Post by Pathfinder on Nov 13, 2022 11:22:51 GMT
Ninno¯ kyo¯ Ideology and Zen Teaching in the Ko¯zen gokokuron
Treatises with overtly political overtones are a unique feature of Japanese Buddhism. On this point, it is useful to contrast Japan with China. When Buddhism was first introduced, China already had an established civilization with
well-defined moral and social principles. In the Chinese context, discussions
of Buddhist morality thus tended to conflict with nativist sentiments. A persistent tendency among the Chinese was to regard Buddhism as the ideology
of an alien people, essentially distinct from the principles and beliefs governing
Chinese civilization. As a result, Buddhist treatises on the value of native Chinese traditions tended to be either positively self-assured in the superiority of
Buddhism, or apologetically inclined, in search of harmony between native
Chinese and Buddhist teachings.28 By adopting Chinese Buddhist and Confucian ideologies at the same time, Japan tended to fuse Buddhist and Confucian principles into a single harmonious ideology which formed the basis
for Japan’s definition of civilization.
Aside from the initial objections of the Mononobe warrior clan and the
Nakatomi family of Shinto priests in the sixth century, Buddhism was immune
from the wrath of antiforeign temper until the rise of Japanese nativism in the
Tokugawa (Edo) period.29 The reason for this immunity is clear. Until Tokugawa
rule, Buddhism was the acknowledged core of Japanese civilization. The common refrain among the Japanese ruling elite who determined the course of
Japanese civilization was: “When the Buddhist law flourishes, so does the secular order.”30 Because of this belief and until the rediscovery of Chinese Confucianism along with their “pure” Shinto heritage, Buddhism was not regarded
zen buddhism as the ideology of the japanese state 73
as a foreign ideology that had either to proclaim its superiority or to apologize
for its presence, as was the case in China. As a result, ideological debates in
Japan tended to be sectarian, that is, between different factions that shared a
common vision, rather than cutting across fundamental ideological boundaries. Since Buddhism was not relegated to a private domain of exclusively
spiritual matters but was viewed as the rationale for state policy and the existence of government institutions, many Buddhist sectarian debates were politically inspired.31 The decline of authority in the late Heian era exacerbated
the need for sectarian debate focusing on political concerns.
The end of the Heian era brought political and ideological challenges to
the Heian ruling elite. Ideologically, the Heian decline resulted in challenges
to the position of the Tendai school as the spiritual and moral authority of the
Japanese state. Politically inspired Buddhist treatises calling for reform were a
natural development in this environment. Such works represent a period of
new competition within Buddhism, with new factions vying for the honor of
displacing Mount Hiei as the “Chief Seat of the Buddhist Religion for Ensuring
the Security of the Country.”32
The most prominent attempt to redefine the Japanese Buddhist state during this period was the Ko¯zen gokokuron. The aim of the work was twofold: to
reaffirm the central role of Buddhist ideology as the spiritual and moral core
of Japanese civilization, and to challenge the validity of the way this goal was
being carried out under the auspices of the Tendai school. The work was set
squarely within the context of Tendai reform. Like Luther in sixteenth-century
Christendom, Eisai saw Zen not as a revolutionary teaching that would undermine Tendai, but as a reform doctrine that would reestablish Buddhist and
Tendai credibility.
The Ko¯zen gokokuron text is divided into a preface and ten sections, concluding with a brief summary. The aim of each section is indicated by its title:
1. Ensuring the Lasting Presence of Buddhist Teaching
2. Protecting the Country (with the Teachings of the Zen School)
3. Resolving the Doubts of the People of the World
4. Verification (Provided by) Virtuous Masters of the Past
5. The Transmission Lineage of the Zen School
6. Scriptural Authorization for Enhancing Faith (in Zen)
7. Outlining Zen Doctrines for Encouraging Zen Practice
8. The Program of Rituals for Protecting the Country at Zen Monasteries
9. Explanations from Great Countries
10. Initiating the Vow to Transfer Merit
Rather than exclude Tendai, Eisai sought to reform it by redefining it in
terms of its relation to Zen. In order to understand how Eisai sought to meld
Tendai with the Zen tradition, one needs also to understand how Eisai con-
74 zen classics
ceived of Zen teaching and how he associated it with Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology. We
can begin by placing Eisai’s eventual identification with Zen in the context of
his original quest.
When Eisai set out from Japan on his second pilgrimage, his intended
destination was not China but India, the homeland of the Buddha and Buddhist teaching.33 His goal was to personally set foot on the “diamond ground”
where the Buddha had attained enlightenment. This plan underscores Eisai’s
commitment to reform on the pretext that Heian-era decline was rooted in
Japan’s deviation from correct Buddhist teaching. Only after Eisai’s request to
continue on to India was denied by Chinese authorities did he focus his attention on the study of Chinese Ch’an.34 With the possibility of studying authentic
Buddhist teaching in the Buddha’s homeland thwarted, Eisai turned to a ready
alternative: the purported “living” transmission of the Buddha’s teaching in
the Sung Ch’an masters around him. Sung Ch’an represented a viable alternative to Eisai for a number of reasons.35 On one level, it is easy to imagine
how impressed Eisai must have been with the world of Sung Ch’an, with its
grand monasteries, institutional structure, and state support. The stability and
prosperity of the Sung world stood in marked contrast to the brutality and
chaos into which Japanese civilization had fallen. The revitalization of Mount
T’ien-t’ai and its transformation into a Ch’an center during the Sung would
have also made a deep impression on Eisai, suggesting the model for reform
and revitalization in Japan. The most important influence that Sung Ch’an had
on Eisai, however, went beyond these circumstantial factors associated with
the splendor of Sung civilization. It was the new synthesis that Zen teaching
suggested, integrating crucial aspects of Buddhism for Eisai—Tendai and
prajn˜a¯-teaching, meditation practice and concern for morality, and Ninno¯ kyo¯
ideology—into a single, seamless whole.
Eisai saw Zen teaching in terms that pertained directly to Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology. In the preface of the Ko¯zen gokokuron, Eisai depicts Zen as the Mind
teaching, the essence of enlightenment, and the “actual teaching of the former
Buddhas” transmitted through S´a¯kyamuni “from master to disciple via the
robe of authentic transmission.”36 The Ninno¯ kyo¯ conceived itself in comparable
terms as “the spiritual source of the mind of buddhas, bodhisattvas, and all
sentient beings.”37 This depiction accounts for Eisai’s view of the Ninno¯ kyo¯ as
an integral part of the Zen school’s Mind teaching.
In terms of Buddhist scriptures, the Mind teaching is revealed in two
forms according to Eisai. “Externally, the Mind teaching conforms to the position taken in the Nirva¯nfia-su¯tra [J. Nehan kyo¯] that the Buddha-nature, through
the aid of the precepts, is always present.”38 In this regard, Eisai stands
staunchly in the Tendai tradition established by the Chinese T’ien-t’ai master
Chih-i, who emphasized upholding the Buddhist precepts as the basis from
which wisdom arises.39 This external emphasis on the precepts is joined to an
internal perspective, “the view of the Prajn˜a¯ su¯tra [J. Hannya kyo¯] that awak-
zen buddhism as the ideology of the japanese state 75
ening is attained through wisdom.” Taken together, these two perspectives on
the Mind teaching indicate the teaching of the Zen school reflecting the transsectarian perspective of the inherent harmony between Zen and Buddhist
scriptures and doctrines.
The two forms of the Mind teaching referred to by Eisai indicate two meditation traditions that he attempted to harmonize and integrate. One is the Zen
teaching of the Nirva¯nfia-su¯tra and the T’ien-t’ai school, with its emphasis on
the precepts. The other is the Zen teaching of the Prajn˜a¯ su¯tra and the Ch’an
school, with its emphasis on wisdom.40 I will later examine Sung precedents
for the integration of these two Chinese “Zen” traditions.
The emphasis on morality and the precepts emerges in the first section of
the Ko¯zen gokokuron, beginning one of the major bases for Eisai’s argument:
monastic reform. According to Ninno¯ kyo¯ teaching, the survival of both Buddhist and secular institutions is predicated on the moral character of a country,
typified by the monastic discipline of the Buddhist clergy. This discipline has
important consequences regarding the status of Buddhism in society and the
role that Buddhism performs in legitimizing state authority. In effect, the behavior of the Buddhist clergy serves as a moral barometer of the country, determining the credibility of Buddhism in the eyes of the state and the country
as a whole. By extension, corruption undermines the status of Buddhism and
its claim to authority. The Buddhist monastery, whether as the repository of
virtue or the beacon of enlightenment, depends on the moral discipline of its
members, in this view, for both spiritual and social justification. Practically
speaking, the social support given to Buddhism, and ultimately its very existence as a temporal institution, is intricately connected to the moral discipline
of its members. In this regard, the opening section of the Ko¯zen gokokuron
begins with a quote from the Su¯tra on the Six Perfections (J. Roku haramitsu
kyo¯): “The Buddha said, ‘I preached the rules governing moral training [vinaya]
so as to ensure the lasting presence of Buddhism [in the world],’ ”41 marking
the temporal aim of Eisai’s treatise to preserve the existence and integrity of
the Buddhist order. This concern for moral reform is the theme of the first
section, and continues to appear throughout the treatise.42 It is also evident
from Eisai’s conservative approach toward the Buddhist precepts. In complete
defiance of the Japanese Tendai tradition established by Saicho¯, which established its identity in part by liberating its members from the stricter, more ruleoriented discipline of early Buddhism, Eisai demanded that Zen monks observe the stricter Hı¯naya¯na precepts in addition to Mahaya¯na ones. Eisai’s
position on monastic reform, moreover, was not a personal, idiosyncratic conception. It specifically reflected the model of Buddhism that Eisai had witnessed in Sung China. In the Ko¯zen gokokuron, this connection is apparent in
the following citation from the Ch’an-yu¨an ch’ing-kuei (J. Zen’en shingi, “The
Regulations for Pure Conduct at Zen Monasteries”), the official record of regulations observed at Ch’an institutions in Sung China:
76 zen classics
The ability to spread Buddhist teaching throughout the world of
unenlightened people most assuredly rests on strict purity in one’s
moral training. As a result, observing the Buddhist rules governing
moral behavior [kairitsu] takes precedence in the practice of Zen and
the investigation of the Way. Without the insulation and protection
from transgressions and errors [provided by the monastic rules],
how will one ever become a Buddha or a patriarch?... Through
reading and reciting the monastic rules and understanding the benefit they provide, one is well versed in the differences between upholding the rules for moral behavior and violating them, and on
what behavior is permissible and impermissible... [Monks of the
Zen School] rely completely on the sacred utterances issued from
the mouth of the golden one, the Buddha; they do not indulge their
fancies to follow ordinary fellows.43
The political aim of Eisai’s reform is expressed directly when he states,
“In our country, the Divine Sovereign [the Japanese Emperor] shines in splendor, and the influence of his virtuous wisdom spreads far and wide.”44 Recall
that Eisai specifically stipulated the Ko¯zen gokokuron, the “Treatise on the Promotion of Zen for the Protection of the Country,” as being consistent with the
teaching of the Buddha to the Benevolent Kings (i.e., the Ninno¯ kyo¯). For Eisai
this meant that Zen, as the legitimate interpretation of Buddhist teaching and
practice, represented the means through which Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology could be
implemented. The basis for Japan’s future glory, Eisai asserted, rested in state
sponsorship of Zen teaching.
Much of Eisai’s confidence stemmed from his belief in Japan’s destiny as
one of the preeminent Buddhist kingdoms in the world. Eisai is quick to show
how this belief is based on scriptural authority, on the Buddha’s assertion
recorded in the scriptures that in the future “the most profound teaching of
Buddhist wisdom” [prajn˜a¯] will flourish in the lands to the northeast.45 For
Eisai, “the most profound teaching of Buddhist wisdom” is none other than
Zen teaching. The lands to the northeast where this teaching is destined to
flourish are China, Korea, and Japan. Since the transmission of Zen teaching
to China and Korea has already been accomplished, only the transformation
of Japan remained. The clear implication is that Japan’s natural destiny as a
preeminent Buddhist country can be fulfilled only by the adoption of Zen
teaching.46 The Mind teaching of the Zen school, in conjunction with the vision
of the ideal Buddhist state in the Ninno¯ kyo¯, thus constitutes the basis for
Japan’s future glory.
The ideology of the Ninno¯ kyo¯ played an important role not only in determining the primary position of Buddhist moral teaching in the affairs of the
country but also in determining where primary responsibility lay for carrying
out such reforms. Recall in this regard the provision, advanced in the Ninno¯
zen buddhism as the ideology of the japanese state 77
kyo¯, that rulers of states—not the Buddhist clergy or faithful—were responsible
for managing Buddhism and ensuring its continued existence. The preservation of Buddhism in this conception, it should be remembered, is intricately
connected with the ruler’s own self-interest in preserving his state. Thus, since
the state is primarily a moral order based on Buddhist teaching, the moral
integrity of the Buddhist clergy lies at the core of the state’s identity.47
The declining social and political situation at the end of the Heian era
provided Eisai’s message with a great sense of urgency. Here too the Ninno¯
kyo¯ served as a primary source of inspiration. On the one hand, recall that the
Ninno¯ kyo¯ characterizes itself as “the father and mother of all kings” (i.e., rulers), and as a treasure for driving away demons and protecting a country. More
specifically, recall the admonition in the Ninno¯ kyo¯ that it be entrusted to rulers
especially at such times when the credibility of Buddhist teaching and the
Buddhist clergy have been exhausted. The clear implication is that the Ninno¯
kyo¯ should serve as the ruler’s model for reestablishing the authority of Buddhist institutions and the moral character of his country. As a result, there is
a strong sense in the Ko¯zen gokokuron that the Ninno¯ kyo¯ speaks directly to the
political and moral decay of the time. Witness the following passage from the
Ninno¯ kyo¯:
Oh Great Monarch, when Buddhist teaching has degenerated to the
point where its doctrines alone survive but it is no longer practiced
[masse] . . . , the king and his chief ministers of state will frequently
engage in illicit activities [that contravene Buddhist Law]. They will
support Buddhist teaching and the community of monks only for
their own selfish interests, committing great injustices and all sorts
of crimes. In opposition to Buddhist teaching and in opposition to
the rules governing moral behavior, they will restrain Buddhist
monks as if they were prisoners. When such a time arrives, it will
not be long before Buddhist teaching disappears.48
In accordance with Ninno¯ kyo¯ teaching, the ruler of the country is best
situated to reestablish the credibility of Buddhist teaching and the moral order
of the state. Given the political turmoil and competition among claimants to
the imperial throne, on one hand, and the rising importance of the military in
government affairs and the competition between different warrior families, on
the other, the position occupied by any ruler was extremely tenuous. Eisai’s
response to this state of affairs seems to be reflected in a passage from the
Scripture on the Perfection of Wisdom of the Victorious Ruler (Sho¯-tenno¯ hannya
kyo¯):
Suppose that when a bodhisattva who had studied the Buddhist
teaching on wisdom [i.e., the prajn˜a¯- teaching of the Zen school] became the ruler of the country, mean despicable sorts of people came
78 zen classics
to slander and insult him. This ruler would defend himself without
making a display of his majesty and authority, saying, “I am the
ruler of the country. I rule exclusively by the authority vested in me
through the Buddhist teaching [on wisdom].”49
This statement suggests that the Ninno¯ kyo¯ was important to the message
of the Ko¯zen gokokuron in two ways. In terms of its overall message, the Ko¯zen
gokokuron was conceived within the framework of Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology. This is
its fundamental significance. In terms of the social and political context, the
historical situation within which the Ko¯zen gokokuron was created, the passages
cited from the Ninno¯ kyo¯ suggested concrete solutions to specific issues. In
this latter instance, the Ninno¯ kyo¯ is not unique but fits a general pattern guiding the references to scriptures in the Ko¯zen gokokuron. Because of the overall
importance of Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology for the Ko¯zen gokokuron, however, the references to the Ninno¯ kyo¯ merit special attention.
From the preceding we can see how Zen teaching suggested a program of
reform for Eisai. In Eisai’s interpretation, the Zen-based reform program was
necessary to realize Japan’s destiny as a great Buddhist country. Zen represented moral reform through increased vigilance in following the precepts
(kai), the essential teaching on Buddhist wisdom (Skt. prajn˜a¯, J. hannya) transmitted through the masters of the Zen school, the meditation traditions (zen)
of both the T’ien-t’ai/Tendai and Ch’an/Zen schools, and the method to achieve
the ideal Buddhist state advocated in the Ninno¯ kyo¯. In Eisai’s interpretation,
Zen clearly had the potential to serve as the multidimensional ideology that
Japan required, encompassing the political, moral, soteriological, philosophical, and utopian aims of the country. The Ninno¯ kyo¯, we have seen, played a
significant role in establishing the political and utopian aims, as well as the
parameters for carrying them out.
Zen Monastic Ritual and Ninno¯ kyo¯ IdeologyNinno¯ kyo¯ Ideology and Zen Teaching in the Ko¯zen gokokuron
Treatises with overtly political overtones are a unique feature of Japanese Buddhism. On this point, it is useful to contrast Japan with China. When Buddhism was first introduced, China already had an established civilization with
well-defined moral and social principles. In the Chinese context, discussions
of Buddhist morality thus tended to conflict with nativist sentiments. A persistent tendency among the Chinese was to regard Buddhism as the ideology
of an alien people, essentially distinct from the principles and beliefs governing
Chinese civilization. As a result, Buddhist treatises on the value of native Chinese traditions tended to be either positively self-assured in the superiority of
Buddhism, or apologetically inclined, in search of harmony between native
Chinese and Buddhist teachings.28 By adopting Chinese Buddhist and Confucian ideologies at the same time, Japan tended to fuse Buddhist and Confucian principles into a single harmonious ideology which formed the basis
for Japan’s definition of civilization.
Aside from the initial objections of the Mononobe warrior clan and the
Nakatomi family of Shinto priests in the sixth century, Buddhism was immune
from the wrath of antiforeign temper until the rise of Japanese nativism in the
Tokugawa (Edo) period.29 The reason for this immunity is clear. Until Tokugawa
rule, Buddhism was the acknowledged core of Japanese civilization. The common refrain among the Japanese ruling elite who determined the course of
Japanese civilization was: “When the Buddhist law flourishes, so does the secular order.”30 Because of this belief and until the rediscovery of Chinese Confucianism along with their “pure” Shinto heritage, Buddhism was not regarded
zen buddhism as the ideology of the japanese state 73
as a foreign ideology that had either to proclaim its superiority or to apologize
for its presence, as was the case in China. As a result, ideological debates in
Japan tended to be sectarian, that is, between different factions that shared a
common vision, rather than cutting across fundamental ideological boundaries. Since Buddhism was not relegated to a private domain of exclusively
spiritual matters but was viewed as the rationale for state policy and the existence of government institutions, many Buddhist sectarian debates were politically inspired.31 The decline of authority in the late Heian era exacerbated
the need for sectarian debate focusing on political concerns.
The end of the Heian era brought political and ideological challenges to
the Heian ruling elite. Ideologically, the Heian decline resulted in challenges
to the position of the Tendai school as the spiritual and moral authority of the
Japanese state. Politically inspired Buddhist treatises calling for reform were a
natural development in this environment. Such works represent a period of
new competition within Buddhism, with new factions vying for the honor of
displacing Mount Hiei as the “Chief Seat of the Buddhist Religion for Ensuring
the Security of the Country.”32
The most prominent attempt to redefine the Japanese Buddhist state during this period was the Ko¯zen gokokuron. The aim of the work was twofold: to
reaffirm the central role of Buddhist ideology as the spiritual and moral core
of Japanese civilization, and to challenge the validity of the way this goal was
being carried out under the auspices of the Tendai school. The work was set
squarely within the context of Tendai reform. Like Luther in sixteenth-century
Christendom, Eisai saw Zen not as a revolutionary teaching that would undermine Tendai, but as a reform doctrine that would reestablish Buddhist and
Tendai credibility.
The Ko¯zen gokokuron text is divided into a preface and ten sections, concluding with a brief summary. The aim of each section is indicated by its title:
1. Ensuring the Lasting Presence of Buddhist Teaching
2. Protecting the Country (with the Teachings of the Zen School)
3. Resolving the Doubts of the People of the World
4. Verification (Provided by) Virtuous Masters of the Past
5. The Transmission Lineage of the Zen School
6. Scriptural Authorization for Enhancing Faith (in Zen)
7. Outlining Zen Doctrines for Encouraging Zen Practice
8. The Program of Rituals for Protecting the Country at Zen Monasteries
9. Explanations from Great Countries
10. Initiating the Vow to Transfer Merit
Rather than exclude Tendai, Eisai sought to reform it by redefining it in
terms of its relation to Zen. In order to understand how Eisai sought to meld
Tendai with the Zen tradition, one needs also to understand how Eisai con-
74 zen classics
ceived of Zen teaching and how he associated it with Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology. We
can begin by placing Eisai’s eventual identification with Zen in the context of
his original quest.
When Eisai set out from Japan on his second pilgrimage, his intended
destination was not China but India, the homeland of the Buddha and Buddhist teaching.33 His goal was to personally set foot on the “diamond ground”
where the Buddha had attained enlightenment. This plan underscores Eisai’s
commitment to reform on the pretext that Heian-era decline was rooted in
Japan’s deviation from correct Buddhist teaching. Only after Eisai’s request to
continue on to India was denied by Chinese authorities did he focus his attention on the study of Chinese Ch’an.34 With the possibility of studying authentic
Buddhist teaching in the Buddha’s homeland thwarted, Eisai turned to a ready
alternative: the purported “living” transmission of the Buddha’s teaching in
the Sung Ch’an masters around him. Sung Ch’an represented a viable alternative to Eisai for a number of reasons.35 On one level, it is easy to imagine
how impressed Eisai must have been with the world of Sung Ch’an, with its
grand monasteries, institutional structure, and state support. The stability and
prosperity of the Sung world stood in marked contrast to the brutality and
chaos into which Japanese civilization had fallen. The revitalization of Mount
T’ien-t’ai and its transformation into a Ch’an center during the Sung would
have also made a deep impression on Eisai, suggesting the model for reform
and revitalization in Japan. The most important influence that Sung Ch’an had
on Eisai, however, went beyond these circumstantial factors associated with
the splendor of Sung civilization. It was the new synthesis that Zen teaching
suggested, integrating crucial aspects of Buddhism for Eisai—Tendai and
prajn˜a¯-teaching, meditation practice and concern for morality, and Ninno¯ kyo¯
ideology—into a single, seamless whole.
Eisai saw Zen teaching in terms that pertained directly to Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology. In the preface of the Ko¯zen gokokuron, Eisai depicts Zen as the Mind
teaching, the essence of enlightenment, and the “actual teaching of the former
Buddhas” transmitted through S´a¯kyamuni “from master to disciple via the
robe of authentic transmission.”36 The Ninno¯ kyo¯ conceived itself in comparable
terms as “the spiritual source of the mind of buddhas, bodhisattvas, and all
sentient beings.”37 This depiction accounts for Eisai’s view of the Ninno¯ kyo¯ as
an integral part of the Zen school’s Mind teaching.
In terms of Buddhist scriptures, the Mind teaching is revealed in two
forms according to Eisai. “Externally, the Mind teaching conforms to the position taken in the Nirva¯nfia-su¯tra [J. Nehan kyo¯] that the Buddha-nature, through
the aid of the precepts, is always present.”38 In this regard, Eisai stands
staunchly in the Tendai tradition established by the Chinese T’ien-t’ai master
Chih-i, who emphasized upholding the Buddhist precepts as the basis from
which wisdom arises.39 This external emphasis on the precepts is joined to an
internal perspective, “the view of the Prajn˜a¯ su¯tra [J. Hannya kyo¯] that awak-
zen buddhism as the ideology of the japanese state 75
ening is attained through wisdom.” Taken together, these two perspectives on
the Mind teaching indicate the teaching of the Zen school reflecting the transsectarian perspective of the inherent harmony between Zen and Buddhist
scriptures and doctrines.
The two forms of the Mind teaching referred to by Eisai indicate two meditation traditions that he attempted to harmonize and integrate. One is the Zen
teaching of the Nirva¯nfia-su¯tra and the T’ien-t’ai school, with its emphasis on
the precepts. The other is the Zen teaching of the Prajn˜a¯ su¯tra and the Ch’an
school, with its emphasis on wisdom.40 I will later examine Sung precedents
for the integration of these two Chinese “Zen” traditions.
The emphasis on morality and the precepts emerges in the first section of
the Ko¯zen gokokuron, beginning one of the major bases for Eisai’s argument:
monastic reform. According to Ninno¯ kyo¯ teaching, the survival of both Buddhist and secular institutions is predicated on the moral character of a country,
typified by the monastic discipline of the Buddhist clergy. This discipline has
important consequences regarding the status of Buddhism in society and the
role that Buddhism performs in legitimizing state authority. In effect, the behavior of the Buddhist clergy serves as a moral barometer of the country, determining the credibility of Buddhism in the eyes of the state and the country
as a whole. By extension, corruption undermines the status of Buddhism and
its claim to authority. The Buddhist monastery, whether as the repository of
virtue or the beacon of enlightenment, depends on the moral discipline of its
members, in this view, for both spiritual and social justification. Practically
speaking, the social support given to Buddhism, and ultimately its very existence as a temporal institution, is intricately connected to the moral discipline
of its members. In this regard, the opening section of the Ko¯zen gokokuron
begins with a quote from the Su¯tra on the Six Perfections (J. Roku haramitsu
kyo¯): “The Buddha said, ‘I preached the rules governing moral training [vinaya]
so as to ensure the lasting presence of Buddhism [in the world],’ ”41 marking
the temporal aim of Eisai’s treatise to preserve the existence and integrity of
the Buddhist order. This concern for moral reform is the theme of the first
section, and continues to appear throughout the treatise.42 It is also evident
from Eisai’s conservative approach toward the Buddhist precepts. In complete
defiance of the Japanese Tendai tradition established by Saicho¯, which established its identity in part by liberating its members from the stricter, more ruleoriented discipline of early Buddhism, Eisai demanded that Zen monks observe the stricter Hı¯naya¯na precepts in addition to Mahaya¯na ones. Eisai’s
position on monastic reform, moreover, was not a personal, idiosyncratic conception. It specifically reflected the model of Buddhism that Eisai had witnessed in Sung China. In the Ko¯zen gokokuron, this connection is apparent in
the following citation from the Ch’an-yu¨an ch’ing-kuei (J. Zen’en shingi, “The
Regulations for Pure Conduct at Zen Monasteries”), the official record of regulations observed at Ch’an institutions in Sung China:
76 zen classics
The ability to spread Buddhist teaching throughout the world of
unenlightened people most assuredly rests on strict purity in one’s
moral training. As a result, observing the Buddhist rules governing
moral behavior [kairitsu] takes precedence in the practice of Zen and
the investigation of the Way. Without the insulation and protection
from transgressions and errors [provided by the monastic rules],
how will one ever become a Buddha or a patriarch?... Through
reading and reciting the monastic rules and understanding the benefit they provide, one is well versed in the differences between upholding the rules for moral behavior and violating them, and on
what behavior is permissible and impermissible... [Monks of the
Zen School] rely completely on the sacred utterances issued from
the mouth of the golden one, the Buddha; they do not indulge their
fancies to follow ordinary fellows.43
The political aim of Eisai’s reform is expressed directly when he states,
“In our country, the Divine Sovereign [the Japanese Emperor] shines in splendor, and the influence of his virtuous wisdom spreads far and wide.”44 Recall
that Eisai specifically stipulated the Ko¯zen gokokuron, the “Treatise on the Promotion of Zen for the Protection of the Country,” as being consistent with the
teaching of the Buddha to the Benevolent Kings (i.e., the Ninno¯ kyo¯). For Eisai
this meant that Zen, as the legitimate interpretation of Buddhist teaching and
practice, represented the means through which Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology could be
implemented. The basis for Japan’s future glory, Eisai asserted, rested in state
sponsorship of Zen teaching.
Much of Eisai’s confidence stemmed from his belief in Japan’s destiny as
one of the preeminent Buddhist kingdoms in the world. Eisai is quick to show
how this belief is based on scriptural authority, on the Buddha’s assertion
recorded in the scriptures that in the future “the most profound teaching of
Buddhist wisdom” [prajn˜a¯] will flourish in the lands to the northeast.45 For
Eisai, “the most profound teaching of Buddhist wisdom” is none other than
Zen teaching. The lands to the northeast where this teaching is destined to
flourish are China, Korea, and Japan. Since the transmission of Zen teaching
to China and Korea has already been accomplished, only the transformation
of Japan remained. The clear implication is that Japan’s natural destiny as a
preeminent Buddhist country can be fulfilled only by the adoption of Zen
teaching.46 The Mind teaching of the Zen school, in conjunction with the vision
of the ideal Buddhist state in the Ninno¯ kyo¯, thus constitutes the basis for
Japan’s future glory.
The ideology of the Ninno¯ kyo¯ played an important role not only in determining the primary position of Buddhist moral teaching in the affairs of the
country but also in determining where primary responsibility lay for carrying
out such reforms. Recall in this regard the provision, advanced in the Ninno¯
zen buddhism as the ideology of the japanese state 77
kyo¯, that rulers of states—not the Buddhist clergy or faithful—were responsible
for managing Buddhism and ensuring its continued existence. The preservation of Buddhism in this conception, it should be remembered, is intricately
connected with the ruler’s own self-interest in preserving his state. Thus, since
the state is primarily a moral order based on Buddhist teaching, the moral
integrity of the Buddhist clergy lies at the core of the state’s identity.47
The declining social and political situation at the end of the Heian era
provided Eisai’s message with a great sense of urgency. Here too the Ninno¯
kyo¯ served as a primary source of inspiration. On the one hand, recall that the
Ninno¯ kyo¯ characterizes itself as “the father and mother of all kings” (i.e., rulers), and as a treasure for driving away demons and protecting a country. More
specifically, recall the admonition in the Ninno¯ kyo¯ that it be entrusted to rulers
especially at such times when the credibility of Buddhist teaching and the
Buddhist clergy have been exhausted. The clear implication is that the Ninno¯
kyo¯ should serve as the ruler’s model for reestablishing the authority of Buddhist institutions and the moral character of his country. As a result, there is
a strong sense in the Ko¯zen gokokuron that the Ninno¯ kyo¯ speaks directly to the
political and moral decay of the time. Witness the following passage from the
Ninno¯ kyo¯:
Oh Great Monarch, when Buddhist teaching has degenerated to the
point where its doctrines alone survive but it is no longer practiced
[masse] . . . , the king and his chief ministers of state will frequently
engage in illicit activities [that contravene Buddhist Law]. They will
support Buddhist teaching and the community of monks only for
their own selfish interests, committing great injustices and all sorts
of crimes. In opposition to Buddhist teaching and in opposition to
the rules governing moral behavior, they will restrain Buddhist
monks as if they were prisoners. When such a time arrives, it will
not be long before Buddhist teaching disappears.48
In accordance with Ninno¯ kyo¯ teaching, the ruler of the country is best
situated to reestablish the credibility of Buddhist teaching and the moral order
of the state. Given the political turmoil and competition among claimants to
the imperial throne, on one hand, and the rising importance of the military in
government affairs and the competition between different warrior families, on
the other, the position occupied by any ruler was extremely tenuous. Eisai’s
response to this state of affairs seems to be reflected in a passage from the
Scripture on the Perfection of Wisdom of the Victorious Ruler (Sho¯-tenno¯ hannya
kyo¯):
Suppose that when a bodhisattva who had studied the Buddhist
teaching on wisdom [i.e., the prajn˜a¯- teaching of the Zen school] became the ruler of the country, mean despicable sorts of people came
78 zen classics
to slander and insult him. This ruler would defend himself without
making a display of his majesty and authority, saying, “I am the
ruler of the country. I rule exclusively by the authority vested in me
through the Buddhist teaching [on wisdom].”49
This statement suggests that the Ninno¯ kyo¯ was important to the message
of the Ko¯zen gokokuron in two ways. In terms of its overall message, the Ko¯zen
gokokuron was conceived within the framework of Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology. This is
its fundamental significance. In terms of the social and political context, the
historical situation within which the Ko¯zen gokokuron was created, the passages
cited from the Ninno¯ kyo¯ suggested concrete solutions to specific issues. In
this latter instance, the Ninno¯ kyo¯ is not unique but fits a general pattern guiding the references to scriptures in the Ko¯zen gokokuron. Because of the overall
importance of Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology for the Ko¯zen gokokuron, however, the references to the Ninno¯ kyo¯ merit special attention.
From the preceding we can see how Zen teaching suggested a program of
reform for Eisai. In Eisai’s interpretation, the Zen-based reform program was
necessary to realize Japan’s destiny as a great Buddhist country. Zen represented moral reform through increased vigilance in following the precepts
(kai), the essential teaching on Buddhist wisdom (Skt. prajn˜a¯, J. hannya) transmitted through the masters of the Zen school, the meditation traditions (zen)
of both the T’ien-t’ai/Tendai and Ch’an/Zen schools, and the method to achieve
the ideal Buddhist state advocated in the Ninno¯ kyo¯. In Eisai’s interpretation,
Zen clearly had the potential to serve as the multidimensional ideology that
Japan required, encompassing the political, moral, soteriological, philosophical, and utopian aims of the country. The Ninno¯ kyo¯, we have seen, played a
significant role in establishing the political and utopian aims, as well as the
parameters for carrying them out.
Zen Monastic Ritual and Ninno¯ kyo¯ Ideology
Treatises with overtly political overtones are a unique feature of Japanese Buddhism. On this point, it is useful to contrast Japan with China. When Buddhism was first introduced, China already had an established civilization with
well-defined moral and social principles. In the Chinese context, discussions
of Buddhist morality thus tended to conflict with nativist sentiments. A persistent tendency among the Chinese was to regard Buddhism as the ideology
of an alien people, essentially distinct from the principles and beliefs governing
Chinese civilization. As a result, Buddhist treatises on the value of native Chinese traditions tended to be either positively self-assured in the superiority of
Buddhism, or apologetically inclined, in search of harmony between native
Chinese and Buddhist teachings.28 By adopting Chinese Buddhist and Confucian ideologies at the same time, Japan tended to fuse Buddhist and Confucian principles into a single harmonious ideology which formed the basis
for Japan’s definition of civilization.
Aside from the initial objections of the Mononobe warrior clan and the
Nakatomi family of Shinto priests in the sixth century, Buddhism was immune
from the wrath of antiforeign temper until the rise of Japanese nativism in the
Tokugawa (Edo) period.29 The reason for this immunity is clear. Until Tokugawa
rule, Buddhism was the acknowledged core of Japanese civilization. The common refrain among the Japanese ruling elite who determined the course of
Japanese civilization was: “When the Buddhist law flourishes, so does the secular order.”30 Because of this belief and until the rediscovery of Chinese Confucianism along with their “pure” Shinto heritage, Buddhism was not regarded
zen buddhism as the ideology of the japanese state 73
as a foreign ideology that had either to proclaim its superiority or to apologize
for its presence, as was the case in China. As a result, ideological debates in
Japan tended to be sectarian, that is, between different factions that shared a
common vision, rather than cutting across fundamental ideological boundaries. Since Buddhism was not relegated to a private domain of exclusively
spiritual matters but was viewed as the rationale for state policy and the existence of government institutions, many Buddhist sectarian debates were politically inspired.31 The decline of authority in the late Heian era exacerbated
the need for sectarian debate focusing on political concerns.
The end of the Heian era brought political and ideological challenges to
the Heian ruling elite. Ideologically, the Heian decline resulted in challenges
to the position of the Tendai school as the spiritual and moral authority of the
Japanese state. Politically inspired Buddhist treatises calling for reform were a
natural development in this environment. Such works represent a period of
new competition within Buddhism, with new factions vying for the honor of
displacing Mount Hiei as the “Chief Seat of the Buddhist Religion for Ensuring
the Security of the Country.”32
The most prominent attempt to redefine the Japanese Buddhist state during this period was the Ko¯zen gokokuron. The aim of the work was twofold: to
reaffirm the central role of Buddhist ideology as the spiritual and moral core
of Japanese civilization, and to challenge the validity of the way this goal was
being carried out under the auspices of the Tendai school. The work was set
squarely within the context of Tendai reform. Like Luther in sixteenth-century
Christendom, Eisai saw Zen not as a revolutionary teaching that would undermine Tendai, but as a reform doctrine that would reestablish Buddhist and
Tendai credibility.
The Ko¯zen gokokuron text is divided into a preface and ten sections, concluding with a brief summary. The aim of each section is indicated by its title:
1. Ensuring the Lasting Presence of Buddhist Teaching
2. Protecting the Country (with the Teachings of the Zen School)
3. Resolving the Doubts of the People of the World
4. Verification (Provided by) Virtuous Masters of the Past
5. The Transmission Lineage of the Zen School
6. Scriptural Authorization for Enhancing Faith (in Zen)
7. Outlining Zen Doctrines for Encouraging Zen Practice
8. The Program of Rituals for Protecting the Country at Zen Monasteries
9. Explanations from Great Countries
10. Initiating the Vow to Transfer Merit
Rather than exclude Tendai, Eisai sought to reform it by redefining it in
terms of its relation to Zen. In order to understand how Eisai sought to meld
Tendai with the Zen tradition, one needs also to understand how Eisai con-
74 zen classics
ceived of Zen teaching and how he associated it with Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology. We
can begin by placing Eisai’s eventual identification with Zen in the context of
his original quest.
When Eisai set out from Japan on his second pilgrimage, his intended
destination was not China but India, the homeland of the Buddha and Buddhist teaching.33 His goal was to personally set foot on the “diamond ground”
where the Buddha had attained enlightenment. This plan underscores Eisai’s
commitment to reform on the pretext that Heian-era decline was rooted in
Japan’s deviation from correct Buddhist teaching. Only after Eisai’s request to
continue on to India was denied by Chinese authorities did he focus his attention on the study of Chinese Ch’an.34 With the possibility of studying authentic
Buddhist teaching in the Buddha’s homeland thwarted, Eisai turned to a ready
alternative: the purported “living” transmission of the Buddha’s teaching in
the Sung Ch’an masters around him. Sung Ch’an represented a viable alternative to Eisai for a number of reasons.35 On one level, it is easy to imagine
how impressed Eisai must have been with the world of Sung Ch’an, with its
grand monasteries, institutional structure, and state support. The stability and
prosperity of the Sung world stood in marked contrast to the brutality and
chaos into which Japanese civilization had fallen. The revitalization of Mount
T’ien-t’ai and its transformation into a Ch’an center during the Sung would
have also made a deep impression on Eisai, suggesting the model for reform
and revitalization in Japan. The most important influence that Sung Ch’an had
on Eisai, however, went beyond these circumstantial factors associated with
the splendor of Sung civilization. It was the new synthesis that Zen teaching
suggested, integrating crucial aspects of Buddhism for Eisai—Tendai and
prajn˜a¯-teaching, meditation practice and concern for morality, and Ninno¯ kyo¯
ideology—into a single, seamless whole.
Eisai saw Zen teaching in terms that pertained directly to Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology. In the preface of the Ko¯zen gokokuron, Eisai depicts Zen as the Mind
teaching, the essence of enlightenment, and the “actual teaching of the former
Buddhas” transmitted through S´a¯kyamuni “from master to disciple via the
robe of authentic transmission.”36 The Ninno¯ kyo¯ conceived itself in comparable
terms as “the spiritual source of the mind of buddhas, bodhisattvas, and all
sentient beings.”37 This depiction accounts for Eisai’s view of the Ninno¯ kyo¯ as
an integral part of the Zen school’s Mind teaching.
In terms of Buddhist scriptures, the Mind teaching is revealed in two
forms according to Eisai. “Externally, the Mind teaching conforms to the position taken in the Nirva¯nfia-su¯tra [J. Nehan kyo¯] that the Buddha-nature, through
the aid of the precepts, is always present.”38 In this regard, Eisai stands
staunchly in the Tendai tradition established by the Chinese T’ien-t’ai master
Chih-i, who emphasized upholding the Buddhist precepts as the basis from
which wisdom arises.39 This external emphasis on the precepts is joined to an
internal perspective, “the view of the Prajn˜a¯ su¯tra [J. Hannya kyo¯] that awak-
zen buddhism as the ideology of the japanese state 75
ening is attained through wisdom.” Taken together, these two perspectives on
the Mind teaching indicate the teaching of the Zen school reflecting the transsectarian perspective of the inherent harmony between Zen and Buddhist
scriptures and doctrines.
The two forms of the Mind teaching referred to by Eisai indicate two meditation traditions that he attempted to harmonize and integrate. One is the Zen
teaching of the Nirva¯nfia-su¯tra and the T’ien-t’ai school, with its emphasis on
the precepts. The other is the Zen teaching of the Prajn˜a¯ su¯tra and the Ch’an
school, with its emphasis on wisdom.40 I will later examine Sung precedents
for the integration of these two Chinese “Zen” traditions.
The emphasis on morality and the precepts emerges in the first section of
the Ko¯zen gokokuron, beginning one of the major bases for Eisai’s argument:
monastic reform. According to Ninno¯ kyo¯ teaching, the survival of both Buddhist and secular institutions is predicated on the moral character of a country,
typified by the monastic discipline of the Buddhist clergy. This discipline has
important consequences regarding the status of Buddhism in society and the
role that Buddhism performs in legitimizing state authority. In effect, the behavior of the Buddhist clergy serves as a moral barometer of the country, determining the credibility of Buddhism in the eyes of the state and the country
as a whole. By extension, corruption undermines the status of Buddhism and
its claim to authority. The Buddhist monastery, whether as the repository of
virtue or the beacon of enlightenment, depends on the moral discipline of its
members, in this view, for both spiritual and social justification. Practically
speaking, the social support given to Buddhism, and ultimately its very existence as a temporal institution, is intricately connected to the moral discipline
of its members. In this regard, the opening section of the Ko¯zen gokokuron
begins with a quote from the Su¯tra on the Six Perfections (J. Roku haramitsu
kyo¯): “The Buddha said, ‘I preached the rules governing moral training [vinaya]
so as to ensure the lasting presence of Buddhism [in the world],’ ”41 marking
the temporal aim of Eisai’s treatise to preserve the existence and integrity of
the Buddhist order. This concern for moral reform is the theme of the first
section, and continues to appear throughout the treatise.42 It is also evident
from Eisai’s conservative approach toward the Buddhist precepts. In complete
defiance of the Japanese Tendai tradition established by Saicho¯, which established its identity in part by liberating its members from the stricter, more ruleoriented discipline of early Buddhism, Eisai demanded that Zen monks observe the stricter Hı¯naya¯na precepts in addition to Mahaya¯na ones. Eisai’s
position on monastic reform, moreover, was not a personal, idiosyncratic conception. It specifically reflected the model of Buddhism that Eisai had witnessed in Sung China. In the Ko¯zen gokokuron, this connection is apparent in
the following citation from the Ch’an-yu¨an ch’ing-kuei (J. Zen’en shingi, “The
Regulations for Pure Conduct at Zen Monasteries”), the official record of regulations observed at Ch’an institutions in Sung China:
76 zen classics
The ability to spread Buddhist teaching throughout the world of
unenlightened people most assuredly rests on strict purity in one’s
moral training. As a result, observing the Buddhist rules governing
moral behavior [kairitsu] takes precedence in the practice of Zen and
the investigation of the Way. Without the insulation and protection
from transgressions and errors [provided by the monastic rules],
how will one ever become a Buddha or a patriarch?... Through
reading and reciting the monastic rules and understanding the benefit they provide, one is well versed in the differences between upholding the rules for moral behavior and violating them, and on
what behavior is permissible and impermissible... [Monks of the
Zen School] rely completely on the sacred utterances issued from
the mouth of the golden one, the Buddha; they do not indulge their
fancies to follow ordinary fellows.43
The political aim of Eisai’s reform is expressed directly when he states,
“In our country, the Divine Sovereign [the Japanese Emperor] shines in splendor, and the influence of his virtuous wisdom spreads far and wide.”44 Recall
that Eisai specifically stipulated the Ko¯zen gokokuron, the “Treatise on the Promotion of Zen for the Protection of the Country,” as being consistent with the
teaching of the Buddha to the Benevolent Kings (i.e., the Ninno¯ kyo¯). For Eisai
this meant that Zen, as the legitimate interpretation of Buddhist teaching and
practice, represented the means through which Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology could be
implemented. The basis for Japan’s future glory, Eisai asserted, rested in state
sponsorship of Zen teaching.
Much of Eisai’s confidence stemmed from his belief in Japan’s destiny as
one of the preeminent Buddhist kingdoms in the world. Eisai is quick to show
how this belief is based on scriptural authority, on the Buddha’s assertion
recorded in the scriptures that in the future “the most profound teaching of
Buddhist wisdom” [prajn˜a¯] will flourish in the lands to the northeast.45 For
Eisai, “the most profound teaching of Buddhist wisdom” is none other than
Zen teaching. The lands to the northeast where this teaching is destined to
flourish are China, Korea, and Japan. Since the transmission of Zen teaching
to China and Korea has already been accomplished, only the transformation
of Japan remained. The clear implication is that Japan’s natural destiny as a
preeminent Buddhist country can be fulfilled only by the adoption of Zen
teaching.46 The Mind teaching of the Zen school, in conjunction with the vision
of the ideal Buddhist state in the Ninno¯ kyo¯, thus constitutes the basis for
Japan’s future glory.
The ideology of the Ninno¯ kyo¯ played an important role not only in determining the primary position of Buddhist moral teaching in the affairs of the
country but also in determining where primary responsibility lay for carrying
out such reforms. Recall in this regard the provision, advanced in the Ninno¯
zen buddhism as the ideology of the japanese state 77
kyo¯, that rulers of states—not the Buddhist clergy or faithful—were responsible
for managing Buddhism and ensuring its continued existence. The preservation of Buddhism in this conception, it should be remembered, is intricately
connected with the ruler’s own self-interest in preserving his state. Thus, since
the state is primarily a moral order based on Buddhist teaching, the moral
integrity of the Buddhist clergy lies at the core of the state’s identity.47
The declining social and political situation at the end of the Heian era
provided Eisai’s message with a great sense of urgency. Here too the Ninno¯
kyo¯ served as a primary source of inspiration. On the one hand, recall that the
Ninno¯ kyo¯ characterizes itself as “the father and mother of all kings” (i.e., rulers), and as a treasure for driving away demons and protecting a country. More
specifically, recall the admonition in the Ninno¯ kyo¯ that it be entrusted to rulers
especially at such times when the credibility of Buddhist teaching and the
Buddhist clergy have been exhausted. The clear implication is that the Ninno¯
kyo¯ should serve as the ruler’s model for reestablishing the authority of Buddhist institutions and the moral character of his country. As a result, there is
a strong sense in the Ko¯zen gokokuron that the Ninno¯ kyo¯ speaks directly to the
political and moral decay of the time. Witness the following passage from the
Ninno¯ kyo¯:
Oh Great Monarch, when Buddhist teaching has degenerated to the
point where its doctrines alone survive but it is no longer practiced
[masse] . . . , the king and his chief ministers of state will frequently
engage in illicit activities [that contravene Buddhist Law]. They will
support Buddhist teaching and the community of monks only for
their own selfish interests, committing great injustices and all sorts
of crimes. In opposition to Buddhist teaching and in opposition to
the rules governing moral behavior, they will restrain Buddhist
monks as if they were prisoners. When such a time arrives, it will
not be long before Buddhist teaching disappears.48
In accordance with Ninno¯ kyo¯ teaching, the ruler of the country is best
situated to reestablish the credibility of Buddhist teaching and the moral order
of the state. Given the political turmoil and competition among claimants to
the imperial throne, on one hand, and the rising importance of the military in
government affairs and the competition between different warrior families, on
the other, the position occupied by any ruler was extremely tenuous. Eisai’s
response to this state of affairs seems to be reflected in a passage from the
Scripture on the Perfection of Wisdom of the Victorious Ruler (Sho¯-tenno¯ hannya
kyo¯):
Suppose that when a bodhisattva who had studied the Buddhist
teaching on wisdom [i.e., the prajn˜a¯- teaching of the Zen school] became the ruler of the country, mean despicable sorts of people came
78 zen classics
to slander and insult him. This ruler would defend himself without
making a display of his majesty and authority, saying, “I am the
ruler of the country. I rule exclusively by the authority vested in me
through the Buddhist teaching [on wisdom].”49
This statement suggests that the Ninno¯ kyo¯ was important to the message
of the Ko¯zen gokokuron in two ways. In terms of its overall message, the Ko¯zen
gokokuron was conceived within the framework of Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology. This is
its fundamental significance. In terms of the social and political context, the
historical situation within which the Ko¯zen gokokuron was created, the passages
cited from the Ninno¯ kyo¯ suggested concrete solutions to specific issues. In
this latter instance, the Ninno¯ kyo¯ is not unique but fits a general pattern guiding the references to scriptures in the Ko¯zen gokokuron. Because of the overall
importance of Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology for the Ko¯zen gokokuron, however, the references to the Ninno¯ kyo¯ merit special attention.
From the preceding we can see how Zen teaching suggested a program of
reform for Eisai. In Eisai’s interpretation, the Zen-based reform program was
necessary to realize Japan’s destiny as a great Buddhist country. Zen represented moral reform through increased vigilance in following the precepts
(kai), the essential teaching on Buddhist wisdom (Skt. prajn˜a¯, J. hannya) transmitted through the masters of the Zen school, the meditation traditions (zen)
of both the T’ien-t’ai/Tendai and Ch’an/Zen schools, and the method to achieve
the ideal Buddhist state advocated in the Ninno¯ kyo¯. In Eisai’s interpretation,
Zen clearly had the potential to serve as the multidimensional ideology that
Japan required, encompassing the political, moral, soteriological, philosophical, and utopian aims of the country. The Ninno¯ kyo¯, we have seen, played a
significant role in establishing the political and utopian aims, as well as the
parameters for carrying them out.
Zen Monastic Ritual and Ninno¯ kyo¯ IdeologyNinno¯ kyo¯ Ideology and Zen Teaching in the Ko¯zen gokokuron
Treatises with overtly political overtones are a unique feature of Japanese Buddhism. On this point, it is useful to contrast Japan with China. When Buddhism was first introduced, China already had an established civilization with
well-defined moral and social principles. In the Chinese context, discussions
of Buddhist morality thus tended to conflict with nativist sentiments. A persistent tendency among the Chinese was to regard Buddhism as the ideology
of an alien people, essentially distinct from the principles and beliefs governing
Chinese civilization. As a result, Buddhist treatises on the value of native Chinese traditions tended to be either positively self-assured in the superiority of
Buddhism, or apologetically inclined, in search of harmony between native
Chinese and Buddhist teachings.28 By adopting Chinese Buddhist and Confucian ideologies at the same time, Japan tended to fuse Buddhist and Confucian principles into a single harmonious ideology which formed the basis
for Japan’s definition of civilization.
Aside from the initial objections of the Mononobe warrior clan and the
Nakatomi family of Shinto priests in the sixth century, Buddhism was immune
from the wrath of antiforeign temper until the rise of Japanese nativism in the
Tokugawa (Edo) period.29 The reason for this immunity is clear. Until Tokugawa
rule, Buddhism was the acknowledged core of Japanese civilization. The common refrain among the Japanese ruling elite who determined the course of
Japanese civilization was: “When the Buddhist law flourishes, so does the secular order.”30 Because of this belief and until the rediscovery of Chinese Confucianism along with their “pure” Shinto heritage, Buddhism was not regarded
zen buddhism as the ideology of the japanese state 73
as a foreign ideology that had either to proclaim its superiority or to apologize
for its presence, as was the case in China. As a result, ideological debates in
Japan tended to be sectarian, that is, between different factions that shared a
common vision, rather than cutting across fundamental ideological boundaries. Since Buddhism was not relegated to a private domain of exclusively
spiritual matters but was viewed as the rationale for state policy and the existence of government institutions, many Buddhist sectarian debates were politically inspired.31 The decline of authority in the late Heian era exacerbated
the need for sectarian debate focusing on political concerns.
The end of the Heian era brought political and ideological challenges to
the Heian ruling elite. Ideologically, the Heian decline resulted in challenges
to the position of the Tendai school as the spiritual and moral authority of the
Japanese state. Politically inspired Buddhist treatises calling for reform were a
natural development in this environment. Such works represent a period of
new competition within Buddhism, with new factions vying for the honor of
displacing Mount Hiei as the “Chief Seat of the Buddhist Religion for Ensuring
the Security of the Country.”32
The most prominent attempt to redefine the Japanese Buddhist state during this period was the Ko¯zen gokokuron. The aim of the work was twofold: to
reaffirm the central role of Buddhist ideology as the spiritual and moral core
of Japanese civilization, and to challenge the validity of the way this goal was
being carried out under the auspices of the Tendai school. The work was set
squarely within the context of Tendai reform. Like Luther in sixteenth-century
Christendom, Eisai saw Zen not as a revolutionary teaching that would undermine Tendai, but as a reform doctrine that would reestablish Buddhist and
Tendai credibility.
The Ko¯zen gokokuron text is divided into a preface and ten sections, concluding with a brief summary. The aim of each section is indicated by its title:
1. Ensuring the Lasting Presence of Buddhist Teaching
2. Protecting the Country (with the Teachings of the Zen School)
3. Resolving the Doubts of the People of the World
4. Verification (Provided by) Virtuous Masters of the Past
5. The Transmission Lineage of the Zen School
6. Scriptural Authorization for Enhancing Faith (in Zen)
7. Outlining Zen Doctrines for Encouraging Zen Practice
8. The Program of Rituals for Protecting the Country at Zen Monasteries
9. Explanations from Great Countries
10. Initiating the Vow to Transfer Merit
Rather than exclude Tendai, Eisai sought to reform it by redefining it in
terms of its relation to Zen. In order to understand how Eisai sought to meld
Tendai with the Zen tradition, one needs also to understand how Eisai con-
74 zen classics
ceived of Zen teaching and how he associated it with Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology. We
can begin by placing Eisai’s eventual identification with Zen in the context of
his original quest.
When Eisai set out from Japan on his second pilgrimage, his intended
destination was not China but India, the homeland of the Buddha and Buddhist teaching.33 His goal was to personally set foot on the “diamond ground”
where the Buddha had attained enlightenment. This plan underscores Eisai’s
commitment to reform on the pretext that Heian-era decline was rooted in
Japan’s deviation from correct Buddhist teaching. Only after Eisai’s request to
continue on to India was denied by Chinese authorities did he focus his attention on the study of Chinese Ch’an.34 With the possibility of studying authentic
Buddhist teaching in the Buddha’s homeland thwarted, Eisai turned to a ready
alternative: the purported “living” transmission of the Buddha’s teaching in
the Sung Ch’an masters around him. Sung Ch’an represented a viable alternative to Eisai for a number of reasons.35 On one level, it is easy to imagine
how impressed Eisai must have been with the world of Sung Ch’an, with its
grand monasteries, institutional structure, and state support. The stability and
prosperity of the Sung world stood in marked contrast to the brutality and
chaos into which Japanese civilization had fallen. The revitalization of Mount
T’ien-t’ai and its transformation into a Ch’an center during the Sung would
have also made a deep impression on Eisai, suggesting the model for reform
and revitalization in Japan. The most important influence that Sung Ch’an had
on Eisai, however, went beyond these circumstantial factors associated with
the splendor of Sung civilization. It was the new synthesis that Zen teaching
suggested, integrating crucial aspects of Buddhism for Eisai—Tendai and
prajn˜a¯-teaching, meditation practice and concern for morality, and Ninno¯ kyo¯
ideology—into a single, seamless whole.
Eisai saw Zen teaching in terms that pertained directly to Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology. In the preface of the Ko¯zen gokokuron, Eisai depicts Zen as the Mind
teaching, the essence of enlightenment, and the “actual teaching of the former
Buddhas” transmitted through S´a¯kyamuni “from master to disciple via the
robe of authentic transmission.”36 The Ninno¯ kyo¯ conceived itself in comparable
terms as “the spiritual source of the mind of buddhas, bodhisattvas, and all
sentient beings.”37 This depiction accounts for Eisai’s view of the Ninno¯ kyo¯ as
an integral part of the Zen school’s Mind teaching.
In terms of Buddhist scriptures, the Mind teaching is revealed in two
forms according to Eisai. “Externally, the Mind teaching conforms to the position taken in the Nirva¯nfia-su¯tra [J. Nehan kyo¯] that the Buddha-nature, through
the aid of the precepts, is always present.”38 In this regard, Eisai stands
staunchly in the Tendai tradition established by the Chinese T’ien-t’ai master
Chih-i, who emphasized upholding the Buddhist precepts as the basis from
which wisdom arises.39 This external emphasis on the precepts is joined to an
internal perspective, “the view of the Prajn˜a¯ su¯tra [J. Hannya kyo¯] that awak-
zen buddhism as the ideology of the japanese state 75
ening is attained through wisdom.” Taken together, these two perspectives on
the Mind teaching indicate the teaching of the Zen school reflecting the transsectarian perspective of the inherent harmony between Zen and Buddhist
scriptures and doctrines.
The two forms of the Mind teaching referred to by Eisai indicate two meditation traditions that he attempted to harmonize and integrate. One is the Zen
teaching of the Nirva¯nfia-su¯tra and the T’ien-t’ai school, with its emphasis on
the precepts. The other is the Zen teaching of the Prajn˜a¯ su¯tra and the Ch’an
school, with its emphasis on wisdom.40 I will later examine Sung precedents
for the integration of these two Chinese “Zen” traditions.
The emphasis on morality and the precepts emerges in the first section of
the Ko¯zen gokokuron, beginning one of the major bases for Eisai’s argument:
monastic reform. According to Ninno¯ kyo¯ teaching, the survival of both Buddhist and secular institutions is predicated on the moral character of a country,
typified by the monastic discipline of the Buddhist clergy. This discipline has
important consequences regarding the status of Buddhism in society and the
role that Buddhism performs in legitimizing state authority. In effect, the behavior of the Buddhist clergy serves as a moral barometer of the country, determining the credibility of Buddhism in the eyes of the state and the country
as a whole. By extension, corruption undermines the status of Buddhism and
its claim to authority. The Buddhist monastery, whether as the repository of
virtue or the beacon of enlightenment, depends on the moral discipline of its
members, in this view, for both spiritual and social justification. Practically
speaking, the social support given to Buddhism, and ultimately its very existence as a temporal institution, is intricately connected to the moral discipline
of its members. In this regard, the opening section of the Ko¯zen gokokuron
begins with a quote from the Su¯tra on the Six Perfections (J. Roku haramitsu
kyo¯): “The Buddha said, ‘I preached the rules governing moral training [vinaya]
so as to ensure the lasting presence of Buddhism [in the world],’ ”41 marking
the temporal aim of Eisai’s treatise to preserve the existence and integrity of
the Buddhist order. This concern for moral reform is the theme of the first
section, and continues to appear throughout the treatise.42 It is also evident
from Eisai’s conservative approach toward the Buddhist precepts. In complete
defiance of the Japanese Tendai tradition established by Saicho¯, which established its identity in part by liberating its members from the stricter, more ruleoriented discipline of early Buddhism, Eisai demanded that Zen monks observe the stricter Hı¯naya¯na precepts in addition to Mahaya¯na ones. Eisai’s
position on monastic reform, moreover, was not a personal, idiosyncratic conception. It specifically reflected the model of Buddhism that Eisai had witnessed in Sung China. In the Ko¯zen gokokuron, this connection is apparent in
the following citation from the Ch’an-yu¨an ch’ing-kuei (J. Zen’en shingi, “The
Regulations for Pure Conduct at Zen Monasteries”), the official record of regulations observed at Ch’an institutions in Sung China:
76 zen classics
The ability to spread Buddhist teaching throughout the world of
unenlightened people most assuredly rests on strict purity in one’s
moral training. As a result, observing the Buddhist rules governing
moral behavior [kairitsu] takes precedence in the practice of Zen and
the investigation of the Way. Without the insulation and protection
from transgressions and errors [provided by the monastic rules],
how will one ever become a Buddha or a patriarch?... Through
reading and reciting the monastic rules and understanding the benefit they provide, one is well versed in the differences between upholding the rules for moral behavior and violating them, and on
what behavior is permissible and impermissible... [Monks of the
Zen School] rely completely on the sacred utterances issued from
the mouth of the golden one, the Buddha; they do not indulge their
fancies to follow ordinary fellows.43
The political aim of Eisai’s reform is expressed directly when he states,
“In our country, the Divine Sovereign [the Japanese Emperor] shines in splendor, and the influence of his virtuous wisdom spreads far and wide.”44 Recall
that Eisai specifically stipulated the Ko¯zen gokokuron, the “Treatise on the Promotion of Zen for the Protection of the Country,” as being consistent with the
teaching of the Buddha to the Benevolent Kings (i.e., the Ninno¯ kyo¯). For Eisai
this meant that Zen, as the legitimate interpretation of Buddhist teaching and
practice, represented the means through which Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology could be
implemented. The basis for Japan’s future glory, Eisai asserted, rested in state
sponsorship of Zen teaching.
Much of Eisai’s confidence stemmed from his belief in Japan’s destiny as
one of the preeminent Buddhist kingdoms in the world. Eisai is quick to show
how this belief is based on scriptural authority, on the Buddha’s assertion
recorded in the scriptures that in the future “the most profound teaching of
Buddhist wisdom” [prajn˜a¯] will flourish in the lands to the northeast.45 For
Eisai, “the most profound teaching of Buddhist wisdom” is none other than
Zen teaching. The lands to the northeast where this teaching is destined to
flourish are China, Korea, and Japan. Since the transmission of Zen teaching
to China and Korea has already been accomplished, only the transformation
of Japan remained. The clear implication is that Japan’s natural destiny as a
preeminent Buddhist country can be fulfilled only by the adoption of Zen
teaching.46 The Mind teaching of the Zen school, in conjunction with the vision
of the ideal Buddhist state in the Ninno¯ kyo¯, thus constitutes the basis for
Japan’s future glory.
The ideology of the Ninno¯ kyo¯ played an important role not only in determining the primary position of Buddhist moral teaching in the affairs of the
country but also in determining where primary responsibility lay for carrying
out such reforms. Recall in this regard the provision, advanced in the Ninno¯
zen buddhism as the ideology of the japanese state 77
kyo¯, that rulers of states—not the Buddhist clergy or faithful—were responsible
for managing Buddhism and ensuring its continued existence. The preservation of Buddhism in this conception, it should be remembered, is intricately
connected with the ruler’s own self-interest in preserving his state. Thus, since
the state is primarily a moral order based on Buddhist teaching, the moral
integrity of the Buddhist clergy lies at the core of the state’s identity.47
The declining social and political situation at the end of the Heian era
provided Eisai’s message with a great sense of urgency. Here too the Ninno¯
kyo¯ served as a primary source of inspiration. On the one hand, recall that the
Ninno¯ kyo¯ characterizes itself as “the father and mother of all kings” (i.e., rulers), and as a treasure for driving away demons and protecting a country. More
specifically, recall the admonition in the Ninno¯ kyo¯ that it be entrusted to rulers
especially at such times when the credibility of Buddhist teaching and the
Buddhist clergy have been exhausted. The clear implication is that the Ninno¯
kyo¯ should serve as the ruler’s model for reestablishing the authority of Buddhist institutions and the moral character of his country. As a result, there is
a strong sense in the Ko¯zen gokokuron that the Ninno¯ kyo¯ speaks directly to the
political and moral decay of the time. Witness the following passage from the
Ninno¯ kyo¯:
Oh Great Monarch, when Buddhist teaching has degenerated to the
point where its doctrines alone survive but it is no longer practiced
[masse] . . . , the king and his chief ministers of state will frequently
engage in illicit activities [that contravene Buddhist Law]. They will
support Buddhist teaching and the community of monks only for
their own selfish interests, committing great injustices and all sorts
of crimes. In opposition to Buddhist teaching and in opposition to
the rules governing moral behavior, they will restrain Buddhist
monks as if they were prisoners. When such a time arrives, it will
not be long before Buddhist teaching disappears.48
In accordance with Ninno¯ kyo¯ teaching, the ruler of the country is best
situated to reestablish the credibility of Buddhist teaching and the moral order
of the state. Given the political turmoil and competition among claimants to
the imperial throne, on one hand, and the rising importance of the military in
government affairs and the competition between different warrior families, on
the other, the position occupied by any ruler was extremely tenuous. Eisai’s
response to this state of affairs seems to be reflected in a passage from the
Scripture on the Perfection of Wisdom of the Victorious Ruler (Sho¯-tenno¯ hannya
kyo¯):
Suppose that when a bodhisattva who had studied the Buddhist
teaching on wisdom [i.e., the prajn˜a¯- teaching of the Zen school] became the ruler of the country, mean despicable sorts of people came
78 zen classics
to slander and insult him. This ruler would defend himself without
making a display of his majesty and authority, saying, “I am the
ruler of the country. I rule exclusively by the authority vested in me
through the Buddhist teaching [on wisdom].”49
This statement suggests that the Ninno¯ kyo¯ was important to the message
of the Ko¯zen gokokuron in two ways. In terms of its overall message, the Ko¯zen
gokokuron was conceived within the framework of Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology. This is
its fundamental significance. In terms of the social and political context, the
historical situation within which the Ko¯zen gokokuron was created, the passages
cited from the Ninno¯ kyo¯ suggested concrete solutions to specific issues. In
this latter instance, the Ninno¯ kyo¯ is not unique but fits a general pattern guiding the references to scriptures in the Ko¯zen gokokuron. Because of the overall
importance of Ninno¯ kyo¯ ideology for the Ko¯zen gokokuron, however, the references to the Ninno¯ kyo¯ merit special attention.
From the preceding we can see how Zen teaching suggested a program of
reform for Eisai. In Eisai’s interpretation, the Zen-based reform program was
necessary to realize Japan’s destiny as a great Buddhist country. Zen represented moral reform through increased vigilance in following the precepts
(kai), the essential teaching on Buddhist wisdom (Skt. prajn˜a¯, J. hannya) transmitted through the masters of the Zen school, the meditation traditions (zen)
of both the T’ien-t’ai/Tendai and Ch’an/Zen schools, and the method to achieve
the ideal Buddhist state advocated in the Ninno¯ kyo¯. In Eisai’s interpretation,
Zen clearly had the potential to serve as the multidimensional ideology that
Japan required, encompassing the political, moral, soteriological, philosophical, and utopian aims of the country. The Ninno¯ kyo¯, we have seen, played a
significant role in establishing the political and utopian aims, as well as the
parameters for carrying them out.
Zen Monastic Ritual and Ninno¯ kyo¯ Ideology