Poetic composition was extremely serious business in Kamakura-period Japan
(1185-1333). The era boasts the Shinkokin
wakashû 新古今和歌集, possibly the greatest
of all Japanese poetic anthologies, as well as many sophisticated and highly
theoretical works of poetry criticism, most of which have yet to be translated
or adequately researched in or outside of Japan. The following article, written
for an academic conference at Purdue University in October 2002 and previously
published in the 2003 conference proceedings,1
concerns one such late thirteenth-century poetic treatise: Nomori no kagami
野守鏡, an angry polemic
directed at the new poetic style of Kyôgoku Tamekane 京極為兼
(1254-1332), a great-grandson of the eminent Fujiwara no Teika
藤原定家 (1162-1241) and a poet who would achieve fame in his own and later generations for the stylistic
innovations of his verse. As one of many contentious Kamakura-period
commentaries, Nomori no kagami offers
us insights today into the rich, unsettled, and sometimes menacing world of
Nomori no kagami and the Perils of Poetic Heresy
In the ninth month of the third year
of Einin 永仁 (1295), an anonymous critic composed a Buddhist poetic commentary by the name of Nomori no kagami
, “Mirror of the Watchman of the Fields.”2 The work is both a vitriolic attack upon the new poetic style of Kyôgoku
Tamekane, who had recently been chosen to edit the imperial anthology Gyokuyô wakashû
and an angry denunciation of the
fledgling Pure Land and Zen sects of Kamakura Buddhism. In the twentieth
century, scholars have been largely concerned with establishing the identity of
the author and the circumstances of the work’s composition. Fukuda Hideichi has
argued that it was written by a Tendai priest affiliated with both the
Enryakuji Eastern Tower at Sakuramoto (Mount Hiei), and the Gyôzan
魚山 school of
shômyô 声明 sutra chanting.3
Ogawa Toyo’o has more recently suggested that the author was a priest by the
name of Kujin 公尋, a
disciple of Kôkaku 光覚 in the Gyôzan shômyô
Other than such biographical or essentially religious inquiries, Nomori no kagami has received little
attention in the modern period. Nevertheless, from the perspectives of Buddhist
literary studies and early-medieval poetics, it is an important work because of
its unique and radical extensions of prevailing theories of Buddhism and waka 和歌 (Japanese poetry).
By the late thirteenth century, waka had come to be widely associated in
Japan with various aspects of Buddhist thought and practice. In his poetic
commentary Korai fûteishô
古来風躰抄 (1197), for example, Fujiwara no
Toshinari (Shunzei) asserts the concord of waka
and the Three Truths of Tendai Buddhism.5
The Ise monogatari commentary Waka chikenshû
和歌知顕集, which Kikuchi Hitoshi dates to the
mid-Kamakura period (13th century), reports that Japanese poetry “is the source of magical powers, drawing us to enlightenment,” and explains that the thirty-one syllables of a waka correspond to the thirty-one visible characteristics of a Buddha.6
(ca. 1280), the priest Mujû Ichien identifies waka as the dharani (magical Buddhist spells) of Japan, while an exemplum in Jikkinshô
(1252) suggests that the chanting of waka may be substituted for that of the nenbutsu, the ritual invocation of Amida Buddha’s name.7
According to the poetic commentary Sangoki
(13th/early 14th century), the poet-priest Saigyô (1118-1190) maintained that the practice of poetry is a form of Buddhist meditation, and in Kokon chomonjû
(1254), Tachibana no Narisue describes the painting in 1124 of a waka
mandala—an esoteric tableau mingling the written names of the so-called “Thirty
Six Poetic Geniuses” among representations of the Seven Buddhas of the Past—and
Narisue’s own veneration of it in the ninth month of 1249.8
Such waka-Buddhism associations were common
in the thirteenth century, and insofar as they were advanced as a means of both
defending waka against its critics
and enhancing its prestige, they tended to be affirming of all waka, without regard to specific
compositional styles. In 1295, however, the outspoken Nomori no kagami author altered the formerly generalist, positivist
paradigm by acridly equating Kyôgoku Tamekane’s innovative poetic style with
the recent “heresies” of the new sects of popular Buddhism. Invoking the
ubiquitous rhetoric of the miraculous powers of poetry to condemn rather than
affirm—bringing to bear the reverse edge of a double-edged sword, one might
say—he argued that as bad waka,
Tamekane’s verse constituted a dangerous affront to both the deities of Japan
and the Buddhist Law. Fourteen years after the second Mongol invasion of Japan,
he predicted that the country would be left vulnerable to foreign attack should
Tamekane’s style become widespread. Combining native and imported philosophical
thought with a Nichiren-type apocalyptic vision, and inspired by the continuing
Mongol threat,9 he broke new
ground in early-medieval critical discourse by extending the principles of
contemporary waka theory to their
logical (and now seemingly obvious) ends.
Kyôgoku Tamekane and the New Kamakura Buddhism
In its narrative
structure, Nomori no kagami is far
from unique. According to its introductory conceit (reminiscent of such works
無名草子 and Masukagami
増鏡), an unidentified narrator—a Buddhist novice, over sixty years
old—travels to Enkyôji Temple on Mount Shosha to pray for guidance in the Way
of Poetry. On the temple grounds, he encounters a priest—a poet of over
fifty—and the two fall into a discussion of waka.
The narrator asks the priest’s opinion of Tamekane’s new poetic style, and the
priest replies that although Tamekane is born of an illustrious family, his waka violates six poetic principles. The
narrator immediately equates these with the six arms of Kannon (suggesting
Tamekane’s desecration of the bodhisattva), and urges the priest to further
explain. What follows is the priest’s detailed account, the conservative
critique that is Nomori no kagami
proper. It is divided into two parts, the first of which details Tamekane’s six
offenses, and the second of which is a discursive polemic on the topics of
Buddhism, shômyô, and the deplorable
state of poetry in Japan.
As the priest would have us believe, Tamekane’s overarching offense is his failure to adhere to the poetic mores of his forebears. Traditional poems, he explains, when compared to those by Tamekane, are “like a man to a monkey.”10
Tamekane’s crime, for which he draws the priest’s reactionary ire, is his violation of poetic orthodoxy. Paraphrased, his six poetic transgressions are (1) his failure to take the appropriate heart (kokoro
as seed; (2) his tendency to compose on exactly what he feels, to the exclusion of aesthetic considerations; (3) his use of vulgar, non-poetic language; (4) his disinclination to seek new conception (fuzei
風情) within established, traditional boundaries; (5) his failure to internalize appropriate poetic form (sugata
and (6) his preference for the eighth-century Man’yôshû
style rather than that of the early tenth-century Kokinshû
As Inoue Muneo has observed, although the Nomori no kagami author himself does not appear to have been of a poetic house, his complaints, attributed to the priest at Enkyôji Temple, resonate with those of the Nijô poetic faction.12
Regarding the first of Tamekane’s offenses—“taking the heart as seed and not taking the heart as seed”—the priest explains:
There are two aspects of the heart—good and bad—which is why in Buddhism it is said that though one takes the heart as guide, one should not take the heart as guide.13
In the same way, a poem should take the good heart as its seed, and not the bad. The good heart is elegant and refined—far from vulgar—and everyone who hears it should be moved. As the Kokinshû preface explains, “emotion springs from the heart, and poetry is expressed in words.”14
The bad heart is understood by the individual alone, and though that person might think it graceful, it will not appeal to anyone else. The Kokinshû preface warns that “[most poets] take anything to be a poem, apparently because they fail to understand the true nature of poetry.”15
As for Lord Tamekane, when it comes to taking the heart as seed, he says that one should always just compose directly on the things one feels. His language is unadorned, like ordinary speech. Hearing his new-style verse, the Tamatsushima Deity must have to wash out her ears in the waves of Waka-no-ura. (NKT 4:86)
The priest’s reference to the anguish of the Tamatsushima Deity, a god of poetry identified with the legendary Sotôrihime, is typical of the acerbic wit displayed throughout the work. Wit aside, however, the priest’s criticism is not wholly unfair. In the commentary Tamekane-kyô wakashô
(completed ca. 1287), Tamekane repeatedly stresses the importance of following the heart, even at the expense of proper diction. Words are less important than feeling, he maintains, “for when one evokes the heart in words, those words take on the scent of the heart.”16
In the course of his condemnation of Tamekane’s style, the priest is reminded of Ippen Shônin
the thirteenth-century founder of the Ji sect of Pure Land Buddhism. Fukuda Hideichi, Kobayashi Chishô and others have identified the Nomori no kagami priest’s doctrinal orientation as Tendai-mikkyô.17 From the priest’s perspective, Ippen, like Tamekane, is guilty of heterodox views:
Speaking of Tamekane’s mistakes, the priest
Ippen misunderstands the principle of the nenbutsu.
Because he thinks the phrase “skip and dance with great rejoicing” (yuyaku kangi
means one ought to dance, he prances about as a kind of nenbutsu practice, waving his head and
lifting his feet.18
Moreover, he thinks the expression, “the True Heart is the Pure Land” (jikishin soku jôdo
直心即浄土), means that one should
avoid lying or holding anything back. Thus, he does not cover himself when he
is naked, and just like a crazy person, he speaks his mind against those he
dislikes without the least restraint. People esteem this as the epitome of
righteousness, and rich and poor alike, they flock to him. Their number is
greater than that of a thriving market. (NKT 4:68)
Ippen’s most grievous offense (like Tamekane’s)
would seem to be his popularity. In espousing his own misguided practice, he is
guilty of leading others astray, thereby contributing to the degradation of
Buddhism in Japan.
The priest continues by
enumerating Ippen’s three principal heresies. The first is the “dancing nenbutsu,” which, according to Ippen hijiri e
一遍聖絵 (an illustrated
biography composed in 1299), Ippen took up as a lifelong practice in Shinano
Province in 1279.19 The priest
asserts that despite the sutras’ and commentaries’ inclusion of the locution,
“skip and dance with great rejoicing,” there is no precedent for nenbutsu dancing among the founders of
the various schools. Ippen’s second heresy is his habit of speaking freely
about others and failing to conceal his nakedness. His third is his
renunciation of proper priestly robes for the sake of a filthy horse blanket.
Later, the priest
equates Ippen’s transgressions with Tamekane’s literary offenses. In both
cases, their problems stem from instances of textual misinterpretation:
There is not the slightest difference between
[Tamekane’s violation of] these poetic principles and [Ippen’s] present
heresies. First, to take the words “taking the heart as seed” and then compose
madly on an incorrect heart, is the same as following one’s reading of “yuyaku” and deciding to dance. Next, to
recall the forthrightness of the “straight poetic style” (tadakotouta
and then compose in a plain, unadorned style, is the same as misunderstanding
the meaning of righteousness and then speaking ill of others and not concealing
one’s private parts. Finally, to not emulate the elegant hearts and words (kokoro and kotoba) of poems in the old style, but to compose in a nearly
vulgar form, is the same as giving up one’s priestly robes for a horse blanket.
Whereas Tamekane fails to understand the
meanings and significances of the Kokinshû
and its prefaces—holy writ of the Way of Poetry, the Nomori no kagami priest would have us believe—Ippen misconstrues
the sutras. Furthermore, like Tamekane, who has a tendency to express in verse
all that is in his heart, Ippen speaks his mind freely and lays himself
天狗草紙, a satiric picture scroll dating from 1296 (one year after Nomori no kagami), contains criticisms
of Ippen and his followers that are remarkably similar in wording and content
to those in Nomori no kagami.21
The two works are connected in some way, but exactly how is unclear.22
In addition to its prose passages, Tengu
zôshi contains painted
representations of Ippen and his devotees in a variety of compromising
situations, and one can imagine from these how the author of Nomori no kagami must have looked upon
Ippen and his sect (and by extension, upon Tamekane’s new poetic style). First,
there is a gluttonous, disorderly feast at which a priest is shown eating from
his hand while a nun—apparently sick from having consumed too much—is led away
from a rice tub by a companion.23
Next, a group of Ippen’s followers are depicted performing the dancing nenbutsu as a tengu—a kind of large demon-bird-man—showers them with flower
petals. The Tengu zôshi narrator
When they practice the nenbutsu, they wave their heads, shake their shoulders and dance,
just like wild horses. The way they carry on, they’re no different from
mountain monkeys. Neither the men nor the women hide their genitals. Eating
with their bare hands, reveling in their impropriety, they act like beasts from
the animal realm.24
Finally, there is an image of Ippen urinating
into a bamboo tube. A kneeling nun holds the container under his robes,
collecting his water for use as medicine. “What a lot of pee!” one onlooker
exclaims in an inscribed caption. “It’s a cure for all that ails you,” another
remarks. A blind nun declares her intention to wash her eyes out in it, and a
lay woman says she wants to drink some to cure a stomach ailment, of all
Perhaps it was this sort of vulgarity that the Nomori no kagami author associated with Tamekane’s abandonment of
the Kokinshû style.
a later section of the commentary, the Nomori
no kagami priest compares Tamekane’s lax poetic approach to the loose
practices of some contemporary Zen and Pure Land adherents. Their common
problem (besides their popularity) is an aversion to the rigors of tradition:
those half-baked Zen priests these days, upon hearing the slightest sutra
verse, they think they have immediately plumbed the depths of the Dharma. And
those deluded nenbutsu
practitioners—they just point to the passage about chanting the name, and then
think they can easily attain rebirth in the Pure Land. Shakyamuni and Amida
both abandoned their countries and left their homes to take up painful ascetic
practices, but the devotees of the Zen and nenbutsu
schools say they can easily attain enlightenment with little effort, and
everyone rushes to join them, since they choose not to strain themselves with
learning. Those who study the exoteric and esoteric doctrines have grown few as
a result. It reminds me of the poetry these days, composed with ease by just
following the heart, and without the poet considering the poems of old,
avoiding poetic ills, adorning language, or guarding against taboos. If these
new-style poems were to be chosen for an anthology, doubtless everyone would
come to emulate them in the end. (NKT 4:87)
In the way that the Zen and Pure Land sects have
robbed the older institutions of their adherents, perverting the practice of
Buddhism, Tamekane’s innovations threaten to derange the rules of waka composition, leading all poets
astray. In fact, the identification of Tamekane’s new poetic style with the
rise of the Zen sect in Japan is particularly ominous insofar as both Nomori no kagami and Tengu zôshi attribute the Mongol
conquest of Song China in 1127 to the advent of Zen.26
The priest’s final
warning about a poetic anthology is most telling. As Fukuda Hideichi has shown,
it was common knowledge in 1295 (the year of Nomori no kagami’s composition) that Emperor Fushimi
had appointed Tamekane principal compiler of a
new imperial anthology, later to be titled Gyokuyô
wakashû (completed in 1313). Although Tamekane was only one of four
compilers, Fushimi is said
to have rigged the selection committee so as to give him an incontestable
voice. Tamekane’s rival, Nijô Tameyo
(1250-1338), who was another
designated compiler, resigned from the committee in protest.27 Although the priest in Nomori
no kagami speaks abstractly about a possible selection of poems, his
complaint—as that of a likely Nijô sympathizer—is concrete and clear. If
Tamekane’s influence should go unchecked, he forebodes, everyone will take up
the new style, and the consequences will be severe.
The Perils of Poetic Heresy
In light of the
conventional wisdom of early-medieval Japan, the Nomori no kagami author indeed had reason to fear. Identifying the
Way of Poetry with political governance, Tamekane’s grandfather, Fujiwara no
(1196-1275), warns in
his commentary Kokin joshô
古今序抄 (1264) against the
reckless composition of waka.28
Similarly, Gyokuden jinpi
玉伝深秘, a medieval compendium
of secret waka lore from the poetic
lineage of Fujiwara no Tameaki
藤原為顕 (fl. ca. 1263-1278; an
illegitimate son of Tameie), explains that “the affairs of state (sedô no matsurigoto) depend upon the
quality of waka produced.”29
The late Kamakura-period treatise Jinpi
(also associated with
Tameaki) proposes that the nation suffered the calamity of the Mongol invasions
because the imperial anthologies were carelessly compiled.30
Like many poets and
scholars of the medieval period, the Nomori
no kagami priest professes a faith in the supernatural powers of poetry. He
claims that in the not-so-distant past, even Tamekane’s great-great-grandfather
(1114-1204) was capable of moving deities with verse. He explains that it was by means of waka—two
poems recited for the Kasuga Deity—that Shunzei secured the prosperity of his
family line, including the thankless Tamekane. The Nomori no kagami priest laments:
Even if Hitomaro or Akahito should appear before
Tamekane and instruct him to compose poems as he does, he should remember his
Fujiwara heritage and resist, being who he is. That he chooses to compose in
such a deviant style is both disloyal to his lineage and disrespectful of the
Way. (NKT 4:71)
Tamekane’s disloyalty invites condemnation, but
his disrespect for the Way of Poetry is positively dangerous.
Tale literature of the
twelfth and thirteenth centuries abounds in stories of the ritual use of poetry
as magic. Poets are reported to have employed waka toward a variety of ends, whether to summon rain, cure
illness, find love, right wrongs, or achieve social success. Mujû Ichien,
author of the Buddhist tale anthology Shasekishû (ca. 1280), asserts that Japanese poems “provoke
responses in Buddhas and bodhisattvas and move gods and humans alike” because,
as dharani, they “encompass the
natural truths of lay and monastic life in thirty-one syllables.”31
The powers of a poem, Mujû contends, derive from a combination of content
(truth) and form. Although the Nomori no
kagami priest acknowledges the importance of truth, he is particularly
concerned with the issue of language and its appropriate selection:
Dharani are words selected from
the heart of the teachings of the various Buddhas; they are the ultimate
distillation of the true principle of immediate salvation of sentient beings.
This is why although their lines are few, their effects are great. The words of
poetry are also many, but the poet chooses from among them in order to compose
a verse in thirty-one characters. The same as a dharani, the verse expresses the truth of the poet’s intent. (NKT 4:87)
Just as the words of a dharani are selected from the sutras, the priest maintains, the
words of a waka are drawn from the
larger poetic lexicon. Tamekane, however, fails to discriminate among words.
The third of his six poetic transgressions is his use of vulgar, non-poetic
language. The Nomori no kagami priest
Lord Tamekane chooses neither his words nor his
heart. He proposes that we should simply compose in whatever way we feel. Not
only will this be the end of the Way of Poetry, it will destroy Buddhist Truth
as well. (NKT 4:87)
Logically speaking, if the Ways of Poetry and
Buddhism are the same (as numerous early-medieval commentaries maintain), then
the destruction of one would indeed signify the destruction of the other.
The dangers of
Tamekane’s new poetic style in fact extend beyond the death of waka and the dissolution of Buddhist Truth.
In what Ogawa Toyo’o has described as a “radical ideology of the powers of
the Nomori no kagami priest invokes
Chinese philosophical thought to argue that the security of the very state
depends upon the proper maintenance of waka
It is because waka establishes rectitude in music and etiquette that our country
is stable and not wracked by outside enemies. That Buddhism is widespread here,
excelling countries greater than our own, is also due entirely to the virtues
of waka. The Song Dynasty is without waka, and thus lacking guidance in music
and etiquette, their Eight Schools of Buddhism have all disappeared and their
country is plundered by foreign traitors. Now considering that the deities of
Japan—deities who revere the Holy Law, protect our nation and love
poetry—detest the contemporary style, we are sure to suffer their wrath as a
result. If Lord Tamekane receives unhindered control of an imperial anthology
and chooses muddled poems in the new style, it will mean the end of waka. (NKT 4:83)
The priest’s warning is dire. Though fine poems
may move the gods, bad ones may alienate them as well. For this reason, it is
the religio-political duty of all poets to compose appropriate waka as a means of ensuring the
stability of Buddhism and the state. After all, it was the deities, with their
“divine wind” (kamikaze
who swept away the
invading Mongol ships in 1274 and 1281. Without their aid, the country might
have been overrun, suffering the unhappy fate of the Song in China.
the Nomori no kagami priest, a
champion of waka as ritual
literature, Tamekane’s violation of poetic convention lends his verse a
dangerously chaotic quality that would have been especially disturbing in the
era of the Mongol threat. Herbert Plutschow has explained that “[r]itual
literature can be seen as a reaction toward chaos, used at specific occasions,
regular or irregular, whenever chaotic forces had to be countered.”33
Because Tamekane “chooses neither his words nor his heart,” composing poems
from language outside the limits of established poetic diction, his waka fails in its ritual purpose: that
of safeguarding Japan against the Mongol hordes. Galvanized by the recent
attacks—frightening events of a geo-political scale—the Nomori no kagami author boldly extends the boundaries of
thirteenth-century critical discourse in order to castigate Tamekane and his
intended compilation of Gyokuyô wakashû.
By equating Tamekane’s poetic innovations with the heresies of the new schools
of Kamakura Buddhism, extending the formerly positivist waka-Buddhism association to its more-or-less logical extremity,
the Nomori no kagami author
articulates a dark new conception of poetry, politics, and the hazardous powers
塙保己一, ed. Gunsho ruijû
群書類従. 19 vols. Tokyo: Keizai Zasshisha
Nihon koten bungaku taikei
日本古典文学大系. 100 vols. Tokyo:
Iwanami Shoten, 1958-68.
Nihon koten bungaku zenshû
51 vols. Tokyo: Shôgakukan, 1970-76.
ed. Nihon kagaku taikei
10 vols. Tokyo: Fûkan Shobô, 1956-63.
Shin Nihon koten bungaku taikei
100 vols. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1989-2005.
Shinpen Nihon koten bungaku zenshû
新編日本古典文学全集. 88 vols. Tokyo: Shôgakukan, 1994-.
and Watanabe Kaigyoku
渡邊海旭, eds. Taishô shinshû daizôkyô
85 vols. Tokyo: Taishô Issaikyô Kankôkai, 1924-32.
All other works:
福田秀一. “Nomori no kagami ni
tsuite no kôsatsu.” In Chûsei waka shi no
kenkyû, 622-58. Tokyo:
Kadokawa Shoten, 1972.
Heian-chô bungaku kenkyûkai 1995
Heian-chô bungaku kenkyûkai
平安朝文学研究会, ed. “Nomori no kagami seikô (1-5).” Sôzô to shikô
創造と思考 1-5 (1991-1995): 26-30;
43-47; 49-57; 64-71; 49-55.
Dennis Hirota. No Abode: The Record of Ippen. Honolulu: University of Hawaii
Press, 1986. Rev. ed. 1997.
Robert N. Huey. Kyôgoku Tamekane: Poetry and Politics in Late Kamakura Japan.
Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1989.
井上宗雄. “Nomori no kagami to Genshô waka kuden.” In Chûsei kadan shi no kenkyû: Nanboku-chô ki,
38-42. Tokyo: Meiji Shoin, 1965.
Kadokawa Shoten Henshûbu 1960
Kadokawa Shoten Henshûbu 角川書店編集部,
ed. Ippen hijiri e. Vol. 10 of Nihon emakimono zenshû. Tokyo: Kadokawa
片桐洋一. Ise monogatari no kenkyû: shiryô hen. Tokyo: Meiji Shoin, 1969.
菊地仁. “Waka darani kô.” Denshô bungaku kenkyû 28 (January 1983). Reprinted in Watanabe Yasuaki
渡辺泰明, ed. Higi to shite no waka, 217-34. Tokyo: Yûseidô, 1995.
R. Keller Kimbrough. “Reading the
Miraculous Powers of Japanese Poetry: Spells, Truth Acts, and a Medieval Buddhist Poetics of the
Supernatural.” Japanese Journal of
Religious Studies 32, no. 1 (2005): 1-33.
小林智昭. “Nomori no kagami kô.” In Hôgo bungaku no sekai, 176-213. Tokyo: Kasama Shoin, 1975.
小松茂美, ed. Tsuchigumo sôshi, Tengu
zôshi, Ôeyama ekotoba. Vol. 19 of Zoku Nihon emaki taisei. Tokyo: Chûô Kôronsha,
黒田日出男. “Tengu zôshi ni okeru Ippen.” In Sugata to shigusa no chûseishi
姿としぐさの中世史. Tokyo: Heibonsha, 1986.
William LaFleur. The Karma of Words: Buddhism and the
Literary Arts in Medieval Japan. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983.
Helen McCullough. Kokin wakashû: the First Imperial Anthology
of Japanese Poetry. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1985.
増淵勝一. “Nomori no kagami seikô
野守鏡精講 (6).” Shônan tanki daigaku
9 (1998): 37-43.
Masubuchi Katsuichi. “Nomori no kagami seikô (7).” Namiki no sato 48 (June 1998): 60-69.
松尾葦江, ed. Genpei jôsuiki
2. Chûsei no bungaku. Tokyo: Miyai Shoten, 1993.
Miki Sumito 三木紀人, ed. Hôjôki, Hosshinshû. Shinchô Nihon koten
shûsei. Tokyo: Shinchôsha, 1976.
小川豊生. “Katokuron josetsu.” Kagoshima joshi daigaku kenkyû kiyô 13,
no. 1 (March 1992). Reprinted in Watanabe Yasuaki
渡辺泰明, ed. Higi to shite no waka, 55-74. Tokyo: Yûseidô, 1995.
Ogawa Toyo’o. “Katokuron josetsu 2.”
In Uta monogatari to waka setsuwa.
Edited by Setsuwa to Setsuwa Bungaku no Kai. Vol. 9 of Setsuwa ronshû. Osaka: Seibundô, 1999.
Herbert E. Plutschow. Chaos and Cosmos: Ritual in Early and
Medieval Japanese Literature. Leiden: Brill, 1990.
Jacqueline Stone. Original Enlightenment and the
Transformation of Medieval Japanese Buddhism. Honolulu: University
of Hawaii Press, 1999.
高橋秀栄. “Shinshutsu shiryô:
emakimono Tengu zôshi no kotobagaki.” Komazawa daigaku
Bukkyô-gakubu kenkyû kiyô 56 (March 1998): 291-314.
梅津次郎, ed. Tengu zôshi, Zegaibô-e. Vol. 27 of Shinshû Nihon emakimono zenshû. Tokyo: Kadokawa
Charlotte von Verschuer. “Japan’s
Foreign Relations 1200 to 1392 A.D.: A Translation from Zenrin Kokuhôki.” Monumenta Nipponica 57, no. 4 (Winter 2002): 413-445.
Haruko Wakabayashi. “The Dharma for
Sovereigns and Warriors: Onjô-ji’s Claim for Legitimacy in Tengu zôshi.” Japanese
Journal of Religious Studies 29, no. 1-2 (2002): 35-66.
1 R. Keller
Kimbrough, “Nomori no kagami and the
Perils of Poetic Heresy,” Proceedings of
the Association for Japanese Literary Studies 4 (2003): 99-114. There is
also a companion article to this piece (“Reading the Miraculous Powers of
Japanese Poetry: Spells, Truth Acts, and a Medieval Buddhist Poetics of the
Supernatural,” Japanese Journal of
Religious Studies 32, no. 1 ), which is available for download as a
PDF file from the website of the Japanese
Journal of Religious Studies at
http://www.nanzan-u.ac.jp/SHUBUNKEN/welcome.htm (select publications;
periodicals; English periodicals; Japanese
Journal of Religious Studies; Back Issues On-line; 2005, 32/1).
no kagami is typeset in NKT 4:64-96 and GR 27:474-514 (see list of
abbreviations at the end of this article). A section corresponding to the first
five-and-a-half pages of the NKT Nomori
no kagami text has been annotated in a series of short articles: Heian-chô bungaku kenkyûkai 1995, Masubuchi 1998a, and
Masubuchi 1998b. Nakagawa Hiro’o
(at Tsurumi University
鶴見大学) is currently compiling an annotated edition for publication in Miyai Shoten’s
Karon kagaku shûsei
3 Fukuda 1972,
pp. 622-40. All extant Nomori no kagami
manuscripts contain a colophon attributing the work to Rokujô
(1251-1319). Fukuda rejects the attribution, but he argues
that the internal date of 1295 is in fact correct.
4 Ogawa 1999,
pp. 264-70. Although Ogawa makes a convincing case, his argument rests upon the
supposition that the old priest at Enkyôji Temple (to whom the narrator
attributes the commentary) is a transparent projection of the author.
5 NKBZ 50:274-75; LaFleur 1983, pp. 90-97; Stone 1999,
6 The abstract essence of a poem (its kokoro) corresponds to the thirty-second distinguishing
characteristic of a Buddha (the Unseen Sign, or mukenchô-sô
Katagiri 1969, p. 199. Sangoki (NKT 4:341) and Genpei
jôsuiki (vol. 7; Matsuo 1993, p. 38) contain similar explanations. On the
date of Waka chikenshû, see Kikuchi
1983, p. 221.
7 Shasekishû, in NKBT 85:222-23; Jikkinshô, in SNKBZ 51:443-44. Jikkinshô 10:53 records that Fujiwara no Ietaka (1158-1237) attained
rebirth in the Pure Land after reciting three waka at the time of his death, and that a monk by the name of
Hônichi Shônin achieved Pure Land rebirth after making it his lifelong practice
to recite three waka, three times a
8 Sangoki, in NKT 4:341; Kokon chomonjû, in NKBT 84:252-53. The mandala was painted at a celebration marking the renovation of Ungoji
temple in 1124. The Thirty-six Poetic Geniuses (sanjûrokkasen
三十六歌仙) were identified by Fujiwara no Kintô (966-1041) in his
anthology Sanjûrokunin sen
三十六人撰. The Seven Buddhas of the Past (kako shichibutsu
過去七仏) are Shakyamuni and the six Buddhas who appeared in the
world before him.
9 For a
discussion of the conflict, see Verschuer 2002, pp. 414-16 and 427-36.
10 NKT 4:70
11 In identifying Tamekane’s six poetic faults (ayamari), the priest first lists them as
cryptic, dialectic abbreviations: (1)
心を種として心を種とせざる事 (Taking the heart as seed and not taking
the heart as seed); (2)
心をすなほにして心をすなほにせざる事 (Being frankhearted and not being
詞をはなれて詞をはなれざる事 (Avoiding language and not avoiding language); (4)
風情をもとめて風情をもとめざる事 (Seeking conception and not seeking
姿をならひて姿をならはざる事 (Emulating form and not emulating form); (6) 古風をうつして
古風をうつさざる事 (Patterning the old style and not
patterning the old style). NKT 4:67. Also see Huey 1989, pp. 34-35.
12 Inoue 1965,
13 Ôjô yôshû 往生要集 (written
in 985; TSD 84 : 65a). Kamo no Chômei
alludes to this same passage in Hosshinshû
(ca. 1212-1216; Miki 1976, p. 43), but as Masubuchi suggests, his meaning is
somewhat different from that of the Nomori
no kagami author. Masubuchi 1998a, p. 42a.
14 From the
Mana (Chinese) Preface to Kokin wakashû 古今和歌集 (dated
905; SNKBT 5:339).
15 From the
Kana (Japanese) Preface to Kokin wakashû
(SNKBT 5:15). The translation of the second
part of this sentence is borrowed from McCullough 1985, p. 7.
16 NKBT 65:161. Whether or not the Nomori no kagami author was familiar with Tamekane-kyô wakashô is unclear. See Fukuda 1972, pp. 649-56.
1972, pp. 628-630; Kobayashi 1975, p. 208.
18 The phrase “joyful dancing” (yuyaku kangi
) appears in the Muryôjukyô 大無量寿経 sutra (TSD 12 : 273a).
19 Kadokawa Shoten Henshûbu 1960, pp. 68 and 40-41;
Hirota 1997, p. xxxix.
20 The “straight poetic style” is the fifth of six poetic styles outlined in the Kokinshû Kana Preface.
1984, pp. 56b and 168b. The title Tengu
zôshi is in fact anachronistic; as Takahashi Shûei has demonstrated, there
is strong evidence that the work was previously known as Shichi tengu e 七天狗絵.
Takahashi 1998, pp. 291-97.
22 Umezu Jirô
has suggested that their authors may have been the same, but Fukuda Hideichi
and others have argued against this possibility. Umezu 1978, p. 10; Wakabayashi
2002, pp. 53-55; Takahashi 1998, p. 293; Fukuda 1972, pp. 625-26.
23 The Tengu zôshi paintings are reproduced in
Komatsu 1984, pp. 58-59. Kuroda Hideo argues that the depiction of the nuns is
actually a representation of female homosexuality within the Jishû 時衆. His argument is strong, but his conclusion is impossible
to substantiate. Kuroda 1986, pp. 18-24.
1984, pp. 56b and 168b.
1984, pp. 59b and 168c-d.
26 NKT 4:83
and 88; Komatsu 1984, p. 168b. Tengu
zôshi is somewhat more direct than Nomori
no kagami in attributing the downfall of the Song Dynasty to the advent of
Zen. The Nomori no kagami priest
first explains that the Song fell prey to barbarians because of the dissolution
of the eight sects of Buddhism (p. 83), and he later explains that those eight
sects disappeared because of the rise of Zen (p. 88).
1972, pp. 657-58.
28 Ogawa 1999,
29 Ogawa 1999,
30 NKT 4:396.
I follow Ogawa 1999 (p. 261) in interpreting the “national calamity” to be that
of the Mongol invasions.
85:222-23. Also see Kimbrough 2005.
85:222-23. Also see Kimbrough 2005.
1990, p. 258.
Keller Kimbrough is an assistant professor of Japanese Literature at the University of Colorado, Boulder. He has also taught at the University of Michigan, the University of Virginia, and Colby College since completing his PhD at Yale University in 1999. Keller is the author of the forthcoming Preachers, Poets, Women & the Way: Izumi Shikibu and the Buddhist Literature of Medieval Japan (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Center for Japanese Studies, in press), and numerous articles in the journals Monumenta Nipponica, Women and Performance, Asian Folklore Studies, Japanese Journal of Religious Studies, and Japanese Language and Literature.