In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

137 SHINRAN’S VIEW OF BUDDHIST HISTORY historiography” (køkoku shikan 皇国史観) was emphasized in Japan. Referring         > =åkyamuni’s position in Buddhist history to that of Jimmu in Japanese history and criticized the tendency in Japanese   =å       3. The jåtaka       %  =åkyamuni during his previous lifetimes, when he was still a bodhisattva striving to attain enlightenment and %   %   that it may have been especially important at the time the Tannishø was written to stress the privileged position of the “evil person,” and that this was all right as long as it was applied to a person whose past good karma opened up, but dangerous to do this in connection with a person wherein this was not the case and that, therefore, the Tannishø should not be shown indiscriminately to ordinary persons. There may be something to be said for this. Ryøshø,8 on the other hand, opined that one must make it clear that the terms “good person” and “evil person” are not used here in their ordinary sense and that, if they were taken in their ordinary sense, the alternative position, quoted by Shinran, would rather apply, namely “Even a good person can attain birth in the Pure Land, how much more easily an evil person.” Expressions similar to this one are found in Hønen. Hønen used the terms “evil person” and “good person” in their ordinary sense. It is the meaning of the words from the standpoint of an observer. 143 LECTURES ON THE TANNISHŌ But even though our founder Shinran used these words in a different sense, we must not necessarily conclude that Hønen and Shinran contradict one another on this point. The words are the same but the contents are different. Hønen speaks from his standpoint as a guide of other people; Shinran, on the other hand, simply bares his own self-realization, and then waits for people of the same conviction to come forward. Of course, even in Shinran’s case, it would be hard to imagine that he would have used that bold expression when writing things down in his own hand. It is an expression used by Shinran while talking freely, and to people whose good karma was opening up. Since that   #%@øgatsuin has good reasons for his concern. On the other hand, Ryøshø %  @øgatsuin on this point, but it remains true that we must pay attention to the fact that Shinran’s expression belongs to the category of oral tradition. Oral tradition does not consider expediency, but speaks unadorned truth. When writing things down, on the other hand, one is sure to mix expediency with truth. The strength of the Tannishø lies in the fact that it has been written down in a straightforward way. On that point it is different from the Kudenshø 口伝鈔 (A Chronicle of Oral Tradition) %  @  覚如 (1270–1351),9 who writes things rather selectively, out of fear that people might get mistaken ideas. The Tannishø does not concern itself with the possibility of being misunderstood. As a result, there are undoubtedly people who misunderstand it. But is it not true that words which are not subject to misunderstanding have    #    # us to read our present text. “   (  *  ''   &( $  to the intent of the other-power of the original vow.{|          %%        the conclusion that it does not correspond to the spirit or intent of Amida’s original vow. The word “intent” (ishu 意趣) is also used in chapter 10, where it is said that the disciples who, according to the        @      hear his verdict on points of doctrine disputed among them, “received Shinran’s intent.” Also here it means the intent or true meaning of the original vow of other-power. And Shandao wrote, for instance, “Although the advantages of the two gateways of meditative and nonmeditative practices have been taught up to this point [in the Contemplation Sutra], in view of the intent of the Buddha’s original vow, this is to bring sentient beings solely to wholehearted utterance of the name of Amida Buddha.”10 144 SOGA RYŌJIN Turning to the words, “The reason is that as long as people do good through self-power,” the “good persons” of the beginning are now called “people [who] do good through self-power.” The people of the six higher grades in the Contemplation Sutra are precisely such people, whereas the people of the three lower grades are common mortals who do only evil and no good. However, the people who do good are also common mortals. Good or evil, people are all...

Share