Buddhism on a Countercurrent: A Case Study of the Hamon

Abstract

In 995, Yuanqing 源淸, a renowned master of the Tiantai school in China, requested the Japanese Buddhist community to critique his work, the Guanjing shu xianyao ji 觀經疏顯要記 (Xianyao ji). In response, Genshin 源信 and Kakuun 覚運, two prominent Japanese Tendai scholars, authored the Kan muryōju kyō sho kenyō ki hamon 観無量寿経疏顕要記破文 (Hamon) containing 21 critiques. This paper examines the historical context, content, and influence of the Hamon. The Hamon serves as an important example of Sino-Japanese Buddhist exchange, as it was the Chinese side that first initiated this intellectual engagement with the Japanese monks—and not the other way around. The analysis of the text indicates that the Hamon was not merely a critique but a platform for intellectual exchange. Genshin and Kakuun’s critiques reflect Silla’s Pure Land Buddhism, whereas Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji embodies the Chinese Tiantai commentary tradition on the Guan wuliangshou jing 觀無量壽經. Although not directly recorded in Chinese sources, some records suggest that the Hamon had reached China and potentially influenced Zhili’s 知禮 thought. This study aims to deepen our understanding of Sino-Japanese Buddhist exchanges during the late 10th and 11th centuries, illustrating what may be described as ‘Buddhism on a countercurrent.’

1. Introduction

The concept of ‘Eastward transmission of Buddhism’ (i.e., India → China → (the Korean Peninsula) → Japan) has been regarded as common knowledge in the study of Buddhist history. However, adopting such a viewpoint carries the risk of overlooking the influence of Buddhism that flowed in the opposite direction. Furthermore, the perspective of ‘from root to branches’ often added to this concept can overlook the uniqueness of the ‘branch’ regions. Ishii (2019, pp. 2–6) has argued that the concept of ‘Eastward transmission of Buddhism’ (bukkyō tō den 仏教東伝) fails to capture the reality of East Asian Buddhist history. Buswell (2005) have also reevaluated the history of Buddhist thought in East Asia, highlighting the significant roles played by Korean monks and challenging the Sino-centric perspective.

To gain a more accurate understanding of the reality of East Asian Buddhism, it is necessary to thoroughly examine the influence and relationships in each specific period and region. Additionally, it is crucial to highlight that the transmission of Buddhism was never a one-way process.

Instances of Buddhism flowing back from Japan to China and Korea have primarily been discussed in the context of modern Buddhist studies, which began after the 19th century. Pre-modern cases have yet to be fully reported. The creation of the Kan muryōju kyō sho kenyō ki hamon 観無量寿経疏顕要記破文 [A Critique of the Sub-commentary Revealing the Essentials of the Commentary on the Sūtra of the Meditation on the Buddha of Immeasurable Life] (circa 999,1 hereafter referred to as the Hamon) 2represents a significant example of Buddhism on a ‘countercurrent,’ as it originated from China’s request for intellectual exchange.

This paper first examines the historical context in which the Hamon was composed, focusing on letters sent by the Chinese Tiantai monk, Yuanqing 源淸 (?–998). It then analyzes the structure and content of the Hamon, and finally considers the influence it may have had after being sent to China.

2. A Letter from China

During the late Tang, Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms periods, Buddhism in China suffered severe setbacks due to continuous wars, as well as the lasting impact of the Huichang persecution of Buddhism (Huichang fei fo 會昌廢佛). During this era, many Buddhist texts were lost, and the once-flourishing doctrinal traditions of Tang Buddhism dwindled to the point of near extinction. In contrast, the country of Wu Yue 吳越, located in the Zhejiang 浙江 region, became a center where many monks gathered due to the active promotion of Buddhism by its kings, as well as the relatively stable conditions in the region (Yanagi 2015, pp. 3–11). Efforts to revive Buddhism were initiated in Wu Yue, and envoys were sent to Japan and Koryŏ 高麗 to re-import Buddhist texts that had been lost in China (Chikusa 2000; Liu 2008). As a result, many Buddhist texts from Koryŏ and Japan were sent to China. Yuanqing, a monk from Fengxian 奉先 Temple in Wu Yue and later a prominent figure in the Off-mountain branch (Shanwai pai 山外派) of the Tiantai school, is believed to have observed these circumstances. Yuanqing likely realized that many Tiantai texts lost in China were preserved in Japan, and that Japanese Buddhist studies were advancing. Eventually, Yuanqing decided to send a letter to Japan.

In 995,3 Yuanqing’s letter arrived in Japan via a commercial ship from China. There were two letters:4 one was addressed to Senga 暹賀, the Chief Monk (zasu 座主) of the Tendai sect on Mount Hiei (Hiei zan 比叡山) (also known as Hokurei 北嶺 [the Northern Mountain]), and the other was directed to the esteemed monks of Mount Hiei renowned for their academic excellence and profound virtue (sekitoku 碩德).

This raises an important question: how did Yuanqing acquire such precise knowledge that the head temple of Japan’s Tendai sect was on Mount Hiei and that the incumbent Chief Monk there was Senga? There are two possible explanations for this.

The first possibility is that Yuanqing was indeed familiar with the situation in Japan. Based on the contents of his letter and other historical sources, it can be confirmed that a monk named Qiyin 齊隱 (fl. late 10th century) served as the courier of the letter. Qiyin was a monk from Shuixin Temple 水心寺 near Qiantang Lake 銭塘湖 in Hangzhou 杭州 who traveled aboard on a merchant vessel of Zhu Rencong 朱仁聰 (fl. 10th century), a Song dynasty merchant engaged in trade between Japan and Song (Hayami 1988, p. 167). Delivering Yuanqing’s letter was not Qiyin’s first journey to Japan. He had previously made a visit to Japan in 987 (the first year of the Eien 永延 era) (Historiographical Institute the University of Tokyo 1928, p. 190), where he met Genshin 源信 (942–1017), one of the leading scholar-monks of Mount Hiei at the time. Qiyin received several Japanese-authored Buddhist texts from him, including Ōjō yōshū 往生要集 [The Essentials of Rebirth in the Pure Land], to bring back to China (Hayami 1988, pp. 140–5). It is reasonable to speculate that Qiyin may have obtained information on Japanese Buddhism from Genshin during this time. Furthermore, Fengxian Temple, where Yuanqing resided, was also located in Hangzhou, the same area as Qiyin’s temple. Thus, it is plausible that Yuanqing learned about the Japanese Buddhist scene from Qiyin, leading him to address his letter to Mount Hiei, the head temple of Japan’s Tendai sect.

Another possibility is that Yuanqing may not have had precise knowledge of the state of Buddhism in Japan. The addressees ‘Senga, the Chief Monk of Hokurei,’ and the ‘esteemed monks of Hokurei,’ appear only in the title of each letter. Since it was uncommon to title a letter, this suggests that the title may have been added later in Japan. In the body of the letter, the recipients are simply referred to as ‘the grand master of the Senglu’ (Senglu dashi 僧録大師) and ‘the esteemed Dharma masters’ (zhu shuode fashi 諸碩德法師). The term Senglu 僧録 denotes the highest-ranking official monastic position responsible for overseeing the registration of monks and the appointment of monastery heads.5 Thus, it appears that Yuanqing sent the letter not to any specific individual but rather to the highest-ranking monk in Japan. The letter was likely delivered by Qiyin, or possibly under the auspices of the Japanese court, to Senga and the esteemed monks of Mount Hiei. In any case, this suggests that Qiyin’s role in delivering the letter was significant.

Given the minimal differences between the two letters, this study will examine only the contents of the letter addressed to the esteemed monks, as follows:

On the sixteenth day of the fourth month of the first year of the Zhidao 至道 (May 18, 995) of the Great Song, I, Yuanqing, a monk of Fengxian Temple in Hangzhou, who transmits the teachings of Tiantai and lectures on sutras and treatises, solemly burnt incense and purified myself to present this letter to the esteemed teachers who transmit the great teachings in Japan. I, Yuanqing, have heard that those who share the same path, though far apart, are connected; those who do not share the same path, though close, are separated. … I, Yuanqing, am merely an ordinary monk from the Wu Yue region. … I have diligently dedicated over twenty-four years to the teachings of the Tiantai Zhiyi 智顗. In the end, I still cannot attain sharp wisdom or reach profound truths. … I only regret that I lack the ability to fly through air or the supernatural power to appear at will [to make my way to Japan]. [I also regret that I am] unable to arrange my robes, sit beside you, and bow to the ground with all five limbs in reverence, to demonstrate the respect between teacher and student. Recently, following each lecture, I, Yuanqing, published two juan 卷 of the Fahua shizhuzhi 法華示珠指 [Revealing the Meaning of the Jewel in the Lotus Sūtra], one juan of the Longnü chengfo yi 龍女成佛義 [Meaning of the Dragon King’s Daughter’s Enlightenment], and two juan of the Shiliuguan jing ji 十六觀經記 [The Sub-commentary on the Sixteen Contemplations Sūtra]. … I now present these works, along with the monk, Qiyin. I respectfully hope that esteemed scholars, whether in the spare moments of discussing profound matters with the Buddha or in the extra time of gathering disciples to expound the Dharma, might briefly review them, offering corrections or pointing out any flaws. How could this blessing be for me alone? All of our disciples would be greatly blessed as well. I, Yuanqing, have always lamented the differences and omissions in the scriptures. I have devoted myself to seeking what is missing. These include works such as the Renwang bore shu 仁王般若疏 [The Commentary on the Humane King Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra], … the Xiao Mituo jing shu 小彌陀經疏 [The Commentary on the Small Amitābha Sūtra]. … I sincerely hope that esteemed scholars, focusing solely on our shared path rather than the physical distance that separates us, will each pass on a copy, facilitating its circulation [in China]. … I vow to dedicate the rest of my life to lecturing on these works and spreading them widely to repay such kindness. In the future, should there be any shortages of Confucian texts or missing passages in Buddhist scriptures in your country, please let me know the titles, and I will append and provide them. … I, Yuanqing, have long admired and deeply yearned [for the greatness of your land], offering countless praises. Further elaboration is respectfully withheld. With profound respect, I bow in homage. 大宋至道元年四月既望，杭州奉先寺傳天台敎講經論僧源清謹薫盟(=盥?)，奉書於日本國傳大敎諸碩德法師座下。源清聞，道同也，雖遠而合，道不同也，雖近而離。… 源清吳越間常僧耳，… 磨鉛策蹇，二紀有餘，於天台智者敎。終未能奮利智達遠理。… 但恨無飛空之術，乏神足之通。莫由攝衣座隅，五體投地，以展師資之禮耳。源清近因講次輒出，法華示珠指二卷，龍女成佛義一卷，十六觀經記兩卷，… 今竝附僧齊隱士呈。幸望諸碩德，或對御(=佛?)談玄之暇，或聚徒說法之餘，略許觀覽，若蒙加點，若得指瑕。豈唯源清幸甚，吾徒皆幸甚。源清常慨敎文殊缺，每功搜贖[sic]。其如仁王般若疏，… 小彌勒(=陀?)經并[sic]疏，… 惟諸碩德，但以道同，不以人遠，各傳一本，使之流通。… 誓當畢此形而講貫，遍諸處以傳行，以此爲報恩也。後國或儒書少本，釋典闕文，希示其名題，尋當附獻也。… 源清嚮仰久矣，思慕深矣，視頌多矣。不宣。和南。6

Yuanqing humbly sought guidance in a tone of respect and modesty in his letter, which elicited a response from Japan filled with surprise and delight. Due to space constraints, a full quotation is omitted here, but the reply sent back to Yuanqing conveyed sentiments such as: ‘A request from distant China—how moving it is! Only now, with white hair, have I come to know this. What is regrettable is that we are separated by vast distances, beyond ten thousand miles of waves. … May we, one day, sit knee to knee beneath the Dragon Flower Tree at the dawn of the third assembly, [when the future Buddha Maitreya descends to save us]’ (中国之遠求，有感哉。臨白首而始知。恨隔面於鼇波万里之外。… 願促膝於龍華三会之朝).7

Upon receiving Yuanqing’s letters, the Japanese authorities set up a panel consisting of the most eminent scholars of their time to review the documents sent by Yuanqing. They also initiated the task of transcribing the requested scriptures.

3. A Critique of the Xianyao ji: The Hamon

Among the documents sent by Yuanqing was the Shiliuguan jing ji, formally titled Guan wuliangshou jing shu xianyao ji 觀無量壽經疏顯要記 [The Sub-commentary Revealing the Essentials of the Commentary on the Sūtra of the Meditation on the Buddha of Immeasurable Life] (lost, hereafter referred to as the Xianyao ji). According to the records of Yuanqing’s disciple Zhiyuan 智圓 (976–1022), the Xianyao ji was widely read in China at that time.8 The Xianyao ji was a sub-commentary written to ‘reveal the essentials’ (xian yao 顯要) of Tiantai Zhiyi’s Guan wuliangshoufo jing shu 觀無量壽佛經疏 [The Commentary on the Guan wuliangshoufo jing] (hereafter referred to as the Guanjing shu). The Guan wuliangshou (fo) jing 觀無量壽(佛)經 [the Sūtra of the Meditation on the Buddha of Immeasurable Life] (hereafter referred to as the Guanjing) is a sutra that expounds on the sixteen contemplations on the Pure Land.

The task of critiquing the Xianyao ji was undertaken by two prominent figures of the Tendai sect on Mount Hiei in Japan at that time: Genshin and Kakuun 覚運 (953–1007), who were later revered as the founders of the Eshin 恵心 and Danna 檀那 schools in the Tendai sect, respectively. Genshin was responsible for the first volume of the Xianyao ji, while Kakuun took charge of the second volume. Together, they produced two volumes of the Hamon.

The critiques of Yuanqing’s work were presumably sent back to Song China after the year 1001 (Hayami 1988, pp. 175–8). Unfortunately, there was no response from China regarding the Hamon. Yuanqing, who had originally requested the critique, already passed away in the year 998. Moreover, at that time, the Chinese Tiantai sect was embroiled in internal debates between the on-mountain branch (Shanjia pai 山家派) and the off-mountain branch factions,9 leaving Yuanqing’s disciples or related monks with no time to respond to the Hamon (Hayami 1988, p. 175). Under such unfortunate circumstances, not only was there no reply to the Hamon, but no records in China mention the Hamon.

Since there are no direct references to the Hamon in Chinese records, one must first examine the Hamon in detail, and then thoroughly read the works of relevant Chinese writings of the time, to investigate its possible influence in China, seeking clues based on their content that may suggest its impact.

4. The Structure and Content of the Hamon

The Hamon comprises a total of twenty-one critiques, with eleven in the first volume and ten in the second volume. Each critique follows a structured format, beginning by quoting a passage from the Xianyao ji, indicated by the phrase ‘The sub-commentary states’ (記云), which identifies the target of the critique. This is followed by the critique itself, introduced by terms such as ‘Now, saying [regarding this matter]’ (今謂), ‘Asking [about this matter]’ (問), or ‘Now, upon examining [this matter]’ (今案). In some instances, before the passage from the Xianyao ji, the phrase ‘the commentary states’ (疏云), appears, accompanied by a passage from Zhiyi’s Guanjing shu, which serves as the basis for the Xianyao ji.

A detailed analysis of the content of these critiques will be reserved for another occasion due to space constraints.10 This study briefly outlines each critique as follows:

• First Critique: The chronological order of the three Pure Land Sūtras—the Wuliangshou jing 無量壽經 [Skt. Amitāyus-sūtra, also known as the Larger Sukhāvatī-vyūha; the Sūtra of Immeasurable Life], the Emituo jing 阿彌陀經 [Skt. Amitābha Sūtra, also known as the Smaller Sukhāvatī-vyūha; The Sūtra of Amitābha Buddha], and the Guanjing.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: The Wuliangshou jing was expounded first, followed by the Emituo jing and the Guanjing.

  Genshin’s critique: The order is not definitive.

• Second Critique: The sequence of the forty-eight vows in the Wuliangshou jing.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: Quoting the vows as the 2nd, 30th, and 31st.

  Genshin’s critique: According to the Wuliangshou jing, they should be the 3rd, 31st, and 32nd.

• Third Critique: The meaning of the five Avīci (wu wujian 五無間) in the Guanjing shu.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: The five Avīci refers to the five characteristics of Avīci Hell.

  Genshin’s critique: The term refers to the five karmas, or sins, leading to the Avīci hell.

• Fourth Critique: The issue of the first Buddha.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: The search for the first Buddha leads to error.

  Genshin’s critique: This does not provide a sufficient answer. An interpretation from the perspective of the ultimate truth is needed.

• Fifth Critique: The issue of the first sentient being or kleśa.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: The theory that the first deluded thought arises from pure nature is an inexplicit teaching (Buliaoyi 不了義).

  Genshin’s critique: There are various interpretations. I would like you to clarify a more doctrinally accurate interpretation.

• Sixth Critique: The issue regarding Thusness (Zhenru 眞如).

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: Thusness is originally deluded.

  Genshin’s critique: Thusness is free from all forms of delusion.

• Seventh Critique: Associating the three bodies of the Buddha (Sanshen 三身) with the threefold truth (Sandi 三諦).

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: The response body (Yingshen 應身) corresponds to the truth of nominal existence (Jiadi 假諦).

  Genshin’s critique: The following sentence must be supplemented: the reward body (Baoshen 報身) corresponds to the truth of emptiness (Kongdi 空諦), and the Dharma body (Fashen 法身) corresponds to the truth of the mean (Zhongdi 中諦).

• Eighth Critique: The interpretation of the meaning of Kāśyapa’s dance in the Guanjing shu.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: The story indicates a rejection of Hīnayāna practitioners who have not fully eradicated nescience.

  Genshin’s critique: This is a skillful interpretation that thoroughly dispels any doubts.

• Ninth Critique: The interpretation of the passage ‘Adorned it with immeasurable virtues, directed toward it through various practices, and clarified it through verbal expressions, questions, and answers’ (無量功德共莊嚴之，種種衆行而歸趣之，言説問答而詮辯之), in the Guanjing shu.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: Virtues and practices represent the gist (Zong 宗) and the application (Yong 用). Verbal expressions represent the teachings (Jiao 敎).

  Genshin’s critique: This interpretation accurately captures the intent of Tiantai Zhiyi.

• Tenth Critique: The issue of the realm of eternally tranquil light (Changjiguangtu 常寂光土).

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: The impurity of the realm of eternally tranquil light is considered the reward realm (Baotu 報土) for the three stages of worthies and ten stages of sages (Sanxian shisheng 三賢十聖).

  Genshin’s critique: This interpretation is challenging to comprehend. How can the reward body be born in the realm of eternally tranquil light, where the Dharma body is born? I hope for a more satisfying interpretation.

• Eleventh Critique: Regarding the doctrinal classification (Jiaoxiang panshi 敎相判釋) of the Guanjing as the sudden teaching (Dunjiao 頓敎) in the Guanjing shu.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: The sudden teaching refers to the complete teaching (Yuanjiao 圓敎).

  Genshin’s critique: It is neither the pure complete teaching (Chunyuan 純圓) nor the inclusive expedient complete teaching (Daiquanyuan 帶權圓). Therefore, it cannot be classified as the complete teaching.

• Twelfth Critique: The content of the three samādhi (san sanmei 三三昧) in the Guanjing shu.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: The three samādhi are the samādhi with coarse apprehension and fine analysis (youjue youguan 有覺有觀), the samādhi with only fine analysis (wujue youguan 無覺有觀), and the samādhi with neither coarse apprehension nor fine analysis (wujue wuguan 無覺無觀).

  Kakuun’s critique: The three samādhi should be the samādhi of emptiness (Kong 空), the samādhi of no-marks (Wuxiang 無相), and the samādhi of non-contrivance (Wuyuan 無願).

• Thirteenth Critique: The understanding of Qingfa 請法 in the section headings from the Guanjing shu.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: Qingfa refers to the ritual code of requesting.

  Kakuun’s critique: Qingfa refers to the request for teachings.

• Fourteenth Critique: The interpretation of Wuku 五苦 [the five sufferings] in the Guanjing shu.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: Wuku refers to Wu’equ 五惡趣 [the five evil destinies] and the character for Ku 苦 [suffering] should be changed to E 悪 [evil].

  Kakuun’s critique: Wuku is acceptable as it stands.

• Fifteenth Critique: The body of Dharma realm (Fajieshen 法界身) in the Guanjing.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: All the three bodies are equal to the body of Dharma realm.

  Kakuun’s critique: The idea of the response body pervading the Dharma realm (Fajie 法界) is difficult to understand.

• Sixteenth Critique: The size of the bodies of Buddha and Bodhisattvas in the Guanjing.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: The size of Avalokiteśvara Bodhisattva’s body needs revision, as it is depicted as larger than the Buddha’s body.

  Kakuun’s critique: Although this may be accurate, it is undesirable to alter each character in the Sūtra to align with reason.

• Seventeenth Critique: Regarding the Śrāvaka in the Pure Land.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: The Śrāvaka born in the Pure Land are considered the Śrāvaka on the Mahāyāna Buddhist path.

  Kakuun’s critique: There is a lack of sufficient evidence.

• Eighteenth Critique: The reason why beings who have committed the five heinous sins (Wuniezui 五逆罪) can be born in the Pure Land in the Guanjing.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: In the Guanjing, due to the presence of both repentance (Chanhui 懺悔) and meditative practices (Dingshan 定善), unlike in the Wuliangshou jing, those who have committed the five heinous sins can attain birth in the Pure Land.

  Kakuun’s critique: The Wuliangshou jing merely omits this detail; emphasizing only repentance and meditative practices would preclude sentient beings of lesser capacity from attaining birth in the Pure Land.

• Nineteenth Critique: The content of the four kinds of assurance of Buddhahood (Shouji 授記) in the Guanjing shu.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: The four kinds are the kalpa and country (Jieguo 劫國), the non-arising (Wusheng 無生), the already known (Yizhi 已知), and the not yet known (Weizhi 未知).

  Kakuun’s critique: The four kinds should be the assurance conferred before the arousal of the intention to attain enlightenment (wei faxin 未發心), at the moment of its inception (shi faxin 適發心), kept hidden from the recipient but revealed to others (mi shouji 密授記), and publicly before all (xianqian 現前).

• Twentieth Critique: The content of the three kinds of supranormal cognition (Sanming 三明) in the Guanjing shu.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: The three kinds are the power of divine vision (Tianyan 天眼), the power of divine hearing (Tian’er 天耳), and the power of awareness of the minds of others (Taxin 他心).

  Kakuun’s critique: These are the power of divine vision, the power of the knowledge of previous lifetimes (Suzhu 宿住), and the power of the extinction of contamination (Loujin 漏盡).

• Twenty-First Critique: The content of the four kinds of Śrāvaka.

  In Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji: The four kinds of Śrāvaka are the determined (Dingxing 定性), those retrogressing from the intention to achieve enlightenment (Tui puti 退菩提), the transformed (Yinghua 應化), and those on the Mahāyāna Buddhist path (Dasheng fodao 大乘佛道).

  Kakuun’s critique: The four kinds of Śrāvaka are the determined, the arrogant (Shangman 上慢), those retrogressing from enlightenment, and the transformed, with an additional fifth category that includes Śrāvaka on the Mahāyāna Buddhist path.

The above provides a brief introduction to the critiques. Although a thorough inquiry is beyond the scope of this paper, two notable characteristics deserve mention.

First, as inferred from the title Hamon 破文, which means ‘to refute the text,’ the Hamon is structured as a document aimed at examination and critique, containing many points addressing perceived errors by Yuanqing. However, upon closer inspection, we find that it also includes sections intended for praise (the eighth and ninth critiques), requests or further clarification (the fourth, fifth, tenth, and fifteenth critiques), supplementary additions (the seventh critique), reflections of differing attitudes or reasoning (the sixteenth and eighteenth critiques), and an instance where the critique appears somewhat misaligned (the thirteenth critique11). Such variations of perspectives are evident throughout.

Previous research has regarded the Hamon as evidence of Japan’s advanced doctrinal understanding at the time, unquestioningly accepting all critiques by Genshin and Kakuun as valid.12 While China experienced a decline in the doctrinal Buddhist tradition and lost many texts due to wars and persecution of Buddhism, Japan continued to accumulate research and maintained a high level of doctrinal understanding through intense debate (Rongi 論義).13 When considering such unusual circumstances of Buddhism in Japan and China, the Hamon can be viewed as an instance of China seeking guidance and feedback on Buddhist studies from Japan. However, a more detailed analysis reveals that it went beyond mere criticism and correction but served as a platform for intellectual exchange on multiple levels. It should be noted that the fact that Japanese monks were in the position of providing guidance to their Chinese counterpart does not necessarily suggest that the Japanese doctrinal understandings were superior to the ones held in China.

Second, there is a difference in the texts referenced by Genshin and Kakuun compared to those referenced by Yuanqing, indicating that they inherited distinct traditions. Genshin and Kakuun referred to Pure Land texts from Silla 新羅 as well as from Tang. For instance, in the first critique,14 there is an indication that the ‘Dharma Master Kyō 興’ cited by Genshin as a source may refer to Kyŏnghŭng 憬興 (fl. late 7 c.– early 8th c.) from Silla, highlighting the potential influence of Silla’s Pure Land Buddhism in Japan—a characteristic not observed in Chinese Tiantai Pure Land Buddhism. In contrast, the primary text Yuanqing referenced was the Shi guan wuliangshou jing ji 釋觀無量壽經記 [The Sub-commentary on the Guanjing (shu)] (hereafter referred to as the Shi guanjing ji) by Facong 法聰 (fl. late 8th century). The content from the third and seventh critiques15 indicates that Yuanqing was heavily influenced by Facong’s Shi guanjing ji. This text is a commentary on Zhiyi’s Guanjing shu, predating Yuanqing’s, which reveals that Yuanqing inherited the Tiantai tradition of annotating the Guanjing or the Guanjing shu. However, in Japanese Tendai Pure Land Buddhism of that time, Facong’s Shi guanjing ji was not actively cited.

Not only are the referenced texts different, but Genshin and Kakuun also place greater importance on the Wuliangshou jing than Yuanqing does, as can be seen in the second and eighteenth critiques. This can be attributed to the influence of Silla Buddhism as well. It is well known that in China, the tradition of Pure Land Buddhism emphasizes commentaries on the Guanjing rather than the Wuliangshou jing. Many Chinese Pure Land scholars focused primarily on the Guanjing. It was in Silla that commentaries on the Wuliangshou jing became active.16 Buddhist scholars such as Wŏnhyo 元曉 (617–686), Pŏbwi 法位 (fl. 661–681), Hyŏnil 玄一 (fl. 681–701), Ŭijŏk 義寂 (fl. 681–701), and Kyŏnghŭng from Silla all left commentaries on the Wuliangshou jing. These works had a significant impact on early Japanese Pure Land studies, leading to greater emphasis on the Wuliangshou jing in Japan compared to the Guanjing.17 In the eighteenth Critique,18 Kakuun defends the Wuliangshou jing against Yuanqing’s assertion that the Guanjing allows even those who have committed the five heinous sins to be born in the Pure Land, as it includes teachings on repentance and meditative practices, while the Wuliangshou jing does not. Kakuun argues that the Wuliangshou jing merely omits those teachings.

Additionally, the mistake Yuanqing made regarding the number of the forty-eight vows in the Wuliangshou jing in the second Critique19 could be interpreted as a result of the tradition that places less emphasis on the Wuliangshou jing. Genshin, on the other hand, would have quickly noticed this error in the numbering of the forty-eight vows.

5. The Hamon Sent to China

As mentioned earlier, since there are no records explicitly referring to the Hamon in China, we can only indirectly infer whether the Hamon reached China or what impact it may have had by examining the content of various texts. When adopting this approach, two noteworthy observations emerge.

First, some sources indicate that the Hamon was indeed sent to China. In the Emituo jing shu 阿彌陀經疏 [commentary on the Amitābha Sūtra] by Zhiyuan, a disciple of Yuanqing, it is mentioned that ‘There is a commentary on the Amitābha Sūtra from Japan. It says that it was spoken by Zhiyi, but this is not true. The words are vulgar and the meaning is distant. It is clear that it is a fabrication by the Japanese’ (世有彌陀經疏，自日東傳來，言智者説者，非也。詞俚義疎。諒倭人之假託乎).20 The commentary on the Amitābha Sūtra referenced by Zhiyuan is believed to be one of the texts that Yuanqing requested in his letter. This commentary is thought to have been sent to China along with the Hamon, suggesting that the Hamon successfully reached China.

A similar case can be found in the Renwang bore shu, another text that Yuanqing requested in his letter. Regarding the re-importation of the Renwang bore shu in China, Chao Shuozhi 晁說之 (1059–1129) provides the following account in his ‘Renwang huoguo bore jing shu xu’ 仁王護國般若經疏序 [Preface to the Commentary on the Prajñāpāramitā Scripture for Humane Kings to Protect Their States]: ‘During the Chen and Sui dynasties, the Tiantai Master Zhiyi, distantly inheriting from Nāgārjuna, established a great teaching. … this teaching spread to Japan and flourished overseas. As the Central Plains [of China] fell into turmoil and disorder, [Buddhist] texts were destroyed and lost … At the beginning of our Song dynasty, this teaching gradually crossed the seas and entered the regions of Wu Yue. … Regarding the Renwang jing shu, two versions arrived earlier, but everyone dismissed them as forgeries,’ (陳隋間天台智者，遠稟龍樹，立一大教，… 此教播於日本，而海外盛矣。屬中原喪亂，典籍蕩滅，… 我有宋之初，此教乃漸航海入吳越，… 仁王經疏先至有二本，衆咸斥其偽).21 Here, the Renwang jing shu can be interpreted as referring to the Renwang bore shu that had been sent to China in response to Yuanqing’s request, along with the Hamon.

The second observation is that the Guan wuliangshoufo jing shu miaozong chao 觀無量壽佛經疏妙宗鈔 [The Sub-commentary of the Guanjing shu Based on the Profound Tenet] (hereafter referred to as the Miaozong chao), written by Zhili 知禮 (960–1028) about 20 years after the Hamon in China, reflects the issues pointed out in the Hamon. The relevant details are summarized in the table below (

Table 1. Conceptual changes in Guanjing commentary before and after the Hamon.

	The Xianyao ji (Before 995)	The Hamon (Circa 999)	The Miaozong chao (1021)
The meaning of the five Avīci (五無間) (cf. The Third Critique)	[the five characteristics of Avīci Hell:] ceaseless retribution, ceaseless suffering, up to, endless form (body). (報無間，受苦無間，乃至，形無間).22	The five karmas leading to the Avīci hell (五無間業).23	The [five] karmas leading to the Avīci hell (業至無間).24
Associating the three bodies of the Buddha (三身) with the threefold truth (三諦) (cf. The Seventh Critique)	The response body corresponds to the truth of nominal existence. (應身即假).25	The reward body corresponds to the truth of emptiness, and the Dharma body corresponds to the truth of the mean; [this must be supplemented]. (報身即空，法身即中).26	The truth of nominal existence corresponds to the [physical] body of characteristics, the physical is the response body. The truth of emptiness corresponds to the body of the Dharma aspect, the Dharma aspect is the reward body. The truth of the mean corresponds to the body of the true aspect, the true aspect is the Dharma body. (假即相好身/色是應身， 空即法門身/法門是報身， 中即實相身/實相是法身).27
The content of the four kinds of assurance of Buddhahood (四種授記) (cf. The Nineteeth Critique)	The kalpa and country, the non-arising, the already known, and the not yet known. (劫國，無生，已知，未知).28	[The assurance conferred] before the arousal of the intention to attain enlightenment, at the moment of its inception, kept hidden from the recipient but revealed to others, and publicly before all. (未發心，適發心，密記，現前).29	[The assurance conferred] before the arousal of the intention to attain enlightenment, kept hidden from the recipient but revealed to others, publicly before all, and [at the moment of initial arousal of the intention of attain enlightenment, at which the insight into] the non-arising [is attained]. (未發心，密記，現前，無生).30
The content of the three kinds of supranormal cognition (三明) (cf. The Twentieth Critique)	The power of divine vision, the power of divine hearing, and the power of awareness of the minds of others. (天眼，天耳，他心).31	The power of divine vision, the power of the knowledge of former abodes, and the power of the extinction of contamination. (宿住，天眼，漏盡).32	The power of the knowledge of previous lifetimes, the power of the extinction of contamination, and the power of divine vision. (宿命，漏盡，天眼).33

).

As the table shows, the Miaozong chao, the later commentary on the Guanjing shu reflects the critiques found in the Hamon.34 Given that Zhili, a prominent contemporary figure of the Chinese Tiantai school, corresponded with Genshin on matters of Tiantai doctrine35, it is not unlikely that he may have encountered the Hamon prepared by Genshin and Kakuun prior to writing the Miaozong chao.

Moreover, the following point increases the likelihood that Zhili was influenced by the Hamon. The eleventh critique36 addresses the Xianyao ji’s interpretation of the sudden teaching (Dunjiao 頓敎) as the complete teaching (Yuanjiao 圓敎) within the doctrinal classification of the Guanjing. Genshin challenges this interpretation by questioning whether it should be considered the pure complete teaching (Chunyuan 純圓) or the inclusive expedient complete teaching (Daiquanyuan 帶權圓). To argue that it cannot represent the pure complete teaching, Genshin points to a passage in the Guanjing describing King Bimbisāra reaching the Hīnayāna’s (Xiaosheng 小乘) attainments.37 According to the Tiantai doctrinal classification, the complete teaching represents the highest level. Thus, if it were the pure complete teaching, it would not include references to the Hīnayāna’s attainments. Notably, this context of King Bimbisāra reaching the Hīnayāna’s attainment in relation to the doctrinal classification did not appear before Genshin. Interestingly, Zhili similarly refers to this content in his discussion of the doctrinal classification of the Guanjing, explaining that King Bimbisāra is not the primary subject of its teachings.38 This parallel indicates that Zhili was likely aware of Genshin’s counterargument.

6. Conclusions

This study first introduced the background of the formation of the Hamon, underscoring its significance as an important instance of Sino-Japanese Buddhist exchange, where intellectual engagement was initially sought from the Chinese side.

Next, it briefly reviewed the structure and content of the Hamon and presented analysis, confirming that the twenty-one critiques in the Hamon encompass a diverse range of Buddhist doctrinal exchanges. These critiques extend beyond mere corrections from the Japanese side, including praise for Yuanqing’s work, requests for further clarification of his views, and instances of misaligned critique, thus showing the multi-layered landscape of intellectual exchange between China and Japan during that period.

Additionally, critiques by Japanese scholars, Genshin and Kakuun, demonstrated the influence of Silla’s Pure Land Buddhism, while Yuanqing’s Xianyao ji continued the Chinese Tiantai commentary tradition on the Guanjing or the Guanjing shu.

Finally, since there are no direct records of the Hamon in Chinese sources, some records from contemporary Chinese texts were collected which suggest that the Hamon did indeed reach China and may have influenced Zhili’s Miaozong chao.

In closing, I will make some observations on how the Hamon fits into the broader phenomenon of Buddhist ‘countercurrents’ mentioned in the introduction, and outline directions for future research.

Cases such as the Hamon suggest that the history of Buddhism, conventionally understood within the framework of the ‘Eastward transmission of Buddhism,’ must be restructured with greater chronological and regional specificity. Such a critique has already been raised in previous scholarship: Ishii (2019), in his writing of history of East Asian Buddhism, treats the histories of Buddhism in China, Korea, Japan, and Vietnam in parallel, while Buswell (2005) highlights the role of Korean monks to challenge the China-centered narrative of East Asian Buddhism. Building on these insights, I aim to broaden and systematize the scope and examples of these countercurrents in Buddhist transmission. My future research will explore the following hypothesis.

When viewed from a longue durée perspective, the history of East Asian Buddhism reveals at least three major periods in which Buddhist thought did not simply move eastward but flowed back ‘westward’ toward China as a countercurrent, exhibiting dynamic and non-hierarchical exchanges across the region.

The first wave of countercurrent occurred in the 7th century, with Buddhist thought flowing from the Korean Peninsula back to China, exemplified by influential Silla monks such as Wŏnch’ŭk (613–696), a Yogācāra (Faxiang 法相) scholar who impacted not only China but even Tibet, and Wŏnhyo (617–686), whose interpretations of the Awakening of Mahāyāna Faith (Dasheng qixin lun 大乘起信論) exerted considerable influence on Chinese Buddhist thought.

The second wave, from the 10th to 12th centuries, saw Japan—where Buddhism arrived later than on the Korean Peninsula—join the reverse flow, with both Koryŏ and Japanese Buddhism influencing China. The Hamon examined in this paper is a key example of this countercurrent from Japan to China. While Yuanqing’s letter, quoted earlier, already attests to the existence of this phenomenon, one limitation of current research on the Hamon is the lack of direct textual evidence demonstrating its transmission and impact in China. To address this issue, I am currently investigating another critique text sent from Japan to China, titled Ryūnyo jōbutsu gonjitsu ginan 龍女成仏権実疑難 [Questioning the Provisional and True Meanings of the Dragon King’s Daughter’s Enlightenment], as a potential source of further evidence.

In this same period, several prominent Koryŏ monks also contributed to the countercurrent to China. These include Ŭit’ong 義通 (927–988), who became the 16th patriarch of the Chinese Tiantai lineage; Ch’egwan 諦觀 (?–970), author of the Ch’ŏnt’aesagyoŭi 天台四教儀 [Outline of the Tiantai Fourfold Teachings], which became a standard textbook in East Asian Tiantai studies; and Ŭich’ŏn 義天 (1055–1101), who compiled a comprehensive catalogue of East Asian commentaries, undertook their collation and publication, thereby exerting a significant influence across the entire East Asian region.

The third wave began in the 20th century and continues to the present. Japan was the first among the East Asian countries to develop Buddhist Studies as a modern academic discipline, and this scholarship was subsequently transmitted to Korea and China.

Each of these three historical waves emerged under different circumstances and involved distinct content, thus requiring careful, source-based scholarship. What remains clear, however, is that the transmission of Buddhism in East Asia was never a simple, one-way process, but rather a dynamic and multidirectional process shaped by complex historical interactions.