28-NOTES.pdf

Notes

Page references to articles included in this volume are set in italics.

Introduction

1 For the context of this incident, the ensuing debate, and its role in Critical

Buddhism see Bodiford, “Zen and the Art of Religious Prejudice.”

2 See the essays on method in the Journal of the Association of Buddhist Studies 18/2

(1995); for examples of the practice of cultural criticism in Buddhist studies see the

essays in Lopez, ed., Curators of the Buddha .

3 On the role of normative scholarship in Buddhist studies see the recent issue of

Journal of the Association of Buddhist Studies 18/2 (1995), including José Cabezón,

“Buddhist Studies as a Discipline,” 256–60, and Luis O. Gómez, “Unspoken

Paradigms,” 201–3, 204–12.

4 Donald S. Lopez, Jr., “A Sangha-less Sangha,” in Tricycle 5/3 (Spring 1996), 101.

Why They Say Zen Is Not Buddhism

1 For details see Paul Groner, Saichõ: The Establishment of the Japanese Tendai School .

(Berkeley: Buddhist Studies Series 6, 1984), 91–106.

2 D. Seyfort Ruegg has objected to my gloss of tath„gata-garbha as “womb of the

Buddha,” arguing that this is “a meaning which this expression simply does not have in

the relevant Sanskrit texts, any more than does its Tibetan equivalent” (see “Some

Reµections on the Place of Philosophy in the Study of Buddhism,” 170). However, the

Chinese translation ( ju-lai-tsang, Jpn. nyoraizõ ) contains the meaning “womb” and

many facets of East Asian Buddhism use the term very explicitly in this sense. Scholars

familiar with Chinese Buddhist terminology and its use in the East Asian Buddhist tra-

dition should have no trouble accepting this meaning. There are also numerous exam-

ples of the use of the meaning of “womb” even in the Indian tradition. As William

Grosnick (in Donald S. Lopez, Jr., ed., Buddhism in Practice [Princeton: Princeton

University Press, 1995], 92) says with regard to the earliest tath„gata-garbha text:

The term tath„gatagarbha has often been translated by Western scholars as “matrix

of the tath„gata,” but “matrix” does not exhaust the wide range of meanings of the

Sanskrit term garbha . The author of the Tath„gatagarbha Sðtra seems to have been

well aware of this, since he employs many of these different meanings of garbha in

the various similes with which he illustrates the meaning of the tath„gatagarbha . In

407

Notes to Pages 4–6

its most common usage, garbha means “womb,” and the eighth simile of the sðtra

likens the tath„gatagarbha to an impoverished, vile, and ugly woman who bears a

noble, world-conquering king in her womb.

Matsumoto has dealt with this issue in detail in his chapter on “ Padma-garbha and

tath„gata-garbha ,” Critical Studies on Zen Thought , 411–543.

3 This is not to say that there are no Sanskrit terms that carry similar nuances or that

“there is no Sanskrit correspondence.” However, pen-chüeh is a Chinese creation and

not a translation from the Sanskrit (certainly not of prak£ti ). In this sense it can be dis-

tinguished from, e.g., terms such as ju-lai-tsang for which there is an identi³able

Sanskrit equivalent: tath„gata-garbha . For a counter argument see D. Seyfort Ruegg,

Théorie du tath„gatagarbha et du gotra .

4 See the translation by Hakeda Yoshito, The Awakening of Faith (New York:

Columbia University Press, 1967). On the controversy over the origin of the Awakening

of Mahayana Faith , see recent works by William Grosnick (for example, “The Categories

of T’i, Hsiang , and Yung : Evidence That Param„rtha Composed the Awakening of

Faith ,” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 12/1 [1989]: 65–92)

and Whalen Lai, “A Clue to the Authorship of the Awakening of Faith : Šik¤„nanda’s

Redaction of the Word ‘ Nien ’.” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist

Studies 3/1 (1980): 34–53.

5 For details on the Chinese apocrypha and the Jen-wang ching see my Foundations of

T’ien-t’ai Philosophy: The Flowering of the Two Truths Theory in Chinese Buddhism

(Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press, 1989), 41–50; and Robert E. Buswell, Jr., The

Formation of Ch’an Ideology in China and Korea: The Vajrasam„dhi-Sðtra, A Buddhist

Apocryphon (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989). See also Buswell’s collection,

Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha (Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 1990).

6 For details on this sutra see Buswell, The Formation of Ch’an Ideology .

7 Translation by Hakeda, The Awakening of Faith , 37.

8 For details see the authoritative essay on the subject by Tamura Yoshirõ: “An

Outline of the Tendai Theory of Original Enlightenment” in Tada et al., eds., The Texts

of the Tendai Original Enlightenment Tradition , 477–548.

9 See the Ta-ch’eng chi’i-hsin lun i-chi, T No. 1846.

10 For details see my introduction to the special issue on Tendai Buddhism in the

Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 14/2–3 (1987); see also in the same issue the arti-

cles on “The Characteristics of Japanese Tendai” by Hazama Jikõ and “Inherent

Enlightenment and Saichõ’s Acceptance of the Bodhisattva Precepts” by Shirato Waka.

The reader is also directed to the collection of four essays on hongaku shisõ by Sueki

Fumihiko, Jacqueline Stone, Paul Groner, and Ruben Habito in Japanese Journal of

Religious Studies 22/1–2 (1995).

11 See Tamura, “An Outline of the Tendai Theory of Original Enlightenment.”

12 It is often assumed that these phrases are quotes from a Mahayana text, but in fact

they are not, at least as far as I was able to determine. See Miyamoto Shõson · û± ¨ ,

“‘Sõmoku kokudo shikkai jõbutsu’ no busshõronteki igi to sono sakusha” A u … ³ F

408

Notes to Pages 6–16

Ò„¨[BuM§ Ç í [ – odu6é [The author of the phrase “grasses, trees, and land all

attain Buddhahood” and its meaning in light of Buddha-nature theory], Indogaku

Bukkyõgaku kenkyð 9/2 (1961): 672–701. There are similar phrases, such as issai shujõ

shitsu’u busshõ (all sentient beings have the Buddha-nature) in the Mah„parinirv„«a

Sutra , but such Mahayana texts do not go so far as to admit that even non-sentient

things have Buddha-nature. In fact, at least one passage in the Mah„parinirv„«a Sutra

says exactly the opposite: “That which is without Buddha-nature is the ground, the

trees, gravel, and rocks. That which is other than these non-sentient things is all called

Buddha-nature” (T No. 375, 12.581a22–23 and 828b26–27). See Jamie Hubbard,

“Absolute Delusion, Perfect Buddhahood: The Universal Buddha of the San-chieh-

chiao,” in Grif³ths and Keenan, eds., Buddha Nature , 75–94.

13 Shõshin is known for his voluminous commentaries on the major works of T’ien-

t’ai Chih-i, the creative genius and founder of the T’ien-t’ai tradition; it is said that

Shõshin was so involved in his studies that he was not aware of the contemporary strug-

gle between the Taira and Minamoto families, a situation comparable to a German

scholar in the 1940s being unaware of World War II.

14 See Tamura Yoshirõ, “Critique of Original Awakening Thought in Shõshin and

Dõgen,” and the collection of Tamura’s Essays on Hongaku Shisõ , especially 393ff. See

also Yamauchi Shun’yð on Dõgen’s Zen and the Tendai Hongaku Tradition , 718ff.

15 See the translation of this essay in the present volume, pages 165–73 .

16 For a translation of this exposition in the Mah„vagga see Henry Clarke Warren’s

Buddhism in Translations (New York: Atheneum, 1962, reprint of 1896 edition pub-

lished by Harvard University Press), 83–7.

17 Matsumoto takes pains to point out that he is not using the term “native” in a

derogatory sense.

18 See the translation of this essay in the present volume, pages 356–73 .

19 See the partial translation of this chapter in this volume: “The Meaning of ‘Zen’,”

pages 242–50 .

20 Dan Lusthaus challenges this conclusion with regard to Lin-chi; see his essay on

“Critical Buddhism and Returning to the Sources” in this volume, pages 30–55 .

21 See “The Signi³cance of the Critique of Original Enlightenment,” 1–34.

22 “The Signi³cance of the Critique of Original Enlightenment,” 9.

23 “The Signi³cance of the Critique of Original Enlightenment,” 13.

24 See the translation of this essay in this volume, pages 339–55 .

25 See the translation of Matsumoto’s “Buddhism and the Kami,” pages 356–73 .

26 For Hakamaya’s reµections on this occasion, see below, pages 137–8 .

27 For a detailed analysis of this issue, see the article by Steve Heine below, 251–85 .

28 This introduction is included in this volume, pages 56–80 .

29 It may seem superµuous to note this for Western scholars, but it is a radical stance

in the world of Japanese scholarship. In contrast, the Western world of scholarship may

need some of the tolerance and graciousness more typical of Japanese scholarship.

409

Notes to Pages 16–24

Hakamaya’s essay is translated below, pages 113–44 . See also the essay by Paul Grif³ths in

this volume, pages 145–60 .

30 This paper was published later in Heisig and Kiyota, Japanese Buddhism, 145–62.

31 This essay is included in Critical Buddhism , 275–304.

32 “A Critique of the Zen School,” 64.

33 See “Buddhism as Critical of the Idea of ‘Nature’,” 386.

34 The paper was published in Japanese in the Komazawa University journal.

Compare the paper written by Matsumoto for the same conference, translated below,

pages 388–403 .

35 The essays, entitled “Akugõ fusshoku no gishiki kanren kyõten zakkõ” 1 %Y/u

ˆ Å F ¦ ™øP † [Miscellaneous thoughts on texts related to rituals to remove evil

karma], have appeared in a variety of Komazawa journals, from Komazawa Daigaku

Bukkyõgakubu kenkyð kiyõ 50 (1992): 247–74, for the opening article, to the Komazawa

Tanki Daigaku kenkyð kiyõ 24 (1996): 67–91, for the sixth.

36 Ishii Shðdõ, Studies on the History of the Ch’an School during the Sung Period, ix.

37 Yoshizu Yoshihide, Studies in the history of Hua-yen-Ch’an philosophy , 10.

38 Itõ Takatoshi, Critical Studies on Chinese Buddhism , 57.

39 See Tada et al., eds. The Texts of the Tendai Original Enlightenment Tradition ; and

the works by Hazama Jikõ, Shimaji Daitõ, and Tamura Yoshirõ in the bibliography at

the end of the present volume.

40 Hakamaya would add that they are both the same dh„tu-v„da , and that neither are

Buddhist. It should be noted that Tamura was not naively uncritical of hongaku shisõ ;

see, for example, his article on “Critique of Original Awakening Thought in Shõshin

and Dõgen.”

41 Matsumoto ( Prat‡tyasamutp„da and Emptiness , 147) points out that Takasaki

gave a paper entitled “On So-Called Dh„tu-v„da ” at the conference of the Association

of Indian and Buddhist Studies in 1988. However, this paper did not appear in the

Indogaku Bukkyõgaku kenkyð issue that published the proceedings of the conference.

Tath„gata-garbha Thought II (1989), What is Buddha-Nature? (1990), and “Daijõ

kishinron” o yomu A Ø / | = Ç B¤œ‹ [Reading the Awakening of Mahayana Faith ]

(Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1991) are books by Takasaki that were under preparation long

before the appearance of Matsumoto’s and Hakamaya’s critiques; Takasaki’s remarks

have been appended to the end of the books.

42 Takasaki, Reading the Awakening of Mahayana Faith , 206.

43 Takasaki, Tath„gata-garbha Thought II , 373.

44 Takasaki, Tath„gata-garbha Thought II , 373ff..

45 Takasaki, Reading the Awakening of Mahayana Faith , 212. For a more recent

response by Takasaki, see the comments translated in this volume, pages 314–20 .

46 Hirakawa Akira rë½, ed., Nyoraizõ to Daijõ kishinron Øûáo Ø / | = Ç [ Tath„gata-

garbha and the Awakening of Mahayana Faith ] (Tokyo: Shunjðsha, 1990), 78ff.

410

Notes to Pages 25–31

47 It should be noted that Hirakawa’s essay was written in response to Matsumoto’s

early article on the Šr‡m„l„dev‡ Sutra , and does not take into account his later develop-

ments on the theme.

48 See Schmithausen, Buddhism and Nature , 53–62.

49 Buddhism and Nature , 62. For a discussion of Schmithausen’s view see the article

by Paul Grif³ths in this volume, pages 145–60 .

50 For a look at the issue of social discrimination and the Sõtõ sect, and the mixed

reactions to Critical Buddhism, see William Bodiford, “Zen and the Art of Religious

Prejudice.”

51 See Ian Reader’s articles on “Zazenless Zen,” Japanese Religions 14/3 (1986):

7–27; and “Transformations and Changes in the Teachings of the Sõtõ Zen Buddhist

Sect,” Japanese Religions 14/1 (1985): 28–48.

52 Õgoshi Aiko Ø Î( {, Minamoto Junko è|{, and Yamashita Akiko [4g{,

eds., Seisabetsu suru Bukkyõ § Ú ƒ`š[ î [Buddhism as a promoter of sexual discrimi-

nation] (Kyoto: Hõzõkan, 1990), 9–13. See also Minamoto Junko, Feminizumu wa,

ima koso nihonshugi no kaitai o: Umehara Takeshi hihan Ý¬çÓÂèv, Ä YdÕûü – u

m ¿ ¤— ? ã{ −| [Feminism must dismantle “Japanism” now: A critique of Umehara

Takeshi], in Femilõgu: Nihonshugi hihan Ý¬çõ2¸ — Õûü – −| [Femilogue: A cri-

tique of Japanism] (Kyoto: Genbunsha, 1990).

53 See my article “T’ien-t’ai Chih-i’s Concept of Threefold Buddha-nature: A Synergy of

Reality, Wisdom, and Practice,” in Grif³ths and Keenan, eds. Buddha Nature, 171–80.

54 An important step in this direction is made by Sallie King in her recent book on

Buddha Nature . See also the article by King in the present volume, pages 174–92 .

Critical Buddhism and Returning to the Sources

1 Exactly when and how Buddhism lost the ethical edge that is clearly discernible in

the early Pali literature is a matter of controversy, and will not be explored here. For an

important example of Chinese Buddhist ethical acuity from as late as the Yüan dynasty,

see Sechin Jagchid, “The Mongol Khans and Chinese Buddhism and Taoism,” Journal

of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 2 (1979): 7–28.

2 One example: In the Kamakura-Edo eras certain temples, called enkiri-dera , acted as

sanctuaries for battered and mistreated women and offered the only means by which

women could divorce their husbands, that is, by serving as nuns for three years. The

most famous of these temples was Tõkei-ji in Kamakura. The enkiri-dera institution was

abolished in the Meiji period. By contrast, in the mid-1980s a substantial number of

women from Thailand and the Philippines were being brought to Japan, under false pre-

texts, to serve as prostitutes. Some Thai women sought sanctuary in a Buddhist temple,

but they were refused refuge or assistance. Some of the Philippine women, who were

Christian, sought assistance from a Christian organization, which actively took up their

cause; this eventually led to a number of Thai as well as Philippine women being

returned to their homelands. The Japanese public is aware of these events.

411

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: