INTRODUCTION
In the teachings of Honen who initiated the Kamakura Buddhist period in Japan, we generally see a single face, that of the sole practice of the nembutsu. In the traditional Buddhism of Japan before Honen, people of the lower classes and women were shut out from the chance to gain enlightenment. It was for these people that Honen's teachings were conspicuously aimed. At the same time, however, we must wonder how Honen was able to translate his own personal insight into terms that these people could relate to. In this way, Honen's words and actions were often contradictory and seem to show us two different faces. Ishida Mizumaro is quoted as saying, "Honen has two contradictory characters."1 While Fukui Kojun has said,"Honen had two aspects: exclusive nembutsu (senju nembutsu) in his heart and Tendai Buddhism on his exterior."2 In terms of these evaluations, I feel there are two important questions to keep in mind. The first is, as preacher of the exclusive nembutsu, what was Honen's stance toward the aristocracy and the established sects, namely Tendai, who tried to oppress him? Secondly, what is the relationship between the nembutsu and the other ideas and practices which Honen discarded, namely bodhi-citta, meditation, and the precepts? In this way, what is the sense of his senchaku(selection) thought?

Concerning these two questions, I would like to present two parallel points that Honen himself refuted in expressing the true character of his thought and in dissolving misconceptions about himself. The first is that after completing the Senchakushu (in 1198 or 1204), his thought did not develop any further. The second is that the essence of senchaku thought is only about abandoning all practices outside of the nembutsu.

I. Honen's Thought after the Senchakushu
Concerning the first point, I would contend that after writing the Senchakushu, Honen's thought did not stop developing. In examining this period after the writing of the Senchakushu, it may appear that Honen did not take an outward stance concerning the crisis of attacks by the established sects and the storm of oppression against the nembutsu. To the contrary, he confronted his own exclusive nembutsu order with the Shichikajo-kishomon (Seven Article Pledge) admonition3 and in the following year (1206) threw a wayward disciple, Gyoku, out of the order.4 The Shichikajo-kishomon was not a simple, temporary solution, but rather I think it was the first step by Honen in correcting and solidifying his thought. In looking at the principal teachings5 of the third period of Honen's later year's (after the writing of the Senchakushu), there are three key points.

Firstly, in his later years, Honen did not deny the doctrine of the exclusive nembutsu but did seek to control extreme interpretation of this doctrine which led people to believe they could do as they pleased and still achieve salvation or to over rely on the Original Vow (hongan).6 In three letters (#13, #14, #15)7, Honen addressed his followers not only in Kyoto but in Toyama and throughout the country on this confusion and firmly refuted such extreme interpretations of the exclusive nembutsu. In his subsequent Shichikajo-kishomon sent to Mt.. Hiei, he echoed the same sentiment as in these letters.

Secondly, at first Honen asserted that the good acts and practices of the the Gateway of the Holy Path (shodomon) in no way played a part in gaining salvation. However, after writing the Senchakushu, Honen began to re-evaluate these teachings and practices one by one8, and as his thought deepened and developed, granted their role in the process of salvation.9 This can be seen conspicuously in the Eleven Questions and Answers with Zensho-bo (Zenshobo tono juichikajo mondo) (#6). It may been viewed that this re-evaluation was simply a way to avoid the oppression his teaching was receiving. I feel, however, that this re-evaluation is a unique part of the development of Honen's thought. This re-evaluation of the good acts and practices of the shodomon in Honen's thought can be seen in the deepening of his thought concerning auxiliary acts of the nembutsu (irui-no-jogo) in his later years.

Thirdly, by the time the oppression against his nembutsu movement began, it appears to me that Honen had already begun a deepening religious experience, one in which he entered deep states of samadhi (sanmai-hottoku), and that his interest was turning more inward. In terms of Honen's spiritual history, it was this experience along with his abandonment of Mt. Hiei to pursue his own Pure Land path that have the greatest meaning. It is this samadhi experience which lies at the root of Honen's establishment of an exclusive nembutsu religious order. It is not clear, however, exactly when he first began having this experience. It is clear that at the latest he was having such deep experiences of samadhi while writing the Senchakushu.10 I believe that in his later years after writing the Senchakushu, this experience continued to deepen.11 Honen has recorded his own experiences of this period from the age of 66 to 74 in his Sanmai-hottokuki12. He relates that he entered deep states of samadhi after reciting the nembutsu and not as a function of practicing nembutsu meditation in which one visualizes the Pure Land.
By gaining a clearer view of Honen in his later years after the writing of the Senchakushu, we can begin to see why the development of Honen's thought from before writing the Senchakushu to after writing it have led scholars to incorrectly attribute to Honen two contrasting characters.

II. The Nembutsu and Other Practices (shogyo)
I would now like to try to resolve the second point of this paper which concerns the relationship between the nembutsu and other practices (shogyo) in Honen's senchaku thought. Honen himself divided this thought into four stages when explaining it. (see Chart of Selection and Rejection)

In Stage I, he divided Buddhist teachings into two parts. Among the teachings of Shakyamuni Buddha, there are those which concern attaining Buddhahood in this life called the Gateway of the Holy Path (shodomon) and those which concern Birth in the Pure Land (ojo) which are called the Gateway of the Pure Land (jodomon). Honen instructed that all the teachings of other sects and schools which comprise the shodomon should be "temporarily laid aside" and that the teachings of the Pure Land which comprise the jodomon should be selected. In discussions concerning the classification of Pure Land teaching, Honen felt the basis of the teaching is not about their relative superiority or inferiority but rather about their suitability for the common people to understand and to practice. This is why he said to "lay aside temporarily" the teachings of the shodomon and why in Stage II, which is a framework for attaining Birth in the Pure Land, he used the term "miscellaneous practices" (zogyo) in anticipation of further development.

In Stage II, the teachings of the shodomon have been laid aside and the practices not concerning enlightenment in this world but concerning Birth in the Pure Land take on a new role. The reason for instructing to "temporarily abandon" the miscellaneous practices (zogyo) is that in Stage III, in the context of the nembutsu, these miscellaneous practices will take on a new role as auxiliary practices (jogo). Yet, there is one more selection to be made. Namely, within the five other practices (shogyo) of reading and writing, contemplating, prostrating, reciting, praising and offering, the fourth of "single mindedly and wholeheartedly reciting the name of Amida Buddha" is the true guide to people in gaining final salvation, while the other four do not fully accord with Amida Buddha's Original Vow. Therefore, the other four are "set aside" and the single nembutsu practice is finally selected.

In Stage III, after finally selecting the single nembutsu practice, the practitioner's faith will deepen and they will attain the firm establishment of faith (ketsujo-ojoshin). Upon this establishment, the practitioner will arrive at a point where the previously abandoned miscellaneous practices and the good acts and practices of the shodomon take on new roles as supporters of nembutsu practice. The rationale for this process is that within this firm establishment of faith, there resides the deep mind (jinshin) which is part of the three minds (sanjin). This is the place where the practices which were previously estranged from Amida Buddha such as the miscellaneous practices are transformed into practices close to Amida Buddha (jogo). Within this designation of practices close to Amida (jogo), the miscellaneous practices become different kinds of auxiliary acts (irui-no-jogo)13 and are distinguished from the four other practices which have become similar kinds of auxiliary acts (dorui-no-jogo).

An important consideration in this process is that if the practitioner has not attained firm establishment of faith, then no matter how strong the effort, they will not be able to transform these estranged practices into ones close to Amida. Honen stated, however, that the first principle of the firm establishment of faith is Birth in the Pure Land. The high level religious experience of establishing deep mind (jinshin) where miscellaneous practices are transformed into auxiliary acts (irui-no-jogo) is not something readily attainable to all people.14 In this way, Honen did not preach actively to his disciples on attaining this state.15 He only directly transmitted this teaching of auxiliary acts to close disciples Ryukan [the creator of the Chorakuji doctrine]16, Shoku [the creator of the Seizan doctrine]17, and Zenshobo18. Honen also taught that within this idea of auxiliary acts, the schools of the shodomon and all other religious practices were included as well as the daily lives and social activities of our present day.19 In looking at modern society, I feel this principle of auxiliary acts (irui-no-jogo) can be extended as a call to become more actively engaged in the problems of our societies.

Finally, in Stage IV, after attaining Birth in the Pure Land, the practitioner may aim towards Buddhahood and begin the stage of training in various Mahayana practices. In this way, the practices "laid aside" in Stage I are revived. Therefore, we can see that while Pure Land teaching gives its highest priority to attainment of Birth in the Pure Land, it also aims eventually at attainment of Buddhahood.20 After successfully realizing one's practice in the Pure Land and attaining Buddhahood, one returns to the world of humans to perform beneficial action and to save others from suffering.

In the above, I have outlined the four stages of Honen's senchaku thought and attempted to clarify the relationship between the nembutsu and other practices (shogyo). In Stage I, the phrase "the shodomon is temporarily laid aside" is a carefully and scrupulously prepared expression with the expectation of reintroducing these practices in Stage IV. In the same way, in Stage II, the phrase "the other practices (shogyo) of the jodomon are temporarily abandoned" is similarly uttered in anticipation of the revival of these practices in Stage III. Finally, once more within Stage II, "the right practices (shogyo) of the jodomon are temporarily set aside" is stated in anticipation of the revival of these four practices in Stage III. Therefore, I believe that the claim that Honen's conceptions of the nembutsu and of other practices represent a double face of his character is actually an incomplete understanding of the idea of auxiliary acts.

Conclusion
Honen-bo Genku, the initiator of the Kamakura Buddhist era, is misunderstood today just as he was in his own time. Upon briefly looking at Honen's teachings, there appear to be a number of things which are difficult to accept. Many of Honen's expressions are euphemistic and his actions unclear. Upon deeper examination, however, I feel that Honen truly did not have two faces. Firstly, I feel we must reconsider the history of his thought and the idea that his words constitute a contradiction that can be dived into a pre- and a post- period. Secondly, I feel the need to reconsider Honen's thought and his actions in light of the auxiliary acts (irui-no-jogo) doctrine in his four stage senchaku thought.

NOTES:
1. "Honen ni okeru futatsu no seikaku," Honen to Shinran (Tokyo:Akiyama shoten, 1978), 194-213. "Honen no kairitsu-kan ," Honen to Shinran (Tokyo:Akiyama shoten, 1978), 153-193.
2. "Honen den ni tsuite-no ni-san no mondai," Indogaku bukkyogaku kenkyu (hereafter IBK),
5-2. "Honen den shoko,"Etani Festschrift Jodokyo no shiso to bunka (Kyoto: Etani Ryukai sensei koki kinen kai, 1972), 853-867. "Honen Shonin no shasho kijo ni tsuite, Tsukamoto Festschrift Bukkyo shigaku ronshu (Kyoto: Tsukamoto hakase
shoju kinenkai, 1961).
3. "Shichikajo kishomon", Jodoshu zensho (hereafter JZ) 9, 446-449. As to the articles or books which doubt Honen's authorship of Shichikajo kishomon, there are two ones. One is Honen Shonin den no kenkyu (238-239) written by Tamura Encho, and
the other is "Shoki Honen kyodan ni okeru honan ni tsuite" written by Tsuboi Sun'ei, IBK. 6-1. However, many recent scholars support Honen's authorship. Their articles and books are as follows: "Shichikajo kishomon gisensetsu o utagau," written by
Ohashi Shunno, IBK. 7-1; "Shichikajo kishomon to Sosanmon kishomon to ni tsuite" written by Kazuki Joko, Bukkyo bunka kenkyu 8; and Honen imon no kisoteki kenkyu, written by Nakano Seimei (Kyoto: Hozokan, 1994). 350-354.
4. Enko daishi gyojo gazu yokusan 31, JZ 16, 480. Cf. Sanchoki
5. See Appendix 1.
6. Kajimura Noboru, "Ichinen tanen ron," Jodogaku 25. Shirakawa Shoken, "Honen kyogaku ni okeru ichinen tanen no kozo," Shugakuin ronshu 53. Shigematsu Myokyu, Nihon Jodokyo seiritsukatei no kenkyu (Kyoto: Heirakuji shoten, 1964) 393-408.
7. These three letters do not carry any kind of dates of writing. These letters, however, are thought to be written after the time of ordination of Fujiwara no Motochika in 1206.
8. Hirokawa Takatoshi, "Daigobon Honen Shonin denki sanjin ryoken no koto no senja mondai," Todo Festschrift Jodoshu tenseki kenkyu. Tsuboi Shun'ei, "Daigobon Honen Shonin denki ni tsuite," IBK 22-23.
9. Hirokawa Takatoshi, "Honen kyogaku ni okeru hairyu no kozo - irui no jogo setsu no seiritsu o chushin to shite," Honen bukkyo no kenkyu (Tokyo: Sankibo, 1975), 549-580.
10. Takahashi Koji, "Senchakushu no atsukaikata," Honen jodokyo no shomondai (Tokyo: Sankibo, 1994), 417-438.
11. Tamaki Koshiro, "Honen no shukyo teki sekai," Nihon bukkyo shisoron 1, 266-318.
12. As to the authorship of this document, Nakano supports its authenticity (ibid. 261-77) while Tamura doubts (ibid. 240-47).
13. Honen's idea of auxiliary acts (irui-no-jogo) was derived from "the interpretation of the mind that transfers all merit [toward Birth in the Pure Land] and resolves to be born there" (ekohotsugan shin shaku) of Shan-tao's Commentary on the Meditation Sutra
(JZ 2, 58). Cf. Honen shonin denki (Kukanden), Honen shonin den zenshu, and Takaishi: Honen shonin den zenshu kankokai, 1952, 396.
14. Todo Kyoshun, "Honen kyogaku ni okeru bodaishin," IBK. 22-2.
15. "Juni mondo," SHZ. 633. "Zenshobo densetsu no kotoba" SHZ. 462-463.
16. "Gu sanjin gi," Ryukan risshi no jodokyo tsuketari imonshu (Tokyo: Kanazawabunko
shuten kenkyukai, 1941, Reprinted in 1984), appendix 19-20.
17. Shoku described auxiliary acts (irui-no-jogo) as a phase of practice after the establishment of faith in Amida Buddha's other-power. 18. Cf. note 16.
19. "Zenshobo densetsu no kotoba" SHZ. 462-463. In addition to Hirokawa's article, there are several articles on auxiliary acts (irui-no-jogo). Todo Kyoshun, "Irui no jojo ron," Honen shonin kenkyu, 228-246. Todo Kyoshun, "Goshu shogyo ron," Honen
shonin kenkyu, 189-227. Todo Kyoshun, "Honen ni okeru shomyo nembutsu to shogyo," Honen shonin kenkyu, 159-188.
20. "Yogi mondo" SHZ. 632. "Nembutsu taii," SHZ. 407.