TANTRIC BUDDHISM (INCLUDING CHINA AND JAPAN)Purity and heterogeneity: the formation of Mikkyo
discourseIn his criticism of Mikky6, Tokuitsu ignored the important fact that Nara and
early He ian Buddhism already contained numerous esoteric (Tantric) elements,
mainly relating to the ritual and meditative apparatus. Among these elements
were those directed toward the political center (e.g., rites for the protection of
the state) and those expressive of cultural and political marginality (e.g., indi-
vidual practices to gain various siddhi) (see KusHIDA 1964, 1-54; HAY AMI 1975;
MuRA y AMA 1987, 1990). We see here a different configuration of the traits that
characterize Indian Tantrism (DuMONT 1979). The ritual apparatus of Nara Bud-
dhism, with regard to both central state rites and marginal individual practices,
was Tantric in that it reversed Buddhist ideals of renunciation by stressing
material benefits and protection of the state (symbolized by the imperial
lineage).^27
Later Shingon scholars stress the "miscellaneous," "unsystematic," and "frag-
mentary" nature of Nara Mikky6, which they label zomitsu ~~:, in contrast to
the pure, systematic, and mature esoteric teachings-junmitsu 1! 'lB -that were
supposedly introduced to Japan by Kiikai. Although the distinction between
zomitsu and junmitsu is often taken for granted, its basic criteria are neither clear
nor objective, and it is thus quite problematic as a description of actual doctrinal
and ritual differences.^28 MISAKJ (1988) has demonstrated the existence of mul-
tiple esoteric trends in Tang China, and of numerous attempts to construct ortho-
doxies. These efforts were continued in Japan by Shingon and Tendai monks.
The junmitsu/zomitsu distinction was the product of just such an effort, one that
rewrote Mikkyo's history to magnify Kiikai's lineage, downplay Tantric prac-
tices and rites prior to Amoghavajra,^29 and belittle subsequent developments in
rival lineages. These efforts, animated by a certain "volonte d'orthodoxie" (a
term used by Bernard Faure), were in large part successful, though the transla-
tion and production of so-called zomitsu texts did not cease (MISAKJ 1988, pp.
146--47). Tantric multiplicity also continued to flourish in marginal cults like
Tachikawa-ryii 1L. !II mt:, local traditions like Shugend6 ~~~, and even "ortho-
dox" Mikky6 as institutionalized lineages proliferated and sometimes integrated
heterodoxical practices.
The Mikkyo daijiten definesjunmitsu as a synonym for ryobu filii$ mikkyo, a
form of Mikky6 that combines the doctrines and practices of the Womb (taizo
Mliil) system and the Diamond or Vajra (kongo ~illYlJ) system. Junmitsu is
believed to be the direct expression of the enlightenment of Dainichi Nyorai
J.:.:. 8 ~n (Mahavairocana), the personification of the Dharmakaya (MD, p.
1108). Zomitsu is synonymous with zobu 4\tB'I~ mikkyo, that is, everything in
Mikky6 that cannot be reduced to junmitsu. It comprises conditioned doctrines
and rituals propounded by Dainichi Nyorai's three communicational and trans-
formational bodies (the tajuyushin 1!B'5t ffl !t, hengeshin ~11::-!f, and torushin
~Vff.!t ), and as such is explicitly inferior to ryobu. This is a major difference