept of One
Vehicle combined with the concept of mappo so that each teacher insisted
that his way was THE way in Buddhism for that time. Though other forms
might be respected, they were considered ineffectual to bring the
required assurance of true enlightenment and ultimate release.
Honen has samurai background. His teachings thus reflect a more
straightforward and decisive character, however, are neither bombastic
nor combative. He is extroverted and pietistic and appears more
magisterial, having risen in his lifetime to the position of chief
spokesman of a burgeoning movement. Honen comes on the scene as a
compassionate person. In contrast to Heian Buddhism, which favored the
aristocracy, his teaching aims specifically to assure the salvation of
all individuals regardless of their moral and social standing. His
personality has been sentimentalized by tradition, but he has a strength
which projects through that sentimentalization of the centuries, a
strength which enabled him to withstand the persecution brought by the
authorities on Mt. Hiei and which finally resulted in his exile, a
strength that attracted a student of the stature of Shinran.
I believe, however, that we can view Honen's Pure Land teaching as a
rejection of history. Through the meritorious recitation of Nembutsu,
one gains birth in the Pure Land (Jodo) apart from this defiled world of
troubles (Edo). The stress on Pure Land teaching in the Heike Monogatari
illustrates this tendency, particularly in the story of the death of the
boy Emperor Antoku and his going to the kingdom under the sea. Honen's
teachings offer a vision of an alternative world in place of the harsh
existential reality in which we presently suffer. The starkness of
worldly life is softened by the upaya of otherworldliness which is a
gift of compassion to those whose burdens are heaviest and whose
understanding of the nature of burdens is not easily expressed.
In terms of social class, Shinran was of Fujiwara lineage. The tenor
of his teaching suggests an aristocratic background. He also was neither
bombastic nor intemperately critical of other teachings. Rather, he was
lyrical and passionate, as revealed in his hymns and self-confessions.
Shinran was inward, more introverted, probing his inner world.
Through deep introspection of his attitudes and feelings, Shinran
sought to discover some clue or solution to the problem of destiny. As
we shall see, he struggled for years against a sense of imperfection and
appears to have internalized within himself the decline of society. He
took history within himself and resolved it in his own consciousness by
identifying the resulting sense of imperfection with faith in Amida
Buddha. His spiritual inner pilgrimage brought him to a new departure
point. Released from his anxiety and bondage to history, he could live
constructively and meaningfully in the world. From age 35, a political
exile, Shinran went out into provincial Japan, moving from Echigo to and
through the Mito-Kanto area, living a secular life for twenty years, a
life in which he was a teacher and practicer of Nembutsu among the
ordinary people to whom he described himself as neither priest nor
layman. In this period he married Eshin-ni, raised a large family, and
only on the threshold of old age returned to the capital of Kyoto where
he continued to teach, to write and to live as neither priest nor
layman.
If Honen's teaching is marked by its effort to bring salvation within
the reach of ordinary people, Shinran's is concerned for the inner
reality of that offer of salvation. Where Honen places the full reality
of salvation beyond history, Shinran, the existentialist, attempts to
find it within his life by experiencing the assurance of Amida's
compassion even in the turmoil of his own passion and egoism.
Dogen, the Kamakura founder of Soto Zen, also appears to have been a
Fujiwara with considerable literary and philosophical background. He was
singularly impressed with the brevity and transciency of life through the
early loss of his parents. This awareness provided the major theme of
his teaching. His urgency was that we should practice as though it was
our last day. He was deeply theoretical, as well as subjective, or
inward, though not introspective in the same sense as Shinran. Dogen was
a very serious person, and demanded seriousness in religion. He was not
content with halfway measures but insisted that devotees give themselves
totally to Buddhism. The key phrase he learned from his master Ju-ching
was "Cast off mind and body; body and mind cast off!"
Zen Buddhism represents an attempt to transcend history directly
through realizing the Void or one's original nature. Though there may be
some recognition of the decline of history represented in the theory of
mappo, Zen retains the basic optimism of the potential of men to perfect
themselves through meditation and insight. Freed from the bondage of
history by transcending it, one may dwell unperturbed in the world of
turmoil.
Nichiren, the last and latest of the Kamakura teachers, was of
peasant-fisherman origin. He was proud of his lower class background and
probably because of his need to prove himself against Buddhists from the
upper class, he appears more critical and combative than any of the
other teachers. He is objectivist, literal and scripture-oriented in his
outlook. He was an individual with a passionate desire for leadership
and sought a basis for unifying Buddhism and society in order to bring
social peace. He was a patriot, more aware of general social conditions
than were other Buddhists of his time. He particularly felt the threats
coming to Japan from the invasions of the Mongols, and it was these
threats that stimulated his sense of mission to warn the country and
turn it to true Buddhism. Nichiren represents a confrontation with
history. He demands no inward recognition of evil, nor makes a call for
direct transcension. Rather, he stands over against history, pronouncing
judgment and calling for commitment to truth to stave off disaster. A
sense of mission inspires his devotees to become witnesses to truth in
history, and the contemporary institutions based on Nichiren, such as
Soka Gakkai, preserve Nichiren's combativeness, and his sense of
political mission in Buddhism.
While each of these various threads of Kamakura Buddhism had its
contribution to make as a source of spiritual insight for our
contemporary times and problems, we are focusing on Shinran's
perspective because I believe his conquest of history within himself
provides the most profound view of human existence to emerge in the
Kamakura period. The distinctiveness of Shinran's teachings will become
increasingly evident in a deeper acquaintance with the reinterpretation
of doctrine which he carried out, and in the changed style of life which
he initiated. The conquest of history within one's consciousness is an
existential awareness which means to recognize and accept one's
historicity, but at the same time, to see that it is not our essential
self and destiny -- it is not our fate.
Shinran's conviction that we are embraced by the compassion of the
Buddha suggests that we may act and participate in history, in our time,
knowing that our being is an expression of something that reaches beyond
and surrounds that history. Such an existential definition of ourselves
is a defense against the despair resulting from our own imperfections or
the failure of our expectations in the world. More than a defense, it is
a point on which to stand through our lives, a point from which we see
with increasingly clearer and deeper vision the paradox that we are
bound, but in our bondage we are yet free.
