. kkai and the development of shingon buddhism 705
guishing, Kukai utilized passages from sūtras already familiar to Nara
priests to demonstrate that the truth could be expressed in words and
that the dharmakāya was capable of preaching (which he defined as
all communicative acts of the dharmakāya). The esoteric truth was
propounded by the dharmakāya’s preaching via all sensible media. In
a further departure from conventional Mahāyāna understanding, he
followed his teacher Huiguo’s identification of the dharmakāya with
Mahāvairocana (Dainichi Nyorai ), as explicated in the Dis-
tinguishing (Hakeda 1972, 81).
A major, and radical, characteristic of Kūkai’s Shingon was his
understanding of the doctrine of sokushin jōbutsu (becom-
ing a buddha in one’s very body),^13 explained in the Transforming,
which proposed that it was possible to attain buddhahood (enlighten-
ment) in one’s embodied existence. This contrasted with the ortho-
dox Mahāyāna stance that held ineluctable a long process of rebirths
prior to the attainment of enlightenment. Sokushin jōbutsu, however,
could be achieved through utilization of the “three mysteries” (san-
mitsu ; sanmi; triguhya), the functions of the body, speech, and
mind of the practitioner, which allowed the practitioner, through
kaji (adhiṣthānạ ; empowerment), to participate in the samādhi
(meditation) of Mahāvairocana in a process of mutual interpenetra-
tion called nyū ga gan yū (lit., “entering me, me entering”,
ahaṃkāra).
Mahāvairocana was identical with enlightenment inherent within
the practitioner. Kūkai explained in the same text that Mahāvairocana
consisted of the six great elements (rokudai ; earth, water, fire,
wind, space, and consciousness), its forms were the mandalas, and its
functions were the “three mysteries”, and through this explanation he
was able to show that mind and body, human and universe, were non-
dual. The focus on embodiment in the sokushin jōbutsu doctrine is
characteristic of Kūkai’s approach to Buddhism in its emphasis on the
experience of esoteric truth through embodied ritual practice (Yama-
saki 1988; Payne 1996; Sharf 2003).^
(^13) Translation of this term is problematic and varies according to slight differences
in interpretation.