Lineage

[NeonPhoenixNeko]

Hello! I have a brief question.

Who is it that is thought to have taught the tantras used in Shingon? I thought Shakyamuni was always the source, but in this case he seems to play no part in lineage, instead being replaced by Vairocana.

I know in tibet they sometimes say shakyamuni taught tantra and sometimes someone named Vajradhara. I am completely baffled by this as Vajradhara was featured in the BDK's translation of Mahavairocana sutra but seems to be referred to as plural "vajradhara's". What exactly, or who, is Vajradhara, and does it/he play any role in Shingon?

[GDPR_Anonymized001]

Hello! I have a brief question.

Who is it that is thought to have taught the tantras used in Shingon? I thought Shakyamuni was always the source, but in this case he seems to play no part in lineage, instead being replaced by Vairocana.

I know in tibet they sometimes say shakyamuni taught tantra and sometimes someone named Vajradhara. I am completely baffled by this as Vajradhara was featured in the BDK's translation of Mahavairocana sutra but seems to be referred to as plural "vajradhara's". What exactly, or who, is Vajradhara, and does it/he play any role in Shingon?

I'll start by saying I'm not an expert in Shingon (and should probably end my reply with that). However, in the small chance what I do know might be helpful, I'll try to respond.

There is not an easy reply to your question. Any answer given will depend on a deep understanding of the nature of Mahavairocana and Shakyamuni, the three kayas, etc. However, if you read the beginning of the Mahavairocana sutra, for example, it opens by explaining that it is Vairocana preaching.

Your question regarding the role of Vajradhara and the Tibetan perspective is well beyond my knowledge. I can't comment on the Tibetan traditions, at all. Vajradharas, according to the glossary in "Kukai on the Philosophy of Language" can refer to any of the deities holding Vajras that are in attendance around a Buddha. It goes on to explain that there are 19 such deities described in the Mahavairocanabhisambodhi-sutra. (pg 401)

A few years ago I was advised by someone much wiser and accomplished than I that I should put off reading the Mahavairocana sutra and instead focus my time reading basic Mahayana sutra, like the Diamond Sutra, the Vimalakirti Sutra, Lotus Sutra, Lankavatara, etc. I was very grateful for this advice and thought perhaps passing it along might be of benefit.

Out of curiosity, what drew your interest to Shingon?

[Thomas Amundsen]

Hello! I have a brief question.

Who is it that is thought to have taught the tantras used in Shingon? I thought Shakyamuni was always the source, but in this case he seems to play no part in lineage, instead being replaced by Vairocana.

I know in tibet they sometimes say shakyamuni taught tantra and sometimes someone named Vajradhara. I am completely baffled by this as Vajradhara was featured in the BDK's translation of Mahavairocana sutra but seems to be referred to as plural "vajradhara's". What exactly, or who, is Vajradhara, and does it/he play any role in Shingon?

Just a comment on the Tibetan tantra thing. AFAIK, Shakyamuni did not teach any tantras in his Nirmanakaya form. Shakyamuni always manifested in a sambhogakaya form when teaching tantra. This makes sense if you recall the five certainties or perfections of tantra.

[NeonPhoenixNeko]

Your answer was very helpful! I agree that it is good to start with basic sutras. I read both that and the Vajrasekhara Sutra and didn't understand 60% of it. I think it would be great to revisit after working my way up through sutra knowledge.

Tantra knowledge seems a bit out of my league right now, but I am curious about Vajrayana, and Shingon seems far more accessible than the tibetan traditions. At least from what I understand it is one of the early tantra practices from India, so it seems like a good place to start. I am also just fascinated with Japanese culture, and it's what got me interested in Buddhism.

For now I suppose, I won't concern myself too much over the idea of Vajradhara. It seems that it started as being a name for any vajra holder, and later was merged into the idea of a single being. Perhaps this singular Vajradhara is the essence of all other Vajradharas combined? Perhaps somrone with more knowledge could clarify this.

So Shakyamuni taught some but not all Tantras? Some were taught by Vairocana and others by Shakyamuni (regardless of form), are there other well known buddhas who teach tantras?

[Bodhiquest]

Shingon seems far more accessible than the tibetan traditions.

On the contrary; unfortunately only a handful people in the entire world teach Shingon to laypeople openly.

[Grigoris]

Shingon seems far more accessible than the tibetan traditions.

On the contrary; unfortunately only a handful people in the entire world teach Shingon to laypeople openly.

I thought Shingon was largely a tantric lay lineage?

Do you mean teach to UNINITIATED laypeople openly?

[Seishin]

I thought Shingon was largely a tantric lay lineage?

Do you mean teach to UNINITIATED laypeople openly?

As you may already be aware, Japanese Buddhism has their own ordination system. Within that system you are either ordained or a lay person. Outside that system ie from the view point of all other ordination systems based on the vinaya, the ordained clergy in Japan would be viewed as "lay". However, as this is the Shingon subforum and we are talking about Shingon, I feel it is right to make a differentiation between the ordained clergy and lay people, in this instance. Elsewhere in the forum is a different story.

Just my 2 pennies

[GDPR_Anonymized001]

Shingon seems far more accessible than the tibetan traditions.

On the contrary; unfortunately only a handful people in the entire world teach Shingon to laypeople openly.

I thought Shingon was largely a tantric lay lineage?

Do you mean teach to UNINITIATED laypeople openly?

You're correct. There is no vinaya in Shingon (or other Japanese traditions) so technically there are no monastics. As Seishin mentions I think most just sort of understand that this is implied when writing about laypeople or ordained.

That said, I'd be very interested to hear more from Bodhiquest on what he means by "teach Shingon to laypeople openly." Rather surprising statement!

[NeonPhoenixNeko]

Shingon seems far more accessible than the tibetan traditions.

On the contrary; unfortunately only a handful people in the entire world teach Shingon to laypeople openly.

Interesting, what about the books published on Shingon then? BDK released a book on Shingon Texts mostly written by Kukai, are these sorts of teachings not supposed to be taught to uninitiated?

Also when I say more accesible, I mean moreso that it's less confusing to navigate. There are several sects with different viewpoints, a ton of history involved, and even politics. When I read anything on the Tibetan Vajrayana it's like another language, with a handful of terms I'm unfamiliar with! Shingon just seems a bit more straightforward in terms of lineage and philosophy.

[Könchok Thrinley]

I thought Shingon was largely a tantric lay lineage?

Do you mean teach to UNINITIATED laypeople openly?

As you may already be aware, Japanese Buddhism has their own ordination system. Within that system you are either ordained or a lay person. Outside that system ie from the view point of all other ordination systems based on the vinaya, the ordained clergy in Japan would be viewed as "lay". However, as this is the Shingon subforum and we are talking about Shingon, I feel it is right to make a differentiation between the ordained clergy and lay people, in this instance. Elsewhere in the forum is a different story.

Just my 2 pennies

What are then the main differences between ordained and lay people? Are sexual relations somehow restricted for the ordained (for example no one night stands, or no homosexuality, etc)?

[GDPR_Anonymized001]

I thought Shingon was largely a tantric lay lineage?
Do you mean teach to UNINITIATED laypeople openly?

As you may already be aware, Japanese Buddhism has their own ordination system. Within that system you are either ordained or a lay person. Outside that system ie from the view point of all other ordination systems based on the vinaya, the ordained clergy in Japan would be viewed as "lay". However, as this is the Shingon subforum and we are talking about Shingon, I feel it is right to make a differentiation between the ordained clergy and lay people, in this instance. Elsewhere in the forum is a different story.

Just my 2 pennies

What are then the main differences between ordained and lay people? Are sexual relations somehow restricted for the ordained (for example no one night stands, or no homosexuality, etc)?

Shingon is an esoteric tradition so ordination is one of the prerequisites before learning esoteric practices. There are threads in this sub-forum outlining this in a bit more detail.

For other Japanese Buddhist traditions you will need to ask them this question.

[Nyedrag Yeshe]

Shingon seems far more accessible than the tibetan traditions.

On the contrary; unfortunately only a handful people in the entire world teach Shingon to laypeople openly.

I thought Shingon was largely a tantric lay lineage?

Do you mean teach to UNINITIATED laypeople openly?

They are not ordained as per vinaya standards but still pass through a process of ordination (Tokudo) and formal training in a monastery in order to receive proper Mantrayana teachings. This can be seen as preliminaries, but they do this in a very formal setting, not unlike a retreat within a monastic context. Only after proper training, they can lead a "normal", married life and still practice and maybe teach.
http://www.nckoyasan.org/nckoyasan/Discipline.html

[Grigoris]

On the contrary; unfortunately only a handful people in the entire world teach Shingon to laypeople openly.

I thought Shingon was largely a tantric lay lineage?

Do you mean teach to UNINITIATED laypeople openly?

They are not ordained as per vinaya standards but still pass through a process of ordination (Tokudo) and formal training in a monastery in order to receive proper Mantrayana teachings. This can be seen as preliminaries, but they do this in a very formal setting, not unlike a retreat within a monastic context. Only after proper training, they can lead a "normal", married life and still practice and maybe teach.
http://www.nckoyasan.org/nckoyasan/Discipline.html

Thank you for the clarification.

[如傑優婆塞]

Who is it that is thought to have taught the tantras used in Shingon? I thought Shakyamuni was always the source, but in this case he seems to play no part in lineage, instead being replaced by Vairocana.

What we call exoteric Buddhism is the Sūtras of the Sambhogakāyas and Nirmanakāyas. Esoteric Buddhism is the teaching of the Dharmakāya Tathāgata. Kan’en no sho (勸緣疏 / On Encouraging Those with a Connection to Buddhism)

There are three bodies of the Buddhas and two forms of Buddhist doctrine. The doctrine revealed by the Nirmanakāya Buddha (Śākyamuni Buddha) is called Exoteric; it is apparent, simplified, and adapted to the needs of the time and to the capacity of the listerners. The doctrine expounded by the Dharmakāya Buddha (Mahāvairocana) is called Esoteric; it is secret and profound and contains the final truth. 3: Part Three: Major Works of Kūkai: 'The Difference Between Exoteric and Esoteric Buddhism (Benkenmitsu nikyō ron)

Prof. Hakeda adds: His assertion that Esoteric Buddhism was not the doctrine expounded by the historical Buddha was a radical one: everyone believed that literally all of the Buddhist Sūtras had been preached by him. According to Kūkai, the historical Buddha is but one manifestation of Mahāvairocana who exists in history and yet at the same time transcends it. Mahāvairocana in his samādhi is timeless and eternally present in a state of bliss. He goes on to give a detailed summation entitled 'Dharmakāya Mahāvairocana Tathāgata' from pages 81-100. It's too detailed to be reproduced here and that will be your own homework. Part Two: Thought of Kūkai; I: Exoteric Buddhism and Esoteric Buddhism: 'The Difference Between Exoteric and Esoteric Buddhism

I know in tibet they sometimes say shakyamuni taught tantra and sometimes someone named Vajradhara. I am completely baffled by this as Vajradhara was featured in the BDK's translation of Mahavairocana sutra but seems to be referred to as plural "vajradhara's". What exactly, or who, is Vajradhara, and does it/he play any role in Shingon?

From the glossary on 'Vajradhāra': Appendix VII: Glossary, page 401
According to the dàrì jīng shū (my note: Mahāvairocana Sūtra Commentary [大日經疏] by Yīxíng), this term has a profound and a superficial sense. The superficial sense refers to the powerful deities externally holding vajras in attendance around a Buddha, such as the nineteen vajradhāras described at the beginning of the Mahāvairocanābhisaṃbodhi Sūtra. The profound sense refers to the inner retinue (mental events) of Mahāvairocana (the mind king). See mind king. Note: The glossary for 'mind king' on page 377 is too long to be reproduced here.

May I suggest that these two cited books be worth your time and collection on Shingon Buddhism as they come highly recommended and are detailed. There is a qualified teacher that I wish to recommend for you on any further queries. Here's the link. He's here as a member who goes by 'Eijo' (Rev. Eijo) but is more active on that FB page. Pay close attention to their rules on being part of the discussion group.

[NeonPhoenixNeko]

Who is it that is thought to have taught the tantras used in Shingon? I thought Shakyamuni was always the source, but in this case he seems to play no part in lineage, instead being replaced by Vairocana.

What we call exoteric Buddhism is the Sūtras of the Sambhogakāyas and Nirmanakāyas. Esoteric Buddhism is the teaching of the Dharmakāya Tathāgata. Kan’en no sho (勸緣疏 / On Encouraging Those with a Connection to Buddhism)

There are three bodies of the Buddhas and two forms of Buddhist doctrine. The doctrine revealed by the Nirmanakāya Buddha (Śākyamuni Buddha) is called Exoteric; it is apparent, simplified, and adapted to the needs of the time and to the capacity of the listerners. The doctrine expounded by the Dharmakāya Buddha (Mahāvairocana) is called Esoteric; it is secret and profound and contains the final truth. 3: Part Three: Major Works of Kūkai: 'The Difference Between Exoteric and Esoteric Buddhism (Benkenmitsu nikyō ron)

Prof. Hakeda adds: His assertion that Esoteric Buddhism was not the doctrine expounded by the historical Buddha was a radical one: everyone believed that literally all of the Buddhist Sūtras had been preached by him. According to Kūkai, the historical Buddha is but one manifestation of Mahāvairocana who exists in history and yet at the same time transcends it. Mahāvairocana in his samādhi is timeless and eternally present in a state of bliss. He goes on to give a detailed summation entitled 'Dharmakāya Mahāvairocana Tathāgata' from pages 81-100. It's too detailed to be reproduced here and that will be your own homework. Part Two: Thought of Kūkai; I: Exoteric Buddhism and Esoteric Buddhism: 'The Difference Between Exoteric and Esoteric Buddhism

I know in tibet they sometimes say shakyamuni taught tantra and sometimes someone named Vajradhara. I am completely baffled by this as Vajradhara was featured in the BDK's translation of Mahavairocana sutra but seems to be referred to as plural "vajradhara's". What exactly, or who, is Vajradhara, and does it/he play any role in Shingon?

From the glossary on 'Vajradhāra': Appendix VII: Glossary, page 401
According to the dàrì jīng shū (my note: Mahāvairocana Sūtra Commentary [大日經疏] by Yīxíng), this term has a profound and a superficial sense. The superficial sense refers to the powerful deities externally holding vajras in attendance around a Buddha, such as the nineteen vajradhāras described at the beginning of the Mahāvairocanābhisaṃbodhi Sūtra. The profound sense refers to the inner retinue (mental events) of Mahāvairocana (the mind king). See mind king. Note: The glossary for 'mind king' on page 377 is too long to be reproduced here.

May I suggest that these two cited books be worth your time and collection on Shingon Buddhism as they come highly recommended and are detailed. There is a qualified teacher that I wish to recommend for you on any further queries. Here's the link. He's here as a member who goes by 'Eijo' (Rev. Eijo) but is more active on that FB page. Pay close attention to their rules on being part of the discussion group.

Thank you, this is a very detailed response. This answers my question perfectly (at least from the Shingon perspective). I will certainly have a look at these sources. I will contact the reverent if I have any further questions unanswered on this forum!

Also, I had a look at a few of the Kangyur Tantra translations on the website 84000, and it appears that many of the later composed tantras are transmitted by various dharmakaya and samboghakaya, such as Buddha Akshobhya, Avalokitesvara, and even the Nirmanakaya Shakyamuni at times. So I am assuming they are attributed not to a single source but various bodies. Perhaps the later idea of Vajradhara being the source is the fact that he is considered the source of all buddhas and bodhisattvas.

Speaking of which, Samantabhadra as Adi-Buddha is implied within the two main Shingon texts, but Shingon says that Vairocana is Adi-Buddha. Anyone have any guesses why this is?

[如傑優婆塞]

Also, I had a look at a few of the Kangyur Tantra translations on the website 84000, and it appears that many of the later composed tantras are transmitted by various dharmakaya and samboghakaya, such as Buddha Akshobhya, Avalokitesvara, and even the Nirmanakaya Shakyamuni at times. So I am assuming they are attributed not to a single source but various bodies. Perhaps the later idea of Vajradhara being the source is the fact that he is considered the source of all buddhas and bodhisattvas.

If I may offer my musings ...

One: Perhaps, one should consider looking at Shingon in its doctrine & practice from its own ground for the sake of clarity and understanding, at the very least. No amount of extrapolation from other traditions is going to achieve that unless Shingon is thoroughly known on its own home base, just like how this is also applicable to others. There's a common misunderstanding by some from my observation that what's presented in one tradition is taken as some sort of a 'gold standard' to understand the other 'cousin' tradition. Allow me to profer an example here. In past Shingon threads or discussions elsewhere, one may encounter that there's that 'inane' need to force fit Shingon into the Tibetan Buddhist categorisation of tantra classes when none of those narratives apply to the former tradition. And this is dealt with by Rev Eijo:

Link
1. There is no anuttarayoga-tantra in Shingon, and none of the practices and iconography associated with it. Shingon has what corresponds to the kriyā, caryā, and yoga tantras only. Shingon practices no form of "sexual yoga" at all.

2. The system mentioned above of classifiying tantras into four categories is not used in Shingon. Instead, in Shingon tantras are classified into zōmitsu 雑密 and junmitsu 純. Zōmitsu practices have mundane goals, like practices praying for blessings, health, the prosperity of the nation, good harvests, rain making, the ability to memorize Buddhist texts and so on. Junmitsu practices are for perfecting the Mahāyāna bodhisattva path. Both exist in Shingon, with junmitsu being the main practice and zōmitsu existing as a form of skillful means.

This is similarly dealt with in here
Or, there's that thread (pages 2-3 onward) where one poster who comes from an East Asian Buddhist tradition insisted that Shingon had Guru Yoga practice when it exists specifically as a doctrine and practice within the framework of Tibetan Buddhism within the Anuttara/Niruttarayoga scheme, which as already demonstrated, is non-existent in Shingon as can be seen here and directly from the Rev Eijo:

Is there any such thing as guru yoga in the Shingon tradition?

perhaps one finds elements in the tachikawa-ryu because this ryu arose later, when the anuttara yogatantra was already established
http://www.encyclopedia.com/religion/en ... chikawaryu
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachikawa-ryu

Shingon has no guru yoga.

Tachikawaryu was not a form of anuttarayoga tantra at all. It had no guru yoga either.

Two: Suggestions by Rev Eijo on how to understand and approach Shingon: (from the same link)

3. Shingon lacks Tibetan cultural influences, and has instead East Asian cultural influences.

4. Japan had no significant awareness of even the existence of Tibetan Vajrayāna until the 19th century. Since the Bardo Thodol was composed in Tibet, it is utterly unknown to the East Asian tradition. It was first known of in Japan from the Japanese translation of Evan-Wentz's English translation.

5. Not really part of Vajrayāna, but since we are comparing the Shingon and Tibetan traditions, I might note that Shingon doctrinally does not give the most emphasis to Mādhyamika thought. Traditional Shingon doctrinal studies involve a number of areas, including Yogācāra and Mādhyamika in their East Asian forms, called Sanron/Sanlun 三論 and Hossō/Faxiang 法相. To go out on a limb, Shingon thought is perhaps closest to Kegon/Huayan 華嚴 thought. Its practice is not that of Huayan, however; it is tantric practice. Deity yoga is the core practice of Shingon.

Three: The only concern here is as how the Lord advised Aggi-Vacchagotta
Of course you're befuddled, Vaccha. Of course you're confused. Deep, Vaccha, is this phenomenon, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. For those with other views, other practices, other satisfactions, other aims, other teachers, it is difficult to know.

Fourth: In your own words... I will contact the reverent if I have any further questions unanswered on this forum!

Speaking of which, Samantabhadra as Adi-Buddha is implied within the two main Shingon texts, but Shingon says that Vairocana is Adi-Buddha. Anyone have any guesses why this is?

Here's my own speculations:
a. Would that be your own interpretation or is that what the actual (if you could name them) texts mean and understood within Shingon?
b. From the Rev Eijo's book that I linked in my last reply, there are many references and contexts on Fugen /Samantabhadra (vis a vis Kongōsatta / Vajrasattva) but I am unsure if any of that may align with what you have in mind plus I am unsure as to how the term 'ādibuddha' is to be properly contextualised within Shingon but here are some ideas:
i. Remember I posted with reference to Prof Hakeda in his book? He goes on to give a detailed summation entitled 'Dharmakāya Mahāvairocana Tathāgata' from pages 81-100. This is worth your finding out as he analyses various perspectives that looks at various teachers and texts with some historical background & layout of doctrinal stances that may answer your question. As said before, this book comes highly recommended for serious students of Shingon.

ii. A description on one role/aspect of Samantabhdra-Vajrasattva in Shingon (there are many in the cited book)
If [the mantra practitioner] relies on both the teachings of the inner own-realisation of ārya wisdom taught by Vairocana as a svasaṃbhogakāya absorbed in his own inner realisation, and on the wisdom of great Samantabhadra-Vajrasattva, a parasaṃbhogakāya manifested for the liberation of others, then in this lifetime he will encounter a maṇḍala-ācārya [to provide abhiṣeka] and be able to enter the maṇḍala.
Glossary: Fourfold Dharmakāya, 2.2: parasaṃbhogakāya
The Dharmakāya as a saṃbhogakāya manifested for the liberation of others, who teaches the single vehicle for the Bodhisattvas of the Exoteric teachings on the Ten Stages according to their capacity. These Bodhisattvas are still unable to see the Three Mysteries of the Dharmakāya
Sokushin jōbutsu gi (卽身成佛義 / Buddhahood Immediately and in This Body) & Appendix VII: Glossary; Fourfold Dharmakāya, 2.2: parasaṃbhogakāya, page 368

iii. In your own words... I will contact the reverent if I have any further questions unanswered on this forum!

[NeonPhoenixNeko]

Yes, I suppose that it is my own interpretation, I had a look at the texts and it seems that it is nit viewed that way in the Shingon tradition.

I am thinking of learning the Shingon ideology first, as you mentioned, then perhaps expanding my research from there and exploring different viewpoints. But I have to start somewhere I suppose, perhaps I'm getting a little ahead of myself. :p

Also, are you implying that I ask him rather than asking on the forum..?

[NeonPhoenixNeko]

Additionally, it strikes me as odd that Samantabhadra gets so much glorification in these two sutras / tantras. In past Mahayana sutras he is usually considered important, but never to the extent of being the 'essance of the mind of all buddhas' and whatnot. Perhaps this is merely an evolution of thought in early tantra leading to its later forms. But I wonder if it is the very same Samantabhadra mentioned in the Past Vows Sutra among others, there doesn't seem to be a clear cut answer around this though.

[Johnny Dangerous]

Additionally, it strikes me as odd that Samantabhadra gets so much glorification in these two sutras / tantras. In past Mahayana sutras he is usually considered important, but never to the extent of being the 'essance of the mind of all buddhas' and whatnot. Perhaps this is merely an evolution of thought in early tantra leading to its later forms. But I wonder if it is the very same Samantabhadra mentioned in the Past Vows Sutra among others, there doesn't seem to be a clear cut answer around this though.

Samantabhadra the Bodhisattva from the Avatamsaka is not the same as Samantabhadra the primordial Buddha, if that is part of the confusion.

[NeonPhoenixNeko]

Additionally, it strikes me as odd that Samantabhadra gets so much glorification in these two sutras / tantras. In past Mahayana sutras he is usually considered important, but never to the extent of being the 'essance of the mind of all buddhas' and whatnot. Perhaps this is merely an evolution of thought in early tantra leading to its later forms. But I wonder if it is the very same Samantabhadra mentioned in the Past Vows Sutra among others, there doesn't seem to be a clear cut answer around this though.

Samantabhadra the Bodhisattva from the Avatamsaka is not the same as Samantabhadra the primordial Buddha, if that is part of the confusion.

Yes, that is what my confusion is. In the two main Shingon sutras Samantabhadra is mentioned as a bodhisattva, while still being glorified in other parts by various terms such as Vajrasattva-Samantabhadra, The mind-ground of Samantabhadra, etc. I am trying to understand the distinction between the two, if any, within these two texts.