MAHĀPIṬAKA
Newsletter New Series No. 16

January 1, 2011

EDITORIAL COMMITTEE of
the ENGLISH TRANSLATIONof the CHINESE TRIPIṬAKA
Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai(Society for the Promotion of Buddhism)

Editor: MAYEDA Sengaku

Table of Contents
Publishing Schedule
Forthcoming titles ............................................................................................ 1
Review:
Shingon Texts
Translated by Rolf W. Giebel & Dale A. Todaro
NOGUCHI Keiya ............................................................................................2-4
Report:Recent Activities at the French Institute of Eastern Studies (École Française
d’Extrême-Orient)
Frédéric Girard..............................................................................................4-6
Report:A Report on the Annual Meeting of
the Nihon (Japan) Buddhist Research Association (日本佛教學會)
Kenneth K. Tanaka .......................................................................................6-7
Announcement:
Committee Members ........................................................................................... 8

Publishing Schedule

Forthcoming titles:

1. THE COLLECTION FOR THE PROPAGATION AND CLARIFICATION OF
BUDDHISM
Volumes 1 and 2(弘明集 Gumyōshū, Taisho 2102)
Translated by Harumi Hirano Ziegler

2. DISCOURSE TO PRINCE CANDRAPRABHA(月燈三昧經 Gattōzanmaikyō, Taisho 639)
Translated by MURAKAMI Shinkan

3. THE ALL PLEASING: A COMMENTARY ON THE RULES OF DISCIPLINE(善見律毘婆沙 Zenkenritsubibasha, Taisho 1462)
Translated by MORI Sodō and ENDŌ Toshiichi

4. TENDAI LOTUS SCRIPTURES(無量義經 Muryōgikyō, Taisho 276)
Translated by KUBO Tsugunari and Joseph M. Logan(觀普賢菩薩行法經 Kanfugenbosatsugyōbōkyō, Taisho 277)
Translated by KUBO Tsugunari and Joseph M. Logan(妙法蓮華經憂波提舍 Myōhōrengekyō-upadaisha, Taisho 1519)
Translated by Terry R. Abbott-Yamada

5. EXPOSITORY COMMENTARY ON THE VIMALAKĪRTI SUTRA(維摩經義疏 Yuimakyō-gisho, Taisho 2186)
Translated by Jamie Hubbard

1

Review:

Shingon Texts
Translated by Rolf W. Giebel & Dale A. Todaro(BDK English Tripiṭaka Series, published in 2004)
NOGUCHI Keiya
Taisho University
Japanese Mikkyō, especially Shingon Buddhism, seems less well known outside Japan, even though
there are many followers in Japan. Kūkai (774−835, a.k.a. Kōbō Daishi) transmitted the orthodox
tradition of Mikkyō from China to Japan in the beginning of Heian period, i.e. the beginning of the 9th
century C.E. and founded a Buddhist School called Shingonshū on the basis of Mikkyō doctrine. He
has had a great influence not only on Japanese Buddhism but also on Japanese culture in general and is
still nowadays one of the most popular Buddhist priests in Japan. However, it seems that his
importance and popularity have not yet been generally recognized outside Japan, especially in Europe
and America.
The low interest in Kūkai and Shingon Buddhism in Western countries is obviously reflected in
the dearth of academic achievements in Western languages. TOGANOO Shōzui, who introduced thestate of overseas studies of Mikkyō, maintained that there were only a few overseas studies about
Mikkyō in Japan, i.e. Buddhist Tantrism in the Far East, worthy of consultation1). He mentioned
Yoshito Hakeda’s Kūkai: Major Works (Columbia University Press, New York 1972)2) as the only
reliable resource among Western language studies on the life, idea, and works of Kūkai. Even after
more than thirty years from TOGANOO’s article, the numbers of academic achievements about Shingon
Buddhism in Western languages are still limited. Only two books by Hendrik van der Veere about
Shingon priest Kakuban (1095−1143, a.k.a. Kōgyō Daishi) of the late Heian period deserve attention
so far3).
The main reason for the few academic achievements about Shingon Buddhism probably has todue with the difficulties of translating Kūkai’s works into Western languages4). All Kūkai’s works are
written in classical Chinese and include many citations from the various sources. Further, his prosestyle is highly literate, and his poetry freely adopts rhetoric of classical Chinese. In order to understand
Kūkai’s works, readers are required to have not only knowledge of Buddhism but also a broad
understanding of Chinese literature. It is to be noted, furthermore, that there are several significant
technical terms especially based upon Kūkai’s ideas in Shingon Buddhism. In order to elucidate thetechnical terms as such, one should not only read the texts carefully but also receive secret teachings
and training orally from his/her masters concerning the system of practical rituals as an initiated
Shingon priest. Because of this procedure, Shingon schools are called Mikkyō (Secret Teaching) inJapan and apparently less studied by overseas scholars compared to other Japanese Buddhist schools,e.g. Zen, Jōdo, etc.
Having made every endeavor to overcome the difficulties mentioned above, the translators2

present an admirable work contained in Shingon Texts. The English translation of four main works ofKūkai and two major works of Kakuban will undoubtedly play an important role in introducing thephilosophy of Shingon Buddhism outside Japan. In this brief review, I would like to comment on thewords “Mikkyō” and “sokushinjōbutsu,” the most basic and representative key terms for Shingon
Buddhism.
First of all, the word “Mikkyō” literally means “Secret Teaching.” Since the publicationof Benoytosh Bhattacharya’s An Introduction to Budhist Esoterism in 1932, the word “Buddhist
Esoterism” or “Esoteric Buddhism” has become a standard rendering of “Mikkyō” and is employed in
Shingon texts as well. However, these renderings are originally intended to express the idea inhistorical and religious contexts of Indian Buddhism. I think that there is room to carefully examine
whether “Esoteric Buddhism” is the most proper renderinginthe Japanese context.

Incidentally, “Tantric Buddhism” or “Buddhist Tantrism” has been used to indicate Buddhist
movements in India. However, the word “Tantrism” has the connotation of a religious aspect ofHinduism, and thereby I think that the employment of this word should be restricted within traditional
Indian cultural context. In this sense, “Tantric Buddhism” is not perfectly fit for “Mikkyō” in thecontext of Japanese Shingon Buddhism.
From the viewpoint of Shingon Buddhism, on the other hand, the word “Secret Buddhism” as asimple rendering of “Mikkyō” is not appropriate at all, for it does not express Kūkai’s fundamental
idea. Kūkai explains at the end of his Benkenmitsunikyōron (On the Differences between the Exotericand Esoteric Teachings), “Thus [the meanings of] the term “secret” are multilayered and innumerable.
What is called “secret” here is the Dharma body’s own ultimate and uttermost sphere [of being], and it
is to this that the esoteric treasury corresponds.”5) What Kūkai intended to express by “Mikkyō”
includes not only “secret” or “hidden” but also the teaching of the Dharma body’s own ultimate anduttermost sphere.
In order for Shingon Buddhism to be better known among the English-speaking readership, it
will be essential to carefully consider the new English renderings of “Mikkyō” and “Shingon-shū.”Second, “sokushinjōbutsu” is not only the main theme of Kūkai’s Sokushinjōbutsugi (TheMeaning of Becoming a Buddha in This Very Body) but also the ultimate religious goal of Shingon
Buddhism. According to the doctrine of the Mahayana Buddhism, one is required to perform practicesof enormously long duration called “in three eons” in order to become a Buddha. Within Indian texts
belonging to Esoteric Buddhism, moreover, we find parallel phrases to “sokushinjōbutsu.” For
instance, the Amoghapāśa-kalparāja reads as follows: santīhaiva janmani buddhātmabhāvove[di]tavyaḥ (Ms.79b3. “It is to be known that one can have a body of the Buddha in this very
lifetime.”) This expression implies a temporal shortcut. “Sokushinjōbutsu” expounded by Kūkai,however, is not a temporal shortcut but has a characteristic of an ontological basis on which one cantransform a normal body into a Buddha. According to Kūkai’s interpretation, “sokushinjōbutsu” isrealized not “in this very lifetime” but “in this very body,” as is translated by Mr. Giebel properly. In
The Meaning of Becoming a Buddha in This Very Body, moreover, he translated ingeniously the3

Sokushinjōbutsuju, the initial eight line verses expressing Kūkai’s subtle and significant idea by freely
using rhetoric6).
Concerning the rendering of “jōbutsu” in “sokushinjōbutsu,” however, I wonder whether“becoming a Buddha” is the proper rendering. The parallel phrases in the Indian texts are translated as,“to realize the perfect Enlightenment (samyaksaṃbodhi),” “to attain Buddhahood (buddhatva),” “toattain to perfection (siddhi),” etc7). In comparison to these usages, there might be room to further
investigate the kind of renderings that is more appropriate to Kūkai’s philosophical theory.
Studies of Tantrism in India and Tibet have in recent years made great progress centered inEurope. It is my sincere wish that Shingon texts would also become the basis for enhanced level ofresearch on Japanese Mikkyō outside Japan.
_________________________
1) TOGANOO Shōzui, “Gaikokujin no mikkyōkenkyū (*Studies of Mikkyō by Foreigners),” in Gendai mikkyō kōza(*Modern Lectures of Mikkyō) vol. 8, Daitō Shuppansha, Tokyo 1976, p.69.
2) Rolf W. Giebel, a translator of Kūkai’s works in Shingon Texts, does not evaluate Hakeda’s abridged English
translations from academic point of views. See R. Giebel, “Translator’s Comments: Shingon Texts, Reflection on
Translating Kūkai,” Mahāpiṭaka Newsletter New Series no. 10, pp.5-6.
3) Hendrik van der Veere, Kakuban Shōnin: the life and works of Kōgyō Daishi, Nombre, Tokyo 1998.; A Study into theThought of Kōgyō Daishi Kakuban: with a Translation of his Gorin Kuji Myō Himitushaku, Japonica Neerlandica:monographs of the Netherlands Association for Japanese Studies vol. 7, Hotei Pub., Leiden 2000.
4) See also Rolf W. Giebel, ibid.
5) Shingon Texts, p.61.
6) Shingon Texts, pp.67-68.
7) See NOGUCHI Keiya, “Expression to Sokushin-Jōbutsu (to attain perfect enlightenment in one’s present body) in
Sanskrit Texts,” The Comprehensive Studies of Shingi-Shingon Traditions, Daizō Shuppan, Tokyo 2002,
pp.1244-1240.

Report:Recent Activities at the French Institute of Eastern Studies(École Française d’Extrême-Orient)
Frédéric Girard
Director of Researches, French Institute of Oriental Studies
The French Institute of Eastern Studies (École Française d’Extrême-Orient, EFEO) has a long
tradition of Buddhist Studies, particularly in the philological field, with Noël Péri, Paul Mus, Paul
Demiéville, and the Hōbōgirin project. The project was conducted after Second World War by Jacques
May, André Bareau, Jacques Gernet, Hubert Durt, Antonino Forte, Anna Seidel, Robert Duquenne,
Kuo Liying, Iyanaga Nobumi and myself who have spent a valuable part of their time to thisenterprise.

4

A Mahāyāna Studies Team has been created, which was directed by Hubert Durt and myself forsome years. It has been transformed into a Buddhism Studies Team centered on South-East Asia,
Chinese and Japanese Buddhist studies. It has no common research themes — the former apocryphal
project had some editorial completion — and is centered on individual research projects. For example,
Kuo works on Tantric Chinese medieval texts, and Duquenne and Iyanaga mostly on medieval
Japanese Shintō and Tantric associated texts. I am involved in Japanese Buddhist studies centered on
philosophical doctrines, historiography with related sources as iconography, from the epoch of
Shōtoku Taishi to the modern times. A special emphasis is placed on the medieval innovations by
personalities such as Dōgen through his Chinese spiritual pilgrimage (the Hōkyōki) and his posterior
works (Shōbōgenzō, Eiheikōroku), Myōe and the Esoteric teachings based on Kūkai or Kakuban, thehistoriographical literature of Gyōnen or Kokan Shiren, the poetries of the Gozan bungaku (FiveMountains literature) in connection with Confucianism, and the Buddhist post-Christian predication
especially on Zen sectors represented by such people as Suzuki Shōsan, Takuan, Bankei, Sessō, andAsai Ryōi.
Within the framework of this team, and in the editorial project of thematic bilingual journal,
Cahiers d’Extrême-Asie, published by the Japanese Centers of French Institute (at Kyōto and Tōkyō),
it is intended to manage a volume on the « Metaphors in Buddhism » directed by myself. I havecollected studies on the subject which may be augmented by further contributions.
The researchers on this team belong to others Buddhist studies researches projects, such as theone directed by Prof. Cristina Scherrer-Schaub (University of Lausanne and EPHE). They also teachin seminaries in Japan, as Iyanaga or myself, or in France, mostly at the École Pratique des Hautes
Études (EPHE), at the Philological and Historiographical Section, myself in a seminary titled“Philology of Buddhist Texts in Japan,” or for some others at the Science of religions Section. They
participate in conferences common to the two sections, in annual series, which play an important rolefor Buddhist Studies, for there is no Buddhist studies Chair in France.
Last year, we were involved in conferences related to “History and Doctrines of Buddhism,”with the following subjects: Buddhist Monuments in India (M. Kapstein); Iranian Buddhism (Et. de la
Vaissière), Pāli and languages of Ancient Buddhism (N. Balbir), Buddhism in Kucha and Turfan (G.
Pinault), Buddhist literature in Cambodia (O. de Bernon), Buddhism in China (S. Hureau), History of
Tibetan Buddhism (M. Kapstein), the link between Buddhists and bon pos (Ch. Ramble), Buddhism inJapan (J. -N. Robert), the Dasheng qixinlun (Fr. Girard), Buddhist Canons (P. Skilling), and therenovation of Vietnamese Buddhism at the beginning of the 20th Century (P. Bourdeaux).
With the scientific collaboration of fourteen scholars, I am completing a synthetic andcollective work on the Kegon (Flower Ornament) doctrines, considered as a visual tradition, from itsvery origin, in its Chinese specific developments on the analysis of the mind. This is in connection
with others schools as Chan in the Chinese surrounding provinces and in Qitan. A special emphasis isplaced on Japanese adaptation of Kegon ideas, both with the Pure Land doctrines and the Esotericinterpretations through the central figure of Kūkai. Kūkai inherited Kegon conceptions of a5

Vairocana’s focused Buddhist pantheon that developed through the Chinese Empress Wu Zitian and
the Japanese Emperor Shōmu and his wife Kōmyō. He proceeded to re-evaluate the Original Buddha
Mahāvairocana, who is an esoteric form of the exoteric Vairocana as it appears in the Tōji Maṇḍala
which is an extension of Tōdaiji’s maṇḍalic figures.
The number of researchers and the material means of studies in France are very limited.
Concerning Buddhist studies at our French Institute, however, the perspectives are rather good due tothe originality of the personalities involved.

Report:A Report on the Annual Meeting of
the Nihon (Japan) Buddhist Research Association(日本佛教學會)
Kenneth K. Tanaka
Musashino University
This “venerable” association held its annual meeting on September 15 and 16 at Otani University in
Kyoto. Having begun in 1928, this was its 80th meeting. The theme for this year was “What is
Scripture? : the Meaning of Buddha’s Teachings,” which served as the common topic for all thepapers. The same topic will again serve as the conference theme next year at Hokkaido University to
be held August 30 – 31, 2011.
Based on my estimate, there were close to 200 delegates mostly from the 31 member Buddhist
colleges. The membership in this association is not based on individuals but by institution, making it
quite unique in this regard.
The format of this year’s meeting showed a significant departure from past meetings on two
points. First, concurrent sessions were abandoned in favor of one session, and secondly, acommentator was assigned to each of the seven sessions.
There were two or three papers for each session for a total of twenty papers. The presentation
covered the gamut of Buddhist doctrinal areas from Āgama sutras, Abhidharma, Yogācārabhūmi, toShinran’s writings.
To provide a glimpse into the conference, allow me to list one representative paper from each of
the seven sessions:
1)“Meaning of Śākyamuni’s Teachings in Shinran’s Thought” by TAMAKI Kōji,
Ryukoku University

2)“The Two Level Structure of Upāya” by IKEGAMI Yōsei, Minobusan University

6

3)“Scripture in Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra,” by HIROSAWA Takayuki, Taisho University

4)“An Interpretation Concerning the Appropriateness of Scripture within Abhidharma
Texts,” by TOBITA Yasuhiro, Waseda University

5)“The Meaning of ‘Buddha’s Teachings’ in Chinese and Japanese Buddhism,” by FUJII
Kyōkō, Hokkaido University

6)“Buddha’s Teachings in the Doctrine of Jishu School,” by NAGASAWA Masayuki,
Kyoto Seizan College

7)“Sermons’ Propagational Intent and the Last Words: as Basis for Rendering Meaning
to Buddha’s Teachings,” by MUROJI Yoshihito

From a personal perspective, it was for me the first time to attend this conference, which, to mymild surprise, was attended by most of the major Buddhist scholars from Japan. This reflected, in myview, the high regard and respect that many of the Buddhist scholars have for this academic
association.
At Session One, which centered on Shinran’s works, Mr. TAMAKI (see above) and the other twopanelists stressed, as expected, the importance of the role that the Pure Land sutras played in Shinran’s
thought. During the question and answer period, I asked them about the role that the teacher (Hōnen)played for Shinran in comparison to the role of scripture. As expected the panelists all indicated thatthe role of the teacher was, indeed, large, but, in my view, they did not elaborate as I would have liked
on the degree of importance vis-à-vis the scripture.
Unfortunately, given the limited time allotted for questions, I deferred to others in the audience
to ask their questions, but if I had more time I would have pointed out that for Shinran his faith in
Hōnen as a person was a more decisive factor in Shinran’s decision to rely on the Pure Land scripture
than his direct reliance without a teacher. Without Hōnen, there probably would not have been thesame degree of reliance on the Pure Land scripture.
I make this observation, in part, on my understanding of the Japanese cultural predilection tohighly and unconditionally honor one’s teacher, particularly in a religious context. It is my plan topursue this topic in my own current research on the nature of faith or shinjin in Shin Pure Land
Buddhist thought.

7

Announcement:

Committee Members
Editorial Committee, Tokyo:
MAYEDA Sengaku (Chairperson), Professor Emeritus, The University of TokyoICHISHIMA Shōshin, Professor Emeritus, Taisho University
ISHIGAMI Zennō, Shukutoku Junior College
KATSURA Shōryū, Ryukoku University
NAMAI Chishō, Koyasan University
NARA Yasuaki, Professor Emeritus, Komazawa UniversitySAITŌ Akira, The University of TokyoSHIMODA Masahiro, The University of Tokyo
Kenneth K. Tanaka, Musashino University
WATANABE Shōgo, Toyo University
YONEZAWA Yoshiyasu, Taisho University
Publication Committee, Berkeley:John R. McRae (Chairperson), Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research
Carl W. Bielefeldt, Stanford University
Marianne Dresser, Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research
Hudaya Kandahjaya, Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research
Brian Kensho Nagata, Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research (Manager)
Kiyoshi Yamashita, Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and ResearchMAHĀPIṬAKA
Newsletter New Series No.16
EDITORIAL COMMITTEE of
the ENGLISH TRANSLATION of the CHINESE TRIPIṬAKA
c/o Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai (Society for the Promotion of Buddhism)
4-3-14 Shiba, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-0014, JAPAN
Tel: +81-3-3455-5851
Fax: +81-3-3798-2758
E-Mail:bdk@bdk-jp.org
URL: http://www.bdk-jp.org

8