3.The Value of Shōmyō ('Uttering the Name') in the Jōdo school

After the decease of the Buddha the earnest desire of his followers was to see him again. They could not persuade themselves to think that such a great personality as the Buddha had completely passed away from among them. The impression he had left in their minds was too deep to be wiped off so soon and so easily. This is generally the case with any great soul. We are loath to consider his physical death the ending of all that constituted him, all that belonged to him; we want to believe that he is still alive among us, not in his former worldly fashion but in some way, perhaps in the way we like to designate spiritual. Thinking so, we are sure to see him somewhere and sometime.

This was true with the Christ as with the Buddha. But the Buddha had been living among a people who were trained in all kinds of concentration called Samādhi, and who were also perfect masters of practical psychology. The result was the production of such sūtras as the Meditation sūtra (Kwangyo) or the Pratyutpannasamādhi sūtra (Hanjusammai), in which directions are given in detail for having a personal interview with the Buddha or the Buddhas. First, there must be an intense thinking of the past master, an earnest longing to see him once more, and then, the spiritual exercise in which the thinking and longing is to be visualized —this is the natural order of things.

This visualization seems to have taken two courses as time went on: the one was nominalistic¹ and the other idealistic. It is of significance that these two tendencies are traceable in one and the same sūtra which is entitled Sapta-śatikā-Prajñā-pāramitā sūtra² which was translated into Chinese by Man-t'o-lo-hsein of Fu-nan-kuo in A.D. 503, of the Liang dynasty. The sūtra belongs to the Prajñāpāramitā class of Mahāyanā literature and is considered to be one of the earliest Mahāyanā texts. It contains the essence of Prajñāpāramitā philosophy, but what strikes us as strange is that the two tendencies of thought, nominalistic and idealistic, apparently contradicting each other, are presented here side by side. I suspect the later incorporation of the passages referring to the nominalistic current of thought which is made so much of by the expositors of the Pure Land teaching. However this may be, the visualizing process of meditation is generally superseded in this sūtra by the idealization of Buddhahood, which is typical of all the Prajñā texts.

In the opening passage of this sūtra, Mañjuśrī expresses his desire to interview the Buddha in his true aspect, thus:

'I desire to see the Buddha as he is in order to benefit all beings. I see the Buddha in the aspect of suchness (tathatā), of no-other-ness, of immovability, of doing-nothing-ness; I see the Buddha as free from birth and death, from form and no-form, from spatial and temporal relations, from duality and non-duality, from defilement and purity. Thus seen, he is in his true aspect and all beings are thereby benefited.

'By seeing the Buddha in this manner [the Bodhisattva] is freed from both attachment and non-attachment, both accumulation and dissipation....

'While thus seeing the Buddha for the sake of all beings, his [Bodhisattva's] mind is not attached to the form of all beings. While teaching all beings so as to make them turn towards Nirvana, he is not attached to the form of Nirvana. While arranging varieties of things in order for the sake of all beings, the mind does not recognize them [as having individual realities].'

In another version by Samghapāla, which appeared a few years later than Man-t'o-lo's, we have this:

'Buddha asked: Do you really wish to see the Buddha?

'Mañjuśrī said: The Dharmakāya of the Buddha is not really to be seen. That I come to see the Buddha here is for the sake of all things. As to the Dharmakāya of the Buddha, it is beyond thinkability, it has no form, no shape, it is neither coming nor departing, neither existent nor nonexistent, neither visible nor invisible, it is such as it is, it is reality-limit. This light [that emanates from the Buddha giving a supernatural power to those who can perceive it] is Prajñāpāramitā, and Prajñāpāramitā is the Tathagata, and the Tathāgata is all beings; and it is in this way that I practise Prajñāpāramitā.'

In Man-t'o-lo's translation, this Prajñāpāramitā is defined to be 'limitless, boundless, nameless, formless, beyond speculation, with nothing to depend on, with no anchorage, neither offensive nor blessed, neither darkening nor illuminating, neither divisible nor countable.... And when this is experienced, one is said to have attained enlightenment.'

The thought expressed here is in perfect agreement with what generally characterizes the philosophy of the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras. The Buddha here is described in highly abstract terms by a series of negations. While the idea Buddha thus does not appear to go beyond verbalism (adhivacana), he is after all more than a mere name (nāamad-hey a). Any amount of negations, it is true, fails to make one grasp the suchness of Buddhahood, but this does not of course mean that the Buddha, or what is the same thing, Prajñāpāramitā or supreme enlightenment, can be realized by merely repeating his name. If this is possible, the uttering of the Buddha-name must be considered in some other light; that is, not in the sense of abstract negation, but in the psychological process started by the repetition itself. It is interesting to see this shifting of thought from con-ceptualism to psychological realism. Let us see what Mañjuśrī has further to say about supreme enlightenment to be attained by means of the Buddha-name (nāmadheya).

In the second half of the Saptaśatikā-Prajñāpāramitā (Man-t'o-lo version) a Samādhi known as i-hsing¹ is mentioned, whereby the Yogin realizes supreme enlightenment and also comes into the presence of the Buddhas of the past, present, and future. The passage in the Man-t'o-lo runs as follows:

'Again, there is the Samādhi i-hsing; when this Samādhi is practised by sons and daughters of good family, supreme enlightenment will speedily be realized by them.

Mañjuśrī asked, 'Blessed One, what is this i-hsing Samādhi?'

The Blessed One said: 'The Dharmadhātu is characterized with oneness, and as the Samādhi is conditioned by [this oneness of] the Dharmadhātu it is called the Samādhi of Oneness (i-hsing). If sons and daughters of good family wish to enter upon this Samādhi of Oneness they must listen to the discourse on Prajñāpāramitā and practise it accordingly; for then they can enter upon the Samādhi of Oneness whereby they will realize the Dharmadhātu in its aspect of not-going-back, of not-being-destroyed, of unthinkability, of non-obstruction, of no-form.

'If sons and daughters of good family wish to enter upon the Samādhi of Oneness, let them sit in a solitary place, abandon all thoughts that are disturbing, not become attached to forms and features, have the mind fixed on one Buddha, and devote themselves exclusively to reciting (ch'êng) his name (ming, or nāmadheya), sitting in the proper style in the direction where the Buddha is, and facing him squarely. When their thoughts are continuously fixed on one Buddha, they will be able to see in these thoughts all the Buddhas of the past, present, and future....'¹

In Man-t'o-lo's text there is a strange mixture of Prajñāpāramitā philosophy proper with the visualization of the Buddha by means of his name, which is recited with singleness of thought. Hsüan-tsang's text refers to reflecting on the personality of personal features of the Buddha in connection with holding his name, which to a certain extent contradicts the idea of the first text. For the first one emphasizes the uttering of the name with no allusion whatever to visualizing the personal marks of Buddhahood, and yet it promises the Yogins their seeing not only one Buddha whose name they recite but all the Buddhas of the past, present, and future. And this is indeed the point upon which the Pure Land followers lay great emphasis in their teaching; that is, the sūtra's preference given to verbal or nominalistic recitation rather than reflection or visualization.

In the Pratyutpanna-samādhi sūtra¹ also, the visualizing meditation singularly blends with the nominalistic trends of thought. The subject of discourse here as given to the Bodhisattva Bhadrapala is how to realize a Samādhi known as Pratyutpanna, in which all the Buddhas of the ten quarters come and stand before the Yogin ready to answer all the questions he may ask them. The Yogin's qualifications are:

1. He must have great faith in the Buddha; 2. He must exert himself to the farthest extent of his spiritual energy; 3. He must be provided with a thorough understanding of the Dharma; and 4. He must always be associated with good friends and teachers. When these conditions are fulfilled, the Samādhi is matured, and then, first, because of the sustaining power of the Buddha which is added to the Yogin; secondly, because of the virtue of the Samādhi itself; and, thirdly, because of the virtue inherent in the accumulated stock of merit, all the Buddhas appear before the Yogin in such a manner as images are reflected in a mirror.

In the beginning the Yogin hears of the name of the Buddha Amitābha and his Land of Purity. By means of this name, he visualizes all the excellent and extraordinary features belonging to the Buddha, such as his thirty-two major marks of manhood and eighty minor ones. The Yogin will also visualize all the resplendent glories of the Buddha while reflecting (nien) on his name with singleness of thought.

When this exercise attains its fullness, the Yogin's mind is purged of all its impurities. As it grows pure, the Buddha is reflected in it, and the mind and the Buddha are finally identified, as if the mind is looking at itself or the Buddha at himself, and yet the Yogin is not conscious of this fact of self-identification. To be thus unconscious is Nirvana. When there is the slightest stirring of a thought the identification scale is tipped, and there starts a world of infatuations.

Strictly speaking, it is doubtful whether the sūtra makes so much of the name and its recitation as is maintained by the followers of the Pure Land. As far as we can see, the visualization plays as much importance as thinking of the name. It is true that without a name our minds are unable to take hold of anything; even when there is really something objectively in existence, so long as it remains unnamed it has no reality for us. When a thing gets its name, its relations with other things are defined and its value fully appreciated. Amitābha is non-existent when we cannot invoke him by a name; naming is creating, so to speak. But, on the other hand, mere naming does not prove to be so efficient, is not so effect-producing, as when there is back of it a corresponding reality. Mere uttering the name 'water' does not quench the thirst; when it is visualized and there is a mental picture of a spring it produces a more physiologically realistic effect; but it is only when there is real fresh water before us which is quaffed that the thirst actually eases.

By means of sheer will and imagination, the mental picture can attain the highest degree of intensification, but there is naturally a limit to human powers. When this limit is reached, a leap into the abyss is possible only by the sustaining power which is now added to the Yogin by the Buddhas of the ten quarters. Thus the name, reflection or visualization and actualization are the natural order of things playing the most important role in the system of the Pure Land teaching.

It was owing to Shan-tao's¹ pietistic synthesis that the visualizing meditation, the nominalistic attitude, and the rebirth in the Pure Land were made to form a system, which was to be put into active service by means of the Nembutsu; that is, by constantly and singlemindedly pronouncing the name of Amitābha Buddha. After him, visualization gradually ceased to be upheld and nominalism came to reign over the entire school of the Pure Land. In China the koan exercise had about this time probably been gaining influence along with the prevalence of nominalism, but in Japan the establishment of the Pure Land school as an independent sect greatly helped the growth of the Nembutsu; that is, the vocal Nembutsu.

The transition of emphasis from idealism to nominalism, from the singleminded thinking to the vocal recitation, may be traced in the following passage from the An-lê-chi of Tao-ch'o, who answers the question how the Nembutsu is to be practised:

'It is like a man travelling through the wilderness who happens to be attacked by a highwayman. The latter savagely threatens the traveller at the point of the sword and if his order is not obeyed, is ready to murder him. The traveller fleeing away from the impending peril observes a stream before him. Before reaching it, he reflects: "When I come to the river, should I cross it with my dress on or not? As to undressing myself there may not be time enough for it. But even when I jump into it with all my things on, my head and neck may not be safe enough from the attack." At this critical moment he has indeed no other thought than devising the way to get to the other side of the river. His mind is exclusively devoted to it. It is the same with the devotee of the Nembutsu. When he thinks of the Buddha Amitābha, his mind should be exclusively occupied with the thought, so that it has no room left for anything else.

'Whether he thinks (nien) of the Dharmakāya of the Buddha, or of his supernatural powers, or of his Prajñā, or of the light issuing from his hair-tuft, or of his physical features, or of his Original Vow, let the devotee uninterruptedly pronounce (ch'êng) the name of the Buddha with singleness of thought so that no room is left in his mind for anything else, and he is sure to be reborn in the presence of the Buddha.'

At such a critical moment as described here it is doubted whether the devotee has enough room left in his mind to do any sort of reflection. All that he can do will be pronouncing the name of the Buddha, for he cannot have any psy-chological time which is to be devoted to thinking of the Buddha's virtues or powers or features. In this case his Nembutsu (nien-fo, literally, 'thinking of the Buddha') cannot be more than a shōmyō (ch'êng-ming, literally, 'pronouncing or uttering the name'). For in the pronouncing of the name of the Buddha, that is, in reciting the Nembutsu, his whole being is absorbed; this is all he can do consciously, there can be no other thoughts in his field of consciousness.

Shan-tao distinguishes, in his commentary on the sūtra of Meditations, two kinds of devotional practice for the Nembutsu devotee, 'proper' and 'mixed'. The 'proper practice' consists in thinking (nien) of the name of the Buddha Amitābha with singleness of thought. But here too 'thinking of the name' has no meaning except when the name is deliberately pronounced. This kind of thinking is effective only when the vocal nerves and muscles are set in motion in accompaniment with the mental representation. In fact, it is doubtful whether any thinking, high or low, can be carried on without its muscular accompaniment, however slight and imperceptible it may be.

Adding to this psychological fact, the Pure Land philosophers propose the theory that the name (nāmadheya) is the repository of all the virtues belonging to the Buddha, that is to say, of all the inner attainments and virtues belonging to one Amitābha Buddha such as the fourfold knowledge, the triple body, the tenfold power, the fourfold fearlessness, etc. Together with all his external functions and virtues including his excellent features, his illuminating rays of light, his discourses on the Dharma, his deeds of salvation, etc.—they are all included in the name of the Buddha Amitābha.¹ Thus, as we see further on, psychology and philosophy have combined to lay entire stress of the Nembutsu teaching on the pronouncement of the name.

In the Wūjō-yōshyu (Fas. II, Part 1), compiled by Genshin (942-1017), who was one of the forerunners of the Jōdo (Pure Land) school of Buddhism in Japan, the author raises the question: 'Is Nembutsu-Samādhi to be gained by mere meditation or by vocal recitation?' The answer is given by a quotation from Chisha-daishi's Maka-shikwan (Chih-chê Tai-shih's Mo-he-chih-kuan)² Fas. II, Part 1: 'Sometimes recitation and meditation go on hand in hand, sometimes meditation precedes and recitation follows, sometimes recitation comes first and then meditation. When recitation and meditation go on thus in constant succession and without interruption each thought as well as each sound is fixed on Amitābha.'³ In this, the vocal Nembutsu is not yet brought out sufficiently prominently.

It was Hōnen (1133-1212) who, following the teaching of Shan-tao, emphasized the Nembutsu; that is, the recitation of the Buddha's name. This was regarded as the most important practice in the Pure Land school when the devotees wished to be re-born in the Land of Amida. Praising his virtues, making offerings, bowing before him, reading the sūtras, and meditating on him—these were by no means to be slighted, but the chief act of piety consisted

To confirm this view, Hōnen again quotes Shan-tao, according to whom the Nembutsu is easier to practise than any other deeds of devotion. The question as to why meditation is set aside in preference to singleminded recitation is answered thus: 'It is because sentient beings are all very heavily handicapped with hindrances, and the world in which they are living is full of subtle temptations; it is because their mind is too disconcerted, and their intelligence too clumsy, and their spirit too wandering. Meditation, therefore, is not theirs. Taking pity on them, the Buddha advises them to concentrate on reciting his name, for when this is practised without interruption the devotee is sure of his rebirth in the Land of in the recitation [ch'êng-ming). By constantly uttering his name with devotion, in whatever posture one may be in, whether sitting or standing, lying down or walking, he will surely, after some time has elapsed, be taken by Amida into his abode of happiness. For this, according to the masters of the Jōdo school, is in full accordance with the teachings of the sūtras; that is to say, with the original vows of the Buddha.

Hōnen then proceeds to state that thinking or meditating is reciting, the two being the same; that to think of Amida is to recite his name and vice versa. Nembutsu, 'thinking of the Buddha', has thus come to be completely identified with shōmyō, 'reciting or pronouncing the name'; meditation has turned into recitation. What may be termed the Buddhist philosophy of nominalism has come to occupy the minds of the Pure Land devotees, for they now realize the presence in the name of something that goes altogether beyond conception. My object is now to study the psychological signification of this vocal Nembutsu and to see in what relationship it stands to the koan exercise as practised by followers of Zen.

Footnotes

1 It is not quite proper to use a scholastic term in this connection, but my idea is to distinguish here the aspect of the Nembutsu exercise in which the significance of the name is held up more emphatically against all other considerations. By 'nominalism', therefore, I wish to indicate roughly the principle operating in the emphatical upholding of the name as efficacious to mature the Samādhi of Oneness, or in being born in the Pure Land of Amitābha. 'Idealism' or 'conceptualism' will then mean the attitude of Prajñāpāramitā philosophers who endeavour to describe the ultimate nature of Reality by means of highly abstract, conceptualistic terms which are generally negativistic.

2 There are three Chinese translations of this sūtra, the first of which appeared in A.D. 503 and the last in A.D. 693. It is generally known as a sūtra on Prajñāpāramitā expounded by Mañjuśrī. The Buddhist Tripitaka, Taisho Edition, Nos. 232, 233, and 220 (7).

1 'Samādhi of One Deed (?)', in Man-t'o-lo's version, is the 'Samādhi of One Form Array' (ekanimitta (?) vyūhasamādhi) in Hsüan-tsang's translation. In the Sanskrit text now extant this Samādhi is called ekavyūhasamādhi. Vyūha is generally rendered as chuang-yen in Chinese, meaning 'embellishment', 'array', or 'arrangement in order'. The sense is, however, not to arrange things merely for the sake of decoration; it is to fill the abstract barrenness of Reality with multiplicities, and it may be regarded sometimes as synonymous with 'individualization', or 'particular objects'. Ekavyūha, therefore, may mean 'one particular object' and ekavyūha-samādhi 'a samādhi with one object in view'. It is difficult to take hsing to be equivalent to uyūha, for hsing is usually caryā.

The passage containing the account of the i-hsing samādhi is missing in Samghapāla's translation, which fact suggests its later addition. Probably the earlier text of the Saptaśatikā-Prajñāpāramitā sūtra thoroughly retained the characteristic features of Prajñā-paramita philosophy with no admixture of the visualizing meditation and also of the nominalistic trend of thought.

1 In the Hsüan-tsang version no reference is made to the recitation (ch'êng), thus: 'If sons and daughters of good family wish to enter upon this Samādhi, let them retire to a solitary place away from confusions, and sit cross-legged without thinking of forms of any kind; let them, in order to benefit all sentient beings, single-mindedly and collectively take hold of the [Buddha's] name and reflect well on his personality, while turning in the direction where the Buddha is and facing him in the proper attitude. To have their thoughts continually fixed on this one Buddha is thereby to see all the Buddhas of the past, present, and future.'

In the Sanskrit Saptaśatikā, we have simply 'tasya nāmadheyam grahi-tavyan'.

1 This is also known as the Bhadrapāla Bodhisattva sūtra because this is the name of the interlocutor in the sūtra. There are four extant Chinese translations of it. The first one was done by Lou-chia-ch'ien as early as A.D. 179. It is one of the authoritative sources of the Pure Land teaching. See also pp. 171 f.

1 Died A.D. 68i.

1 From Hōnen's Passages Relative to the Nembutsu and Original Vows (Senjyaku nembutsu-hongwanshu), Fas. I. In this Hōnen attempts to explain his position as founder of the Nembutsu school in Japan.

2 The Taisho Tripitaka, No. 1911.

3 Soon after this, Genshin quotes another authority in the Jōdo teaching, Huai-kan: 'According to the sūtra of the Meditations, this one harassed to the extreme has no time to think of the Buddha; but being advised by good friends he recites the name of the Buddha Amitābha, and thereby he is enabled to keep up his recitation uninterruptedly and with sincerity of heart.—In a similar manner, let those who wish to attain a Samādhi in the Nembutsu keep up their recitation audibly without stopping, and they will surely realize the Samādhi and see the holy congregation of the Buddhas right before them as in the daylight.—The louder you recite the name of the Buddha at the top of your voice the easier the attainment of the Samādhi of the Nembutsu. When your recitation is not loud enough, the mind is liable to distraction. This will be found out by the Yogin himself without being told by others.'