This is another in a series of daily articles concerning Kishio Satomi's book, "Japanese Civilization; Its Significance and Realization; Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles," which details the foundations of Chigaku Tanaka's interpretation of Nichiren Buddhism and Japan's role in the early 20th century.
Kishio Satomi is explicit in his linkage of the Shokyu War and Nichiren’s growing Buddhist philosophy.
Nichirenism and the Japanese National Principles, p120-121As years rolled on, this infant prodigy became distinct from all others, and when he became twelve years of age reason was beginning to bud in his mind.
He gave vent to his great doubt concerning the contradictory facts of the country with regard to the most important things. What were they? According to one of his extant autographical manuscripts, he harbored two serious doubts, the one was about religion and the other about the Shokyu War, with reference to the Japanese National Principles and history. He writes in one of his letters:
“As you know, I studied diligently from my boyhood, and I prayed to the Bodhisattva Kokuzō since I was twelve years of age in order that I should be made the wisest man in Japan. But, for certain reasons, I cannot write about it minutely yet ” (Works (the Ryogonkaku Edition), Second Series, p. 88; the manuscripts in Nichiren’s own handwriting are extant. Cf. Works, p. 1543).
Buddha’s true teaching must be one, though there exist thousands of different doctrines with pious imposition; however, Buddhism in general was contradictory at that time. Nichiren, first of all very much questioned such Buddhism. In the second place, he could not neglect the Shokyu War, which had happened one year before his birth. Why was the Sovereign’s army beaten by the Hōjō’s? And why do not people doubt such a topsy-turvy, a mere subject like Hōjō Yoshitoki daring to expel the three ex-Emperors to islands? Without doubt, Nichiren wanted to solve these marvelous questions, so he made up his mind to go to the Buddhist Monastery to enable him to get at the root of such phenomena. He says:
“The seven sects of Mahayanism sing their own praises as follows: Our Sect is the important essence of the whole Buddhism, etc. People say: We, common people, can be satisfied with any master or priest by believing him. It might be the best way to revere and believe any priest; but my, Nichiren’s, doubt has not been dispelled. Although every individual tries to get ahead of all others, yet the Sovereign must be one; if two Kings co-exist in one country there cannot be peace; if there are two masters in one home, then family dissensions will break out. It is not otherwise in Buddhism. Apart from what it is, one Scripture must be the great King of all the Buddhist Scriptures. Nevertheless, the ten Sects and the seven sects, all of them, still discuss the problem and each one individually claims to be the great King of Buddhism, just as in the case of a people being in a state of confusion under seven or ten kings. I was once at sixes and sevens and harbored a doubt on this point to solve the problem ” (Works, p. 154).
These quotes from Nichiren fail to convey the message Satomi is trying promote. This happens in the book more often than expected. In my reading of Nichiren’s writings I don’t recall explicit statements that the defeat of the three ex-emperors was a catastrophe. In fact, there are examples of exactly the opposite.
In Kangyō Hachiman-shō, Remonstration with Bodhisattva Hachiman, Writings of Nichiren Shōnin, Doctrine 1, Page 277, Nichiren writes:
Ex-Emperor Gotoba, however, was the ruler in name only; he was a liar, wicked and dishonest. On the contrary, Shogunal Regent Hōjō Yoshitoki was a subject in name, but he was worthy of a great ruler without double-talk, in whom the Great Bodhisattva Hachiman vowed to reside.
And in Shuju Onfurumai Gosho, Reminiscences: from Tatsunokuchi to Minobu, Writings of Nichiren Shōnin, Biography and Disciples, Volume 5, Pages 33, he says:
The prosperity of the Hōjō clan is due to ex-Emperor Gotoba as well as Wada Yoshimori, who both tried to destroy the Hōjōs. If not for them, how could the Hōjōs hold onto their hegemony and rule over Japan? Therefore, we should say that they, who planned to subjugate the Hōjōs, were the prime allies of the Hōjō clan.
Table of ContentsNext