Icchānaṅgala. [alt. Icchānaṅkala]. Pāli name of a brāhmaṇa village in the Indian kingdom of KOŚALA, on the outskirts of which was a grove where the Buddha preached the Pāli Ambaṭṭhasutta to the brāhmaṇa youth, Ambaṭṭhamānava. The Pāli SUTTANIPĀTA states that the town was the residence of several eminent brāhmaṇas. Elsewhere it is said that brāhmaṇas were in the habit of visiting the grove to discuss their interpretations of the Vedas. The Pāli Vāseṭṭhasutta states that two brāhmaṇa youths well versed in the Vedas, Vāseṭṭha and Bhāradvāja, once sought out the Buddha’s counsel to resolve a debate while the Buddha was sojourning at the town. In the SAṂYUTTANIKĀYA, the Buddha is described as having once spent a rains retreat (S. VARṢĀ) in solitude at the Icchānaṅgala grove while attended by a single disciple, the monk Nāgita. After a while, the local villagers discovered his presence and disturbed his solitude with constant visits and noise. At the end of the three months’ rains retreat, the Buddha preached the Icchānaṅgalasutta to a gathering of monks at the village, in which he described how he had spent his time while in solitary retreat practicing mindfulness on breathing (ĀNĀPĀNASMṚTI). He declares dedication to this practice to be a life lived according to the noble (ĀRYA) way and one that leads to the destruction of the contaminants (ĀSRAVA) and the attainment of ARHATship.
icchantika. (T. ’dod chen; C. yichanti; J. issendai; K. ilch’ŏnje 一闡提). In Sanskrit, “incorrigibles”; a term used in the MAHĀYĀNA tradition to refer to a class of beings who have lost all potential to achieve enlightenment or buddhahood. The term seems to derive from the present participle icchant (desiring), and may be rendered loosely into English as something like “hedonist” or “dissipated” (denotations suggested in the Tibetan rendering ’dod chen (po), “subject to great desire”). (The Sinographs are simply a transcription of the Sanskrit.) The Mahāyāna MAHĀPARINIRVĀṆASŪTRA states that persons become icchantika when they refuse to accept such basic principles as the law of causality, have lost their moral compass, are no longer concerned about either present actions or their future consequences, do not associate with spiritual mentors, and generally do not follow the teachings of the Buddha. In the LAṄKĀVATĀRASŪTRA, an icchantika is defined as a being who is explicitly antagonistic to the “bodhisattva collection” (BODHISATTVAPIṬAKA) of the canon, viz., to Mahāyāna scriptures, and who falsely claims that those scriptures do not conform to the SŪTRA and the VINAYA. As a consequence of their disdain for the dharma, icchantikas were commonly assumed to be condemned to an indefinite period (and, according to some texts, an eternity) in the hells (see NĀRAKA). Certain bodhisattvas, such as KṢITIGARBHA, could, however, voluntarily choose to become icchantikas by renouncing all of their own wholesome faculties (KUŚALAMŪLA) in order to save even the denizens of the hells. In East Asia, there was a major debate about whether icchantikas were subject to eternal damnation or whether even they retained the innate capacity to attain enlightenment. The Chinese monk DAOSHENG (355–434) rejected the implication that Buddhism would condemn any class of being to hell forever. He went so far as to reject the accuracy of passages suggesting such a fate that appeared in the first Chinese rendering of the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra made by FAXIAN and BUDDHABHADRA in 418. DHARMAKṢEMA’s subsequent translation of the sūtra in 421, however, affirmed Daosheng’s view that the buddha-nature (C. FOXING; S. BUDDHADHĀTU) was inherent in all beings, even icchantikas. The FAXIANG school of YOGĀCĀRA Buddhism was the only school of East Asian Buddhism that posited the existence of icchantikas, which it viewed as beings who had destroyed the pure seeds (BĪJA) innate in the mind through their heinous actions and thus had lost all hope of becoming buddhas. Virtually all other schools of East Asian Buddhism, however, asserted the doctrine of the universality of the buddha-nature in all sentient beings (and, in some cases, even in inanimate objects), and thus rejected any implication that icchantikas were bereft of all prospect of achieving buddhahood. See also SAMUCCHINNAKUŚALAMŪLA; QINI[ZUI].
ichinengi. (一念義). In Japanese, “the doctrine of a single recitation,” in the Japanese PURE LAND traditions, the practice of a single verbal recitation of the buddha AMITĀBHA’s name (J. nenbutsu; C. NIANFO). This doctrine refers to a position held by some of HŌNEN’s (1133–1212) major disciples in the early JŌDOSHŪ, especially Jōkakubō Kōsai (1163–1247), and to a lesser extent SHINRAN (1163–1273). After Hōnen passed away, a debate emerged among his followers over whether salvation in Amitābha’s pure land of SUKHĀVATĪ was attained through a “single recitation” of the Buddha’s name, or “multiple recitations” (see TANENGI). The single-recitation position advocates that a single moment of faith would be sufficient to ensure rebirth in that pure land, because the person would then be receptive to Amitābha’s grace. Due to this near-exclusive emphasis on the role of grace in effecting salvation, some of the proponents of single-recitation practice apparently engaged in antinomian behavior, such that the doctrine of ichinengi came to be associated with subversive political activities. The degree to which this single moment of faith arises from the “self-power” (JIRIKI) of the aspirant or the “other-power” (TARIKI) of Amitābha was also debated. Although Shinran seems to have favored the single-recitation position, he also argued that neither the single- nor multiple-recitation position provided a comprehensive perspective on the prospect of salvation. (For the JISHU practice of ippen nenbutsu, the one-time invocation of the Buddha’s name as if it were the time of one’s death, see IPPEN.)
ignorance. See AVIDYĀ.
Ikeda Daisaku. (池田大作) (b. 1928). Third president of SŌKA GAKKAI, Japan’s largest lay Buddhism organization, which is considered one of Japan’s “new religions.” Ikeda also helped found Sōka Gakkai International (SGI), which in 2008 claimed twelve million members in 192 countries and territories. He is a prolific author, who also founded a number of institutions, including Sōka University, the Kōmeitō political party, the Institute of Oriental Philosophy, and the Tōkyō Fuji Art Museum. Ikeda was born on January 2, 1928, in the Ota Ward of Tōkyō, to parents who cultivated and sold seaweed. After graduating from Fuji Junior College, he took employment under Toda Josei (1900–1958), the second president of Sōka Gakkai. Ikeda received intensive mentoring from Toda and accompanied him on most of his travels. Ikeda also helped carry out Toda’s propagation (shakubuku) campaigns. Ikeda served as the third president of Sōka Gakkai from 1960 to 1979 until disagreements with the NICHIREN SHŌSHŪ priesthood, notably its head priest, Nikken (b. 1922), led to his resignation from the organization. In 1991, poor relations with the priesthood culminated in his excommunication. While remaining as Sōka Gakkai’s spiritual leader, Ikeda has additionally served as the president of SGI since its founding in 1975. Throughout his career with Sōka Gakkai and SGI, Ikeda has met with both criticism and praise. At times, the organization’s aggressive proselytizing efforts have made Ikeda and Sōka Gakkai objects of suspicion, and its political activities have led to several scandals: the 1956 “Ōsaka incident” in which he was charged with election fraud after engineering the election of a Kōmeitō party member; and a 1979 controversy over the suppression of several publications that criticized Ikeda and Sōka Gakkai. At the same time, Ikeda is respected as a leader on human rights and peace issues. He has been a strong supporter of the United Nations and has engaged in discussions with political leaders around the world. The expansive growth of both Sōka Gakkai and SGI can in large measure be attributed to his leadership.
Ikkyū Sōjun. (一休宗純) (1394–1481). Japanese ZEN master in the RINZAISHŪ, also known by his sobriquet Kyōun shi (Master Crazy Cloud). Materials on Ikkyū’s life are an often indistinguishable mixture of history and legend. Little is known of Ikkyū’s early years, but he is said to have been the illegitimate son of Emperor Gokomatsu (r. 1382–1392, 1392–1412). In 1399, Ikkyū was sent to the monastery of ANKOKUJI in Kyōto. In 1410, he left Ankokuji to study under Ken’ō Sōi (d. 1414), who belonged to the MYŌSHINJI branch of Rinzai Zen. After Ken’ō’s death in 1414, Ikkyū continued his studies under the monk Kasō Sōdon (1352–1428) in Katada (present-day Shiga prefecture) near Lake Biwa. Kasō gave him the name Ikkyū, which he continued to use. While studying under Kasō, Ikkyū had his first awakening experience and also acquired some notoriety for his antinomian behavior. Perhaps because of his rivalry with a fellow student named Yōsō Sōi (1378–1458), Ikkyū left Kasō shortly before his death and headed for the city of Sakai. During this transition period, Ikkyū is said to have briefly returned to lay life, marrying a blind singer and fathering a son. Ikkyū’s life in Sakai is shrouded in legend (most of which date to the Tokugawa period). There, he is said to have led the life of a mad monk, preaching in taverns and brothels. In 1437, Ikkyū is also said to have torn up the certificate of enlightenment that his teacher Kasō had prepared for him before his death. In 1440, Ikkyū was called to serve as the abbot of the monastery of DAITOKUJI, but he resigned his post the next year. Ikkyū devoted much of his later life to his famous poetry and brushstroke art. Later, Ikkyū had a falling out with Yōsō, who as abbot secured Daitokuji’s prominent place in Kyōto. In 1455, Ikkyū published a collection of his poems, the Jikaishū (“Self-Admonishment Collection”), and publicly attacked Yōsō. In 1456, Ikkyū restored the dilapidated temple Myōshōji in Takigi (located halfway between Sakai and Kyōto). There, he installed a portrait of the Zen master Daitō (see SŌHŌ MYŌCHŌ). Ikkyū also began identifying himself with the Chinese Chan master XUTANG ZHIYU, the spiritual progenitor of the Daitokuji lineage(s), by transforming portraits of Xutang into those of himself. In 1474, Ikkyū was appointed abbot of Daitokuji, which had suffered from a devastating fire during the Ōnin war, and he committed himself to its reconstruction, until his death in 1481. Among his writings, his poetry collection Kyōunshū (“Crazy Cloud Anthology”) is most famous. Also well known is his Gaikotsu (“Skeletons”), a work, illustrated by Ikkyū himself, about his conversations with skeletons. See also WU’AI XING.
illusory body. See MĀYĀDEHA.
Imje chong. (臨濟宗). The Korean pronunciation of the Chinese LINJI ZONG; the name of a short-lived school of Korean Buddhism during the Japanese colonial period (1910–1945). In 1910, shortly after Japan’s formal annexation of Korea, Hoegwang Sasŏn (1862–1933, a.k.a. Yi Hoegwang) and other Korean monks signed a seven-item treaty with the Japanese SŌTŌSHŪ, which would have assimilated their newly formed Wŏn chong (Consummate Order) of Korean Buddhism into the Sōtō order. In response to this threat to Korean Buddhist autonomy, such renowned monks as HANYŎNG CHŎNGHO (1870–1948), HAN YONGUN (1879–1944), and other Korean Buddhist leaders established the Imje chong, with its headquarters at the monastery of PŎMŎSA in Pusan. These monks adopted this name to demonstrate that they considered the practices of the Sōtō school to be anathema to the fundamentally Linji orientation of Korean Sŏn practice. Both the Wŏn chong and the Imje chong were ultimately disestablished in 1912 by the Japanese colonial administration after the promulgation of the 1911 Monastery Ordinance, in which all aspects of Korean Buddhist institutional life were brought under the administrative control of the Japanese government-general.
impermanence. See ANITYA.
imwŏtko. (C. shi shenme; J. kore ikan; K. 
/si simma 是甚麼). In vernacular Korean (and specifically the dialect of Kyŏngsang province), “What is this?”; the foundational contemplative question (K. hwadu; C. HUATOU) used within the Korean SŎN (C. CHAN) tradition. This hwadu was taught by both KYŎNGHŎ SŎNGU (1849–1912) and YONGSŎNG CHINJONG (1864–1940) as part of their attempts to revive Korean kanhwa Sŏn (C. KANHUA CHAN) practice at the turn of the twentieth century. Imwŏtko is a dialectical contraction of the standard vernacular Korean phrase “Igŏsi muŏsin ko” (“What is this?”), which is the translation of the classical Chinese question “What is this?” (C. SHI SHENME; K. si simma) that was frequently raised by teachers in the Chinese Chan tradition. For example, the sixth patriarch HUINENG (638–713) is said to have asked, “There is this one thing that supports the heavens above and opens the earth below. It is as bright as the sun and moon and as dark as a lacquer barrel. It is constantly inside all my activities. What is that thing?” And MAZU DAOYI (709–788) asked, “It is not mind, not buddha, not a thing. So, what is it?” Imwŏtko differs from the enigmatic expressions of the enlightenment experience that appear in many of the Sŏn exchanges between master and disciple; it is instead presumed to ask the fundamental question about what existence itself means, such as what is my original face (K. pollae myŏnmok; C. BENLAI MIANMU). By asking this most basic of existential questions, imwŏtko is thought to generate the sensation of doubt (K. ŭijŏng; C. YIJING) more readily than might the standard Sŏn GONG’AN and is often thus the first hwadu given to beginning meditators, and especially laypersons, in Korean Sŏn training. But because the doubt generated by imwŏtko may not be as intense and sustained as that generated by the standard kongan, monks and nuns will typically shift from imwŏtko to one of those cases as their meditation progresses.
indeterminate questions. See AVYĀKṚTA.
Indra. (P. Inda; T. Dbang po; C. Yintuoluo/Di-Shi; J. Indara/Taishaku; K. Indara/Che-Sŏk 因陀羅/帝釋). In Sanskrit, Indra is an abbreviation for ŚAKRO DEVĀNĀM INDRAḤ (“ŚAKRA, the king of the gods”). Indra is the Vedic king of the gods of the atmosphere or sky, who eventually becomes the chief of all divinities in Indian popular religion. Indra is incorporated into the Buddhist pantheon as a guardian of the DHARMA and the king of the DEVA realm. Indra is always depicted in Indian Buddhist iconography as subservient to the Buddha: he worships the Buddha, holds an umbrella over him to shield him from the sun, or carries his alms bowl for him. Indra presides over the heaven of the thirty-three divinities (TRĀYASTRIṂŚA), the second of the six heavenly realms that exist within the sensuous realm (KĀMADHĀTU), located on the summit of MOUNT SUMERU. In the middle of this heaven is found Indra’s royal city, Sudarśana, at the center of which is his royal palace, Vaijayanta. See also INDRAJĀLA; ŚAKRA.
Indrabhūti. (T. In dra bo dhi). There are at least three figures by this name known to the Indian and Tibetan traditions. Perhaps the most important is a semimythical king of OḌḌIYĀNA ([alt. Uḍḍiyāna], probably the Swat region of northwest India but also identified as Orissa) at the time of the miraculous birth of PADMASAMBHAVA; according to tradition, he had no male heir, and so he installed Padmasambhava as crown prince. A second Indrabhūti is listed among the eighty-four MAHĀSIDDHA as a teacher of TILOPA; he may be the Indrabhūti, closely associated with mahāsiddha Lawapa, who is first in the lineage list (T. gsan yig) of the VAJRAYOGINĪ practices of the Tibetan SA SKYA sect and a brother of Lakṣmīṅkarā. There is also a ninth-century Indian king and tantric master, a student of Ācārya Kukurāja, who authored the Cittaratnaviśodhana, called Indrabhūti.
Indrajāla. (T. Dbang po’i dra ba; C. Yintuoluo wang/Di-Shi wang; J. Indaramō/Taishakumō; K. Indara mang/Che-Sŏk mang 因陀羅網/帝釋網). In Sanskrit, “Indra’s net”; a metaphor used widely in the HUAYAN ZONG of East Asian Buddhism to describe the multivalent web of interconnections in which all beings are enmeshed. As depicted in the AVATAṂSAKASŪTRA, the central scripture of the Huayan school, above the palace of INDRA, the king of the gods, is spread an infinitely vast, bejeweled net. At each of the infinite numbers of knots in the net is tied a jewel that itself has an infinite number of facets. A person looking at any single one of the jewels on this net would thus see reflected in its infinite facets not only everything in the cosmos but also an infinite number of other jewels, themselves also reflecting everything in the cosmos; thus, every jewel in this vast net is simultaneously reflecting, and being reflected by, an infinite number of other jewels. This metaphor of infinite, mutually reflecting jewels is employed to help convey how all things in existence are defined by their interconnection with all other things, but without losing their own independent identity in the process. The metaphor of Indra’s net thus offers a profound vision of the universe, in which all things are mutually interrelated to all other things, in simultaneous mutual identity and mutual intercausality. The meditation on Indra’s net (C. Diwang guan; J. Taimō kan; K. Chemang kwan) is the last of the six contemplations outlined by Fazang in his Xiu Huayan aozhi wangjin huanyuan guan (“Cultivation of the Inner Meaning of Huayan: The Contemplations That End Delusion and Return to the Source”), which helps the student to visualize the DHARMADHĀTU of the unimpeded interpretation between phenomenon and phenomena (SHISHI WU’AI FAJIE).
Indra’s net. See INDRAJĀLA.
indriya. (T. dbang po; C. gen; J. kon; K. kŭn 根). In Sanskrit and Pāli, “faculty,” “dominant,” or “predominant factor”; a polysemous term of wide import in Buddhist soteriological and epistemological literature. In the SŪTRA literature, indriya typically refers to the five or six sense bases: e.g., the visual, auditory, olfactory, gustatory, and tactile faculties associated with the physical sense organs and the mental base associated with the mind; in the case of the physical senses, the indriya are forms of subtle matter located within the organs of the eye, ear, nose, tongue, and body that enable the functioning of the senses. The mind (MANAS) is typically listed as a sixth, internal sensory faculty. The six sense faculties (ṣaḍindriya) are subsumed as well within the list of the twelve ĀYATANA (sense-fields) and eighteen DHĀTU (elements). ¶ Indriya is also used soteriologically to describe the five “dominants” or “spiritual faculties” that are crucial to development along the path: faith (ŚRADDHĀ), effort (VĪRYA), mindfulness (SMṚTI), concentration (SAMĀDHI), and wisdom (PRAJÑĀ). These two denotations for indriya are subsumed by the VAIBHĀṢIKA school of SARVĀSTIVĀDA abhidharma into a more extensive list of twenty-two faculties: (1–5) the five physical sense faculties, which are the predominant factors in the rise of the sensory consciousnesses, etc.; (6–7) the “female” (strīndriya) and “male” (puruṣendriya) faculties, which are the predominant factors in distinguishing sex organs and marking physical gender; (8) the “life force” (jīvitendriya; see JĪVITA), the predominant factor in birth and prolonging the physical continuum up through the “intermediate state” (ANTARĀBHAVA); (9) the mental faculty (MANENDRIYA), the predominant factor that governs both rebirth and the associations between an individual and the world at large; (10–14) the five faculties of sensation or feeling—viz., pleasure (SUKHA), suffering (DUḤKHA), satisfaction (saumanasya), dissatisfaction (daurmanasya), and indifference (UPEKṢĀ)—the predominant factors with regard to contamination (SAṂKLEŚA), for passions such as attachment, hatred, conceit, delusion, etc., attach themselves to these five sensations, creating bondage to worldly objects; (15–22) the eight faculties—viz., the five moral faculties of faith (śraddhā), energy (vīrya), mindfulness (smṛti), concentration (samādhi), and wisdom (prajñā), and the three immaculate faculties of (1) anājñātam ājñāsyāmī ’ndriyam (“the faculty of resolving to understand that which is yet to be understood”), (2) ājñātendriya (“the faculty of having understood”), and (3) ājñātāvīndriya (“the faculty of perfecting one’s understanding”)—which are the predominant factors regarding purification (VIŚUDDHI); this is because the five moral faculties are the predominant factors that purify beings of their bondage to worldly objects and offer access to NIRVĀṆA, and the three immaculate faculties are the predominant factors in the origin, duration, and enjoyment of nirvāṇa. ¶ Indriya is also used to refer to “three capacities” (see TRĪNDRIYA) of the disciples of the Buddha or of a particular teaching, based on their level of aptitude or capacity for understanding: viz., those of dull faculties (MṚDVINDRIYA), those of intermediate faculties (MADHYENDRIYA), and those of sharp faculties (TĪKṢṆENDRIYA).
indriyasaṃvara. (T. dbang po sdom pa; C. genlüyi; J. konritsugi; K. kŭnyurŭi 根律儀). In Sanskrit and Pāli, “sensory restraint,” or “guarding the sense organs”; an important factor in the development of mindfulness (SMṚTI, P. SATI) and eventually concentration (SAMĀDHI), in which the meditator trains to see things as they actually are, rather than only in terms of oneself—i.e., as things we like, dislike, or are indifferent toward. In addition to its role in formal meditative training, indriyasaṃvara should also be maintained throughout the ordinary activities of everyday life, in order to control the inveterate tendency toward craving. Maintaining sensory restraint helps the meditator to control one’s reaction to the generic signs (NIMITTA) or secondary characteristics (ANUVYAÑJANA) of an object; instead, one halts the perceptual process at the level of simple recognition, simply noting what is seen, heard, etc. By not seizing on these signs and characteristics, perception is maintained at a level prior to an object’s conceptualization and the resulting proliferation of concepts (PRAPAÑCA) throughout the full range of one’s sensory experience. As the frequent refrain in the sūtras states, “In the seen, there is only the seen,” and not the superimpositions created by the intrusion of ego (ĀTMAN) into the perceptual process. Mastery of this technique of sensory restraint provides access to the signless (ĀNIMITTA) gate to deliverance (VIMOKṢAMUKHA).
Inhŭi chŏn. (K) (仁熙殿). See WANGNYUNSA.
in’in ekishi. (因院易師). In Japanese, “changing teachers in accordance with the temple.” Since the fifteenth century, members of the SŌTŌSHŪ of the ZEN tradition have participated in the practice of taking the lineage of the monastery where one was appointed abbot, even if that lineage was different from one’s own. The practice of inheriting the temple’s lineage was known as the “temple dharma lineage” (GARANBŌ), and the practice of switching lineages was called in’in ekishi. Basing his claims on the teachings found in the SHŌBŌGENZŌ, the Sōtō Zen master MANZAN DŌHAKU attempted to reform this practice by asserting the importance of the direct, face-to-face transmission (menju shihō) from one master to his disciple (isshi inshō). In 1700, he made a request to the Agency of Temples and Shrine (jisha bugyō) to intervene in the garanbō system. Despite fierce opposition from such figures as TENKEI DENSON (1646–1735), the Tokugawa government banned the practice in 1703.
initiation. See ABHIṢEKA.
inka. (印可). In Japanese, “certification.” See YINKE.
insight meditation. See VIPASSANĀ; VIPAŚYANĀ.
Inwa. (Burmese). See AVA.
ip’ansŭng. (理判僧). In Korean, “practice monk,” monks who engaged in meditation, scriptural study, and chanting; one of the two general types of Korean monastic vocations, along with SAP’ANSŬNG, administrative monks, who were responsible for the administrative and financial affairs of the monastery. Ip’ansŭng traditionally enjoyed higher standing within the monastery than the administrative monks, and the meditation monks had generally more status than doctrinal specialists. During the post-1945 “Purification Movement” (Chŏnghwa undong) within the Korean SAṂGHA, the celibate monks called themselves ip’ansung, while pejoratively referring to married monks as sap’ansung.
Ippen. (一遍) (1239–1289). Japanese itinerant holy man (HIJIRI) and reputed founder of the JISHU school of the Japanese PURE LAND tradition. Due perhaps to his own antinomian proclivities, Ippen’s life remains a mixture of history and legend. Ippen was a native of Iyo in Shikoku. In 1249, after his mother’s death, Ippen became a monk at the urging of his father, a Buddhist monk, and was given the name Zuien. In 1251, Ippen traveled to Dazaifu in northern Kyūshū, where he studied under the monk Shōdatsu (d.u.). In 1263, having learned of his father’s death, Ippen returned to Iyo and briefly married. In 1271, Ippen visited Shōdatsu once more and made a pilgrimage to the monastery of ZENKŌJI in Shinano to see its famous Amida (AMITĀBHA) triad. His visit to Zenkōji is said to have inspired Ippen to go on retreat, spending half a year in a hut that he built in his hometown of Iyo. The site of his retreat, Sugō, was widely known as a sacred place of practice for mountain ascetics (YAMABUSHI). In 1272, Ippen set out for the monastery of SHITENNŌJI in Ōsaka, where he is said to have received the ten precepts. At this time, Ippen also developed the eponymous practice known as ippen nenbutsu (one-time invocation of the name [see NIANFO] of the buddha Amitābha), which largely consists of the uttering the phrase NAMU AMIDABUTSU as if this one moment were the time of one’s death. Ippen widely propagated this teaching wherever he went, and, to those who complied, he offered an amulet (fusan), which he said would assure rebirth in Amitābha’s pure land. From Shitennōji, Ippen made a pilgrimage to KŌYASAN and a shrine at KUMANO, where he is said to have had a revelation from a local manifestation of Amitābha. Ippen then began the life of an itinerant preacher, in the process acquiring a large following now known as the Jishū. In 1279, Ippen began performing nenbutsu while dancing with drums and bells, a practice known as odori nenbutsu and developed first by the monk KŪYA. Ippen continued to wander through the country, spreading his teaching until his death. A famous set of twelve narrative hand scrolls known as the Ippen hijiri e (“The Illustrated Biography of the Holy Man Ippen”) is an important source for the study of Ippen’s life. Currently designated a Japanese national treasure (kokuhō), the Ippen hijiri e was completed in 1299 on the tenth anniversary of Ippen’s death. See also ICHINENGI.
īrṣyā. (P. issā; T. phrag dog; C. ji; J. shitsu; K. chil 嫉). In Sanskrit, “envy” or “jealousy,” one of the forty-six mental concomitants (CAITTA) according to the SARVĀSTIVĀDA school of ABHIDHARMA, one of the fifty-one according to the YOGĀCĀRA school and one of fifty-two according to the Pāli abhidhamma. Envy is the unwholesome displeasure one experiences when witnessing others’ virtues, gains, and rewards, or simply general well-being, and is the opposite of the salutary mental state of sympathetic joy (MUDITĀ), which is one of the four BRAHMAVIHĀRAs. “Envy” is also taken to be one of the possible derivative emotions of “aversion” (DVEṢA) and cannot exist independent of that latter mental state.
irwŏnsang. (一圓相). In Korean, “one-circle symbol”; the central doctrinal concept and object of religious devotion in the modern Korean religion of WŎNBULGYO, considered to be functionally equivalent to the notion of the DHARMAKĀYA buddha (pŏpsinbul) in mainstream MAHĀYĀNA Buddhism. The founder of Wŏnbulgyo, PAK CHUNGBIN (later known by his sobriquet SOT’AESAN), believed that worshipping buddha images, as symbols of the physical body of the buddha, no longer inspired faith in Buddhist adherents and was thus a hindrance to religious propagation in the modern age; he instead instructed Wŏnbulgyo dharma halls to enshrine on their altars just the simple circle that is the irwŏnsang. This irwŏnsang was the “symbol” (sang) of the ineffable reality of the “unitary circle” (irwŏn). In Sot’aesan’s view, different religions may have various designations for ultimate truth, but all of their designations ultimately refer to the perfect unity that is the irwŏn. Sot’aesan described the irwŏn as the mind-seal of all the buddhas and sages, the original nature of all sentient beings, and the ineffable realm of SAMĀDHI that transcends birth and death; but it simultaneously also served as the monistic source from which the phenomenal world in all its diversity arises. By understanding this irwŏn through tracing the radiance of the mind back to its fundamental source (K. hoegwang panjo; see HUIGUANG FANZHAO), Wŏnbulgyo adherents seek to recognize the fundamental nonduality of, and unity between, all things in existence and thus master the ability to act with utter impartiality and selflessness in all their interactions with the world and society.
īryāpatha. (P. iriyāpatha; T. spyod lam; C. weiyi; J. igi; K. wiŭi 威儀). In Sanskrit, lit. “movement,” referring specifically to a set of four “postures,” “deportments,” or modes of physical activity, in progressive order of ease: walking (CAṄKRAMA [alt. gamana]; P. caraṃ), standing (sthāna; P. ṭhāna, tiṭṭhaṃ), sitting (niṣaṇṇa; P. nisinna), and lying down (śaya/śayana; P. sayaṃ/sayāna). Because the body was presumed typically to be always in one or another of these postures, they constituted specific objects of mindfulness of the body (KĀYĀNUPAŚYANĀ; P. kāyānupassanā; see also SMṚTYUPASTHĀNA) and there are accounts of monks attaining the rank of ARHAT in each of the four postures. The īryāpatha figure prominently in ĀNANDA’s enlightenment experience. After striving in vain all night to perfect his practice before the start of the first Buddhist council (see COUNCIL, FIRST), where the canon was to be redacted, Ānanda had given up, only to become enlightened as he was in the process of lying down to rest—and thus technically between postures. ¶ The term īryāpatha can refer in other contexts to general behavior or “deportment” (but typically to religiously salutary deportment) or to a specific “course” of religious and/or ascetic practice.
Iryŏn. (一然) (1206–1289). Korean monk-literatus during the Koryŏ dynasty, known as the author of the SAMGUK YUSA (“Memorabilia of the Three Kingdoms”), the source for much of the lore concerning the incipiency and early development of Buddhism in Korea. Iryŏn was born in KYŎNGJU, the ancient capital of the Silla dynasty, became a monk while still a child, and passed the monk’s examination (SŬNGKWA) in the SŎN school at the age of twenty-two. Iryŏn became a well-known literatus of both Buddhist and Confucian literature and was close to the royal family of the Koryŏ dynasty, including King Ch’ungnyŏl (r. 1236–1308), who visited Iryŏn at KWANGMYŎNGSA in 1282. The Samguk yusa was written ca. 1282–1289, during the period of Mongol suzerainty over Korea, which began in 1259. In his miscellany, Iryŏn includes a variety of hagiographies of eminent monks in the early Korean Buddhist tradition, often drawing from local accounts of conduct (haengjang), rather than official biographies, and reams of material on early Korean Buddhist miracles and anomalies drawn from regional lore. In its emphasis on local narrative, where Buddhism dominated, over official discourse, Iryŏn’s Samguk yusa contrasts with Kim Pusik’s (1075–1151) earlier Samguk sagi (“Historical Records of the Three Kingdoms”), which included little information on Buddhism. Iryŏn’s funerary inscription refers to seven other works written by him, in over one hundred rolls; interestingly, however, the Samguk yusa is not included in that list, suggesting that it may have been published posthumously, perhaps sometime around 1310. The only other extant work of Iryŏn’s besides the Samguk yusa is his Chungp’yŏn Ch’odong owi (“Five Ranks of the Caodong School, Revised”), in two (alt. three) rolls. No longer extant are his Ŏrok (“Discourse Record”; two rolls), Kesong chapchŏ (“Miscellany of Gāthās and Verses”; three rolls), and his massive Sŏnmun yŏmsong sawŏn (“Chrestomathy of Selected Verses of the Sŏn school”), in thirty rolls.
Ishin Sūden. (以心崇傳) (1569–1633). Japanese ZEN master in the RINZAISHŪ. Sūden was born in Kii (present-day Wakayama prefecture) and, while still a youth, left home to become a monk at the Zen monastery of NANZENJI. In 1608, he was appointed the scribe of the new shōgun Tokugawa Ieyasu (1543–1616). Sūden was put in charge of foreign correspondence and was also given the important title of sōroku, or registrar general of monks. As sōroku, Sūden established the hatto (“laws”) for temples and monasteries and put them under the direct control of the bakufu government. Sūden thus came to be known as the kokui no saishō, or “black-robed minister.” With the assistance of the bakufu, Sūden also restored Nanzenji to its former glory. Konchi’in, the name of Sūden’s residences at both Nanzenji and Edo, came to be synonymous with Sūden and his policies. After Ieyasu’s death, Sūden continued to assist the second shōgun Tokugawa Hidetada (1579–1632) in political and religious affairs. In 1626, Sūden was given the honorary title Enshō Honkō kokushi (State Preceptor Perfectly Illuminating, Original Radiance) from Emperor Gomizunoo (r. 1611–1629). His diary, the Honkō kokushi nikki, is a valuable source for studying the sociopolitical history of the early Tokugawa bakufu. Sūden also left a collection of poems known as the Kanrin gohōshū.
itivṛttaka. (P. itivuttaka; T. de lta bu byung ba). In Sanskrit, “fables”; one of the nine (NAVAṄGA) (Pāli) or twelve (DVĀDAŚĀṄGA[PRAVACANA]) (Sanskrit) categories (AṄGA) of Buddhist scripture according to their structure or literary style. See also ITIVUTTAKA.
Itivuttaka. In Pāli, lit., “This Was Said”; fourth of the fifteen books contained in the KHUDDAKANIKĀYA of the Pāli SUTTAPIṬAKA. The collection is comprised of 110 suttas, each prefaced with the words vuttaṃ hetaṃ Bhagavatā (“This was said by the Blessed One”), rather than the more typical evaṃ me sutaṃ (“thus have I heard”; see EVAṂ MAYĀ ŚRUTAM). The suttas were preached to the slave woman Khujjutarā, who, to indicate that these were the Buddha’s words and not her own, introduced the suttas in this way when repeating them to her mistress.