The China Mirror
and discussed in chapte
r 3
.
53. Nagahara and Kishi,
Zen’yaku Azuma kagami
, 3:398, the entry for Jō’ō 3 (1224).7.17.
The Past in the Wake of the Mongols
217
The familiar framework of
kami
and buddhas returns yet again in
the account of the H
ō
ji Disturbance of 1247, in which
bakufu
forces de-
feat an uprising of Miura loyalist supporters of the deposed shogun, Kuj
ō
Yoritsune (1218–56). The H
ō
j
ō
hero, Tokiyori (1227–63), initially learns
of the uprising from a shrine head into whose hands a prayer petition
has fallen. The petition asks the “miraculous gods” not to help the rebel-
lion, but instead to aid in protecting stability and safety.
54
Roughly two
weeks later, in his report to the
bakufu
on H
ō
ji 1 (1247).6.13, Tokiyori is
moved to attribute “this battle and the peace of the Kant
ō
” as “all
brought about by the efficacy of the dharma.”
55
This lingering rhetoric
serves as a reminder that despite the surge in reliance upon
kami
among
warriors, this was complementary—not contradictory—to reliance upon
assorted buddhas.
The obverse of this position vis-
à
-vis the undeserving is likewise ex-
plicit in instances where failure or censure is attributed to affronts to the
gods and/or buddhas. On Jish
ō
5 (1181).1.21, shortly before Kiyomori’s
death, for instance, we find another catalogue of his faults, stated in terms
that suggest he is not long for this world: in “an excess of pride,” Kiyo-
mori “scorns court governance, disregards the authority of the gods, de-
stroys the Buddhist law, and brings suffering and chaos to the people.”
56
As if this is not enough, he also orders the seizure of the military rice ra-
tions headed to the shrine of the Sun Goddess and the arrest of the
people involved, an act “unprecedented in the hundreds and thousands
of years since the Sun Goddess’s [first] reposing [there].”
57
This is the per-
fect setup for Yoritomo’s abovementioned observation that in his death,
Kiyomori essentially got what he had coming to him.
Other less dramatic examples include the sudden death of the gover-
nor of Echigo on Y
ō
wa 1 (1181).9.3, before he is able to carry out his plan
to attack Kiso Yoshinaka (1154–84), which is interpreted as “divine pun-
ishment, perhaps?”; and the Y
ō
wa 2 (1182) response to Minamoto no Yuki-
ie’s (died 1186) prayer in which he is informed that the gods are behind
54. Nagahara and Kishi,
Zen’yaku Azuma kagami
, 4:459, the entry for Hōji 1
(1247).5.26.
55. Nagahara and Kishi,
Zen’yaku Azuma kagami
, 4:470.
56. Nagahara and Kishi,
Zen’yaku Azuma kagami
, 1:95.
57. Nagahara and Kishi,
Zen’yaku Azuma kagami
, 1:95.
218
Moving Mirrors
the Minamoto.
58
(And given this, the Hie monks are encouraged to fall
in line.
59
) Even Retired Emperor Goshirakawa invokes the “resentment
of the people and the curses of the gods” to urge Kamakura to get their
stewards under control.
60
Moreover, such threats are still potent a quarter of a century later,
when Miura Yoshimura urges his siblings to abandon their agreement
with the Wada family to support them in their revolt against the H
ō
j
ō
-
led
bakufu
forces, lest they incur “the punishment of heaven” (
tenken
) for
their disloyalty. (Yoshimura points to his family’s long service to the Min-
amoto and reminds his brother that the current shogun, Sanetomo, be-
longs to the same line.) In the same uprising, the Wada partisan Tsuchiya
Yoshikiyo (died 1213) is felled by a stray arrow widely attributed to the
gods.
61
In other words, just as the support of the
kami
was needed for
success, divine censure was also seen as a real threat: without a divinely
bestowed right and a commitment to Buddhism (far from incompatible
allegiances in this period), one’s cause could not triumph.
62
While the idea of Buddhist principles influencing events is familiar
from the earlier
Mirrors
, in the justifications for attributing how matters
unfold to the gods, one can observe a reorientation away from concerns
with imperial authority. As the
bakufu
grew in strength, it moved toward
what Sasaki has described as typical of nonelite belief in the
kami
: the
previously mentioned idea of Japan as a sacred land that enjoyed divine
protection but without commitment to the notion of the emperor as di-
vine.
63
Indeed, where one might expect the removal of an imperial prince
from the office of shogun to cause at least some discomfiture—were his
“divine origin” taken seriously—the record makes no mention of
kami
or buddhas in the quashed 1266 uprising that ends Munetaka’s position
58. Nagahara and Kishi,
Zen’yaku Azuma kagami
, 1:112 and 126–27, respectively.
59. Nagahara and Kishi,
Zen’yaku Azuma kagami
, 1:127.
60. Fujiwara no Tsunefusa’s transcription of this is included in Nagahara and Kishi,
Zen’yaku Azuma kagami
, 1:362, the entry for Bunji 3 (1187).10.3.
61. For the first exchange and for the arrow incident, see Nagahara and Kishi,
Zen’yaku Azuma kagami
, 3:208, the entry for Kenryaku 3 (1213).5.2, and 3:213, the entry
for Kenryaku 3 (1213).5.3, respectively.
62. Conlan’s work suggests that this logic continued unabated in the fourteenth
century (
State of War
, 166–67).
63. Sasaki Kaoru,
Nihon chūsei shisō no kichō
, 126.
The Past in the Wake of the Mongols
219
as shogun.
64
Instead, after Yoritomo’s initial citation of his tie to the im-
perial house, there seems to be little concern about justifying uprisings
(or crackdowns) with rhetoric that makes recourse to imperial ties. The
gods and buddhas are enough.
All of the rhetoric of cosmological forces notwithstanding, however,
there is no “principle” that is ever articulated as such. While the omni-
present Buddhist rituals suggest that karmic causality is still very much
a part of the understanding of the universe, the lack of a frame story to
remind readers to be on the lookout for a karma-driven explanation cre-
ates a certain vagueness in outlook. Similarly, the concept of “final age,”
most often rendered in this text as
matsudai
, is never treated in a sustained
way: the range of events to which it is applied—from a miraculous res-
urrection to a copy of the
Kokin wakashū
(Anthology of Waka Old and
New, written in 905)—suggests a diff erent level of gravitas than was used
in its earlier deployment. Nor is there any theorization of the involvement
of
kami
in mundane affairs—again, something that the patterns of the
earlier
Mirrors
would lead one to expect in a preface. To be sure, the vic-
torious side in a military struggle is aided by
kami
, no doubt thanks to
the many offerings and prayers made to them both annually and ad hoc,
but no long-term trajectory is spelled out. In short,
The Mirror of the East
is not a text that derives its authority from a discourse on principles, nor
does it make a clear statement on where the world is headed. Without
the authority of place that the earlier
Mirrors
established through their
settings at specific temples, there is no obvious concern in
The Mirror of
the East
with situating its world on a well-delimited cosmological path.
Instead, various types of authority, which are mobilized in the treat-
ment of military campaigns, are scattered throughout the work along with
the more general movement of goods and people within the world of the
text. I propose that by refraining from tying the text to a specific temple,
the compilers of
The Mirror of the East
have created a narrative that is able
to mobilize diff erent strands of authority—strands that were unlikely to
map to a single locus within the domain of the Kamakura shogunate in
Dostları ilə paylaş: |