JIABS

Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies

In Memoriam Professor Akira HIRAKAWA by Kotabo FUJIJA ............................................................................... Paul M. HARRISON Relying on the Dharma and not the Person: Reflection on authority and Transmission in Buddhism and Buddhist Studies ..................... Colette CAILLAT Gleanings from a Comparative Reading of Early Canonical Buddhist and Jaina Texts ................................................................................. Robert H. SHARF Thinking through Shingon Ritual ..................................................... Giulio AGOSTINI On the Nikaya Affiliation of the Srighanacarasangraha and the Sphuartha Srighanacarasangrahaika .............................................

25 51

97

Mario D'AMATO Can all Beings Potentially Attain Awakening? Gotra-theory in the Mahayanasutralakara ................................... 115 Dan ARNOLD Candrakirti on Dignaga on Svalakaas ......................................... 139 Carmen MEINERT Structural Analysis of the bSam gtan mig sgron. A Comparison of the Fourfold Correct Practice in the Aryavikalpapravesanamadharai and the Contents of the four Main Chapters of the bSam gtan mig sgron 175 Notes on the Contributors................................................................. 197

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

Preamble: Ritual Meanings

In 1979 Frits Staal, a Sanskritist who specializes in Vedic ritual, published an article in which he proclaimed ritual to be devoid of meaning. Staals argument, subsequently developed in a number of publications1, is at first glance deceptively simple: when we ask about the meaning of a ritual we seek an explanation in language. Such an explanation will always involve a conceptual reduction, in that we seek to transpose the lived complexity of a ritual performance to a verbal formulation. Ritual, according to Staal, resists such reduction by its very nature. Ritual is pure activity (Staal 1979a: 9); it is a discipline engaged in for its own sake, which cannot therefore be thus reduced. Basically, the irreducibility of ritual shows that action constitutes a category in its own right (Staal 1983: 1.16).

A draft of this paper was presented at the symposium Matrices and Weavings: Expressions of Shingon Esoteric Buddhism in Japanese Culture and Society, held at the University of Hawaii, August 31 to September 2, 2002. I would like to thank the participants of that conference, especially Tom Eijo Dreitlein of Koyasan University, for their comments and advice. I am also indebted to Poul Andersen, Phyllis Granoff, Charlie Orzech, and Elizabeth Horton Sharf for their comments and suggestions. 1 See, for example, Staal 1979a; 1979b; 1983: 2.127-134; and 1990. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies Volume 26 Number 1 2003

52

ROBERT H. SHARF

Staals claim that ritual is meaningless is predicated on the corollary claim that ritual is antecedent to language. A variety of non-human species display ritual behavior, and ritual may well have been commonplace among Homo sapiens long before the advent of language and culture. (Staal argues that language is actually an outgrowth of ritual in general and ritualized vocalizations the precursors of mantras in particular.) Besides, individuals often acquire competence in a rite before they learn what, if anything, the rite signifies. Scholars are then wrong to assume that there are symbolic meanings running through the minds of ritualists and that such meanings constitute the sine qua non of ritual performance. According to Staal, people do rituals simply because they have been taught to do so, often from an early age. If ritual is meaningless if it does not refer to a domain of meanings extrinsic to ritual action itself then popular theories such as rituals enact myths, rituals reflect social structures, or rituals inculcate values and norms are misguided as they confound the historical and logical relationship between ritual and meaning. Besides, says Staal, those who hold that rituals enact myths, encode social structures, or impart collective norms, fail to explain why anyone would want to use ritual for these tasks when words would serve just as well if not better (Staal 1979a: 7; 1990: 123). Ritual, according to Staal, is behavior acts and sounds that is governed by rules. The rules constitute a syntax allowing the creation of infinitely malleable recursive structures not unlike those of language. But unlike language, ritual has no semantics; the acts and sounds that constitute ritual interact without reference to meaning (Staal 1990: 433). Ritual is then not so much like language as it is like dance, about which Isadora Duncan famously proclaimed: If I could tell you what it meant, there would be no point in dancing it (Staal 1979b: 120). Needless to say, Staal does not deny that individuals do ascribe meanings to rituals. His point is that such meanings are secondary or superfluous and hence tell us little about the transcultural (not to mention crossspecies) phenomenon of ritual per se. Following the earlier observations of Arnold van Gennep, Staal notes that rituals may be transmitted through time with little or no change, despite changes in the meanings ascribed to them. If a rite remains the same irrespective of shifts in meaning, then

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

53

meaning cannot be intrinsic to the rite. In the development of our concepts and theories of ritual it is only a small step from changing meaning to: no intrinsic meaning and structural meaning, and from there to: no meaning (Staal 1979a: 11). Moreover, if the goal of ritual were the conveyance of meaning, then ritual would admit change in so far as this or any other goal was well served. Thus rituals lack not only meaning but also a purpose or goal.
One reason that the absence of visible or otherwise detectable results causes [the ritualist] no concern is that large rituals are ends in themselves. The rites have no practical utility and have lost their original function, if ever they had one. The ritualists perform them not in order to obtain certain ends, but because it is their task. Lack of practical utility, incidentally, is a characteristic that ritual shares with many of the higher forms of human civilization. It may be a mark of civilization. (1983: 1.18)

Pushing this argument to its logical conclusion, Staal closed his original 1979 article with a passage, used as an epigraph above, suggesting that just as ritual is meaningless, so too is religion, language, and even life itself (1979a: 22). In doing so, Staal unwittingly revealed his hand: he had stipulated the conditions for ascribing meaning such that they can never be met. Staal will only admit meanings that are both invariant and intrinsic to the phenomena under investigation. But this is to ignore the insight, fundamental to linguistics and semiotic theory, that meaning does not reside within a sign. Rather, meaning emerges from the complex cultural system, determined in part through social interactions, that marks a particular phenomenon as a sign in the first place. A signifier is meaningful only as a point in a set of relations. And since meaning never resides in the thing itself, meaning must always be extrinsic, contingent, and variant2. In claiming that the thing-in-itself has no meaning, Staal has uncovered not the meaninglessness of the thing itself but rather the semiotic logic that renders meaning possible in the first place3. Rituals trade in signs that
2 Some might argue that there is one case in which we can talk of fixed meaning, namely, as a defining feature of the class of proper nouns. Yet Derrida, for one, questions even this restricted sense of fixed meaning (Derrida 1985). 3 Or, one might say that Staal has simply reaffirmed the Wittgensteinian insight that the abstract thing-in-itself is a piece of philosophical nonsense. For a critique of Staal similar to my own, see Andersen 2001: 162-163.

54

ROBERT H. SHARF

dont possess meaning so much as they invite meaning. To speak of the meaning of a rite one must adopt a particular perspective situate oneself in a particular world of discourse and different perspectives yield different meanings. As anthropologists have noted since the time of Tylor, even participants in one and the same rite will hold various and often conflicting interpretations of the event, and the interpretations will change over time4. Moreover the emic accounts of ritual participants will differ dramatically from the plethora of etic readings offered by historians of religion, sociologists, anthropologists, or psychologists. But here ritual is surely no different from any other cultural product, including works of art and literature5. Some of what is conveyed in a particular ritual performance may indeed be difficult if not impossible to convey in words. Even then it may be misleading to label these elements meaningless. When Isadora Duncan says, If I could tell you what it meant, there would be no point in dancing it, she does not mean that dance is meaningless but rather that she is incapable of putting into words that which she puts into dance. Staal has every right to stipulate that meaning only be predicated to properly formed linguistic utterances to restrict meanings to language. But such a stipulation renders the rest of his argument tautological. Few would quibble with the claim that ritual is constituted not by language so much as by action. This criticism aside, Staal does make several important points. Ritual activity qua activity is indeed difficult to translate into words. Moreover,
4 The old and greatest difficulty in investigating the general subject [of idolatry] is this, that an image may be, even to two votaries kneeling side by side before it, two utterly different things (Tylor 1920: 2.168-169). 5 Staals argument was, I suspect, inordinately influenced by the archaic nature of the rituals he was studying. The Agnicayana is an ancient rite consisting largely of mantric utterances in Vedic, the meaning of which is inaccessible to most of the participants. The archaic character of the rite, and the fact that so much of the liturgical content is gibberish to the actors, may account for its seeming invariance across generations. But even then Staal likely overestimates resistance to change. It is precisely because the rite has only been practiced in fits and starts over the last hundred years that the Brahmins abide so closely to textual authority. (What other authority can they call upon, now that the authority of received tradition has been compromised?) Even then, many significant alterations were made in the performance Staal observed, including the use of plant offerings instead of goats.

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

55

rites have lives of their own, independent of the symbolic and mythological associations that may be ascribed to them. Finally, appreciation of the symbolic and mythological world of ritual does not in and of itself account for the obsessive, rule-bound character of ritual action. Adepts may spend years acquiring competence in elaborate and physically arduous rites the historical origins and symbolic associations of which remain obscure to them. To castigate such adepts for their ignorance would only betray our own. Shingon Ritual That ritual is resistant to conceptual reduction and discursive appropriation has posed a particular problem for modern Shingon exegetes. Shingon apologists, like their counterparts in other religious traditions, have felt compelled to respond to modern rationalistic and scientific critiques of religion in general and ritual in particular. This has led some writers to ignore or downplay elements of the tradition considered unscientific or magical in favor of Shingon teachings deemed properly philosophical, psychological, spiritual, or aesthetic. But this has not been easy, given that sacerdotal ritual lies at the heart of the Shingon tradition. Ritual performance was essential, of course, to virtually all schools of Buddhism throughout Japanese history, but other schools have had an easier time reinventing themselves in the light of late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century modernist mores. Apologists for Zen, for example, insisted that true Zen eschews ritual altogether in favor of unmediated spiritual experience, while Pure Land exegetes recast their tradition in theological terms strikingly similar to Protestantism: Pure Land, we are told, is a doctrine of divine grace predicated on faith in an all-compassionate being6. Even Tendai and Nichiren partisans have gotten into the act: sectarian introductions to these traditions invariably foreground doctrine and cosmology at the expense of ritual practice. Some Shingon exegetes tried adopting similar strategies. They produced books on Shingon that simply ignore ritual practice altogether7, or
For an alternative view of medieval Japanese Pure Land see Dobbins 2001. Minoru Kiyotas book Shingon Buddhism: Theory and Practice (1978), for example, despite the title, is all theory and no practice. The English study of Kukais works by
7 6

56

ROBERT H. SHARF

that depict Esoteric (mikkyo ) ritual as a means toward inculcating inner transformation and mystical experience8. Given the intellectual genealogy of categories such as mystical experience, such claims are always a bit suspect (Sharf 1995, 1998), but in the case of Shingon they are especially so. The sticking point is not the absence of a sophisticated body of doctrine or theology through which to frame Shingon ritual. On the contrary, Shingon doctrine is conceptually rich and partakes of a certain literary and aesthetic elegance that may well appeal to modern sensibilities. One might cite, for example, the notion that the phenomenal world is the theophany of the dharmakaya-buddha Mahavairocana (Dainichi ), or the related doctrine that the enactment of the three mysteries (sanmitsu , the ritual performance of the body, speech, and mind of the deity) gives tangible form to the practitioners primordial identity with the divine9. Such tenets resonate, at least on the surface, with popular Western conceptions of mysticism and the perennial philosophy. The problem for Shingon modernists is not doctrine. Rather, it is that doctrine is patently secondary to a complex set of ritual procedures that constitute the core of the monastic curriculum. The early popularity and rapid growth of the Shingon lineage in Heian Japan was due to its possession of the exalted eighth-century Tantric rites that Kukai (774-835) brought back from the Tang capital. These rituals constituted a world unto themselves, and while their connections to normative Buddhist teachings were not always salient, they carried the imprimatur of celebrated Indian Buddhist masters. Most important, those with access to this ritual technology were promised the power to defeat their enemies, end droughts and famines, cure disease, and attain exalted states on the Buddhist path. (Indeed, this is one reason why so many recent attempts to define Tantra have failed. To date, virtually all attempts begin by identifying the conceptual foundations the soteriology, cosmology, metaphysics,
Yoshito Hakeda (1972), while learned and important, focuses exclusively on doctrine while remaining mute on the subject of ritual. 8 Matsunaga 1989: 25-27, 1990: 27. See also Toganoo 1982b: 23; Ishida 1987: 27; Yamasaki 1988: 123; and the discussion in Sharf 2001b: 193-195. 9 On the sanmitsu see Hizoki , KDZ 2.40.

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

57

or what have you supposedly common to Tantric traditions across Asia. Even in so-called polythetic definitions of Tantra, the extended set of salient characteristics is comprised entirely of symbols and concepts what Staal would classify as meanings rather than of ritual implements, gestures, sounds, and procedures. Yet, if it makes sense to talk about a pan-Asian phenomenon of Tantra at all and this is a big if then I believe it is better approached not in terms of thought [meanings] but of practice [actions]. If the term Tantra has any cross-cultural referent, it is to a body of technological expertise comprised of certain powerful tools mantras, mudras, icons, altars, esoteric implements including ceremonial weapons, and so on and the arcane procedural knowledge necessary to wield them. This technology could be, and apparently was, appropriated by diverse religious traditions and transmitted independent of any theoretical or doctrinal overlay.)10 The fact that Shingon apologists may experience difficulty in recasting their ritual practices in an acceptably modern or rational light need not concern scholars who stand outside the tradition. There is no shortage of theoretical models and conceptual strategies on which scholars might draw. They could adopt a comparative approach, for example, noting structural similarities between Shingon and non-Shingon traditions. Think of the striking parallels between Shingon ritual and the traditions of shamanism, spirit mediumship, and possession that are so widespread throughout Asia. In each case an initiated master engages in an occult performance through which he or she comes to personify or embody a divine being. The performance endows the shaman or ritual master with the deitys power and authority by virtue of which the performer is able to intervene in worldly and otherworldly affairs11. Comparativists might step back even further and view Shingon ritual under the rubric of sacrifice la Henri Hubert and Marcel Mauss

On the nature and status of Tantric Buddhism in China see Sharf 2002: 263-278. It is unlikely that the structural parallels observed between East Asian shamanism and Buddhist Tantra are entirely accidental. They may well be the product of shared ancestry or cultural diffusion and borrowing. Edward Davis, for example, shows how nonBuddhist ritual masters (fashi ) in Song China employed Tantric techniques (including mantra and mudra) to invoke their guardian spirits who were then used in rites of exorcism (Davis 2001: 49). On the connections between Buddhist Tantra and East Asian spirit possession see also Strickmann 2002: 198-218.
11

10

58

ROBERT H. SHARF

([1898] 1981). In Shingon, as in all sacrificial traditions, particular goods are purified through consecration or aspersion rites and then offered to powerful supernatural beings in exchange for some boon12. Or, following van Gennep, scholars might foreground the initiatory, ascetic, or transformative dimensions of Shingon ritual, placing Shingon under the broad rubric of rites du passage. Shingon rites thus create a liminal situation in which the officiant is transformed, at least temporarily, from one social or sacerdotal state to another. Such broad theoretical models, under the rubrics of shamanism, sacrifice, liminality, or what have you, mitigate some of the arcane otherness of Shingon ritual by framing it as an instance of a larger transcultural and transhistorical human phenomenon. But this conceptual gain comes at a price: these theories impose a set of foreign categories and concerns that obscure as much as they reveal. Moreover, as grand narratives they tend to reduce the distinctiveness, complexity, and internal coherence of the particular tradition at hand. In this paper I will focus, instead, on an expository narrative that originates not from without but from within the Shingon tradition. This is the so-called guest-host paradigm, according to which all major Shingon ritual practices (Sk: sadhana) are structured as feasts or entertainments for visiting deities, wherein the practitioner assumes the role of host (shujin ), and the main deity takes the position of honored guest (hinkyaku , daihin ). This narrative, familiar to all Shingon priests, is of considerable antiquity and is believed to bespeak the ancient Indian provenance of the rites. The guest-host paradigm is used in both traditional commentaries and contemporary sectarian tracts to explain individual procedures and to relate them to the overall structure of the rite, lending narrative coherence to the whole13.

12 Precisely because such a notion of sacrifice is so broad, some would limit the term sacrifice to situations involving the slaughter of a sacrificial victim; on the concept of sacrifice see esp. the discussion in Heesterman 1993: 7-44. For a brief discussion of Shingon ritual in the context of sacrifice see Payne 1991: 88. 13 On the guest-host structure (daihin geisho no keishiki ), see Takai 1953: 109-110, 117; Toganoo 1982b: 45-46; Yamasaki 1988: 162; Strickmann 1989: 16-17; and Payne 1991: 88-89. The guest-host structure is also widely used in Tibetan exegesis of Buddhist Tantra, but that topic lies outside the confines of the present paper.

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

59

While this paradigm does account for the general structure of Shingon practices, it also engenders certain ambiguities and contradictions. These ambiguities, I will suggest, may shed light on features of the Shingon ritual system that relate to the early development of Buddhist Tantra. Thinking through the narrative will also allow us to revisit Staals thesis concerning the relationship between ritual actions and meanings. Before turning to this narrative, however, it is necessary to say a few words about the Shingon monastic curriculum. Shingon Training Anyone wishing to become a Shingon priest today must undergo a sequence of four initiations known collectively as the Shidokegyo or four preliminary practices of liberation. Each of the practices is centered around the invocation of a particular buddha, bodhisattva, or other divine being (known as the honzon or principal deity)14 and his or her retinue. The rite proper takes from two to five hours to complete and is repeated three times a day in the context of an extended ascetic retreat15. In addition to the central rite, the priest undergoing Shidokegyo training performs a variety of auxiliary practices, including daily visits to neighboring shrines and temples, ancestral rites for lineage patriarchs, offerings to hungry ghosts, and so on, leaving little time for meals or rest. If done in a traditional manner, the Shidokegyo sequence requires over one hundred days to complete, whereupon the practitioner is eligible for consecration (kanjo , Sk: abhieka) as a Shingon master (ajari , Sk: acarya). This consecration authorizes the priest to perform Esoteric rituals on behalf of others. All Shingon rituals and ceremonies are organized as a sequence of smaller liturgical procedures that typically consist of an incantation
14 The term honzon (C: benzun) is likely derived from Tantric sources, but it lost its explicitly Tantric overtones rather early and came to be used by all sects of Japanese Buddhism. On this term see esp. the Benzun sanmei chapter of the Mahavairocanasutra (T.848: 18.44a-b); Hizoki, KDZ 2.30; Mikkyo Jiten Hensankai eds. 1983: 2068bc; Mochizuki 1933-36: 5.4697b-4698a; and Goepper 1979. 15 The three daily performances, each of which is called a single sitting (ichiza gyobo ), are known respectively as early night (shoya ), late night (goya ), and mid-day (nitchu ).

60

ROBERT H. SHARF

(a mantra, dharai, hymn, etc.) accompanied by a hand gesture (mudra) and a guided contemplation (kanso ). The four initiations that comprise the Shidokegyo namely the Juhachido (eighteen methods), Kongokai (vajra-realm practice), Taizokai (matrix16 realm practice), and Goma (fire ceremony) consist of hundreds of such segments of varying duration and complexity. Of these hundreds, modern commentators regard three specific segments that usually appear in each of the Shidokegyo rites as the soteriological core of the practice. These three units interpenetration of self [and deity] (nyuga-ganyu , #51), formal invocation (shonenju , #53), and syllable-wheel contemplation (jirinkan , #55) unite respectively the body, speech, and mind of the practitioner with the body, speech, and mind of the principal deity (honzon) of the rite. As such, they constitute the ritual instantiation of the three mysteries (sanmitsu), a cardinal Shingon doctrine that affirms the identity of practitioner and buddha17. Traditional Shingon ritual manuals, known as shidai (sequential programs) or giki (ritual regulations), often list only the names of the dozens of procedures that comprise the rite. With less common procedures the manuals may include mnemonic aids such as the pronunciation of the mantras (in Siddham script, Chinese characters, and/or the Katakana syllabary), the text of liturgical hymns and recitations, directions on how to form certain mudras, and diagrams to help in the contemplations. In any case, the manuals presume a vast store of ritual knowledge on the part of the practitioner. The more elaborate rites such as the Taizokai and Goma consist of hundreds of such procedures, many of them of considerable complexity. Traditionally, these manuals were not printed but were hand-copied and transmitted from master to disciple. Thousands of such manuals survive in temple archives, and hundreds have made their way into modern printings of Buddhist and Shingon canonical collections. A comparison of the manuals quickly reveals a host of small but notable alterations in

Prior to undertaking the Juhachido, the practitioner must complete the Raihai kegyo (preliminary prostration practice), which today takes from one to four weeks to complete. As such, the modern Shidokegyo sequence is actually organized into five segments. 17 See, for example, the discussion in Toganoo 1982b: 66.
16

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

61

the liturgies: elements are added or removed, recitations and contemplations are modified, and some manuals include short expository directions and comments interlinear notes that threaten to enter the liturgy proper that may represent the oral transmission (kuden ) of a particular master or lineage. The Shingon ritual tradition, now many centuries old, was conservative but pace Staal by no means invariant. These differences gave rise to a profusion of independent lines (ryu ) that differed in the details of their ritual performances and exegeses18. There was no opprobrium associated with amending the rites; all bona fide Shingon masters (ajari) were sanctioned to alter the rites as they saw fit. Two related reasons are given for this authority: (1) masters were regarded as spiritually advanced and ritually sanctified beings whose interpretations of the rites reflected their inner wisdom; (2) more practically, there was no single authoritative Chinese or Japanese textual source for the rites on which the Japanese could draw. There was, rather, a profusion of sanctioned texts and teaching lineages, a situation readily acknowledged by the tradition19. Annen (841?-915?), for example, notes that the reason there were so many differences in the ritual transmissions brought back to Japan by Ennin (794-864) was that he studied under eight different teachers20. At the same time, scholars should not exaggerate the differences between Shingon initiatory lineages. While these lines did compete for prestige and patronage, in the end the variations in ritual performance are relatively minor and rarely affect the rites underlying structure21.
18 According to tradition, there are twelve major Shingon initiatory lineages, six associated with the Ono line and six associated with the Hirosawa line . However, there are dozens of sub-lineages, the two most important today being the Chuin-ryu now dominant on Mount Koya and the Sanboin-ryu stemming from Daigoji in Kyoto. For a full discussion of the complex relationship between the various lineages see Toganoo 1982a: 239-266; 1982b: 33-40; and Takai 1953: 25-58. 19 The absence of a single authoritative ritual text and the freedom of an acarya to interpret and alter the ritual as he pleases is discussed in Kakuchos (960-1034) Sanmitsu shoryoken (T.2399: 75.633c14 ff.) and Taizokai shoki (T.2404: 75.806c1 ff.); see also Todaro 1986: 114. 20 Taizokai daiho taijuki , T.2390: 75.54a22; Todaro 1986: 114. 21 The same can be said for the differences between Shingon mikkyo writ large (Tomitsu ) and Tendai mikkyo (Taimitsu ). The sequence in which Tendai priests perform the Shidokegyo is slightly different (in Tendai the Taizokai rite precedes the Kongokai), but the overall narrative structure and most of the individual procedures are identical.

62

ROBERT H. SHARF

This structure is rooted in a subset of eighteen ritual procedures known as the juhachido or eighteen methods which constitute a latticework around which are hung dozens if not hundreds of additional elements. Juhachido is also the name of the first of the four Shidokegyo practices, and it is through this extended rite that a Shingon priest comes to acquire a basic understanding of the ritual system22. (In this paper I use lower case italics [juhachido] to refer to the original sequence of eighteen procedures, and capitalized unitalicized script [Juhachido] to refer to the full Shidokegyo rite.) The guest-host narrative is captured in the root procedures of the eighteen methods. History and Structure of the Eighteen Methods The origin of the eighteen methods is far from clear. The Daishoten kangi soshin binayaka ho , a work preserved in fascicle nine of Kukais Sanjujo sakushi , contains what some Shingon scholars believe to be the earliest record of the rite23. But the de facto locus classicus is another roughly contemporaneous text, the Juhachi geiin (C. Shiba qiyin). Tradition holds that this text, extant only in Japan, is the work of Kukais teacher Huiguo (746-805) as recorded by Kukai himself, but little is known with certainty about the provenance of the work24. The same is true of virtually all of the ritual manuals attributed to Kukai, including his three other eighteen-methods
22 There are a variety of rites structured around the eighteen-methods sequence that can be used for the Shidokegyo Juhachido performance. These ritual forms, such as the Nyoirinbo , are referred to as ritual sequences established on the eighteen methods (juhachido date no shidai ); see Toganoo 1982b: 47-49. The Nyoirinbo serves as the Juhachido in the Sanboin-ryu, using a manual derived from the Shonyoirin Kanjizai bosatsu nenju shidai by Gengo (914-995); see the appendix to this paper. 23 The Sanjujo sakushi is traditionally considered a work by Kukai dating to his years in China (Toganoo 1982b: 44; Ono 1932-36: 4.86). 24 In his Juhachido kuketsu , Raiyu (1225-1304) writes that Kukai received the eighteen methods from Huiguo (T.2529: 79.71c9ff). Most modern Shingon scholars accept this position and view the Juhachi geiin as Kukais record of Huiguos instructions (Takai 1953: 116-117). The Juhachi geiin is reproduced in both the Taisho canon (T.900), where it is attributed to Huiguo, and the Kobo Daishi zenshu (KDZ 2.634-645), where it is attributed to Kukai.

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

63

manuals: the Juhachido nenju shidai , Juhachido kubi shidai , and Bonji juhachido . While they are all likely early Shingon compositions, they may well postdate Kukais death. The sequence of eighteen root procedures appears to be a Japanese systematization of a ritual pattern found in group of related Chinese manuals associated with Amoghavajra. The texts most commonly mentioned as sources for the eighteen methods are the Wuliangshou rulai guanxing gongyang yigui (T.930), Guanzizai pusa ruyilun yuqie (T.1086), Guanzizai pusa ruyilun niansong yigui (T.1085), and Dabao guangbo louge shanzhu mimi tuoluoni jing (T.1005a). In his Sangakuroku , Kukai mentions the first two as the basis for his own Juhachido manuals (Takai 1953: 111-116), but all these texts were familiar to Kukai and all share a common ritual structure. I will have occasion to return to these texts below. Here I will only note that there is some question as to whether or not the Chinese texts, and the Juhachi geiin itself, contain the segment known as the contemplation of the sanctuary (dojokan , #31), an important rite traditionally included among the list of eighteen25. As mentioned above, the term juhachido refers to (1) a skeletal structure of eighteen procedures that was incorporated into more complex rites such as the Taizokai, Kongokai, and Goma; and (2) a full-fledged rite in itself that, in its mature form, consists of some seventy or eighty discrete procedures. The latter Juhachido rite, typically with Nyoirin Kannon (Cintamaicakra Avalokitesvara) as the principal deity, was incorporated into the Shingon monastic curriculum by the end of Kukais lifetime. Kukais Shingon denju saho , for example, mentions the Juhachido as one of six practices mandatory for all Shingon priests26.
25 Takai 1953: 117-118. The dojokan is also known as the Tathagata fist mudra (nyorai kenin ). The term dojokan is rare in Chinese texts; one of the few relevant instances is found in the Sheng huanxitian shifa , a ritual manual ascribed to the somewhat obscure Tang monk from the western regions Prajacakra (also known as Zhihuilun ; the reference is found in T.1275: 21.325b5). However, the provenance of the work is unclear, and it may well be a Japanese apocryphon. 26 These six rites are (1) Kechien-kanjo (consecration establishing a bond with the deity); (2) Juhachido; (3) Issonbo (single deity practice); (4) Kongokai; (5) Taizokai; and (6) Goma. These are followed by the Koka-kanjo and Jumyokanjo initiations (KDZ 4.417ff.; see the discussion in Toganoo 1982b: 25-26).

64

ROBERT H. SHARF

And a court document dated 2-23-835, shortly before Kukais death, records that the Juhachido was to be included among practices compulsory for monks seeking ordination among the annual ordinands (nenbundosha )27. The Shidokegyo sequence was becoming standardized, with the Juhachido as the initial rite, by the time of Kakuban (1095-1143) who writes in his Shojuho shokan that he received the Juhachido at age eighteen, the Kongokai and Taizokai at nineteen, the Koka-kanjo three times between the ages of twenty-two and twenty-seven, and lastly the Denbo-kanjo a total of eight times28. Today all Shingon (as well as Tendai) priests begin with the Juhachido, although the principal deity of the rite differs depending on the monks initiatory lineage (ryu). Priests in the Sanboin-ryu use Nyoirin Kannon as the principal deity while Chuin-ryu priests direct the ritual to Dainichi Nyorai (Mahavairocana). Even then, the differences between the rites as actually performed are relatively few and far between. The overview of the original eighteen-methods structure that follows is based primarily on the manuals ascribed to Kukai, notably the Juhachi geiin, Juhachido nenju shidai, and Juhachido kubi shidai29. I have also consulted a number of medieval texts on the juhachido, including the Juhachido kuketsu (T.2529) by Raiyu (1225-1304) and the Juhachi geiin gishaku shoki (T.2475) attributed to Jojin (fl. 1108), both of which provide considerable commentary30. I have subdivided the eighteen methods into six procedures (roppo
27 Study of the Tattvasagraha and Mahavairocana sutras was also compulsory as was facility with shomyo chanting. See Todaro 1985: 104; on the system of annual ordinands see Ab 1999: 39-40. 28 Toganoo 1982b: 26. On the complex problem of the historical origins of the Shidokegyo system see the discussions in Toganoo 1982b: 26-27; Takai 1953: 74-75; and Ueda 1986: 55-58. 29 There are any number of modern accounts of the eighteen methods. The most comprehensive accounts in Japanese are Toganoo 1982b: 44-53, 286-318; Takai 1953: 109216; Tanaka 1962: 95-151; Oyama 1987: 67-143; and Ueda 1986: 102-207. In English see Miyata 1984; Miyata and Todaro 1988: Eighteen Rites; and Payne 1991: 207-227. 30 There is some question about the authorship of the Juhachi geiin gishaku shoki. The Shoshu shosho roku lists the author as Jojin of Kiyomizu-dera , but other traditions attribute it to Shinko of Kojima-dera , or the Tendai monk Annen (Kamata et al. eds. 1998: 734).

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

65

), following a popular medieval mode of analysis31. (The numbers given for the individual rites correspond to their place in the modern Juhachido sequence provided in the appendix.) (1) Procedure for Adorning the Practitioner (shogon gyoja ho , goshin bo ). Traditionally, this section includes the first five of the eighteen methods, all of which serve to purify, adorn, and protect the practitioner, rendering him or her a suitable host. The practitioner begins by anointing his/her body with incense (zuko , #6), followed by a sequence of three rites the buddha family assembly (butsubu sanmaya , #9), lotus family assembly (rengebu sanmaya , #10), and vajra family assembly (kongobu sanmaya , #11) that call upon the deities of the three assemblies to empower (kaji ) and purify the practitioner. Then one protects the body (goshin ) by donning armor (hiko , kongo katchu , #12); the mantra for this rite invokes Agni, and the sequence is said to protect the host from all manner of natural disasters, demons, and evil influences. (2) Procedure for Binding the Realm (kekkai ho ). Now one prepares ones abode i.e., the sanctuary for the deity. First, one secures the sanctuary firmly to the earth by driving a vajra pillar through the practitioners seat to the center of the earth (jiketsu , jikai , or kongoketsu , #29). The four sides of the perimeter are secured (shiho ketsu , #30) by erecting an indestructible vajra wall (kongosho ). The roof has not yet been sealed to allow for the descent of the deity. (3) Procedure for Adorning the Sanctuary (shogon dojo ho ). According to virtually all medieval texts, this section consists of two rites: the contemplation of the sanctuary (or contemplation of the

31 On the six procedures see the Juhachi geiin gishaku shoki, T.2475: 78.115c19-27; Oyama 1987: 69; and Takai 1953: 110. I have also consulted the Taizokai nenju shidai yoshuki (SZ 25) by Goho (1306-1362). In this work Goho analyses the structure of the Taizokai rite into seven limbs (shichi shi ), drawing on Annens Kongokai daiho taijuki (T.2391: 75.170b8-10); the seven are (1) gyogan , (2) sanmaya , (3) jojin , (4) dojo , (5) shosei/hosei , (6) kuyo , and (7) nenju . This breakdown of the ritual is based, according to Goho, on fascicle seven of the Mahavairocana-sutra (T.848: 18:45a ff.); see the discussion in Toganoo 1982b: 54.

66

ROBERT H. SHARF

locus of enlightenment, dojokan , #31)32 and the universal offerings of the great sky-repository (dai kokuzo futsu kuyo , #32). As mentioned above, the Juhachi geiin does not explicitly mention the dojokan a rite that involves the visualization of the principal deity of the rite. However, there is a contemplation (so ) that is clearly related:
Next imagine that in the middle of the altar there is a lion throne set on top of a great eight-petaled lotus blossom. On the throne is a seven-jeweled tower bedecked with colorfully embroidered banners and jewel-covered pillars arrayed in rows. Divine garments are hung about and it is surrounded by fragrant clouds. Flowers rain down everywhere and music plays. Jeweled vessels hold pure water, there is divine food and drink, and a mani gem serves as a lamp. Having performed this contemplation intone the following verse: Through the power of my own merit, the power of the Tathagatas grace, and the power of the dharma-realm, I dwell in universal offerings."
33

Note that this contemplation from the Juhachi geiin makes no reference to the presence of the principal deity. This is striking, since the dojokan found in all later manuals, including the Juhachido nenju shidai attributed to Kukai (KDZ 2.621), foregrounds the appearance of the principal deity in his jeweled palace. The following liturgy, used in the Sanboinryu Juhachido, is typical:
Form the tathagata fist mudra . Contemplate as follows: In front [of me] is the syllable ah (J: aku). The syllable changes into a palatial hall of jewels. Inside is an altar with stepped walkways on all four sides. Arrayed in rows are jeweled trees with embroidered silk banners suspended from each. On the altar is the syllable hrih (kiriku) which changes and becomes a crimson lotus blossom terrace. On top is the syllable a (a) which changes and becomes a full moon disk. On top is the syllable hrih (kiriku),
32 The term dojo is used as a translation of the Sk. bodhimaa, the seat upon which a buddha sits at the time of his enlightenment. Its use for the sanctuary the site of practice is thus metaphorical, and the title of this section might well be translated adornment of the seat of enlightenment. See Takai 1953: 117-118, and Oyama 1987: 101104. 33 T.900: 18.782c11-17. By the time of the compilation of the Juhachido nenju shidai attributed to Kukai, the verses at the end had become separated from the dojokan and appear in a recurring unit called the three powers (sanriki ; KDZ 2.620).

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

67

and to the left and right there are two trah (taraku) syllables. The three syllables change and become a vajra jewel lotus. The jewel lotus changes into the principal deity, with six arms and a body the color of gold. The top of his head is adorned with a jeweled crown. He sits in the posture of the Freedom King (Jizai o ), assuming the attribute of preaching the dharma. From his body flow a thousand rays of light, and his upper torso is encircled by a radiant halo. His upper right arm is in the posture of contemplation. His second right arm holds the wish-fulfilling gem. His third right arm holds a rosary. His upper left arm touches the mountain [beneath him]. His second left arm holds a lotus blossom. His third left arm holds a wheel. His magnificent body of six arms is able to roam the six realms, employing the skillful means of great compassion to end the suffering of all sentient beings. The eight great Kannons and the innumerable members of the Lotus realm assembly surround him on all sides34.

Commentaries typically interpret the dojokan as the moment in the narrative in which the practitioner first establishes contact with the deity, visualizing him in his divine abode35. But then the reference to the sanctuary (dojo) in the title to this section (adornment of the sanctuary) is ambiguous: is the sanctuary being adorned that of the practitioner or the deity? (The term dojo is most commonly associated with the site of practice an earthly chapel yet according to the narrative, the deity has not yet arrived on the practitioners altar.) There are a few ways to account for the anomalous nature of this Juhachi geiin segment. One possibility is that the Juhachi geiin preserves an early tradition that, in contrast with later manuals, remains closer to the narrative logic of the guest-host structure. The scene is not the principal deitys abode at all but rather the sanctuary being readied for the deitys imminent arrival. The altar is imagined as the site of the jeweled palatial tower, with various offerings (flowers, water, food, music, light) laid out and ready for the gods descent. Alternatively, the Juhachi geiin may be intentionally ambiguous as to the location of the divine altar: two of the important sources for the
34 Miyano and Mizuhara 1933: Nyoirin 13-14; cf. Ozawa 1962: Juhachido 51-53. The Chuin-ryu dojokan for the Juhachido is similar except for the identity of the principal deity. 35 Takai explains that the advanced practitioner will contemplate the dojo as within his own mind, but the novice practitioner must begin by viewing the dojo as outside of himself (1953: 161).

68

ROBERT H. SHARF

juhachido sequence the Wuliangshou rulai guanxing gongyang yigui and Guanzizai pusa ruyilun niansong yigui contain contemplations at this point in the sequence that, while not called contemplation of the sanctuary (C: daochang guan), are still close to the later Japanese dojokan in that they invoke the figure of the principal deity in his heavenly palace36. From a doctrinal rather than narrative perspective, the ambiguity is felicitous, since the term dojo refers to the locus of enlightenment itself. From this perspective there is no difference between the abode of the deity and that of the practitioner they are ultimately coextensive. Yet another possibility is that the Juhachi geiin was not intended to serve as a ritual manual at all but rather as a template on which manuals for individual rites might be drafted. As such, the ambiguity concerning the site to be visualized is created by the omission of any descriptive details associated with a specific deity and his divine abode; one was supposed to fill in the blanks later on. (4) Procedure for Inviting [the Deities into the Sanctuary] (kanjo ho ). The practitioner dispatches a jeweled vehicle for the deity (hosharo , #34). The deity and his retinue are beckoned into the vehicle (sho sharo , #35), whereupon they descend into the sanctuary and are welcomed by the practitioner (geisho , #36). Early commentaries note that the practitioner should imagine the carriage as adorned with jewels and Indian in appearance37. (5) Procedure for Binding and Protecting [the Sanctuary] (kechigo ho ). Horse-headed Wisdom King (Bato myoo , Bato Kannon , #39), a wrathful incarnation of Avalokitesvara, is stationed outside the sanctuary to guard the precincts38. The roof is then covered with an impregnable vajra net (kongo mo , #40), and a wall of flames is established around the perimeter (kain , #41). The sanctuary is now sealed off from the outside, making it safe from all malevolent forces. (6) Procedure For Making Offerings (kuyo ho ). This is the final and culminating section of the original eighteen methods. First, pure water

See T.930: 19.69a27 ff. and T.1085: 20.205a7 ff. respectively. See, for example, Juhachi geiin gishaku shoki, T.2475: 78.121b20. 38 In later texts, notably those associated with the Chuin-ryu, the wrathful deity Gozanze myoo (Trailokyavijaya-raja) is used instead.
37

36

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

69

is provided to wash the deitys feet (aka , #43), and lotus seats are set out for the deity to sit upon (rengeza , #44). The Juhachi geiin ends with a section simply called universal offerings (fukuyo ), in which the practitioner imagines five offerings, each limitless and boundless as the clouds or the sea: (1) powdered incense, (2) flower garlands, (3) burnt incense, (4) food and drink, and (5) light. In the Juhachi geiin these five are accomplished together with a single mantra, but later manuals will specify a separate rite for each (go kuyo , #46). They will also add offerings of music (enacted by ringing a bell, shinrei , #45), hymns (san , #47, #48), and so on. The commentaries explain the content and function of each of the offerings in terms of ancient Indian protocol for receiving and fting an honored guest. When the deity arrives the host first washes the deitys feet, as was supposedly the custom in India (although the practice was not unknown in East Asia as well)39. Commentarial discussions of the sort of seat to be offered as well as the form and function of the five offerings (incense, garlands of flowers, and so on) similarly draw on East Asian conceptions of Indian etiquette40. This is all in accord with the theme of the rite as a great Indian-style feast (kyoyo , Takai 1953: 109-110). The Invocation Procedures The enumeration of the eighteen methods and six procedures, as well as the ordinances of the Juhachi geiin, end here with the universal offerings41. The host has prepared his or her abode, summoned the guest, and provided a sumptuous meal and entertainment. Yet Shingon exegetes agree that the center piece of the rite lies in what follows, namely, the invocation procedures (nenju ho ). As noted above, in contemporary Shingon this section consists primarily of three elaborately scripted contemplations: the interpenetration of self [and deity] (nyuga-ganyu,
39 See, for example, Juhachi geiin gishaku shoki, T.2475: 78.122b29-c8, which comments at length on the qualities and symbolic significance of the water offered to the deity. 40 Ibid. T.2475: 78.122c9-123b17. 41 The Juhachi geiin gishaku shoki acknowledges that this is where the eighteen methods ends, and explains that since the procedures that follow differ according to the identity of the principal deity they are not recorded (T.2475: 78.123b17-19).

70

ROBERT H. SHARF

#51), formal invocation (shonenju, #53), and syllable-wheel contemplation (jirinkan, #55). The historical, structural, and doctrinal analyses of these three rites lies beyond the scope of this paper. Suffice it to say that they are said to unite the body, speech, and mind of the practitioner with the body, speech, and mind of the principal deity. Shingon commentators are quick to note, however, that the trope of union is yet another upaya; the rites of the three mysteries do not bring about this union so much as they give form to it. In other words, the practitioner has always been one with the deity; the rites of the three mysteries merely enact, express, or realize this primordial state of affairs42. Each of the rites of the three mysteries is punctuated by a short segment known as the empowerment of the principal deity (honzon kaji , #52, #54, #56), consisting of the recitation of the three mantras of the principal deity. The three-mysteries sequence, interspersed by this empowerment, constitutes the core of the invocation procedures (nenju ho) and the heart of all Shidokegyo rituals. The invocation procedures initiate an abrupt and somewhat dramatic shift in the liturgical narrative. The guest-host scenario is temporarily suspended, and the ritual takes a decidedly soteriological and yogic turn as the practitioner is instructed to enter meditation (nyu jo ) or enter samadhi (nyu zanmai ). This results in a two-tiered and somewhat incongruous structure that is sometimes explained by reference to the history of Buddhist Tantra. Buddhist Tantra, we are told, emerged from a deliberate attempt to appropriate popular non-Buddhist Vedic or Brahmanic rites. Yixing (683-727), in the Goma chapter of his Dapiluzhena chengfo jingshu , says that the Mahayana fire ritual was based on its Vedic counterpart in order to convert followers of the Vedas to Buddhism (T.1796: 39.779a19-21). Buddha created this teaching out of his desire to convert non-Buddhists and allow them to distinguish the true from the false. Thus he taught them the true Goma. The Buddha himself taught the very foundation of the Vedas, and in that way manifested
42 A comprehensive description of these rites along with an analysis of their symbolism and doctrinal significance can be found in Takai 1953: 192-206, and Ueda 1986: 168182. See also the discussion in Sharf 2001b: 183-187.

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

71

the correct principles and method of the true Goma. This is the Buddha Veda .43 While the Buddhist Goma may resemble the Vedic one, Yixing insists that only the Buddhist version leads to real knowledge and salvation. To this end Yixing repeatedly distinguishes between the outer Goma (wai humo ), which is the manifest physical performance of the rite, and the inner Goma (nei humo ), which takes place in the practitioners mind. The Vedas teach the outer Goma alone; the Buddhists, in contrast, understand the deeper significance and symbolism of the Goma and thus perform both inner and outer at once. The Goma fire, for example, is correctly understood by Buddhists to be the purifying wisdom of the Tathagata (T.1796: 39.662b7-13). Buddhist polemics aside, this historical or pseudo-historical account does have a certain explanatory elegance. It seems plausible that the rise, popularity, and increasing status of non-Buddhist Tantric ritual in fifthand sixth-century India led Buddhist practitioners to appropriate the new ritual technology. Buddhist scholiasts legitimized the appropriation by reinterpreting the rituals (after the fact?) according to hoary Buddhist principles. On the one hand, specific elements in the liturgies were explained as symbols for Mahayana teachings (Goma fire = Buddha wisdom). On the other hand, the entire ritual performance was rationalized as a skillful means for manifesting ones intrinsic buddha-nature and realizing the bodhisattva vows. The constant refrain running throughout Yixings commentary, and indeed all East Asian Esoteric exegesis, is that the practitioner must envisage his or her body as the body of the principal deity44. In a single stroke the guest-host narrative of the Indian puja rites dedicated to a bewildering menagerie of deities is rendered a mere upaya for the realization of inherent buddhahood. The early Chinese manuals supposedly translations from Indic originals lend further support to this theory. Recall that the locus classicus for the eighteen methods, the Juhachi geiin, abruptly ends at the conclusion of the offering section, prior to the more soteriologically oriented
T.1796: 39.780b11-15; see the discussion in Toganoo 1982b: 85-86. See, for example, T.1796: 39.582a26, 688c5, 688c12-13, 701a6, 752b21, 781c2729, and so on.
44 43

72

ROBERT H. SHARF

procedure for invocation. There is, as it were, no room for the invocation/contemplation procedures in this stripped down version of the guesthost paradigm. Most of the Chinese precursors of the eighteen methods do, however, continue past the guest-host narrative; the offering section is followed by a wide miscellany of samadhis, discernments (guan ), contemplations (nian ), recitations (niansong ), and so on, all of which foreground traditional Mahayana doctrine and soteriological goals. The offerings in the Wuliangshou rulai guanxing gongyang yigui, for example, are followed by a series of mantra recitations and guided contemplations centered around Amitabha and Avalokitesvara45. These practices are said to induce a samadhi wherein the practitioners body becomes indistinguishable from the body of the deity (T.930: 19.71a28-29). The power of this samadhi, claims the text, will bring about the eradication of defilement, allowing the practitioner to attain the highest level of rebirth in the Pure Land at death. The Guanzizai pusa ruyilun niansong yigui, another text that closely follows the juhachido structure, has a similar series of recitations (song santan jie ), contemplations (siwei ) of the principal deity, mantras, and dharai following the offerings (T.1085: 20.206a18 ff.). These practices culminate in the repeated recitation of the principal deitys mantra such that the mind comes to rest in the samadhi of the principal deity (206b22). The text goes on to promise those who practice the rite three times a day freedom from defilement, the attainment of wisdom, perfection of samadhi, a vision of the deity, and so on, just as it says in the scriptures (206c3-5). The meditative exercises described in these Tang manuals are invariably framed in terms of traditional Mahayana doctrine and soteriology. At the same time, the meditations and recitations seem less mechanical or scripted than the concatenation of mantra/mudra units comprising the earlier guest-host sequence. The Tang texts grant the practitioner greater latitude and flexibility in his or her approach to the invocation procedures, a flexibility redolent of more traditional Buddhist meditative practices (bhavana). The ad hoc quality of the invocation procedures in the
45 The offerings are accomplished with the Offering of the Great Wish-fulfilling Gem (guangda bukong mani gongyang ) mudra and accompanying dharai (T.930: 19.70b6ff.).

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

73

early manuals is further evidence of an underlying two tier structure to the rites. As the rites developed in Japan, the invocation procedures following the offerings became more routinized, and by the medieval period they had come to assume the set form still practiced today: three discrete rites corresponding to the three mysteries. It is unclear, however, exactly when and how this transformation occurred. Two of the three-mysteries rites the all important interpenetration of self [and deity] and syllable-wheel contemplation do not appear in any of the Chinese sources for the eighteen methods. Indeed, they rarely appear in Chinese texts at all, and when they do they are not identified with the specific mysteries of body and mind46. Nor are they found in the Juhachido manuals attributed to Kukai. They do appear, however, in several other ritual manuals ascribed to Kukai, suggesting an early date for the establishment of these rites as set pieces in the Shingon curriculum47. Even then, with few exceptions, the early manuals do not construe the interpenetration of self [and deity] and syllable-wheel contemplation as part of the three-mysteries sequence48. In fact, the various invocation procedures found in the early manuals attributed to Kukai appear relatively fluid, with considerable variation from rite to rite much like their Chinese prototypes. One frequently comes
46 For a rare appearance of the phrase ruwo woru in the Chinese Buddhist canon see the Jingangdingjing dayuqie bimi xindi famen yijue (T.1798: 39.813b15-17). Among the few Chinese references to contemplating the syllable wheel (guan zilun ) see the Achu rulai niansong gongyang fa (T.921: 19.15c11, 19c12), and Yixings Dapiluzhena chengfo jingshu (T.1796: 39.689c9). 47 Mention of nyuga-ganyu is found, for example, in the Senju Kannon gyoho shidai (KDZ 2.552), Jiho kongo nenju shidai (KDZ 2.567; cf. 2.580; 4.787), Mujin shogonzo shidai (KDZ 4.506), Taizo bizai shidai (KDZ 4.616; cf. 4.659), Taizokai unji shidai (KDZ 4.694), Shugokyo nenju shidai (KDZ 4.768), and Shari ho (KDZ 4.772). The jirinkan is found in the Kongokai dai giki (KDZ 4.487), Taizo bizai shidai (KDZ 4.617; cf. 4.659), Taizokai unji shidai (KDZ 4.694), Shugokyo nenju shidai (KDZ 4.769), and Shari ho (KDZ 4.773). 48 Two notable exceptions are the sequences found in the Taizo bizai shidai (KDZ 4.616; cf. 4.659) and Taizokai unji shidai (KDZ 4.694). In both cases the sequences are almost identical to the one found in later medieval manuals, such as the manuals by Gengo, that form the basis of the modern rite. This may be evidence of a relatively late date for the Taizo bizai shidai and Taizokai unji shidai.

74

ROBERT H. SHARF

across units such as formal recitation (shonenju) and entry into meditation (nyu jo )49, yet the specific liturgical content of these segments was not yet systematized. Moreover, there are several instances in which the specific contemplations now associated with the interpenetration of self [and deity] and syllable-wheel contemplation are not identified as discrete units under those headings, but simply appear as part of other liturgical units50. It likely took several generations for the rites to crystallize into their current forms, but given the problems dating the extant manuals it would be difficult to determine precisely how this happened. In any case, the available evidence of the Chinese and early Japanese manuals suggests that the two-tiered structure of the Shidokegyo rites is the result of a complex historical evolution, in which the Vedic guesthost narrative was both legitimized and confounded by the superimposition of an explicitly Mahayana bhavana segment. This bhavana segment was originally less structured and routinized than the rites of the guest-host narrative, which is not surprising given the greater antiquity of the guest-host rites. In any case, the guest-host sequence was reinterpreted in light of the bhavana segment, transforming the entire rite into an extended meditation on, statement about, or performance of ones inherent buddha-nature. One might view this transformation as conceptually elegant and clever, or clumsy and confusing, depending upon ones point of view. Needless to say, such value judgments were not germane to traditional exegetes. These exegetes were, however, forced to confront the confusions that arose from the imposition of two somewhat discordant narratives. The Dispersed Invocations The structural ambiguity of the rite comes to a head in the dispersed invocations (sannenju , #57), the segment that follows the three mysteries in the Shidokegyo liturgies. The dispersed invocations are followed by the latter offerings (go kuyo ), a ritual sequence that
49 See, for example, the Mujin shogonzo shidai (KDZ 4.506); and Saho shidai (KDZ 2.499, cf. KDZ 2.523). 50 See, for example, the Saho shidai (KDZ 2.503-504).

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

75

resumes the guest-host narrative and brings the ritual to a close. If only by virtue of their position in the rite, the dispersed invocations serve to negotiate the gap between the soteriological program of the three mysteries and the guest-host narrative that returns in the latter offerings. The latter offerings consist of many of the same procedures found in the eighteen methods, except that they are performed in reverse order and often abbreviated. Thus it begins with the five offerings and proceeds to offerings of water, music, hymns, and so on. Following these offerings there is a dedication of merit (eko , #64), a standard element appearing near the close of all Buddhist rites. The sanctuary is then unsealed: the encircling flames and the vajra net are removed, Horse-headed Wisdom King is relieved from sentry duty, the vajra wall is withdrawn, and the principal deity is dispatched back to his abode (hakken , #67). The rite closes with a repeat of a few of the apotropaic procedures that opened the performance (goshin bo). The final offerings serve as a denouement of the guest-host narrative, running the sequence in reverse. The dispersed invocations that precede the latter offerings consist of a group of mantras that are repeated anywhere from seven to one thousand times each. The specific mantras used vary depending on the rite, the lineage (ryu), and the principal deity, although three of the mantras Buddha-locana (Butsugen )51, Mahavajracakra (Dai kongorin ), and Ekakara-uiacakra (Ichiji kinrin , Ichiji chorinno ) always appear52. In the Chuin-ryu Juhachido for example, in which Mahavairocana is the principal deity, the mantras used in the dispersed invocations consist of (1) Buddha-locana, repeated twenty-one times; (2) Garbhakosadhatu Mahavairocana, repeated one hundred times53; (3) Vajradhatu Mahavairocana, repeated one thousand times;

51 The Sanskrit reconstruction of the Buddha-locana mantra, which appears at the beginning and end of the dispersed invocations, is: Namo bhagavat-uia om ruru sphuru jvala-tiha-siddha-locani sarvartha-sadhaniye svaha. Miyata and Todaro render this into English as Homage to the uisa of the Bhagavat! Om Speak! Speak! Fill up! Radiate! Remain! Oh, the gaze of the accomplished ones! May you accomplish all aims! Svaha (1988: Eighteen Rites, 31). 52 For an account of why these three mantras are always present see Raiyus Usuzoshi kuketsu , T.2535: 79.178b27-c11. 53 Reconstructed as: Om a vi ra hum kham (Om, followed by five seed syllables).

76

ROBERT H. SHARF

(4) the Four Buddhas Akobhya (Ashuku-nyorai ), Ratnasabhava (Hosho-nyorai ), Amitayus (Amida-nyorai ), and Amoghasiddhi (Fuku-joju ), repeated one hundred times each; (5) Vajrasattva (Kongo satta ), repeated one hundred times; (6) Trailokyavijaya-raja (Gozanze myoo ), repeated twentyone times; (7) Mahavajracakra, repeated seven times; (8) Ekakarauiacakra, repeated one hundred times; and (9) Buddha-locana, repeated seven times54. These mantras need not be accompanied by any specific contemplation; the manuals say only that the practitioner repeats the mantras using the rosary with hands forming the preaching the dharma mudra (seppo no in )55. The mantras of the dispersed invocations, like most Japanese mantras, consist of Japanese pronunciations of Chinese transliterations of Sanskrit invocations, making it difficult for most priests to discern the semantic content (if indeed there is any) of the underlying Sanskrit phrases. (Contemporary training manuals and scholarly commentaries often provide Sanskrit reconstructions, Japanese translations, and explanations of the mantras.) As there are close to two thousand repetitions to perform, the dispersed invocations can take upwards of an hour to complete, constituting one-third to one-half of the duration of the rite. Given their duration and their placement within the ritual sequence situated immediately after the climax of the three mysteries one might suppose that the dispersed invocations comprise a particularly important section of the Shidokegyo practices. Yet traditional Shingon commentators have little to say about the meaning and function of this segment, and what they do say is often vague and equivocal. The meaning of the term sannenju itself is ambiguous (see below), and my use of dispersed invocations is little more than an expedient; supplemental or scattered invocations might serve just as well.
This list, typical of Chuin-ryu manuals, is taken from Oyama 1987: 129-133, and Nakagawa 1986: Juhachido. The mantras will differ depending in part on the identity of the principal deity used for the rite. On the dispersed invocations, in addition to Oyama see Toganoo 1982b: 66-67; Takai 1953: 206-208; Tanaka 1962: 147-148; Ueda 1986: 182-187; Miyata 1984: 91-94; Sawa 1975: 271b; Foguang da cidian zongwu weiyuanhui 1989: 5.4973c-d; Nakamura 1981: 496d; and Ding 1984: 1145d. 55 The rosary is used along with counting sticks to keep track of mantra recitations.
54

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

77

The confusions are in part due to the absence of authoritative textual sources for the dispersed invocations. The sannenju segment does not appear in any of the dozens of Chinese texts on which the Shidokegyo liturgies were based; nor does it appear in the Juhachi geiin, which concludes, as mentioned above, with the offerings at the end of the eighteen methods56. The dispersed invocations are mentioned, however, in many of the manuals attributed to Kukai, including the Juhachido nenju shidai (KDZ 2.627)57. And even when the term sannenju does not appear, early Shingon ritual manuals that conform to the eighteen-methods structure will often prescribe mantra recitations immediately following the three-mysteries rites; these recitations appear to be the functional equivalent of the sannenju. The absence of a canonical Chinese precedent meant that Japanese practitioners enjoyed considerable latitude in their approach to the dispersed invocations. Manuals and commentaries agree that practitioners or at least advanced practitioners (itatsu ) are free to add, subtract, or substitute mantras in accord with their own predilections, to augment or decrease the prescribed number of recitations, or to omit this section entirely. Accordingly, the dispersed invocations were also known as the discretionary invocations (zuii nenju ), and some medieval commentators alternate freely between the two terms58. Moreover, the
56 I have found only a single reference to the term san niansong in the Esoteric teachings section (mikkyo bu ) of the Taisho canon. This is in the Yaoshi yigui yizhu (T.924c: 19.32c23), a text of uncertain authorship and provenance, but here it refers to a segment occurring before the major invocations of the rite, and hence it appears of limited relevance to the discussion at hand. The Jingangdingjing yuqie shibahui zhigui translated by Amoghavajra contains a reference to an esoteric dispersed recitation that augments skillful means (bimi zhucheng fangbian sansong , T.869: 18.286a22). This locution may have influenced Kukais use of the phrase to sannenju shitchi hoben in the Ninno hannyakyo nenju shidai (KDZ 4.751); see the discussion in Ueda 1986: 183. 57 The sannenju is also mentioned in the following manuals ascribed to Kukai: Fudo myoo nenju shidai (KDZ 2.677), Saho shidai (KDZ 2.507); Issai nyorai taisho kongo shidai (KDZ 2.609); Taizo bizai shidai (KDZ 4.617); Taizo bonji shidai (KDZ 2.286); Bizai shidai (KDZ 4.659); Gumonji shidai (KDZ 4.701); and Ninno hannyakyo nenju shidai (KDZ 4.751). Usually the texts simply say, Next, the dispersed invocations , although occasionally, as in the Fudo myoo nenju shidai and Issai nyorai taisho kongo shidai, the text will list the names of the mantras to be used. 58 See, for example, the Taizokai nenju shidai yoshuki by Goho (SZ 25.519b). Kukais Saho shidai contains a short gloss under the sannenju saying it is optional (nini ;

78

ROBERT H. SHARF

dispersed invocations are not found in the liturgies of the Tendai esoteric tradition (Taimitsu ), marking it as one of the few notable differences between the Shidokegyo rites of the Tendai and Shingon schools. The origins and meaning of the term sannenju are unclear59. Commentators typically begin their discussions of the term by opposing the sannenju to the shonenju or formal invocation of the three-mysteries segment60. In its narrow sense, the formal invocation refers to the second of the three mysteries the mystery of speech (gomitsu ) realized through a stylized recitation of the mantra of the principal deity accompanied by an elaborate contemplation of the mantra circulating between the deity and the practitioner. However, the term formal invocation can also denote the entire three-mysteries sequence. In either case, the sho of shonenju is interpreted as formal, solemn, and direct, while san is understood as scattered, dispersed, and diffuse (santa ). Whereas the shonenju is a highly stylized invocation directed toward the principal deity alone, the sannenju is a less stringent scattering of invocations among a variety of supplementary deities. Thus the shonenju, which is accompanied by a mudra as well as an elaborate visualization, is considered the primary recitation, while the sannenju, which is accompanied by a mudra alone, is treated as secondary. Commentators also suggest that the sho of shonenju has the sense of shoshin , meaning a focused or directed mind, in contrast to san as sanshin meaning a diffused or even distracted 61 mind. According to this reading, during the three-mysteries segment

KDZ 2.507). And the reference to the dispersed invocations in the Juhachido sata by Kakuban lists the mantras to be included in this section, namely Buddha-locana, Mahavairocana, Trailokyavijaya-raja, Vajrasattva, and Acalanatha, following which one can continue at ones own discretion (sonogo zuii ; T.2517: 79.26c8). Lexical sources note other names for the sannenju as well, including supplementary invocations (kayo nenju ), and miscellaneous invocations (shozo nenju ; Foguang da cidian zongwu weiyuanhui 1989: 5.4973b; Sawa 1975: 271b). 59 See the sources mentioned in note 54 above. 60 The shonenju is also known as sanmaya nenju , jo nenju , and kaji nenju (Sawa 1975: 388b-389a). 61 See, for example, Ueda 1986: 182, who cites chapter six of the Zuigyo shisho .

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

79

the practitioner is one with the deity, in a state of meditation (jochu ) in which the practitioner enters into the deitys samadhi. In the dispersed invocations that follow, the practitioner emerges from samadhi in order to fulfill the bodhisattva vows, enlightening others by scattering mantras in all directions. How, one might ask, is the practitioner to practice if the mind is scattered? This question is raised in the Juhachido kuketsu by Raiyu, who provides one of the more detailed discussions of the dispersed invocations62. Citing the Hizoki (thought to be Kukais record of Huiguos teaching), Raiyu says that the practitioner and the deity have both merged into the single dharma realm (ichi hokkai ) during the previous invocations, and thus the practitioner is able to retain control even though his or her mind is scattered. Having just merged with the deity, the practitioner is able to reenter the phenomenal world while remaining identified with the principal deity63. Raiyu goes on to equate the formal invocation with meditation and the dispersed invocations with wisdom 64 . Modern commentators pick up this opposition, saying that the formal invocation is the practice of inner realization (jinaisho no homon ), while the dispersed invocations effect the liberation of others (keta )65. The liberation of others is achieved through the invocation of a host of deities (shoson ) that have a karmic bond (en ) with either the principal deity or the practitioner, thereby augmenting the grace and power of the principal deity (Tanaka 1962: 147). The structural relationship between the formal invocation and the dispersed invocations is thus equated with the standard Mahayana moieties of buddha versus bodhisattva, emptiness versus skillful means, and so on.
T.2529: 79.70b11-c4. See also his Usuzoshi kuketsu, T.2535: 79.178b22-179a1. Moriya Eishun , a priest at Kofukuji, explained this to me by saying that during the sannenju the wandering mind of the practitioner is identical with the wandering mind of the principal deity, eliminating the need for any prescribed contemplations to accompany the sannenju recitations. 64 T.2529: 79.70c3. Raiyu also comments that since the dispersed invocations do not appear in the scriptures and early recitation manuals, it is optional in the Rishoin-ryu . 65 Tanaka 1962: 147. Tanaka notes that, according to exegetes such as Kakuban, the formal invocation is also effective in liberating others.
62 63

80

ROBERT H. SHARF

Ritual Incoherence One question that arises is how, if at all, the dispersed invocations fit into the overall narrative program of the Shidokegyo rituals. We have seen that there is a break between (1) the offerings segment that complete the traditional eighteen methods, and (2) the enactment of the three mysteries that follows. At best, the rites of the three mysteries would seem to render the preceding guest-host narrative an upaya; the true relationship between practitioner and deity is not that of host and guest after all but rather one of identity. Yet the guest-host narrative recommences with the latter offerings that follow the dispersed invocations. If this denouement to the narrative, in which the host unbinds the sanctuary and bids farewell to the guest, is taken at face value, then at what point in the narrative does the practitioner emerge from samadhi and disengage from the deity? This question bears directly on the narrative significance and function of the dispersed invocations. Commentators have explored, explicitly or implicitly, three possibilities. The first is that the practitioner disengages from the deity and reverts to his or her former self with the commencement of the dispersed invocations. The dispersed invocations then represent the activity of a bodhisattva; the practitioner, having reentered the marketplace (to borrow a popular Zen image), scatters invocations for the liberation of all sentient beings. The second possibility is that the dispersed invocations are themselves intended to reintegrate the practitioner into the world; they facilitate a gradual and controlled emergence from samadhi66. The third possibility is that the entire sequence of dispersed invocations is performed while ensconced in the samadhi of the principal deity. There is a certain elegance to the last position, according to which the dispersed invocations are the manifest performance of the principal deity himself. This renders the dramatic narrative of the Shidokegyo rituals structurally analogous to the performance of a shaman or spirit
66 See esp. Miyata 1984: 91-94, who views everything following the three mysteries as a gradual process of dissociation. According to Miyata, the process continues through the dispersed invocations to the latter offerings, the unsealing of the realm, and the departure of the deity.

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

81

medium, in which the raison dtre of the ritual prologue is to efface the agency of the practitioner and invoke in his place the presence of the deity. In Shingon, this is viewed not as possession, of course, but rather as an extended communion, referred to as reciprocal resonance [with the deity] (kanno doko ), wherein practitioner and god act in total accord67. This should not be construed merely as an interior meditative state; rather, the physical activity of the performer is precisely the physical activity of the embodied deity (sokushin jobutsu ). This is how the practitioner is instructed to approach the fourth and final rite of the Shidokegyo sequence, namely, the Goma. Like all Shidokegyo rites, the Goma ritual is built around the eighteen methods of the juhachido. But there is an important difference: the Kongokai and Taizokai rituals are constructed as expansions of the Juhachido rite, with dozens of additional ritual elements interspersed among those of the Juhachido. The Goma, in contrast, is constructed by taking the entire fire ritual segment and nesting it whole in the midst of the Juhachido dispersed invocations. Thus the Shidokegyo Goma opens with the Juhachido sequence, running it all the way through the main offerings, threemysteries invocations, and most but not all of the dispersed invocations. The fire ritual proper commences just before the final three mantras of the dispersed invocations (Mahavajracakra, Ekakara-uiacakra, and Buddha-locana). When the Goma is complete the practitioner performs the three mantras that remain from the dispersed invocations and then continues through the latter offerings of the Juhachido (Takai 1953: 389). The fire ritual is thus framed by the recitations of the dispersed invocations, and the practitioner is to remain in a state of unity with the principal deity throughout the fire offerings. In the end, there is little agreement among traditional or modern Japanese exegetes as to the specific point at which the practitioner emerges from samadhi the point at which, according to the logic of the narrative, guest and host are not one but two. This narrative ambiguity mirrors an ambiguity in the rites underlying soteriology.
67 Toganoo 1982b: 66. On the notion of reciprocal accord with the deity see Hizoki, KDZ 2.36; Toganoo 1982b: 151; and Sharf 2002: 77-133.

82

ROBERT H. SHARF

Mahayana notions of tathagatagarbha and intrinsic buddha-nature gave rise to a conundrum that captivated generations of scholiasts: if buddhanature is innate, why practice? The Zen patriarch Dogen (12001253) is often associated with the response that one practices not in order to attain buddhahood but in order to manifest it. But in various guises this solution to the problem predates Dogen by many centuries, and Dogens own approach may have been influenced by his mikkyo training at Enryakuji . In any case, Shingon ritual is predicated on a view of the phenomenal universe as the theophany of the dharmakaya, a view that confutes, at least in theory, the notion that Shingon ritual is intended to bring about a fundamental change in the ontological status of either the practitioner or the world. The point of the rites, in other words, is not the attainment of buddhahood but rather its expression. This expression takes the form of an elaborately scripted drama wherein the practitioner compels the presence of a buddha only to reveal that the buddha was never absent68. Among other things, this notion provides doctrinal justification for the seemingly obsessive character of mikkyo ritual; since there is no ultimate goal to be achieved, one is left, like Soto practitioners of zazen, with practice for its own sake. This also provides conceptual grounds for the ambiguity in the ritual narrative noted above: from the standpoint of tathagatagarbha theory and the doctrine of intrinsic buddha-nature, it makes little sense to mark a ritual moment at which one ceases to be a buddha. Finally, a similar conceptual ambiguity can be discerned in the treatment of the central image (honzon) enshrined on East Asian Buddhist

68 This is made explicit throughout the liturgical recitations and contemplations of the Shingon ritual manuals. Take, for example, the interpenetration of self [and deity], the first of the three-mysteries rites which brings about the union of the body of the practitioner and the body of the deity. The contemplation associated with this rite reads: The principal deity sits on a maala. I sit on a maala. The principal deity enters my body and my body enters the body of the principal deity. It is like many luminous mirrors facing each other, their images interpenetrating each other (Miyano and Mizuhara 1933: Nyoirin 27-28; cf. Ozawa 1962: Juhachido 78-79). Traditional exegetes interpret the use of the mirror image as showing that the body of the principal deity does not literally enter the practitioner; rather, one is to look upon the principal deity as if gazing at ones own reflection. The body of the principal deity and the body of the practitioner have always subsumed each other (Takai 1953: 194).

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

83

temple altars. In order to be ritually efficacious, such images must be consecrated in an eye-opening (kaigen ) ceremony when first installed. Such a consecration transforms an image from a mere physical likeness into a vivified icon that literally embodies the deity69. At the same time, if one looks at the structure of the services regularly performed before such images (J: kuyo , from Sk: puja, rites of offering), they typically involve a ritual segment, however brief, that invites the deity to descend into the image70. This raises the question: if the icon was successfully consecrated at the time of its installation, thereby transforming it into the living body of a deity, what need is there to request the descent of the deity yet again at the time of worship? Is this merely a case of ritual anxiety fueling a ritual obsession that betrays a lingering doubt over the efficacy of the rites? Phyllis Granoff has argued that this confusion can be explained by reference to the historical evolution of image worship in India71. According to Granoff, the two moments of invocation one during the initial consecration of the image and the other during regular feedings may derive from two different paradigms of worship that became incorporated into the later image cult. One is an earlier Vedic model, in which the worshipper must solicit the presence of the deity prior to each sacrifice. This paradigm was established long before the use of sacred icons in India; Brahmin priests invoked invisible beings on an altar that was often a temporary structure built specifically for the occasion. The spread of the cult of the image is associated with a later Puraic mode of worship focused around a consecrated icon permanently enshrined in a temple72. The image, which some believe was introduced from Greece, was approached as the animate physical incarnation of the
69 See Sharf 2001a; for references to the secondary literature on eye-opening ceremonies see Sharf 2001b: 248n. 64. 70 This is true of both exoteric (kengyo ) and esoteric (mikkyo) Buddhism, but as far as I am aware only in the latter case is the deity explicitly sent back to his or her abode at the close of the rite. 71 See Granoff 2001, n.d.a, and n.d.b. I want to thank Phyllis Granoff for generously sharing and discussing her unpublished work with me. 72 It is worth noting that the gap between these two paradigms was so great that the orthodox Brahmin priests originally distanced themselves from and castigated the emerging temple cult.

84

ROBERT H. SHARF

deity. The icon/deity became a permanent resident in the community; it needed to be bathed, dressed, fed, and entertained on a regular basis. But the earlier Vedic paradigm was soon superimposed on the treatment of these images; Vedic-style incantations (mantras) were used to impel the deitys descent at the initial consecration and again during regular puja offerings. The Buddhist treatment of images appears to be based on this pan-Indian synthesis of Vedic and Puraic models. (In Shingon, the Vedic antecedents are somewhat more pronounced, as a new temporary altar is ritually constructed during the course of each performance.) If Granoff is correct, then the ambiguities, if not the discursive incoherence, that result from the fusion of Vedic and Puraic modes of worship is analogous in many respects to the narrative ambiguities that result from the fusion of Vedic ritual and Mahayana bhavana found in the East Asian Esoteric rites discussed above.

Ritual Meaning My musings on the history of Buddhist ritual and image worship are just that: the musings of an outsider based largely on the evidence of ritual texts the provenance and historical development of which are still poorly understood. Historical questions aside, however, my overview of the narrative content, structural logic, and doctrinal import of the ritual procedures is by no means an etic imposition. The guest-host narrative is made explicit in the sequence of Shidokegyo ritual procedures and is further amplified in oral and written commentaries from early on. Moreover, basic Shingon teachings concerning ones identity with the principal deity, the dependently arisen nature of all phenomena, the bodhisattva vows, and so on, are reiterated ad nauseam in the content of Shidokegyo recitations and contemplations73.

73 For example, the culminating moment of the Shidokegyo rites is the ritual identification of the mind of the deity with the mind of the practitioner. This takes place in the syllable-wheel contemplation, which consists in a Madhyamika-style deconstruction of the principal deitys mantra. According to the discursive logic of this rite, to appreciate the dependently arisen nature of the deitys mantra, and thus the emptiness of the deity himself, is precisely to become one with the deitys mind. See Sharf 2001b: 184-185.

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

85

In a parenthetical comment earlier in this paper I suggested that what makes tantra tantra, in any critical cross-cultural sense, lies not in its meanings but in its techniques. Tantra is an applied knowledge pertaining to the use of a cornucopia of ritual implements, icons, occult gestures and utterances. These techniques were adopted into diverse religious contexts across Asia and reinterpreted in the light of local tradition. There is thus no reason to assume that the specifically Shingon understanding of the narrative or doctrinal content of the rites examined above is commensurate with non-Buddhist interpretations of Tantra found in South or Southeast Asia. Buddhist exegetes would agree with this assessment, since by their own account the Buddha borrowed the outward forms of Vedic worship and supplied them with new Mahayana meanings. But by the same measure, any robust account of Shingon Tantra must acknowledge the discursive content of the rites that was salient in the Shingon school. Each element in the rite was understood in the context of this content its place in the overarching guest-host narrative and modifications to the ritual form were made in full awareness of their narrative and doctrinal consequences. As such, Staals thesis as to the essential invariance and meaninglessness of ritual cannot stand, for in Shingon we have a sophisticated ritual tradition of considerable antiquity in which (1) rituals underwent continual, albeit incremental, change, and (2) semantic content clearly mattered. This still leaves us with the question as to why anyone would perform these rites in the first place. Here Staal raises an important point, for the meanings themselves cannot account for or justify the tremendous commitment of human and institutional resources necessary for the performance of these rites. Considerable expense is involved in the acquisition and preparation of the essential ritual paraphernalia, and a monastery must be willing to offer material support to the priests in cloistered retreat. More important, the rituals themselves are hard work: the retreats are long, arduous, and mentally and physically exhausting. Why spend years of ones life perfecting a surfeit of rites that all end up saying much the same thing? Any full response to this question must take into account a host of sociological and psychological factors, bearing on everything from institutional structure, to issues of social status, to questions of identity formation and personal faith issues that cannot be addressed here. But our

86

ROBERT H. SHARF

response must also take into account the power and allure of the rituals themselves, an allure derived in part from the narrative explored above. This narrative situates the practitioner as the protagonist in a dramatic encounter with powerful and mysterious forces. The constructed, fictive, dramatic, and patently playful aspects of the encounter make it no less enchanting74.

74

See Sharf n.d. for an analysis of the element of play in the workings of ritual.

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

87

APPENDIX
Procedural Sequence for the Eighteen-Methods Practice (Juhachido nenju shidai ) The following outline of the Eighteen Methods sequence is that used by contemporary priests in the Sanboin-ryu, in which Nyoirin Kannon functions as the principal deity (see Ozawa 1962: Juhachido, and Takai 1953: 109-216). Among the prototypes for the contemporary rite, the most influential manual is the Shonyoirin Kanjizai bosatsu nenju shidai by Gengo (914-995). Gengos manual is in turn based on the Juhachi geiin , Juhachido nenju shidai , and Juhachido kubi shidai , all of which are attributed to Kukai. The symbol indicates a procedure included in the traditional list of eighteen procedures traced to the Juhachi geiin. The symbol indicates a section included in the six practices (rokuho ). Various ritual purifications precede the formal entrance to the hall. SECTION ONE: PROCEDURE FOR ADORNING THE PRACTITIONER 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Enter the Sanctuary Universal Prostration [to all Tathagatas] Sit Down Separate the Implements Universal Prostration (as above) Rub Powdered Incense (Powdered incense is rubbed on the hands and arms, and then across the chest, anointing the five-part dharma-body .) Contemplate the Three Mysteries (This contemplation uses the um syllable to purify body, speech, and mind.) The following five procedures constitute the goshin bo , or bodily purification and protection. Purify the Three Karmic Actions (body, speech, mind) Buddha Family Assembly Lotus Family Assembly Vajra Family Assembly

8. 9. 10. 11.

88

ROBERT H. SHARF

12.

Don Armor and Protect the Body

SECTION TWO: THE VOWS OF SAMANTABHADRA 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Empower the Perfumed Water (ambrosia) Empower the Implements Contemplate the Character ran Purify the Earth Contemplate the Buddhas Arouse the Vajra Universal Prostration Declaration of Intent Sutra Offerings to Divine Spirits Five Repentances (Samantabhadras vows) Purify the Three Karmic Actions (as above) Universal Prostration (as above) Give rise to the Mind of Awakening (Bodhicitta) Three Samaya Precepts Recite the Vows Five Great Vows (to save all beings, to cultivate all merits and wisdoms, to awaken to all the dharma-gates, to serve all tathagatas, and to realize unexcelled awakening) Universal Offering

27.

SECTION THREE: PROCEDURE FOR BINDING THE [SACRED] REALM 28. 29. 30. Great Vajra Wheel Bind the Earth (also called the Vajra Pillar) Bind the Perimeter, or the Vajra Wall

SECTION FOUR: PROCEDURE FOR ADORNING THE SANCTUARY 31. 32. 33. Contemplate the Sanctuary Universal Offerings of the Great Sky-Repository Small Vajra Wheel

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

89

SECTION FIVE: PROCEDURE FOR INVITING [THE DEITIES INTO THE SANCTUARY] 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Send Forth the Jeweled Vehicle Invite the Deities to Ascend the Vehicle and Ride to the Sanctuary Welcome the Deities Four Syllable Mantra Clap Hands (in welcome)

SECTION SIX: PROCEDURE FOR BINDING AND PROTECTING [THE SANCTUARY] 39. 40. 41. 42. ( ) Invoke the Horse-headed Wisdom King Sky Net (or Vajra Net) Vajra Fire Great Samaya [Assembly]

SECTION SEVEN: PROCEDURE FOR MAKING OFFERINGS 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. Offer Pure Water Offer Lotus Seats Offer the [Five Pronged] Vajra and Bell Five Offerings (powdered incense, garland, burnt incense, food and drink, light) Eulogy of the Four Wisdoms (accompanied by clapping) Eulogy to the Principal Deity Offer the Great Wish-fulfilling Gem (or Universal Offerings) Worship the Buddhas [Names]

SECTION EIGHT: PROCEDURE FOR INVOCATION 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. ( Interpenetration of Self [and Deity] ) Empowerment of the Principal Deity Formal Invocation Empowerment of the Principal Deity (as above, 52) Syllable Wheel Contemplation Empowerment of the Principal Deity (as above, 52) Dispersed Invocations

90

ROBERT H. SHARF

SECTION NINE: LATTER OFFERINGS 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. Five Offerings (as above, 46) Offer Pure Water (as above, 43) Latter Offering of Bell and Vajra (as above, 45) Eulogy (as above, 47) Universal Offering with the Verses of the Three Strengths (as above, 27) Worship the Buddhas [Names] (as above, 50) Dedication of Merits Five Repentances and Vows of a Sincere Mind Release the Realm, consisting of the following five segments, in the reverse of their order above: Great Samaya [Assembly] (as above, 42) Vajra Fire (as above, 41) Sky Net (as above, 40) Horse-headed Wisdom King (as above, 39) Vajra Wall (as above, 30) Send Off [the Principal Deity and His Assembly] Three-fold Samaya Don Armor and Protect the Body (as above, 12) Universal Prostration Leave the Sanctuary

67. 68. 69. 70. 71.

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

91

Works Cited Abbreviations KDZ SZ T Kobo Daishi zenshu . 6 vols. Edited by Sofu senyokai . Tokyo: Rokudai shinposha, 1910. Shingonshu zensho . 44 vols. Edited by Shingonshu zensho kankokai . Koyasan: Koyasan daigaku, 1933-36. Taisho daizokyo . 100 vols. Edited by Takakusu Junjiro and Watanabe Kaigyoku . Tokyo: Taisho issaikyo kankokai, 1924-32. Texts are indicated by the text number (T.) followed by the volume and (when appropriate) page, register (a, b, or c), and line number(s).

Premodern Ritual Manuals and Commentaries Achu rulai niansong gongyang fa . Trans. Amoghavajra. T.921: 19. Bizai shidai . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 4.620-663. Dabao guangbo louge shanzhu bimi tuoluoni jing . Trans. Amoghavajra. T.1005a: 19. Dapiluzhena chengfo jingshu . Yixing . T.1796: 39. Issai nyorai daisho kongo shidai . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 2.605-610. Fudo myoo nenju shidai . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 2.656-678. Guanzizai pusa ruyilun yuqie . Trans. Amoghavajra. T.1086: 20. Guanzizai pusa ruyilun niansong yigui . Trans. Amoghavajra. T.1085: 20. Gumonji shidai . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 4.698-702. Jiho kongo nenju shidai . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 2.556-570. Jingangding lianhuabu xinniansong yigui . Trans. Amoghavajra. T.873: 18. Jingangdingjing dayuqie bimi xindi famen yijue . Amoghavajra. T.1798: 39. Jingangdingjing yuqie shibahui zhigui . Trans. Amoghavajra. T.869: 18. Juhachi geiin . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 2.634-645. Juhachi geiin gishaku shoki . Jojin . T.2475: 78. Juhachido kubi shidai . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 2.611-612. Juhachido kuketsu . Raiyu . T.2529: 79. Juhachido nenju shidai . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 2.616-628. Juhachido sata . Kakuban . T.2517: 79. Kongokai dai giki . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 4.466-496. Kongokai daiho taijuki . Annen . T.2391: 75. Kongokai kue mikki . Gengo . T.2471: 78.

92

ROBERT H. SHARF

Mujin shogonzo shidai . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 4.497-531. Ninno hannyakyo nenju shidai . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 4.720-752. Saho shidai . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 2.495-508. Sanmitsu shoryoken . Kakucho . T.2399: 75. Senju Kannon gyoho shidai . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 2.533-554. Shari ho . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 4.770-773. Sheng huanxitian shifa . Trans. Prajacakra (Zhihuilun ). T.1275: 21. Shiba qiyin . Attr. Huiguo . T.900: 18. (This is a reprint, with minor changes, of the Juhachi geiin; see above.) Shingon denju saho . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 4.417-422. Shonyoirin Kanjizai bosatsu nenju shidai . Gengo . Shugokyo nenju shidai . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 4.755-769. Taizo bizai shidai . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 4.559-617. Taizo bonji shidai . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 2.247-290. Taizokai daiho taijuki . Annen . T.2390: 75. Taizokai nenju shidai yoshuki . Goho . SZ 25.1-519. Taizokai shoki . Kakucho . T.2404: 75. Taizokai unji shidai . Attr. Kukai . KDZ 4.665-697. Usuzoshi kuketsu . Raiyu . T.2535: 79. Wuliangshou rulai guanxing gongyang yigui . Trans. Amoghavajra. T.930: 19. Modern Sources Ab, Ryuichi 1999 The Weaving of Mantra: Kukai and the Construction of Esoteric Buddhist Discourse. New York: Columbia University Press. Andersen, Poul 2001 Concepts of Meaning in Chinese Ritual. Cahiers dExtrme-Asie 12: 155-183. Davis, Edward L. 2001 Society and the Supernatural in Song China. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Ding Fubao , ed. 1984 Foxue da cidian . 1919. Reprint, Peking: Wenwu Publishing. Dobbins, James C. 2001 Portraits of Shinran in Medieval Pure Land Buddhism. In Living Images: Japanese Buddhist Icons in Context (Asian Religions and Cultures), edited by Robert H. Sharf and Elizabeth Horton Sharf, 19-48. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Foguang da cidian zongwu weiyuanhui 1989 Foguang da cidian . 8 vols. Taipei: Foguang chubanshe.

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

93

Gennep, Arnold van 1960 The Rites of Passage. Trans. Monika B. Vizedom and Gabrielle Caffee. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. First published in 1909. Goepper, Roger 1979 Some Thoughts on the Icon in Esoteric Buddhism of East Asia. In Studia Sino-Mongolica, Festschrift fr Herbert Franke, Mnchener Ostasiatische Studien, bd. 25, 245-254. Wiesbaden: Steiner. Granoff, Phyllis 2001 Images and Their Ritual Use in Medieval India: Hesitations and Contradictions. Paper delivered at the conference Images in Asian Religions: Texts and Contexts, held at McMaster University and University of Toronto, May 10-12, 2001. n.d.a The Absent Artist as an Apology for Image Worship: An Investigation of Some Medieval Indian Accounts of the Origins of Sacred Images. Chapter of a Festschrift in honor of Padmanabh S. Jaini being edited by Olle Qvarnstrom. n.d.b Reading Between the Lines: Colliding Attitudes Towards Image Worship in Indian Religious Texts. Chapter of a volume being edited by Gilles Tarabout and Gerard Colas. Hakeda Yoshita S. 1972 Kukai: Major Works. New York: Columbia University Press. Heesterman, J. C. 1993 The Broken World of Sacrifice: An Essay in Ancient Indian Ritual. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Hubert, Henri, and Marcel Mauss 1981 Sacrifice: Its Nature and Functions. Trans. W. D. Halls. 1964. Reprint: Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. A translation of Essai sur la Nature et la Fonction du Sacrifice, LAnne sociologique (Paris, 1898), 29-138. Ishida Hisatoyo 1987 Esoteric Buddhist Painting. Japanese Arts Library, no. 15. Trans. E. Dale Saunders. Tokyo: Kodansha International. Originally published under the title Mikkyoga , Nihon no bijutsu vol. 33 (Tokyo: Shibundo, 1969). Kamata Shigeo et al., eds. 1998 Daizokyo zenkaisetsu daijiten . Tokyo: Yuzankaku. Kiyota, Minoru 1978 Shingon Buddhism: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles and Tokyo: Buddhist Books International. Matsunaga Yukei 1989 Mikkyo: Indo kara Nihon e no densho : . Tokyo: Chuo koron. 1990 Esoteric Buddhism: A Definition. In Mikkyo: Kobo Daishi Kukai and Shingon Buddhism (Bulletin of the Research Institute of Esoteric Buddhist

94

ROBERT H. SHARF

Culture, Special Issue, October 1990), 23-40. Koyasan: Research Institute of Esoteric Buddhist Culture, Koyasan University. Mikkyo Jiten Hensankai , ed. 1983 Mikkyo daijiten . 1970. Reprint in 1 vol., Kyoto: Hozokan. First published in 6 vols, 1931. Miyano Yuchi and Mizuhara Gyoei , eds. 1933 Shidokegyo shidai . 6 vols. Koyasan: Matsumoto nisshindo honten. (This text is based on a set of manuals dated Tensho 4 [1576].) Miyata Taisen 1984 A Study of the Ritual Mudras in the Shingon Tradition: A Phenomenological Study of the Eighteen Ways of Esoteric Recitation (Juhachido nenju kubi shidai: Chuin) in the Koyasan Tradition Including translation of Kukais Juhachido Nenju Kubi Shidai. Published privately. Miyata Taisan and Dale Todaro, eds. 1988 Handbook on the Four Stages of Prayoga, Chuin Branch of Shingon Tradition. Koyasan: Department of Koyasan Shingon Foreign Mission. Mochizuki Shinko 1933-36 Bukkyo daijiten . 10 vols. Tokyo: Sekai seiten kanko kyokai. Nakagawa Zenkyo , ed. 1986 Shidokegyo shidai: Chuin . Koyasan: Shinnoin. Nakamura Hajime , ed. 1981 Bukkyogo daijiten . 1975. Reprint in 1 vol., Tokyo: Tokyo shoseki. Ono Gemmyo 1932-36 Bussho kaisetsu daijiten . 12 vols. Tokyo: Daito shuppansha. Oyama Kojun 1987 Chuinryu no kenkyu . Osaka: Toho shuppan. Originally published as Himitsu Bukkyo Koyasan chuinryu no kenkyu (Koyasan: Oyama Kojun hoin shoshin kinen shuppankai, 1962). Ozawa Shoki 1962 Shido shidai: koshin ho . Kyoto: Sohonzan chishakuin. Payne, Richard Karl 1991 The Tantric Ritual of Japan: Feeding the Gods The Shingon Fire Ritual. Sata-Pitaka Series, vol. 365. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan. Sawa Ryuken , ed. 1975 Mikkyo jiten . Kyoto: Hozokan. Sharf, Robert H. 1995 Buddhist Modernism and the Rhetoric of Meditative Experience. Numen 42 (3): 228-283. 1998 Experience. In Critical Terms for Religious Studies, edited by Mark C. Taylor, 94-116. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 2001a Prolegomenon to the Study of Japanese Buddhist Icons. In Living Images: Japanese Buddhist Icons in Context (Asian Religions and

THINKING THROUGH SHINGON RITUAL

95

Cultures), edited by Robert H. Sharf and Elizabeth Horton Sharf, 1-18. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 2001b Visualization and Mandala in Shingon Buddhism. In Living Images: Japanese Buddhist Icons in Context (Asian Religions and Cultures), edited by Robert H. Sharf and Elizabeth Horton Sharf, 151-197. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 2002 Coming to Terms with Chinese Buddhism: A Reading of the Treasure Store Treatise. Kuroda Institute Studies in East Asian Buddhism, no. 14. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. n.d. Ritual. In Critical Terms for Buddhist Studies, edited by Donald S. Lopez, Jr. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, forthcoming. Staal, Frits 1979a The Meaninglessness of Ritual. Numen 26 (1): 2-22. 1979b Ritual Syntax. In Sanskrit and Indian Studies: Essays in Honor of Daniel H. H. Ingalls, edited by M. Nagatomi, B. K. Matilal and J. M. Masson. Dordrecht: Reidel. 1983 Agni: The Vedic Ritual of the Fire Altar. 2 vols. Berkeley: Asia Humanities Press. 1990 Rules Without Meaning: Ritual, Mantras and the Human Sciences. Toronto Studies in Religion, vol. 4. New York: Peter Lang. Strickmann, Michel 1989 Canons of Giant Art: Ritual of Land and Water. Unpublished paper presented at the conference Art and the Emperor: A Public Interdisciplinary Symposium on the Arts of China, Ohio State University, 14 April 1989. 2002 Chinese Magical Medicine. Edited by Bernard Faure. Asian Religions and Cultures. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Takai Kankai 1953 Mikkyo jiso taikei . Kyoto: Takai zenkeshu chosaku kankokai. Tanaka Kaio 1962 Mikkyo jiso no kaisetsu . Tokyo: Rokuyaon. Todaro, Dale Allen 1985 An Annotated Translaton of the Tattvasagraha (Part 1) with an Explanation of the Role of the Tattvasagraha Lineage in the Teachings of Kukai. Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University. 1986 A Study of the Earliest Garbha Vidhi of the Shingon Sect. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 9 (2): 109-146. Toganoo Shoun 1982a Himitsu Bukkyoshi . 1933. Reprint, Toganoo Shoun zenshu , vol. 1. Koyasan: Koyasan daigaku mikkyo bunka kenkyujo. 1982b Himitsu jiso no kenkyu . 1935. Reprint, Toganoo Shoun zenshu , vol. 2. Koyasan: Koyasan daigaku mikkyo bunka kenkyujo.

96

ROBERT H. SHARF

Tylor, Edward B. 1920 Primitive Culture: Researches into the Development of Mythology, Philosophy, Religion, Language, Art, and Custom. 2 vols., 6th ed. London: John Murray. Ueda Reijo 1986 Shingon mikkyo jiso gaisetsu shidobu shinanryu o chushin toshite . Tokyo: Dobosha. Yamasaki Taiko 1988 Shingon: Japanese Esoteric Buddhism. Trans. Richard and Cynthia Peterson. Boston: Shambhala.