Queequeg wrote: ↑Tue May 25, 2021 3:39 pm
But, that said, I think a big part of his message was to rebel against the exclusivity of Esoteric Buddhism in those days. I think this was the same for Honen and Shinran. He was looking to open the path for all people, not just those who had the capacity and opportunity to become monks.
Well, Vajrayāna tends to create brahmins where there are none, for example Tibetan "ngakpas," especially when it comes to the earlier tantras, like those that spread to China and thence to Japan.
One of the attractive features of Indian Vajrayāna is that it took rituals like homavidhi, burnt offerings, away from brahmins and recontextualized them for Buddhists. For example, Anandagarbha has a whole argument detailing why Buddhist homavidhi is superior to Brahmin homavidhi.
However, Japan, unlike Tibet, was a highly organized society where central authorities were much more present in daily life. With Tibet, you had nomads, bandits, and people pretty much doing as they pleased in areas outside of immediate urban centers and great monastic institutions.
In this sort of Japanese environment, it is easy to see how Buddhism became stratified, and why, in the 13th century, populist forms of Buddhism arose. Actually, my read of Dogen, based on recent reading, was that he was engaged in an idiosyncratic pushback against the populism that exemplified Pure Land and Nichiren, as well as a reform movement aimed at introducing 13th century, Chinese style monastic Chan Buddhism into Japan.
In Tibet, exactly the opposite was happening—there was major institutional pushback against Buddhist populism, especially against the treasure tradition. Also, Mongols were invading... (Dogen also took credit for repelling the Mongols, BTW.)