Jihen's intellectual and political position in the Nanbokucho era - focusing on comparison with Gozan Rinzai Zen Buddhism (Japanese Intellectual History Final Paper)
1. Jihen as an academic ancestor of Yoshida Kanetomo
Many of the ideas revealed in Yoshida Kanetomo’s work are those that have been created by himself, but they are influenced by other ideas as well. One of the most obvious examples of influence is his biologically relative Jihen, if he is not adopted. According to A. Grapard, the idea of the relationship between Jihen’s Buddha and Kami influenced Yoshida Kanetomo, and finally in 16c he developed it.1 I was excited and interested in the fact that one of the craziest ideas of Yoshida Kanetomo was actually in a much earlier period than that, in 14 century.
The most prominent connection between Yoshida Kanetomo and Jihen is an idea of anti-honjisuizaku. Honjisuizaku, in Japanese 本地垂迹, is a thought saying that Kami, divine entities in Japan, are mirrors or incarnation of Buddha and Bodhisattvas. At the time of Yoshida Kanetomo, this kind of honjisuizaku thought was spread not only in Buddhist denominations, but also in the public, and even among Shintoists. The most representative example is the combination of Tendai and Hie shrine. In Mt. Hiei, one of the most influential sect of Buddhism in Japan at that time, Tendai Buddhism has settled down. The main temple was called Enryakuji, which even exists until now. And in the Enryakuji, Shintoism takes a part of it. The whole system can be named as “Hie/Hiei shrine-temple multiple”, and in this case the Shinto in this system is usually called as Sanno Shinto.2 The idea of anti-honjisuizaku is simply to reverse the relationship between Buddha and Kami. In anti-honjisuizaku, all that is fundamental is the Kami. Therefore, the Buddha is nothing but an incarnation of Kami. Yoshida Kanetomo and Jihen share this idea faithfully.
Another common thing to note about the relationship between the two is that they both have the “Root, Branch and Flower” doctrine, though they are different in detail. Yoshida says “Buddhism was the fruit of the great religious tree of Asia, that Confucianism and Taoism were its branches and leaves, and that Shinto was its root.”3 Jihen holds somewhat similar, but not exactly same: in Kujihongigengi (旧事本紀玄義) vol. 5, Japan is a root, Tang dynasty in China is a branch, and India is a fruit. So considering that Jihen was previous than Yoshida, the argument about the geographical origin of culture had been developed to the argument about the intellectual origin of religion.
2. Interesting points of Jihen
It is worth to be studied that Jihen was quite early in a sense of epoch. Even though he lived in 14c, the ideas he was using have affected many coming thoughts and reformation in Shinto. Mostly, as we saw above, Yoshida Kanetomo was faithful successor, because he continued Jihen’s idea of anti-honjisuizaku and “root, branch and flower” doctrine. Also for he is heavily affected and even classified as a member of Ise Shinto, and for Jihen was a member of Urabe family which Yoshida belongs to, he had worked as a bridge between Ise and Yoshida Shinto.
Another interesting point of Jihen is that his thought is political. You may be skeptical whether the fact that an idea is political can be a specific feature of that thought. Because all ideas are somewhat political. Nonetheless, though, Jihen’s ideas are certainly political when compared with other contemporaries. Compared with the idea of Ise Shinto he learned, he maintained a thorough political stance.
The times he played also make his ideas special. He lived from the end of Kamakura Shogunate until the time of the Nanbokucho, the South and the North Court, and wrote mainly since the times of the Nanbokucho. The age in which he lived is roughly characterized into two characteristics.
The first is the invasion of Mongolia. Mongolia, which has finally vassalized Korea after the massive expansion, planned the invasion of Japan in the 13th century. The Mongol-Korea coalition organized a large fleet and attempted to cross into Japan, but it failed to meet an unexpected storm. Despite the failure of the Mongolian invasion, despite the success of the defense, the appearance of a huge enemy from outside seems to have caused considerable sense of insecurity to Japanese. In addition to the crisis, complaints about the government of Hojo were overlapped, and Japan called for a new dominant charisma or ideology.
The second historical background is the development of the Nanbokucho era. As the Kamakura Shogunate collapsed, the Emperor Go-Daigo tried to regain his power as an emperor. This process is called Kemmu Restoration. The political reform centered on the emperor, which was tried from 1334 to 1336, is stranded by the rebellion of the Ashikaga for the reconstruction of Shogunate. Go-Daigo escaped from Heian and moved to Yoshino, and Ashikaga crowned a new emperor in Heian. As a result, the civil war in the Nanbokucho era has occurred for 50 years.
3. The ideas of Jihen4
Jihen’s ideas reflect well the circumstances of these times. Jihen’s activity was under the heavy and painful atmosphere since Shōchū (正中) Incident, after the Tenno-Shogunate (朝幕) relationship was tight. He belonged to a sacerdotal lineage, Urabe. Urabe had been one of major families who handled ritual affairs, and with Nakatomi lineage, Urabe issued Fujiwara house.5 But unfortunately he was not a member of major lineage. Given the middle age tradition of secret transmission of knowledge, belonging to minor line means that one can hardly get access to family knowledge, which directly affects one’s social status. Also he was not able to participate in Jingikan, the institution practicing rituals and controlling shrines all over the state for the sake of emperor.6
The urgent social situation and the restriction to promising knowledge may pushed Jihen to converge from Tendai Buddhism to Shinto. The exact birth and death of Jihen is unknown, but he is estimated to be about 50 years old or 50’s when he was converted from Tendai Buddhism to Shinto. In middle era, age of 50 was not that far from a death. Though he abandoned his whole life and success in Tendai sect, and suddenly devoted to Shinto. He says that he converted after a dream, and claimed that he received edicts from Kami in the dream.
A. Shinkairon (神懷論)7
His first book, Shinkairon, do not exist now so there is no way to analyze it. But we can do some infer from the Kujihongigengi (旧事本紀玄義). There are some sentences in Kujihongigengi mentioning Shinkairon. Since they are written as “…and it is same with Shinkairon” (…如神懷論), we can get restricted inferences about the contents of Shinkairon. According to them, it cannot be ignored that Chinese Study (漢学) used to foster the flourishing of Japanese thought (道), but also it was too strong that destroyed Shinto in Japanese thought. And it points out that it is urgently needed to go back to essence of Shinto by the anti-honjisuizaku paradigm. So at least anti-honjisuizaku was already existed in Shinkairon, and established in the beginning of his works.
B. Kujihongigengi (旧事本紀玄義)
It was written in 1332 (元弘2年), and shows the essence of ideas of Jihen. This book has an important position in Ise Shinto, as being quoted several times in canons of Ise Shinto and vice versa. It is true that Jihen borrowed many arguments from Ise Shinto, but some of them are unique. Not whole volumes are left, only remaining Vol. 1, 3, 4, 5, 9. Especially Jihen himself points out that vol. 4, 5, 9 should be considered as that of deep secrets (深秘卷), in the postscript of vol. 4 of Kujihongigengi.8
The volume 4 starts with “天皇領国者。天御量徳也。” which can be translated as “Ruling the state of emperor is, the honorable virtue of the heaven.”9 Given that this book is about the theory of Shinto, it is not usual to mention the legitimacy of ruling of emperor. Actually the whole chapter is dedicated to praise and show the legitimacy of Imperial lineage. Here Jihen suggest 8 principles of rule: 皇位継徳、人王崇神、特尊伏敵、群民順惠、法能治世、政必禁費、奉斉持国、神態任元. And he explains the meaning of each word through the whole chapter. The first one, “The crown of emperor succeed the virtue (皇位継徳) “, is a main theme of these 8 principles. And the others show how specifically the virtue can be achieved. Here I translate it one by one as follows:1011
皇位継徳: The crown of emperor succeed the virtue.
人王崇神: The ancestor of emperor is worshiped as a god.
特尊伏敵: Emperor make enemies obey.
While explaining the meaning of it, Jihen equate emperor with the king of Dharma, the ideal ruler of Buddhist world. (輪王)
群民順惠: Make the people follow by grace.
He used concepts from Confucianism a lot.
法能治世: The Law are capable of ruling the world.
The Law (法) is usually Buddhist concept, but in here he says that “The Law is the Manner or Ritual (禮)” and indirectly mentioning Confucius classics. This can be an example of Jihen’s syncretism rooting for Japan and Shinto.
政必禁費: Ruling must not waste away.
奉斉持国: Justly serve and hold the state.
This requires every social classes to worship Kami.
神態任元: The form of Kami holds the origin.
The concepts from Watarai is used to explain this principle, e.g. Purity. (淨潔)
The volume 5 of Kujihongigengi empathizes on the lineage of Emperor. The focus of it is reveal the sacred origin of imperial lineage. It is just one, unique line from the original Chaos, Kami and Buddha, not two in the heaven and not two in the earth. He tries to figure out the superiority of imperial authority over people.12 The volume 9 is about sacred treasures. The 3 famous sacred treasures, and 10 sacred treasures are linked to the heaven and the earth respectively. In addition, the 10 treasures are identified with 10 Pāramitā of Buddhism, while the 3 treasures are equated with the Buddhist treasures.13
In conclusion, Jihen is suggesting new form of Shinto, although he might claim that the Shinto he is arguing is not something new, but a return to lost original form. The sentiment of social insecurity in his age called for new ideology, and Jihen was one of them who answered the demands of lives. Despite his self-identity as a reactionist, he come up with some unprecedented ideas and contributed the thinking world. He opened the way that Shinto to be more political. Ise Shinto definitely inspired Jihen to deny Buddhism, but Jihen developed theories of Ise Shinto, including anti-honjisuizaku, and reached far more political position as a emperialist. “The way of kami is just the way of emperor, the way of ruler (神道卽皇道, 神道卽君道).”14 In a sense that he supported the legitimacy and power of imperial realm, there are some similarity with Kitabatake Chikafusa (北畠親房).
Setting the hypotheses
Considering those facts of Jihen, I thought I could make the following hypotheses.
- The Jihen thought would have served as the intellectual foundation of the Southern in the Nanbokucho era.15
- If so, there would have been other ideas that constituted the ideological foundation of the North Court.
- If so, it would have been a confrontational and conflictual relationship between Jihen’s ideas and those of the North, as the intellectual foundations of the two courts. Furthermore, I might be able to say there was the proxy warfare in the thinking world, patronized by respective political powers, if
A. There would have been a criticism of each other ‘s ideas on the other.
B. Each political power would act exclusively as a supporter of each idea. – the division of intellectual world like political geographic division.
The thing is, as I continue to read materials and books about that era, I gradually cannot avoid to admit that my hypotheses are not correct. Actually, it is the reason why I’m writing this article less academic way. I decided to write this paper more essay-like, tracking my stages of thought regarding Jihen and the period of the Nanbokucho, because I thought it is easier in essay style to show where I started and where I eventually arrived. So, let the excuse stop at this point, and move into the verification of hypotheses.
Is intellectual foundations of the North Court exist? – Gozan System of Rinzai Zen Buddhism
It is not clear whether there was an ideology that every member of the North Court follows, but Ashikaga family, the two brothers of Ashikaga, favored Rinzai Zen Buddhism. Especially Muso Soseki is worth notice.
Rinzai sect, a part of Zen Buddhism, was relatively newly introduced Buddhism sect. In the period of Kamakura Shogunate, Hojo lineage intentionally and actively imported Zen Buddhism for cultural and political purposes. It was a counterpart of established Buddhist sects in Kyoto, making culturally defected Hojo warriors be more cultural, and providing intellectual background and highly educated services.16 As it had been hundreds of years after importing Buddhism from Tang Dynasty, the Buddhism world in Japan was facing the requirements of reform. Previous Buddhism sects, such as Nara Buddhism, Tendai and Shingon, were still owned powers, but new challengers emerged. During the age of Kamakura Shogunate, some reform movements come up: “Amida piety, the Nichiren tradition, and Zen.”17 And the Shogunate government favored Zen Buddhism, inviting many Chinese monks from Song Dynasty. In the realm of Hojo, Zen Buddhism expanded widely over the country as time goes by,18 and at the end of the era, at least Kamakura metropolis was superbly affected by Zen Buddhism and penetrated the life of aristocrats.
Even in Heian, the heart of old schools of Buddhism and the capital of imperial power, Zen Buddhism started to penetrate in. A famous monk of Zen Buddhism, Enni Ben’en was supported by emperor Go-Saga (1220-1272), and the emperor also invited many Chinse monks. Especially Daikakuji lines were more positive on accepting new Chinese religion. Emperor Kameyama, Go-Uda, Go-Daigo, who belongs to Daikakuji line, was patrons of Zen and studied it. Go-Daigo, who demolished Hojo government and started Kemmu Restoration, even have nice relationship with Muso Soseki.19
In Rinzai Zen, there had been the Gozan system, a network and hierarchy of temples across the state. It started in Kamakura period, but reached its zenith in Muromachi period.20 Gozan is composed of “Five Mountains” (gozan), “Ten Temples” (jissetsu), and other large temples (shozan). Five mountains are the top priority temples, and the ranking goes from Ten Temples to shozan temples. Even in the top five, it is ranked from the first to the fifth. The system was quite organized and run under a bureaucratic way, controlled by the governments. They enjoyed mutual benefits, in controlling over several provinces, financial supports, and general intellectual services. The property of Gozan was forced to be friendly to the power. It is because they are adopted and planted by the governments, so at first Rinzai totally relied on financial support from them, and payed it back in forms of services.
Thus, this newly imported metropolitan Buddhism and its system was ready to function as a supporter of the North Court. The fancy Chinese culture lured many aristocrats in Kamakura period, especially Samurais, and was suitable for illegitimate Shogunate powers, because it is imported to serve the very purpose of supporting uncultured Shogunate against old powers like Kuke or emperor. So it is not a surprise that the Ashikaga brothers, Takauji and Tadayoshi loved Rinzai sect. During Nanbokucho era, Ashikaga Tadayoshi handled the cultural issues and favored Gozan Rinzai sect, involving in the settlement of Gozan system in Kyoto and the whole state.
Is there conflicts between the thoughts of Jihen and those of Gozan Rinzai Buddhism?
1. lack of direct mentioning or citations each other
Though we might confirm that Gozan Rinzai worked as an intellectual fundamental of the North Court during Nanbokucho era, it is hard to see any explicit confrontation of two thought. It is true that Jihen is harshly criticizing Buddhism. But the target of criticism is not Rinzai Buddhism. Rather, it is targeting especially Tendai Buddhism. Through his books like Kujihongigengi or Toyoshiharashimpuwaki spent a lot of words to debunk Sanno Shinto, by holding anti-honjisuizaku, there was not any specific mentioning of Rinzai sect. It might be natural considering that Jihen studied Tendai for most of his life. And we may just be satisfied saying that Jihen debunked Buddhism as a whole, though Rinzai is not directly mentioned. But it is not an enough evidence to state that there was a rivalry between Gozan and Shinto of Jihen. It was not possible for Jihen to do not know about Gozan – it was quite prevalent at that time, mutually benefited with the North Court. So if Jihen intended his idea as a counterpart of Gozan, in political sense, he definitely should have mentioned it.
2. counter examples of exclusive supports
The most critical counter-evidence of intellectual division per political powers is that exclusive patronages are not evident.
A. The South Court patronage to Gozan
There are a lot of facts about patronage of the Gozan system from the South. First, although it was later completed by Ashikaga, it was the Emperor Go-Daigo who first introduced the Gozan system in Heian. As mentioned earlier, he not only invited monks from China, but also tried to introduce the Gozan system to Kyoto, which existed only in Kamakura. Of course, the temples included in the list were different from Ashikaga’s (in fact, the list was constantly modified in the beginning), but the intention of political usage of Rinzai was obvious. He also let the members of imperial lineage be a Rinzai monk, and even his son was included in them. Go-Daigo was trying to strengthen the bond by tying imperial family and Rinzai together with blood. At last, he maintained a close relationship with the most famous monk of the time, Muso Soseki. From the before of Genko War, he invited Muso to Kyoto, and after 1334, Kemmu Restoration, had Muso stay in Kyoto. Looking back on these facts, it is difficult to say that the emperor Go-Daigo did not support the Gozan system.21
B. Gozan showing friendly stance to the South Court
Furthermore, there are evidences that Gozan showed affections toward the South Court. Muso Soseki build Tenryuji for the sake of emperor Go-Daigo, who was dead at that time, even though it was still Nanbokucho era. It is even more surprising considering that Ashikaga allowed Muso to build the temple, Muso refused to leave Heian with Go-Daigo when Ashikaga conquered the capital and after that enjoyed supports from Ashikaga, and Go-Daigo never had positive opinion against Ashikaga even leaving testament of punishing the betrayers.
It was not just the case of Tenryuji that makes this confrontation blur. “Temple for the national pacification” (ankokuji), and “pagodas for the welfare of sentient beings” (rishoto) was started to be built in 1338. It was huge project for Rinzai to penetrate in all over the provinces, and of course for the sake of Ashikaga to reach its governing. But the purpose or justification of constructions22 was to monumentalize the dead who were gone in civil war, happened from Genko War. Reminding Genko War was a war against Hojo by Go-Daigo, it sounds weird to commemorate them in Nanbokucho period.23
Is the ideas of Jihen were used as intellectual bases of the South Court?
Returning to the first hypothesis, it is hard to imagine that Jihen’s thoughts were used as the intellectual foundations of the South Court. Obviously Jihen’s idea is imperial friendly. Despite such ideological affinities, yet, the South dynasties have yet to find records of material or declarative support to Jihen. Above all, the historical record of Jihen is very poor, so it is not a surprise there is no historical material proving this hypothesis. So far, my research does not make it possible to deny that Jihen’s idea would be a sort of unrequited love for the South government.
And in the general historical view of the South, there are already some major thinkers of the South than Jihen. The representative figure is Kitabatake Chikafusa, and the latter three Bo (後の三房) were famous. However, they are difficult to be classified as Shinto thinkers, and it is even harder to see the connection of them with Jihen.
What do these facts tell us about the meaning of Jihen’s ideas? First, the dominant ideology of the time seems to be Buddhism rather than Shinto. Therefore, the biggest ideological conflict at that time was not the conflict between Shinto and Buddhism as I expected. The most important conflict was within Buddhism. The urgent instability of the era invoked the competition between traditional Buddhism and new Chinese Buddhism. This can be seen from the fact that the political conflict at the end of the Kamakura Shogunate was expressed in the form of conflict between the new Buddhism called Chinese Zen Buddhism and the existing Buddhism based on Kyoto and Nara. And the fact that the two governments tried to appeal to Buddhist denominations such as Gozan in Nanbokucho era also supports this claim.
At that time, little Shinto had attempted to become independent from Buddhism like Ise Shinto. The rest seemed to have been restricted to the role of Ujigami, the Kami of a certain clan. Therefore, it was not yet mature enough to grow into a national political ideology. Rather, the most common Shinto form was likely to have been mixed with Buddhism, like Sanno Shinto combined with Tendai. In this situation, though Jihen’s thought has a great implication in its contents, it seems that he did not get much of applause. Jihen’s political position was too low for his ideas to appear against Rinzai’s, and Rinzai’s was too huge organization for Jihen.
Despite many of these questions about the role of Jihen in the times, we still find meaningful attempts in Jihen. One of the most important is that it inspired Yoshida Shinto in later generations. Yoshida Shinto succeeded Jihen’s thought and became one of the most influential shrines in the late Muromachi period and in Edo period. And it is worth to notice Jihen’s powerful and unprecedented politicization of Shintoism. Though before, some Shinto worshiped the ancestors of emperors, but was not able to be ideologized by linking it with political legitimacy. The flow of the new Shinto began in Ise Shinto, and it became the political ideas favoring emperor in Jihen. In these points, it is clear that Jihen is an important figure in the history of medieval Shinto history. Unfortunately, he was not able to occupy a significant position to divide the ideological world of Nanbokucho era in halves.
Collcutt, Martin. Five Mountains, Harvard Univ Asia Center, 1981.
Dumoulin, Heinrich S J. Zen Buddhism: a History. Vol. 2, Japan, World Wisdom, 2005.
Grapard, Allan G. “The Shinto of Yoshida Kanetomo.” Monumenta Nipponica 47, no. 1 (1992): 27. doi:10.2307/2385357.
Kokugakuin University. “Jingidoke, Encyclopedia of Shinto.” Edited by Okada Shōji. Jingidoke, Encyclopedia of Shinto. Accessed November 29, 2016. http://k-amc.kokugakuin.ac.jp/DM/detail.do?class_name=col_eos&data_id=22573.
久 保 田 ( Kubota), 収(Osamu). 中世神道の研究, 京都: 神道史学会, 1959.
大 隅 ( Osumi), 和雄(Kazuo). 中世神道論, 東京: 岩波書店, 1977.
玉 懸 ( Tamakake), 博之(Hiroyuki). 日本中世思想史研究, 東京: ぺりかん社, 1998.
제한된 시간 내에 논지들을 다 다루면서 영어로 작성하기가 까다로웠다. 그 결과, 본문에도 적혀 있지만 학술작문보다 에세이 같이 되어버렸다. 실패한 가설을 다루다보니 이걸 학술적으로 재구성하는게 간단하지 않아서, 편한 길로 가버린 것. 나쁜것만은 아니지만.. 교수님도 긍정적으로 코멘트 주셨고.
한글 아웃라인에는 있었지만 도쿄행 버스를 타기위해 포기한 항목들이 있었다.
이에 대한 제기될 수 있는 재반박
1) 고다이고가 헤이안의 오산을 시작하였으나, 남조로 이전한 이후 그 통제력을 잃음
2) 고다이고는 권력을 위해서 어떤 사상이라도 이용하려 한 것으로 보임.
3) 무소와 친밀한 관계였으나, 고다이고가 요시노로 도망칠때 무소는 헤이안에 남음.
4) 텐류지를 고다이고를 위해 지었다고 주장한것은 당시 북조의 부족한 정통성을 보충하기 위한 방안이었을지도. 게다가 선후관계가 분명하진 않지만, 텐류지를 위해 원나라와 무역을 개시하고 이것을 승려들이 주도함. 경제력 확보를 위해 텐류지를 지었는지, 텐류지를 짓다보니 경제력이 필요했는지는 불분명.
5) 안국사 및 기타 건설은 겐코의 난 이후 사망자를 위한 것이라곤 한다. 그러나 정치적 행정적 목적이 다분하였음. 마찬가지로 정통성 확보 시도로도 해석 가능.
그럼에도 불구하고 오산과 지헨이 대립하였다고 보는건 어려워 보인다.
- 서로 상대를 명확히 타깃으로 하는 반론이 존재하지 않으며, 무관심해 보임.
- 오산의 적은 신토가 아니라 기존 헤이안 불교였음.
이 보고서의 문제점
지헨의 경우 사상적 내용으로 파고들었으면서, 오산에 대해서는 사회적 맥락을 위주로 파고듬.
그러니 서로 만나지 못한다는 결론이 나왔을 수도
오산이 신토에 대해 거의 관심이 없었던 것으로 보인다는점(없는걸 증명하기는 어렵지만 일단은)
지헨이 실제적으로 정치권의 지원을 거의 받지 못했다는 점(마찬가지로 없는것 증명하기지만)
을 고려한다면, 이렇게 다른 접근법을 취할 수 밖에 없던 것이 당연할지도.
이 부분들을 시간관계상 다루지 못해서 아쉬워 여기에라도 적어둔다.
Dear Mr. Kim,
Thank you for this very entertaining paper. I very much appreciated your forthrightness in establishing your “failure” in proving your hypothesis at the front of the paper, rather than trying to cover it up with dense or flowery prose. As you correctly surmise, it is your thought process I am interested in rather than your conclusion.
As to those thought process, there is very little to find fault with here. You establish a reasonable hypothesis, not based on mere speculation, but grounded in extrapolation of existing research. And you then systematically (or at least, as much as possible within the limits of this paper) set out to examine it. In doing so, you make use of relevant secondary sources that your cite prudently.
In the end, the paper does fall a little bit short in that there is no attempt to survey or compare secondary literature. However, with all the other requirements met, I grade this paper at 95.
Together with your other grades of:
Participation 80 (frequently late, but always insightful and engaging during discussion)
This brings me to an overall evaluation of 91.
Thank you for your amiable presence and astute comments this semester, and I wish you the best of luck in your further academic career.
Allan G Grapard, “The Shinto of Yoshida Kanetomo,” Monumenta Nipponica 47, no. 1 (1992): 27, doi:10.2307/2385357. p.34. ↩
ibid. p.34. if you want to see more about it, see Allan G Grapard, “Linguistic Cubism: a Singularity of Pluralism in the Sannō Cult,” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 14, no. 2 (May 1, 1987), doi:10.18874/jjrs.14.2-3.1987.211-234. or Kokugakuin University, “Sanno Shinto, Encyclopedia of Shinto,” ed. Satō Masato, Sanno Shinto, Encyclopedia of Shinto, accessed November 29, 2016, http://k-amc.kokugakuin.ac.jp/DM/detail.do?class_name=col_eos&data_id=22572. ↩
ibid. p.45. ↩
収(Osamu) 久 保 田 ( Kubota), 中世神道の研究, (京都: 神道史学会, 1959). pp.139-159. The suggested facts about Jihen is mainly from the book of Kubota, which has been a milestone to approach middle age Shinto, especially for Jihen. ↩
Grapard, “The Shinto of Yoshida Kanetomo.” p.30. ↩
Kokugakuin University, “Jingidoke, Encyclopedia of Shinto,” ed. Okada Shōji, Jingidoke, Encyclopedia of Shinto, accessed November 29, 2016, http://k-amc.kokugakuin.ac.jp/DM/detail.do?class_name=col_eos&data_id=22573. ↩
久 保 田 ( Kubota), 中世神道の研究. pp.142-146. ↩
ibid. pp.146-148. ↩
和雄(Kazuo) 大 隅 ( Osumi), 中世神道論, (東京: 岩波書店, 1977). p.157. Because the original text is written in Kanbun, Chinese classical literature, there might be several options of translation. In here, I took the translation of Osumi. ↩
ibid. For Japanese translation, see pp.157-180. For original Chinese literal text, see pp.309-318. ↩
For commentary, see 久 保 田 ( Kubota), 中世神道の研究. pp.148-149. ↩
ibid. p.149. ↩
ibid. p.149. ↩
ibid. pp.149-150. ↩
“In relation to the Kemmu government of emperor Go-Daigo and the south court that inherited it, this Shinto idea was formed based on the relationship with political power of the time.” 博之(Hiroyuki) 玉 懸 ( Tamakake), 日本中世思想史研究, (東京: ぺりかん社, 1998). p.58. This sentence is commented as cited from Kubota Osamu, but do not specify the specific page, rather noticing the whole chapter. ↩
Martin Collcutt, Five Mountains, (Harvard Univ Asia Center, 1981). p.87. ↩
Heinrich S J Dumoulin, Zen Buddhism: a History. Vol. 2, Japan, (World Wisdom, 2005). p.149. ↩
Collcutt, Five Mountains. pp.80-81. ↩
ibid. pp.84-86. ↩
Dumoulin, Zen Buddhism: a History. Vol. 2, Japan. pp.149-150. ↩
Collcutt, Five Mountains. pp.84-98. ↩
It was mostly rather symbolic absorption than building real physical temples. Large temples applied to be enrolled as Ankokuji, and the central government or headquarter of Rinzai approve or designated them. While Ankokuji was only for Rinzai temples, Rishoto were not temples but a building in temples. Not like Ankokuji, Rishoto was installed in non-Rinzai temples like Tendai or Shingon. These were the trials to administratively systemize and integrate temples of all kinds of Buddhism in one wide network, which is controlled by the government. ↩
Dumoulin, Zen Buddhism: a History. Vol. 2, Japan. p.152. ↩