@article{oai:icabs.repo.nii.ac.jp:00000100,
 author = {橋本文子},
 issue = {5},
 journal = {仙石山仏教学論集, Sengokuyama Journal of Buddhist Studies},
 month = {Apr},
 note = {110009359750, Kūkai 空海(774-835) developed his theory on the ten stages of the thought of Awakening (Skt. bodhicitta; Ch. 菩提心) on the basis of the passage on the generation of the mental flow 心續生段found in the Mahāvairocanasūtra 大日經.1 It is organised into ten items which actually encapsulate Kūkaiʼs views on the hierarchical classification of the Buddhist teachings 教判and provides a fundamental piece in the doctrinal system of the Shingon school 眞言宗. Kūkai expounded this theory in the Himitsu mandara jūjūshin ron 秘密曼荼羅十住心論and the Hizō hōyaku 秘蔵寶鑰. The former, usually considered to be the earlier work, has survived in an unfinished form. There are quite a few details concerning its formation as well as content which remain unclear. Kūkaiʼ s theory of the ten stages of the thought of Awakening has presented generations of scholars and followers us with many doctrinal problems. Most notable is his allotment of the eighth stage (the so-called ichidō mui jūshin 一道無爲住心) to the Tiantai/Tendai school 天台宗 and the ninth one (goku mujishō jū shin 極無自性住心) to the Huayan/Kegon 華嚴tradition. This hierarchy which became an unmovable truth for the Shingon exponents was, quite understandably, unacceptable to the Tendai followers. The long-standing controversy has continued into modern timesand is still traceable in the studies of such representative scholars as Shishio Enshin 獅子王圓信2 and Nasu Seiryu 那須政隆.3 Nonetheless, one gets the impression that the polemical dispute between modern academics still retains an air of sectarian bias not unlike the works of many mediaeval and pre-modern scholastics. This, I believe, actually hampers any effort to tackle the problem in its essence. My view is that the controversy surrounding the allotment of the eighth and ninth stages brought significant changes to the understanding of the theory of the ten stages of the thought of Awakening in its entirety. A systematic view of the relevant opinions expressed by Tōmitsu (Shingon) exponents from the end of the Heian period throughout the first half of the Middle Ages as well as a good understanding of the background of the ideas put forward by earlier scholars is indispensible in any endevour to disentangle the intricacies surrounding this problem. This will, I hope, ultimately help us to elucidate the original meaning of Kūkaiʼs theory and its historical context. The present paper is part of this larger research project. It mainly deals with a critical text which may have influenced the Jū jū shanan shō 十住遮難抄, a work which I examined in some of my earlier studies.},
 pages = {1--25},
 title = {十住心批判に対する東密側の反論について},
 year = {2010},
 yomi = {ハシモト, フミコ}
}