The Vinaya Pitaka In Japanese Buddhism: Historical Position, Practice-Based Tensions, and Cultural Adaptation

Öz

Vinaya Pitaka, the monastic rule text containing the rules set by Buddha, has continued to exist as one of the foundations of the Buddhist monastic institution and Buddhist tradition from its beginning to the present day. It has shaped the monastic institution and the monastic identity in Buddhist schools. Despite this important state in Buddhism, the position of Vinaya Pitaka has been uncertain and uneven from the beginning in Japanese Buddhism. According to official records, the Vinaya rules were put into practice about two hundred years after Buddhism came to Japan in the sixth century AD. Before it could fully penetrate the Japanese Buddhist monastic institution and the monastic identity, it was largely abolished by the radical stance of Saichō, the founder of the Tendai school, who rejected the Vinaya rules and established a monastic discipline based solely on bodhisattva precepts, which became influential in Japanese Buddhism in general. But the tension regarding Vinaya did not end after this date and the Kamakura period (1185-1333) and the Edo period (1603-1868) witnessed attempts to re-implement the Vinaya rules. These attempts either remained formal and superficial in nature, responding to allegations of corruption in the monastery, or were rather exceptional and did not lead to a general change in practice. Today, Vinaya Pitaka is not included in the curriculum of Japanese Buddhist schools, except for a few lineages corresponding to a small group. This article examines the position of the Vinaya Pitaka in Japanese Buddhism based on practices in Japanese Buddhist schools, considering Hajime Nakamura's analyses of the Japanese thought system. It aims to analyze how fundamental characteristics of Japanese identity and culture influenced the position and implementation methods of the Vinaya Pitaka in Japanese Buddhism. It analyses the historical position of the monastic rules text Vinaya Pitaka within Japanese Buddhism and offers an analysis aimed at understanding why the Vinaya was not accepted as a normative authority in Japan. The question is why the Vinaya Pitaka could not find an institutional and continuous area of practice in the Japanese Buddhist tradition. The thesis is that the fundamental structural elements of Japanese culture and identity—especially this-worldliness and the spirit of tolerance and conciliation—struggled to harmonize with immutable structures like the Vinaya; therefore, while the Vinaya maintained its theoretical importance in Japanese Buddhism, it could not find a systematic area of practical application. That is to say, the conflict between the rigid nature of the Vinaya rules and the adaptive character of Japanese culture has prevented the Vinaya rules from being fully adopted and practiced. In this context, Japanese Buddhism, instead of implementing the strict monastic regulations contained in the Vinaya, either completely neglected these rules or developed alternative literatures tailored to cultural and social expectations. The attitudes and practices adopted by the Tendai, Shingon, and Zen schools regarding the Vinaya appear to support this claim.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• History of Religions
• Japanese Buddhism
• Vinaya Pitaka
• Monastic Rules
• Bodhisattva Precepts
• Shingi.

Japon Budizmi’nde Vinaya Pitaka: Tarihsel Konum, Uygulama Temelli Gerilimler ve Kültürel Adaptasyon

Öz

Buddha tarafından belirlenmiş manastır kurallarını içeren Vinaya Pitaka, başlangıcından günümüze Budist manastır kurumunun temellerinden ve Budist geleneğin ana kaynaklarından biri olarak varlığını sürdürmektedir. Budist manastır kurumu ve keşiş kimliği başlangıçtan itibaren Vinaya Pitaka tarafından şekillendirilmiştir. Budizmde’ki bu önemli konumuna rağmen, Vinaya Pitaka’nın Japon Budizmi’ndeki varlığı ve uygulanırlığı Budizm’in altıncı yüzyılda Çin’den Japonya’ya naklinden itibaren belirsiz ve gerilimli olmuştur. Vinaya’nın uygulamaya konulması Budizm’in Japonya’ya intikalinden ancak iki yüzyıl kadar sonra Nara okulları ile mümkün olmuştur. Fakat Japon Budist manastır kurumuna ve keşiş kimliğine nüfuz etme imkânı bulamadan Tendai okulunun kurucusu Saichō’nun Vinaya kurallarını reddedip yalnızca bodhisattva ilkelerine dayalı bir manastır disiplini kurma yönündeki radikal tutumu, Japon Budizmi’nin genelinde etkili olmuş ve Vinaya’nın Japon Budist manastırlarındaki uygulanırlığı büyük oranda ortadan kalkmıştır. Bu tarihten itibaren de Vinaya ile ilgili gerilim devam etmiş, Kamakura Dönemi (1185-1333) ve Edo Dönemi’nde (1603-1868) Vinaya kurallarını tekrardan yürürlüğe koyma teşebbüsleri ortaya çıkmıştır. Fakat bu teşebbüsler de ya yozlaşma iddialarına karşı cevap verme niteliğinde biçimsel ve yüzeysel kalmış ya da oldukça istisnai kalarak genele yayılan bir uygulama değişikliğine yol açmamıştır. Günümüzde de Vinaya Pitaka küçük bir gruba karşılık gelen birkaç silsile dışında Japon Budist okullarının müfredatında yer almamaktadır. Bu makale, Vinaya Pitaka’nın Japon Budizmi’ndeki konumunu; Japon Budist okullarındaki uygulamalar temelinde, Hajime Nakamura’nın Japon düşünce sistemine dair çözümlemeleri ışığında ele almaktadır. Japon kimlik ve kültürünün temel özelliklerinin Vinaya Pitaka’nın Japon Budizmi’ndeki konumu ve uygulanma biçimlerini nasıl etkilediğini analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Manastır kuralları metni Vinaya Pitaka’nın Japon Budizmi içerisindeki tarihsel konumunu sorgulamakta, Japonya’da Vinaya’nın neden normatif bir otorite olarak kabul edilmediğini anlamaya yönelik bir analiz sunmaktadır. Temel araştırma sorusu, Vinaya Pitaka’nın neden Japon Budist geleneğinde kurumsal ve sürekli bir uygulama alanı bulamamış olduğudur. Temel tezi ise: Japon kültür ve kimliğinin temel yapısal unsurlarının—özellikle bu dünya odaklılık ve hoşgörü/uzlaşma ruhu- Vinaya gibi değiştirilemez yapılarla uyum kurmakta zorlandığı; bu nedenle Vinaya’nın Japon Budizmi’nde teorik olarak önemini korusa da pratikte sistematik bir uygulama alanı bulamadığı yönündedir. Diğer bir deyişle, Vinaya kurallarının katı doğası ile Japon kültürünün uyarlanabilir doğası arasındaki çatışma, Vinaya kurallarının tam olarak benimsenmesini ve uygulanmasını engellemiştir. Bu bağlamda Japon Budizmi, Vinaya’nın içerdiği katı manastır kurallarını uygulamak yerine, bu kuralları ya tamamıyla ihmal etmiş ya da kültürel ve toplumsal beklentilere uygun alternatif uygulamalar geliştirmiştir. Tendai, Shingon ve Zen okulunun Vinaya ile ilgili benimsemiş olduğu tutum ve uygulamaların da bu iddiayı desteklediği görülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dinler Tarihi
• Japon Budizmi
• Vinaya Pitaka
• Manastır Kuralları
• Bodhisattva İlkeleri
• Shingi.

Kaynakça

1. Abe, Yoshiya “Religious Freedom under the Meiji Constitution.” Contemporary Religions in Japan 11:1/2 (1970): 27-79.
2. Baroni, Helen J.. Obaku Zen: The Emergence of the Third Sect of Zen in Tokugawa Japan. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2000.
3. Bauer, Mikael. “The Six Nara Schools.” Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Religion. 2018.
4. https://oxfordre.com/religion/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.001.0001/acrefore-9780199340378-e-573 (12.06.2024).
5. Bodiford, William M. “Bodhidharma’s Precepts in Japan.” Going Forth; Visions of Buddhist Vinaya, ed.William M. Bodiford, içinde 185-209. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2005.
6. Bodiford, William. “Anraku Ritsu: Genealogies of the Tendai Vinaya Revival in Early Modern Japan.” The Eastern Buddhist, 49:1/2 (2018), 181-210.
7. Borup, Jorn. “Contemporary Budist Priests and Clergy,” Handbook of Contemporary Japanese Religions, ed. Inken Prohl ve John Nelson, içinde 107-132. Leiden:Brill, 2012.
8. Borup, Jørn. Japanese Rinzai Zen Buddhism: Myōshinji, a Living Religion, Leiden: Brill, 2008.

9. Bukkyōgo dai jiten 仏教語大辞, edited by Nakamura Hajime, c.2. Tokyo: Tōkyō Shoseki. 1975.
10. Clarke, Shayne. “Miscellaneous Musing on Mulasarvastivada Monks: The Mulasarvastivada Vinaya in Tokugawa Japan.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies, 33:1 (2006):1-49.
11. Collcutt, Martin. “The Early Ch’an Monastic Rule: Ch’ing kuei and the Shaping of Ch’an Community Life.” Early Ch’an in China and Tibet, ed. Whalen Lai ve Lewis R. Lancaster, içinde 165-184. USA:Asian Humanities Press, 1983.
12. Collcutt, Martin. Five Mountains; The Rinzai Zen Monastic Institution in Medieval Japan. USA: Harvard University Press, 1981.
13. Covell, Stephen G. Japanese Temple Buddhism: Worldliness in a Religion of Renunciation. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2005.
14. Deal, William E. ve Brian Ruppert, A Cultural History of Japanese Buddhism. West Sussex: Wiley Blackwell, 2015.
15. Dobbins, James C. “Precepts in Japanese Pure Land Buddhism: Jōdoshū.” Going Forth; Visions of Buddhist Vinaya, ed.William M. Bodiford, içinde 236-254. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2005.
16. Dōgen. Dōgen’s Pure Standarts for the Zen Community A Translation of the Eihei Shingi. çev.Taigen Daniel Leighton ve Shohaku Okumura, New York: State University of New York Press, 1996.
17. Dōgen. Shōbōgenzō The True Dharma-Eye Treasury. c.4, çev.Gudo Wafu Nishijima ve Chodo Cross, USA: BDK America, 2008.
18. Eisai. “A Treatise on Letting Zen Flourish.” çev. Gishin Tokiwa. Zen Texts içinde, 43-238. USA: Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 2005.
19. Foulk,T. Griffith. ““Rules of Purity” in Japanese Zen.” Zen Classics: Formative Texts in the History of Zen Buddhism, ed. Steven Heine ve Dale S.Wright, içinde 137-169. UK: Oxford University Press, 2006.
20. Groner, Paul “Ninkū Jitsudō’s View of the Hinayana Precepts.” Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies 50:1 (2001), 519-523.
21. Groner, Paul. “Annen, Tankei, Henjō and Monastic Discipline in Tendai School: The Background of the Futsū jubosatsukai kōshaku.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 14:2/3 (1987), 129-159.
22. Groner, Paul. “Debates on What Reviving the Precepts the Precepts and Vinaya Meant in Thirteenth Century Japan.” 駒澤大學禪硏究所年報特別号 (2020):19-39.
23. Groner, Paul. Precepts, Ordinations, and Practice in Medieval Japanese Tendai, Honolulu: University of Hwaii Press, 2022.
24. Groner, Paul. Ryōgen and Mount Hiei: Japanese Tendai in the Tenth Century. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2002.
25. Groner, Paul. Saichō: The Establishment of the Japanese Tendai, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2000.
26. Henshall, Kenneth. Historical Dictionary of Japan to 1945. Toronto: The Scarecrow Press, 2014.
27. Hirakawa, Akira, A History of Indian Buddhism From Śākyamuni to Early Mahayana, çev. Paul Groner, USA: University of Hawaii Press, 1990.
28. https://japan.kantei.go.jp/constitution_and_government_of_japan/constitution_e.html 1946 anayasası (İngilizce)
29. https://www.ndl.go.jp/constitution/e/shiryo/04/131/131_005l.html 1946 anayasası (Japonca)
30. Itajiki, Masumi. “Shoki Shinshū ni okeru Tōgoku Monto Kairitsukan: 初期真宗における東国門徒の戒律観.” 印度學佛教學研究,66:2(2018), 665-668.
31. Japanese-English Buddhist Dictionary: Nichi-Ei Bukkyo Jiten日英佛敎辭典. Tokyo: Kenkyusha Printing Co., 1965.
32. Jaffe, Richard M. Neither Monks Nor Layman: Clerical Marriage in Modern Japanese Buddhism, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2011.
33. Jaffe, Richard. “Meiji Religious Policy, Sōtō Zen, and the Clerical Marriage Problem.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 25:1/2 (1998), 45-85.
34. Jaffe, Richard. “The Debate over Meat Eating in Japanese Buddhism.” Going Forth; Visions of Buddhist Vinaya, ed.William M. Bodiford, içinde 253-276. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2005.
35. Jikō, Hazama. “The Characteristic of Japanese Tendai.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 14:2/3 (1987), 101-112.
36. Keizan. Zen Master Keizan’s Monastic Regulations. Çev. Ichimura Shohei. Washington: North American Institute of Zen and Buddhist Studies, 1994.
37. Kenryo, Minowa. “The Change of the Meaning of the Word 'tsuju' in Japan.” Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies,41:1(1992), 507-511.
38. Kenryo, Minowa. “The Movement of the Revival of the Precepts by Ritsu School in Medieval Japan.” The Eastern Buddhist 39:2 (2008): 125-157.
39. Ketelaar, Edward. Of Heretics and Martyrs in Meiji Japan, Buddhism and Its Persecution, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990.
40. Kūkai. Major Works. çev. Yoshito S. Hakeda. New York: Colombia University Press, 1972.
41. Meeks, Lori. “Vows for the Masses: Eison and the Popular Expansion of Precept-Conferral Ceremonies in Premodern Japan.” NVMEN 56 (1), 1-43.
42. MacBain, Abigail Ironside. “Precepts and Performances: Overseas Monks and the Emergence of Cosmopolitan Japan.” Doktora Tezi, Colombia University, 2021.
43. Matsuo, Kenji. A History of Japanese Buddhism. Kent: Global Oriental, 2007.
44. Matsuo, Kenji. “What is Kamakura New Buddhism?: Official Monks and Reclusive Monks.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 24:1/2 (1997), 179-189.
45. Kenji, Matsuo. “Shinpojiumu : Nippon Bukkyō ni okeru Kairitsu o saikōsuru:シンポジウム:日本仏教における戒律を再考する.”日本仏教綜合研究,14 (2016), 41-74.
46. Maxey, Trent E. The “Greatest Problem”: Religion and State Formation in Meiji Japan, Harward University Asia Center, 2014.
47. Moerman, D. Max. “The Archeology of Anxiety: An Underground History of Heian Religion.” Heian Japan, Center and Peripheries, ed. Mikael S. Adolphson, içinde 245-271. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2007.
48. Müller, Charles. “Shinbunritsu:四分律.” Dijital Dictionary of Buddhism. http://buddhism-dict.net/cgi-bin/xpr-ddb.pl?q=%E5%9B%9B%E5%88%86%E5%BE%8B. (06.06.2024).
49. Müller, Charles. “Risshū: 律宗.” Dijital Dictionary of Buddhism, http://buddhism-dict.net/cgi-bin/xpr-ddb.pl?q=%E5%BE%8B%E5%AE%97 (06.06/2024)
50. Nakamura, Hajime. Ways of Thinking of Eastern Peoples: India, China, Tibet, Japan. çev. Philip P. Wiener. Honolulu: University of Hawaii, 1971.
51. Ōtani,Yuka. “Nissō sō Shunjō to Nanto Kairitsu Fukkō Undo:入宋僧俊芿と南都戒律復興運動,” 印度學佛教學研究, 65:2 (2017), 605-611.
52. Pinte, Klaus. “Shingon Risshū: Esoteric Buddhism and Vinaya Orthodoxy in Japan.” Esoteric Buddhism and the Tantras in East Asia, ed.Charles D. Orzech, içinde 845-853. Leiden: Brill, 2011.
53. Pinte, Klaus. “The Samaya Code: Esotericization of Buddhist Precepts in Japan.” Doktora Tezi, Universiteit Gent, 2013.
54. Reader, Ian. Pratically Religious: Worldly Benefits and the Common Religion of Japan. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1998.
55. Rigs, David E. “Are Sōtō Zen Precepts for Ethical Guidance or Ceremonical Transformation? Menzan’s Attempted Reforms and Contemporary Practices.” Dōgen and Sōtō Zen, ed. Steven Heine, içinde 188-210. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015.
56. Rodd, Laurel Rasplica. Nichiren: Selected Writings, Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii, 1980.
57. Sakuma,Yui. “Kokan Shiren no Zenkaisō:虎関師錬の禅戒思.” 印度學佛教學研究, 71:1 (2022), 164-167.
58. Sato, M. “Kobo Daishi no Kairitsukan: 弘法大師の戒律観.” 密教文化, 175 (1991), 59-75.
59. Shimobata, Keisuke. “Ōjōyōshū-giki ni okeru Hōnen no Ōjōyōshū Kaishaku - Jikai no yōhi o megutte: 往生要集義記における法然の往生要集解釈-持戒の要否をめぐって-.” 印度學佛教學研究,69:1(2020), 132-135.
60. Shūkyō Nenkan 宗教年鑑, Bunkachō, 2023.
61. Standart Observances of the Soto Zen School (Sōtōshū Gyōji Kihan曹洞宗行持軌範). c.1, Çev. T.Griffith Foulk, Tokyo: The Administrative Headquarters of Soto Zen Buddhism, 2008.
62. Susuz Aygül, Merve. “Orta Çağ Sōtō Zen Budizminde Manastır Hayatı ve Dindarlık.” Doktora Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul, 2021.
63. Taikō Yamasaki, Shingon: Japanese Esoteric Buddhism, Boston: Shambhala, 1988.
64. Teeuwen, Mark ve Fabio Rambelli. Buddhas and Kami in Japan, Honji suijaku as a combinatory paradigm. London:Routledge, 2003.
65. The Book of the Discipline (Vinaya-Pitaka). c.1. çev. I.B. Horner. Lancester: The Pali Text Society, 1949.
66. The Book of the Discipline (Vinaya-Pitaka). c.4. çev. I.B. Horner. Lancester: The Pali Text Society, 2007.
67. The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Zen Buddhism. ed.Helen j. Baroni. New York: The Rosen Publishing Group, 2002.
68. Toshio, Kuroda. “The Discourse on the “Land of Kami” (Shinkoku) in Medieval Japan: National Consciousness and International Awareness.” Çev. Fabio Rambelli, Japanese Journal of Religious Studies c.23, No.3-4 (1996), 353-385.
69. Toshio, Kuroda. “Buddhism and Society in the Medieval Estate System.” Çev.Suzanne Gay. Japanese Journal of Religious Studies c.23, 3-4 (1996), 287-319.
70. Toshio, Kuroda. “The Development of the Kenmitsu System as Japan’s Medieval Orthodoxy.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 3/4 (1996), 233–69.
71. Uno, Mark. “As Appropriate: Myōe Kōben and the problem of the Vinaya in early Kamakura Buddhism.” Doktora Tezi, Stanford University, 1994.
72. Wachutka, Michael Kokugaku in Meiji-Period. Leiden: Global Oriental, 2013.
73. Waka, Shirato. “Inherent Enlightenment (“Hongaku shisō”) and Saichō’s Acceptance of the Bodhisattva Precepts.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 14:2/3 (1987): 113-127.
74. Walsh, Dermott S. “Paradigm of Practices: The Nature of the Precepts in Eisai’s Zen.” The Eastern Buddhist 49:1/2 (2018), 129-146.
75. Watt, Paul B. “Shingon's Jiun Sonja and His "Vinaya of the True Dharma" Movement.” Religions of Japan in Practice, ed. George J. Tanabe, içinde 71-77, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999.
76. Welter, Albert. “Eisai’s Promotion of Zen for the Protection of the Country,” Religions of Japan in Practice, ed. George J. Tanabe, içinde 63-70, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999.
77. Yifa. The Origins of Buddhist Monastic Codes in China: An Annotated Translation and Study of the Chanyuan Qinggui. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2002.
78. Zengaku daijiten 禪學大辭典. Ed. Komazawa Daigaku Hensanjo 駒澤大學編纂所, Tōkyo: Taishūkan shoten, 1985.