. from vedic india to buddhist japan 1047
past. Thus, it is not mantra in isolation that defines tantra, any more
than mudrā or mandala in isolation do so. By focusing on rituals as a
whole we can also avoid thinking that we have discovered connections
when all we have found is a similarity. Furthermore, even a “continu-
ity of elements does not signify identity of rites,” as Gudrun Bühne-
mann has noted (1988, 31).
Extraordinary Language: From Mantra and Dhāraṇī to Nenbutsu
and Daimoku
Indic philosophy of language informed Buddhist praxis from the time
of the Buddha Śākyamuni forward. Protective invocations, calling on
the extraordinary powers of the Buddha, constitute a very early stra-
tum of Buddhist literature, the parittas. Dhāraṇīs are found as the
valued possessions of bodhisattvas in such Mahāyāna works as the
Lotus Sūtra (Payne 2001). These ideas regarding the efficacy of extraor-
dinary language contributed to the importance of mantra in tantric
Buddhism, and these ideas and practices were brought from India to
East Asia as part of Buddhist culture.
The continuity of form of ritualized linguistic usages is particularly
noteworthy. Sanskrit expressions such as namas (namu ) are not
only found in tantric recitations but extend to the practices of Japanese
Buddhist sects that specifically identify themselves in contrast to tan-
tra—comprising a part of the “penumbra” of tantra in East Asia. One
instance is the Pure Land practice of reciting the name of Amida, the
nenbutsu ( ), “to keep the Buddha in mind.” The term “mantra”
itself is explained in terms of this mnemonic function. The extension
of Indic philosophies of language to East Asia is not limited either
to the simple repetitive use of linguistic forms or to terminology for
identifying those forms. Pure Land understandings of the efficacy of
keeping the Buddha in mind, as found in the Contemplation Sūtra,
for example, are also another expression of the idea that a ritualized
identification with the buddha transforms the practitioner. Much the
same can be said for the Nichiren practice of reciting the title of the
Lotus Sūtra, commonly known as daimoku ( ).
That there is a direct historical link in these examples, rather than
just a vaguely defined “influence,” is suggested by the fact that Hōnen
and Shinran, the founders of Japanese Pure Land, and Nichiren were
all trained as Tendai monks on Mt. Hiei. It is, then, more a matter
of sectarian rhetorics of rupture than of historical continuity that