The Cambridge History of Japan, Vol. 3: Medieval Japan

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF ZEN MONASTICISM 629

and women to the reiteration of a traditional Ch'an monastic ideal in

which his guidance would be offered to the few dedicated monks who

sought him out and could endure the rigorous conditions.

After Dogen's death, the Eiheiji community developed slowly and

peacefully for half a century under the leadership of two of Dogen's

closest disciples, both of whom had been with him from the Koshoji

and had played active roles in organizing the move to Echizen and the

building of the Eiheiji.

Koun Ejo (1198-1280), Dogen's immediate successor, was from the

Kujo branch of the Fujiwara family. Before joining Dogen at the

Koshoji, he had studied Tendai, Pure Land, and esoteric Buddhism

and had begun the practice of Zen as a follower of Dainichibo Nonin.

As a secretary for Dogen, Koun helped copy many of the books in-

cluded in the Shobo

genzo.

He accompanied the ailing Dogen on his

last journey to Kyoto and brought back his ashes to the Eiheiji. Koun

was thus close to Dogen in life and familiar with his ideas and teach-

ings on Zen and monastic practice. He strove to continue those teach-

ings in his leadership of the community.

Tettsu Gikai (1219-1309), who succeeded Koun in 1267 for the

first of several terms as abbot of the Eiheiji, was a member of a

branch of the Fujiwara family from Echizen and had begun his reli-

gious career in the Tendai monastery of the Enryakuji. Tettsu's fam-

ily connections with Echizen may have been crucial in persuading

Dogen to move to that remote province. At the Eiheiji, Tettsu served

as cook

(tenzo)

and one of the officers in charge of monastery finances

(kanzu).

In 1259, he journeyed to China where he spent four years

studying Zen and recording Ch'an monastic architecture, ceremo-

nies,

and religious utensils. The sketches he made of Ch'an monas-

tery buildings were used as models for the Eiheiji, and on the basis of

his other observations, he revised many of the rituals and regulations

in force at the monastery.

The peaceful development of the Eiheiji community was broken in

the year 1300 by a bitter dispute over the succession to the monastery's

leadership and over the character of the Zen practiced there. The

struggle pitted Tettsu's followers Keizan Jokin (1268-1325) and

Gazan Shoseki (1275-1368) against a group of monks led by Gien.

Gien secured the leadership and drove Tettsu's followers from the

Eiheiji by presenting himself

the heir to Dogen's strict Zen tradition

68 Zengaku daijilen. 69 Ibid.

Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008

63O ZEN AND THE GOZAN

and attacking his rivals as advocates of the dilution and distortion of

that tradition.

There was some justice in Gien's charges: Both Keizan and Gazan

wanted to spread Soto Zen outside the Eiheiji cloister. They could

argue that efforts to proselytize were in keeping with the universalism

implicit in the Fukan

zazengi

and Bendowa, but they must also have

been aware that popularization could be attained only by relaxing the

strict, exclusive monastic practices enforced at the Eiheiji. Keizan

was,

by disposition, a syncretist. He had studied Tendai Buddhism

and had close ties with many of the monks and mountain ascetics

(yamabushi)

in the Tendai center at Hakusan. He had also studied

esoteric Buddhism and practiced Zen under Muhon Kakushin and

gozan

masters. After Keizan was excluded from the Eiheiji, he estab-

lished two new monasteries, the Sojiji and Yokoji, in Noto. The

former was converted from a Shingon temple, the latter from a Ritsu

(Vinaya) school center. Keizan's willingness to make accommodations

with other branches of Buddhism, to offer funeral and prayer services

for local warriors and farmers, and to hold mass meetings at which lay

people could do zazen or take the precepts all helped to set in motion a

rapid expansion of Soto Zen based on the Sojiji.

Keizan's work of popularization and diffusion was carried further

by Gazan, who attracted monks from all over Japan to study Zen

under his guidance at the Sojiji and Yokoji. Gazan is said to have had

twenty-five brilliant disciples. Among them, five monks - Daigen

Soshin (d. 1371), Tsugen Jakurei (1322-91), Mutan Sokan (d. 1387),

Daitetsu Sorei (1333-1408), and Jippo Ryoshu (d. 1405) - established

subtemples within the Sojiji. As in the case of the Rinzai monastery of

the Myoshinji, these subtemples provided abbots and supervision for

the Sojiji and became the nuclei for the diffusion of these branches of

Soto Zen throughout the provinces.

With the Daigen and Tsugen branches in the vanguard, Soto Zen

witnessed a dramatic, nationwide diffusion during the fifteenth and

sixteenth centuries. The details of that diffusion go beyond the scope

of this chapter. Some indication of its pace and extent, however, is

provided in the number of monasteries belonging to the Soto school.

At Gazan's death there were probably no more than 30 or 40 Soto

foundations. But a document dated 1745 refers to 16,554 Soto tem-

This "third-generation

dispute"

analyzed

Takeuchi

Michio,

"Nihon

okeru Soto

Zen

tenkai,"

Koza

Zen, vol. 4

(Tokyo:

Chikuma

shobo,

1967),

pp. 152-5.

71 For a

more detailed account

this

expansion,

see

Takeuchi,

"Nihon

okeru Soto

Zen no

tenkai."

Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008

THE DEVELOPMENT OF ZEN MONASTICISM 63I

pies,

most of which were almost certainly established in the phase of

rapid growth during the Muromachi period.

It is natural to ask what lay behind this rapid growth. Obviously,

Soto monks like Keizan, Gazan, and their successors gave their Zen

teachings a mass appeal. A few Soto monks came to the attention of

the Ashikaga shoguns. Out of respect for Gazan, Ashikaga Takauji and

Tadayoshi designated the Yokoji as the ankokuji for Noto. And Baizan

Monbon (d. 1417) of the Daigen branch earned such a reputation as a

Zen master that Ashikaga Yoshimitsu invited him to Kyoto. When

Baizan pleaded illness, Yoshimitsu is said to have sent a painter to

Baizan's monastery to produce a portrait of the monk. The portrait

had to be painted secretly, as Baizan would not receive the painter.

When it was unveiled before the shogun, the legend goes, the hall was

shaken by an earthquake, and so the portrait was returned to the

reclusive monk.

For the most part, however, the Soto monks and monasteries did

not enjoy shogunal or imperial patronage. Rather their patrons were

farmers and local warriors, some of whom emerged as

sengoku

daimyo

from the wars of the late fifteenth century. In many cases, they were

supported by the same daimyo that were patronizing Rinzai monks of

the Daitokuji or Myoshinji lineages. Among the early patrons of Soto

monks were substantial provincial warrior families, some of them of

jito rank. Hatano Yoshishige's successors, for instance, remained pa-

trons of the Eiheiji. The monk Daichi (1290-1366) established several

monasteries under the patronage of both the Kikuchi in Kyushu and

Fujiwara Shigemuni, a jito in Kaga, who conferred domains on the

Gidaji.

In the sixteenth century, a roster of Soto Zen patrons would have

included most of Japan's warlords. Among these sengoku daimyo

patrons were the Uesugi in northern Japan; the Hojo, Ota, and Yuki

in the Kanto; the Imagawa and Tokugawa on the Pacific coast; the

Uesugi, Takeda, Asakura, Hatakeyama, Oda, Asai, and Maeda in

central Japan; the Ouchi, Mori, and Yamana in the west; and the

Otomo and Shimazu in Kyushu. In the late fifteenth and early six-

teenth centuries alone, several hundred Soto temples were estab-

72 Yokozeki Ryoin, Edojidai tomon

seiyo

(Tokyo: Bukkyosha, 1950), pp. 524-5.

73 Cited in Nakamura Hajime et al., Muromachi Bukkyo, vol. 6 of Ajia Bukkyo-shi

(Tokyo:

Kosei

shuppansha, 1972), p. 87.

74 On Daichi and his patrons, see Mizuno Yahoko, Daichi, vol. 9 ofNihon

Zen

goroku

(Tokyo:

Chikuma shobo, 1978), pp. 9-68; and Sugimoto Hisao, Kikuchi-shi sandai (Tokyo:

Yoshikawa kobunkan, 1966), pp.

129-51.

Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008

632 ZEN AND THE GOZAN

lished in territories controlled by the Imagawa family. Both the

Takeda family and Tokugawa Ieyasu, learning from the

gozan

organi-

zation, appointed Soto monks as registrars

(soroku)

of the temples in

their domains.

The patronage by farmers is more difficult to define. The records

that survive from Soto temples all over Japan and the diaries and

letters of Soto monks include lists of donations from villagers and

references to meetings and ceremonies attended by Soto monks and

farming families. Some Soto temples were established in Kyoto,

Kamakura, Sakai, and other urban centers, but overall, the great

expansion of Soto Zen was made in rural areas.

The key to this expansion was popularization: the development of

practices that made Soto Zen and Soto monks welcome in the domains

sengoku

daimyo and in farming villages. (The popularization of Zen

practice will be discussed later in this chapter.) But there were ways

other than the simplification of Zen itself by which Soto monks estab-

lished close ties with warriors and villagers. Some Soto monks, like

Sensd Esai (d. 1475), revived the Ch'an ideal of labor that had been

expressed centuries before by Pai-chang: "A day without work, a day

without food." Perhaps partly from necessity but also from conviction,

these monks farmed the temple lands as did the villagers around them.

Other monks engaged in local welfare work, organizing the building of

bridges, the construction of irrigation channels, the digging of wells,

or the provision of relief services in time of drought or floods. The

surviving diaries and sermons of Soto monks reveal that they also

provided simplified funeral services, prayer meetings for the exorcism

of restless spirits, and ceremonies to pray for rain, relief from sickness,

and other immediate benefits. They were, in almost every way, more

in touch with the day-to-day life of

the

ordinary people than were their

counterparts in the

gozan.

For much of the Muromachi period, Soto Zen lacked the institu-

tional centralization of the gozan schools or the Daitokuji and

Myoshinji lineages. The rift between the Eiheiji and the Sojiji per-

sisted for decades, and the Eiheiji languished as the Sojiji and other

temples in Keizan's lineage flourished. But even among the rapidly

spreading branches of the various Sojiji offshoots, there was little

unity or central organization.

75 For a detailed presentation of the provincial diffusion of Soto Zen under daimyo patronage,

see Suzuki Taizan, "Soto Zen no kofu to sono gegosha," in Kokumin seikatsu-shi kenkyu

(Tokyo: Yoshikawa kobunkan, 1959), pp. 223-76.

76 Nakamura et al., Muromachi Bukkyo, p. 98.

Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008

THE DEVELOPMENT OF ZEN MONASTICISM 633

By the late fifteenth century, however, a process of centralization

was taking place as monks from the Keizan lineages began to serve as

abbots of the Eiheiji, to rebuild its reputation, and to make it, along-

side the Sojiji, the main temple (honzan) of the Soto school. The

prestige of

the

Eiheiji and the Soto school was further enhanced when,

beginning early in the sixteenth century, its leading abbots received

the honorary title of "Zen master" (Zenji) from the imperial court.

Throughout most of the sixteenth century, the Eiheiji overshadowed

the Sojiji as its abbots received imperial appointments, such as those of

the gozan monastery of the Nanzenji, and were permitted to wear

purple robes. Under the imperially granted title "principal training

place for the Soto school in this realm" (Honcho Soto daiichi dojo), the

Eiheiji recovered the primacy it had enjoyed under Dogen and his

immediate successors.

Although the huge Zen school derived from Dogen and Keizan was

the mainstream of Soto Zen in medieval Japan, there was another and

very different transmission. The Chinese monk Tung-ming Hui-jih

(Tomyo Enichi, 1272-1340), who came to Japan in 1309 at the invita-

tion of Hojo Sadatoki, has already been mentioned. Tung-ming was

already a renowned monk in Chinese Ch'an monasteries before he

departed for Japan. He belonged to the Tsao-tung lineage of Hung-

chih Cheng-chueh (Wanshi Shogaku, 1091-1157) and had held high

office in several leading Ch'an monasteries. In Kamakura he received

much wanner reception than Dogen had received on his return to

Kyoto. At the request of the Hojo, Tung-ming served as the abbot of

the Engakuji and most of the Kamakura

gozan

monasteries. Emperor

Godaigo invited him to Kyoto, where he headed the Kenninji and

Nanzenji. Tung-ming, who shared many of the literary interests of the

gozan

monks, was clearly at home in the Japanese

gozan

environment.

At his death his remains were enshrined in the Hakuunan subtemple

in the Engakuji, which became the spiritual center for monks of the

Wanshi Soto lineage.

Tung-ming's followers included cultured monks like the poet-monk

Betsugen Enshi (1294-1364), who was patronized by the Shiba and

Asakura warrior families and served as the abbot of the

gozan

monas-

tery of the Kenninji in Kyoto. Betsugen and a number of other Wanshi

school monks visited Mongol China and were known as experts on the

latest cultural developments in Chinese literary circles. After the de-

struction of the Hojo, the Wanshi school found patrons among the

77 Ibid., pp. 98-100; and Takeuchi Michio, Nikon

Zen (Tokyo: Shunchosha, 1976), p. 290.

Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008

634

ZEN AND THE

GOZAN

Asakai and Nijo, kuge families and the Asakura warrior house in

Echizen. The Asakura connection was particularly important. Wanshi

school monks remained within the orbit of the

gozan

but were able,

with the support of the Asakura who became

sengoku

daimyo, to sur-

vive the decline of the

gozan

that resulted from the weakening of the

bakufu and shugo in the late fifteenth century. However, when the

Asakura were crushed by Oda Nobunaga in 1573, the fortunes of the

Wanshi school declined rapidly.

Before ending this rather extended discussion of the institutional

development and nationwide diffusion of the various branches of medi-

eval Zen, several questions remain to be addressed. We have shown

that Rinzai and Soto Zen spread rapidly - the words "explosive devel-

opment" would perhaps not be an exaggeration - and found patrons

at all levels and in all sectors of medieval society. But why were sho-

guns,

emperors,

shugo,

jito,

sengoku

daimyo, farmers, townspeople,

merchants, tea masters, and wandering entertainers, not to mention

the monks and nuns from other schools of Buddhism, drawn to Zen

and to the monks who advocated it? And how deep and exclusive was

their commitment?

Their motivations, not surprisingly, were complex. People from all

these groups took a spiritual interest in Zen, accepting the assertion

that zazen was indeed the most direct means to realize the enlighten-

ment attained by Sakyamuni. The regent Hojo Tokiyori, the cloistered

emperor Hanazono, and the provincial warrior Akamatsu Norimura

were only three of many millions of lay people of all classes who,

during the medieval period, engaged in what Zen masters described as

a "life-and-death struggle" for enlightenment

(satori)

through zazen.

As Suzuki Daisetsu and many other scholars have pointed out, Zen

had a particularly strong appeal for Japanese warriors: Zazen is physi-

cally demanding; an encounter with a Zen master involves a frank and

penetrating probe of the seeker's sincerity and attainment; Zen prac-

tice calls for a direct, intuitive understanding of self rather than book

learning or the recitation of sutras; and for the Zen practitioner, en-

lightenment must be grasped by one's own efforts, not conferred by

some compassionate Buddha. All of these qualities appealed to Japa-

nese warriors and help explain why they were the most numerous and

enthusiastic patrons of Zen monks. But it would be a mistake to

suggest that all warriors practiced Zen - many were devoted followers

78 The growth of the Wanshi line is described by Imaeda Aishin, "Soto-shu Wanshi-ha to

Asakura-ke," in Ckusei zenshu-shi no kenkyu, pp. 483-503.

Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008

THE DEVELOPMENT OF ZEN MONASTICISM 635

of Nichiren, Shinran, and other Pure Land preachers - or that the

patronage of Zen was restricted to warriors.

Cultural factors also contributed to the widespread acceptance of

Zen. The Hojo regents, Ashikaga shoguns, members of the imperial

court, provincial warriors, and wealthy merchants of Kyoto, Sakai,

and Hakata all were eager to learn from Zen monks the latest in

cultural styles from China. Most gozan monks were advocates of the

"unity of the three creeds." Although Zen remained for them the most

direct path to personal salvation, they also recognized the validity of

Confucianism and Taoism. Chinese Zen monks who came to Japan,

and those Japanese monks who stayed for more than a few years in

China, were fully conversant with the intellectual and cultural inter-

ests of the Chinese literati. In Japan they were happy to discuss with

their patrons the ideas of Confucian or Taoist thinkers, often as a

means of introducing Zen Buddhist ideas. Many Zen monks were

calligraphers, composers of Chinese verse (kanshi), and painters of ink

monochromes, reflecting their spiritual insights and intellectual gather-

ings.

At literary gatherings and tea ceremonies, monks were in great

demand as mentors and arbiters of cultural styles. Members of the

imperial court were interested in the Chinese culture made accessible

through Zen monks. But for the Hojo regents and Ashikaga shoguns,

access to Chinese culture was particularly important. Some familiarity

with the latest in continental styles gave them a greater sense of confi-

dence in their social dealings with the nobility, who remained the

arbiters of taste in the Japanese cultural tradition.

Political factors also played a part in the motivations of Zen's pa-

trons,

especially in the patronage of the gozan by the Hojo and

Ashikaga families. Close political regulation by the Kamakura and

Muromachi bakufus ensured that the Zen monasteries never became

an independent political or military force in medieval society. From

the beginnings of its development in Japan, the Zen monastic institu-

tion, unlike the monasteries of the older schools of Japanese Bud-

dhism, proved amenable to warrior control. At least part of the motiva-

tion for patronage lay in the fact that Zen, as a new institution in

Japanese society, drd not have ingrained social and political ties with

the court, the nobility, and the powerful monasteries clustered around

the capital. For the early Ashikaga shoguns seeking to establish them-

selves in Kyoto, their deliberate promotion of the gozan was a means

of offsetting the influence over the capital exerted by the Enryakuji,

Onjoji, and other long-established Tendai and Shingon monasteries.

Imaeda Aishin has shown in his studies of the ankokuji and rishoto

Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008

636 ZEN AND THE GOZAN

and the provincial diffusion of the

gozan

that Ashikaga Tadayoshi and

Takauji regarded these networks as a means of showing favor to spe-

cific local temples and their patrons, of linking them more closely to

the capital, and of exercising surveillance over them. When both

shugo

and local warriors saw that Zen was in the ascendant under the sho-

gun's patronage, they must have found it politically expedient to spon-

sor Zen monks and establish Zen monasteries their domains. During

the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, when the bakufu was in the

ascendant,

gozan,

jissatsu,

and

shozan

monasteries were the beneficia-

ries of the most generous provincial patronage. In the late fifteenth

century, with the bakufu reduced to political impotence, the

gozan

decline, and the country in turmoil, those branches of Zen - the

Myoshinji, Daitokuji, Soto - that had strong provincial roots and

weaker ties with the shogunate came into greater favor with the up-

surge of local warlords, the

sengoku

daimyo. Like the Hojo and

Ashikaga before them, the daimyo quickly appreciated that Zen mon-

asteries were disciplined and orderly, politically and militarily docile,

and sources of astute advisers, spartan training, and basic literary

education for the warriors' children.

After the fourteenth century, the imperial court lacked the finan-

cial means to be a major patron of Zen. Godaigo, however, had seen

some political advantage to be gained by trying to bring the gozan

monasteries under his wing. Later emperors maintained close :;es

with the Nanzenji and some of the Kyoto gozan. The granting of

purple robes to abbots of the Daitokuji, Myoshinji, and Eiheiji was,

of course, the court's recognition of their spiritual stature, but as the

Tokugawa bakufu realized in the seventeenth century, it also had the

effect of creating political ties between the court and the major Zen

monasteries.

In regard to the exclusiveness of the commitment to Zen, patrons

like Hojo Tokiyori and Ashikaga Tadayoshi practiced Zen assiduously

until their deaths and displayed little inclination to promote other

branches of Buddhism. Most patrons of

Zen,

at least among the elite,

however, seem to have adopted a more eclectic attitude, combining

practice and patronage of Zen with devotion to other Buddhist

schools. Ashikaga Takauji and Yoshimitsu are counted among the

great patrons of the

gozan,

but in their spiritual lives they were also

strongly attracted by the message of salvation carried by Pure Land

preachers. Godaigo's patronage was not unusual, blending, as it did,

the occasional practice of zazen, the Chinese learning and culture

available through Zen monks, and the politically motivated sponsor-

ECONOMY AND ADMINISTRATION 637

ship of certain Zen monasteries with the continued patronage of

Shingon and Tendai Buddhism.

ECONOMY AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE MEDIEVAL ZEN

MONASTERY

The growth and maintenance of a Zen community of several hundred

monks depended on the existence of a stable monastic economy. The

economic basis of all Zen monasteries in the medieval period - Rinzai

and Sotd, gozan and non-^ozan - was income from land, either the

annual rice taxes (nengu) derived from holdings in shoen or the rents

(kajishi) from cultivators of monastic lands. Income from landholdings

was supplemented by a variety of other sources. Among these were

donations from patrons for the construction and repair of buildings;

the conduct of ceremonies; the provision of texts, paintings, and stat-

ues;

fees for funeral services and prayer ceremonies; the proceeds from

foreign trading ventures, from the sale of monastery produce, or from

market fees; the fruits of mendicancy; and the profits of

moneylending. The amount of income and the various elements in the

economic "mix" naturally varied with the size of the monastery, its

location, the wealth and enthusiasm of its patrons, and the period. In

general, the income from shoen holdings provided the mainstay for

Zen monastic economies in the Kamakura period, whereas the income

from rents, commerce, and small donations came to play a greater role

in the Muromachi period as the

shoen

were dismembered and alienated

from their proprietors.

Unfortunately, the sporadic quality of the documentary record

makes it impossible to provide a detailed picture of the economic life

of any single Zen monastery over the whole medieval period. By piec-

ing together information on different monasteries at different times,

however, we can form an impression of the main features of the larger

monasteries' economic life and of the ways in which these may have

changed over time in response to changing political and economic

circumstances in the country at large.

The gozan monasteries, under the patronage of the Kamakura and

Muromachi shogunates, were generously endowed and enjoyed huge

incomes from landholdings, mostly jito shiki, in shoen scattered

throughout the country.

The Tenryuji, in 1387, for instance, enjoyed

79 The economies of the Engakuji, Nanzenji, and Daitokuji are discussed at somewhat greater

length in Collcutt, Five

Mountains,

pp, 255-75.

638 ZEN AND THE GOZAN

an income of "8,123

kanmon

in rice and cash" from more than twelve

shoen

holdings in eight different provinces.

The Nanzenji in the same

period was receiving an annual income of well over four thousand

koku

in rice from domains in Kaga and half a dozen other provinces.

the standards of the age, these were very substantial incomes, greater

perhaps than; those enjoyed by some

shugo.

The

jissatsu

and shozan

monasteries, likewise, were granted extensive

shoen

rights by shoguns,

members of the imperial court, and

shugo

and were protected by the

bakufu.

Although the provincial monasteries in the

gozan

system remained

dependent on income from landholdings, donations, and local mendi-

cancy, the metropolitan

gozan,

especially the Kyoto

gozan,

had other

important sources of income. The capital was the hub of a growing

commercial economy, and some Zen monasteries were active partici-

pants in this growth. The Tenryuji, for instance, derived income from

a thriving sake-brewing enterprise, and the Tofukuji sponsored and

taxed a merchant community at its gates. Zen monks from the Kyoto

gozan

led many of the official trading embassies to China on behalf

the bakufu, the Ouchi, or the Hosokawa. Some

gozan

monasteries,

notably the Shokokuji, sent monks as traders on these missions and

may have derived an occasional income of several thousand kanmon

from the proceeds of such ventures.

A steadier source of income for

gozan

monasteries and some individ-

ual Zen monks in Kyoto was provided by moneylending. Many

gozan

monks came from wealthy families or were able to use administrative

offices in the

gozan

to amass private fortunes. They were not averse to

lending money to needy nobles or warriors at high rates of interest.

One Shokokuji monk in the mid-fifteenth century, known as Sei

tsubun, accumulated funds through the management of Shokokuji

shoen

holdings and made substantial loans to other Kyoto temples and

nobles at interest rates of between 3 and 8 percent per month.

In addition to private usury, some Zer. monasteries also used "mor-

tuary contributions"

{shidosen)

that had been donated by patrons to

pay for memorial services as capital for more public low-interest

loans.

Interest rates on

shidosen

were 2 or 3 percent per month. They

were in considerable demand, but because interest rates would

mount rapidly if the loan were extended, they were sources of fric-

80 Tenryuji monjo, cited by Imatani Akira, Sengoku-ki no Muromachi bakufu (Tokyo: Kadokawa

shoten, 1975), p. 54.

81 Sakurai Keiyu and Fujii Manabu, eds., Nanzenji

monjo

(Kyoto: Nanzenji, 1972), vol. 1, docs.

> 93> 189. 82 Imatani, Sengoku-ki

Muromachi bakufu, pp. 51-54.