Talk:Imagawa Sadayo

Good article
Hey Angus, that was good research. My compliments to you. Instead of guessing and making things up like other people, you did a great research job. 7/7/2005

We need more competent research like yours instead of the garbage that has been posted before by others. This entry is first rate.

By the way Imagawa Ryoshun/Sadayo was truely an admirable person. He was well known for his writings even while he was still alive. Other Lords viewed him as a wise leader and quoted his works in their own writings.


 * Thanks again. He was indeed a very fascinating man, and it is a shame that there has not been much written about him outside of Japan. I received in the mail just yesterday Carl Steenstrup's translation of the Imagawa-jo from a 1973 edition of the Monumenta Nipponica (28:3) which contains a few more interesting points that I plan on adding to this entry shortly. --AngusH 03:45, 12 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Absolutely. I started a page (at a different spelling) by accident, since I wanted to kill redlink in Shōtetsu since Wikipedia's search engine didn't show anything, and my article absolutely sucked in comparison to this one. Kudos!
 * That said, why is this article at "Imagawa Sadayo" rather than "Imagawa Ryoshun" or some variant thereof? I've seen Ryoshun far more often than Sadayo. --maru  (talk)  contribs 06:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

How did you get that translation? Did you have to pay for it? 7/15/2005


 * A small fee for the printing and postage. I've just finished typing it up however, so let me know of a way to contact you and I'll e-mail it your way. --AngusH 12:49, 17 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Wow, that is very generous of you. Thank you.  you can email me at ronin_forty_seven@hotmail.com

I am scanning Wilson's Samurai books and I have a electronic version of Hagakure in pdf format that a professor obtained directly from the publisher. I'll have to send those your way.

I'm trying to get a English translation of Michiyukiburi
Angus, maybe you can get this guy to send us a copy of his thesis. I have written several times offering to pay even, but received no reply.


 * http://ealc.berkeley.edu/people/gradstudentprofiles.htm
 * http://www.fulbrightonline.org/us/program_student_us.php?id=971
 * BARRETT J. HEUSCH (Japanese Literature)
 * bheusch@berkeley.edu


 * "Barrett is a doctoral student specializing in pre-modern Japanese literature. After receiving his B.A. in Japanese from Pomona College he spent several years teaching in Japan and traveling throughout Asia and Central Europe. Possibly because of this, one of his main research interests is travel literature; others include medieval poetry, especially waka, and exile. His M.A. thesis was a study and translation of Michiyukiburi, a travel diary written in 1371 by Imagawa Ryoshun. His dissertation will continue his work on Ryoshun."


 * I actually e-mailed Barrett a few months ago and asked about his translation of Michiyukiburi. He told me that he is preparing his translation for eventual publication and also plans on trying to include a translation of Sadayo's nan-taiheiki as well. He gave no indication of when this might be ready, but I'm pretty excited about it. --AngusH 02:16, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Source document: The regulations 1412 ad
THE REGULATIONS OF IMAGAWA RYOSHUN

Imagawa Sadayo was one of the most remarkable men of his age. He ranked as a leading general and strategist along with Kusu­noki and Kitabatake, and as a poet and scholar became a promi­nent figure in the Court-dominated literary world, composing both historical works and poetry.

The Imagawa were a cadet family of the Ashikaga, taking their name from their manor at Imagawa in Mikawa Province. Ima­gawa's father had supported the Shogun Takauji and had been re-warded with the governorship of Suruga Province. Here the clan settled and in time formed marriage ties with the Court nobility.

Imagawa's military career began with the dispute of the North-ern and Southern Courts. He chose to back the Northern Court and by 1361 had defeated Hosokawa Kiyouji at the fighting in Yoshino. Returning to Kyoto, he shaved his head and entered re­ligion, taking the name of Ryoshun. By 1370, the bakufu had lost control of most of the island of Kyushu and sent Ryoshun to serve as military governor to pacify the area. To this task he devoted the next decade of his life, at the same time continuing his literary interests and contacts with his teacher, Nijo Yoshimoto.

In 1395 it was suggested to the Shogun Yoshimitsu that Ryo­shun was by far too powerful and held rebellious intentions. Thus he was recalled to his governorship in Suruga where he devoted most of his remaining years to literature and poetry.

Ryoshun was the author of a number of literary works and documents, among them the Michiyukiburi, a travel diary includ­ing some of his own poetry; the Nan Taiheiki, an historical work; and the present text, the Regulations, written in 1412 for his younger brother, Tadaaki. Also called the Imagawa Wall Inscrip­tions, the Regulations has been respected and studied as a text on proper morality up until WWII, and used during the Edo period as a basic text in temple schools. Written in kanbun, it sets down the classic view that a warrior must be a man of both military skill and of letters—that lacking one, he will lack both. As a Buddhist, Ryo­shun proscribed the wanton taking of life, but as a member of the warrior class, he held great respect for his profession. As a Confu­cian, he cited the Chinese Classics and demanded respect for one's family, as well as stressing the concept of loyalty and duty to one's master. In him we see the ideal of the warrior at its most balanced stage.

The Regulations of Imagawa Ryoshun

"Without knowledge of Learning, one will ultimately have no military victories."

"Cormorant fishing and falconing are pleasures that uselessly destroy life. They are forbidden."

"it is forbidden to pass the death sentence on a man who has committed a major crime without full investigation"

"It is forbidden to use favoritism and excuse a man who has committed a major crime"

"It is forbidden to bring about one's own excessive prosperity by means of exploiting the people and causing the destruction of shrines."

"It is forbidden to tear down one's ancestors' family temples and pagodas, thereby embellishing one's own domicile"

"It is forbidden to forget the great debt of kindness one owes to his master and ancestors and thereby make light of the virtues of loyalty and filial piety."

"It is forbidden that one should, acting disrespective of the Way of Heaven, attach little importance to his duties to his master and be overly attentive to his own business"

"It is forbidden to be indiscriminate of one's retainers good or evil actions and to distribute unjust rewards and punishments."

be mindful of the fact that, as you know the works of your own retainers, the master knows yours in the same way.

"It is forbidden to disrupt the relationships of other people, and to make others anguish your own pleasure."

"It is forbidden to put others profit at a loss and, recklessly embracing one's own ambition, increase one's own power"

"It is forbidden to be disregardful of one's own financial status and to live too far above it or below it"

"It is forbidden to have contempt for wise retainers and prefer flatterers, and to have one's actions be influenced by those conditions"

"One should not be envious of someone who has prospered by unjust deeds. Nor should he disdain someone who has fallen while adhering to the path of righteousness."

"It is forbidden to be given up to drinking and carousing and, in gambling and the like, to forget one's family duties."

"It is forbidden to be prideful of one's own cleverness, and to ridicule others about everything"

"When a person comes to one's home, it is forbidden to feign illness and thus avoid meeting him."

"It is forbidden to enjoy one's own tranquility, and to retire a man without adding to him some stipend."

"It is forbidden to be excessive in one's own clothing and armor, while his retainers go about shabbily."

"One should be highly reverential of Buddhist priests and treat them with correct manners."

"Regardless of a person's high or low position, it is forbidden to disregard the law of karma, and to simply live in ease."

"It is forbidden to erect barriers in one's own domain and thus cause distress to travelers both coming and going"

THE ABOVE ARTICLES SHOULD BE KEPT IN MIND AT ALL TIMES

Postcript:

"It is natural that training in the martial arts is the Way of the warrior, but it is important to put them into actual practice. First, it is written in the Four Books and Five Classics (*See footnote) as well as in the military writings that in protecting the country, if one is ignorant in the study of literature, he will be unable to govern.

Just as Buddha preached the various laws in order to save all living beings, one must rack one's brains and never depart from the Ways of both Warrior and Literary Man."

"From the time one is young, he should associate with companions who are upright and not even temporarily be taken in by friends of low character. Just as water will conform to the shape of the vessel that contains it, so will a man follow the good and evil of his companions. This is so true. Therefore it is said that the master who governs his domain well loves wise retainers, while the man who exploits the people loves flatterers. This means that if one would know the heart of the master, he should look to the companions who the master loves. One should truly take this to heart. To prefer friends who are superior to him, and to avoid those who are his inferiors, is the wisdom of the good man. However, considering this to be true, it will not do to be overly fastidious in one's choice of people. This is simply saying that one should not love those who are evil. This is not limited to the man who governs the country, for without the love and respect of the masses, all matters are difficult to achieve.

First of all, a samurai who dislikes battle and has not put his heart in the right place even though he has been born in the house of the warrior, should not be reckoned among one's retainers. Many famous generals have made this admonition. Next, if one would wonder about the good and evil of his own heart, he may think of himself as good if many people of both high and low positions gather at his door. And, even if one invites many people, and still they neglect him and he has no comrades, he should think of his own conduct as being incorrect.

Yet, I suppose there are two ways of having the gate crowded with callers. There are also occasions when the people are fearful of the masters' iniquity, are exploited by the high handedness of his retainers and opposed by the plots of his companions, and will gather at the gates of the authorities complaining of their afflictions with explanations of their distress. One should be able to discern such situations well and to correct the arbitrariness of his retainers. He should entrust himself to the wise sayings of the ancients and follow the conditions of the law.

A man who is said to be a master should, in the same way the sun and the moon shine on the grass and trees all over the land, ponder day and night with a heart of compassion into matters of rewards and punishments, for his vassals both near and far, and even to those officials separated from him by mountains and sea; and he should use those men according to their talents. It is possible that there are many examples of men becoming leaders of samurai, and yet being negligent and lacking wisdom and ability, and thus incurring the criticism of men both high and low. Just as Buddha preached the various laws in order to save all living beings, one must rack one's brains and never depart from the Ways of both Warrior and Scholar.

In Governing the country, it is dangerous to lack even one of the virtues of humanity, righteousness, etiquette and wisdom. IN adhering to correct government,, there will be no rancor from the people when crimes are punished. But when the government makes its stand in unrighteousness and the death penalty is passed, there will be deep lamenting. and in such a case there will be no escaping the retribution of Karma.

"There is a primary need to distinguish loyalty from disloyalty and to establish rewards and punishments. It is meaningless to divide up the administration of the domain if one's vassals commit useless acts in their own interests, have no ability in the martial arts, and do not sustain their underlings. And though one can say that the treatment of his vassals in the division of the fiefs has not differed since the time of his ancestors, differences in conduct and authority are dependant of the same frame of mind of the present master.

Being born into a family that has from the beginning earnestly known the Way of Battle, it is truly regrettable to wastefully tamper with the domain, support no soldiers, and receive the scorn of all."

Thus the above is written

in the 19th year of Oei (1412 A.D.)

Imagawa Ryoshun

Footnote:

1The basic Confucian texts. The Four Books are the Analects, the Great Learning, the Doctrine of the Mean and the Book of Mencius. The Five Classics are the Odes, the Book of History, the Book of Rites, the Book of Changes and the Book of Spring and Autumn Annals.

2According to Mahayana Buddhism, the Buddha Shakamuni preached in various ways so that sentient beings of all levels would be able to understand and reach Nirvana. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.7.85.209 (talk) 22:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

The Imagawa Letter -- Streenstrup translation
The Imagawa Letter A Muromachi Warrior’s Code of Conduct Which Became a Tokugawa Schoolbook

By Carl Steenstrup

To the Japanese of the Tokugawa era, ‘Imagawa’ had two meanings. In the first place it was the name of a warrior clan that had been active and influential during the Muromachi period. Secondly, it meant a particular kind of primer. Most Tokugawa primers served two purposes: as copybooks they taught writing, and as textbooks they taught ethics, history, and the formalities of written correspondence. Many primers were actually collections of model letters, to which had been added vocabularies and some encyclopedic information. In the private schools, in which children of commoners were educated, teaching materials rarely went beyond such primers, whereas the fief schools for samurai children started their pupils as soon as possible on a classical Chinese curriculum of the Four Books and the Five Classics.


 * Most primers were intended to teach those facts and expressions which were useful in the gainful occupation of commoners, but a few texts were composed with the moral instruction of samurai in view.[1] To this class of texts belonged what was commonly called the ‘Imagawa Letter’, translated below. The Letter was studied by the sons of samurai and of commoners alike from the time of Ieyasu until the beginning of the Meiji period. An adapted version for girls, Onna Imagawa, was extensively used in female education after it first appeared in 1700.


 * The original Letter was republished at least 220 times during the Tokugawa era. Further, besides Onna Imagawa, a great number of derivative primers appeared, in which the principles set forth in the Letter were illustrated with examples and its details elaborated for the use of particular classes and age-groups. To these books belonged, for example, ‘The Common People’s Imagawa’, ‘The School Pupil’s Imagawa’, ‘The Farmer’s Quasi-Imagawa’, ‘Imagawa Admonitions for Merchants’, ‘Moral Advice for Village Headmen, Based on the Imagawa’, and ‘The Imagawa for Instructing Small Children’. Thus, ‘Imagawa’ became a synonym for ‘textbook with moralizing contents’. The ‘derivative’ Imagawa books for particular groups provide much insight into Tokugawa ideology at grass-root level, and have been intensively studied by Professor Ishikawa Ken. The present translation, however, concerns the original Letter only.


 * The reasons for the popularity of the Letter as a textbook are obvious. The Letter consists of two parts, the first of which contains twenty-three separate sentences[2] of moral advice, written in clear, virile kambun style, while the second section partly reiterates, partly explains these precepts, and does so in a discursive, smooth, more purely Japanese style, written in kana-majiribun.[3] Thus the text shows how to express similar ideas in different keys. There are no highly specialized, quaint, or antique expressions, such as abounded in many other primers, particularly in those that had grown from collections of model letters. The ideas of the Letter are Confucian and Buddhist, but they are not dressed up with displays of learning in Chinese of Indian lore, as were many of the textbooks compiled by Confucian pedagogues or Buddhist priests.[4] There are few details in the Letter; thus the teacher was free to explain the text with examples of his own making. Finally, the text was attributed to a character who had been a true exponent of the Tokugawa ideal that the samurai should possess both learning and valor – the poet-general Imagawa Sadayo or Ryoshun.[5]


 * Ryoshun,[6] 1325-1420, was a kinsman of the Ashikaga shoguns. His father was shugo, or military governor, of the Tokaido seaboard provinces of Totomi and Suruga. Ryoshun received as good an education in martial arts, Confucianism, Buddhism, and Chinese and Japanese literature as the age could provide, and he was an eager learner. He became one of the most influential literary critics of his time, a competent historian, and expert in the philosophy of government, and a prolific poet. In addition, he showed genuine talent for public administration, and gained military experience at an early age. As tandai, or military governor, of Kyushu, 1370-95, he waged and won the war which the Ashikaga and the Northern dynasty fought against the ‘loyalists’ who upheld the Southern dynasty, 1336-92. But for Ryoshun the Ashikaga shogunate might not have survived. His subsequent reputation was great, but his own government treated him harshly. He had influential enemies at the shogun’s court, and in his relations with Korea and with important Kyushu clans he had probably acted too independently of the Ashikaga. In 1395 he was deprived of his post as tandai and was demoted to shugo of only half of Suruga, while his post of shugo of Totomi was transferred to his younger brother, Nakaaki. The post of shugo of Totomi may even have been granted to Nakaaki before Ryoshun was relieved of his office as tandai.[7] Ryoshun never regained Totomi. He was mixed up in an abortive uprising against the Ashikaga, was even banished for a period of time, but spent his last years peacefully in Kyoto, active as a poet and critic until his death.


 * His correspondence was extensive, and to this correspondence belongs the Letter in which he berates Nakaaki for personal and political shortcomings. Bibliographically, Ryoshun’s Letter was but a minor episode in a very long, active and eventful life. Several scholars even doubt whether Ryoshun wrote the Letter himself, and believe that someone else compiled it from his sayings after his death. If Ryoshun did in fact write the Letter, the circumstances under which he did so are not clear; the text throws no light on the question, nor do those sources which testify his authorship agree among themselves. According to one record, Ryoshun wrote the Letter to Nakaaki[8] while the latter was shugo of Totomi. According to another, he wrote it to Nakaaki as a kind of testament in 1412,[9] long after he had retired and many years after Nakaaki himself had been replaced as shugo of Totomi. Ryoshun may also have written the kambun part to Nakaaki while the latter was still shugo, and the kana-majiribun section in 1412.[10] As far as I have been able to investigate, the questions of authorship and dating still remain in the balance.


 * At any rate, the Letter soon became a historical force in its own right. First it became a textbook of ethics for the Imagawa clan, including its retainers. From the Imagawa, an appreciation of the text spread to other clans; as early as before the outbreak of the Onin War, 1467, the Letter appears to have been used as an Office Manual for warrior bureaucrats even outside the Imagawa domains. When the Tokugawa established their hegemony in 1600, the Letter was already in use as a primer. The staff of Ieyasu included the text in the collection of the most important ‘house-laws’ which they compiled, probably for use as reference material in the drafting of the fundamental laws of the Tokugawa system which were issued in 1615. The widespread use of the Letter as a schoolbook has already been mentioned. It became part of the lore even of the unlettered: the theme appears in a play by Chikamatsu, and an unknown playwright expanded the theme into a separate drama.


 * In the following translation of the Letter, I have used the Japanese text given in the critical edition by Professor Kakei Yasuhiko. Punctuation and numeration are those added by him;[11]



Articles of Admonition by Imagawa Ryoshun to His Son Nakaaki

Nakaaki was Ryoshun’s younger brother, but Ryoshun had adopted him. This is why Nakaaki is called ‘son’. Actually, the text calls him ‘stupid son’, but the adjective was merely conventional when speaking about one’s own group, and is not part of the reprimands contained in the Letter itself.[12]

I As you do not understand the Arts of Peace,[13] your skill in the Arts of War[14] will not, in the end, achieve victory.

Nakaaki was a seasoned warrior who had seen service under Ryoshun in Kyushu. But he apparently lacked the cultured personality of Ryoshun, and may have been a rather rough military man. Ryoshun does not here[15] imply the already time-honored argument for the necessity of the ‘Arts of Peace’ in a leading warrior, that is, that these arts are conducive to good government,[16] but maintains that these arts are necessary for ultimate military victory. To a warrior leader, ‘victory’ meant life for himself and the continuation of his clan, and ‘defeat’ very often spelled death for himself-at the hands of the enemy or through self-immolation-and the extinction of his clan. But is it not hyperbole when Ryoshun states that the ‘Arts of Peace’ were a requisite for military success? To answer this question, one must consider the contents of the ‘Arts of Peace’ and of the ‘Arts of War’ in Ryoshun’s time.


 * The ‘Arts of Peace’ embraced all the skills for which literacy was necessary; they included Chinese political philosophy,[17] Japanese and Chinese history,[18] law, the writings of the Zen masters, and the rudiments of science;[19] in short, the intellectual tools necessary for ruling oneself and others. Further, they included the skills necessary to be respected among the Kyoto courtiers, who, in spite of their reduced economic an political power, enjoyed unassailable cultural prestige, and possessed the keys to the titles and honors which only the court could bestow; these skills were, first of all, poetry, familiarity with Nara and Heian literature, and ceremony and deportment. The ‘Arts of War’ were horsemanship, archery and swordsmanship. But for a warrior leader these skills were not enough. He had to be literate in order to utilize the rich store of experience in tactics, strategy, fortification, logistics, espionage, and military psychology contained in the military classics of China.[20]


 * The wars between the adherents of the Northern and Southern dynasties had irreparably split the warrior community.[21] The Northern dynasty supporters, the Ashikaga, were victorious, but they could not be sure of their hegemony. They had to prove that their rule could insure peace, decent administration, and the upholding of the laws. The alternative would be new rebellions. In this situation, a warrior leader who could utilize the store of experience contained in the military as well as in the civilian classics, who was not dependent on other for the writing of his letters, and who could move at ease in the intrigue-nests of Kyoto, had objectively a fairer chance of keeping his territories, his allies, and his head, than did military leaders who lacked these abilities. Seen against the contemporary background, there appears to have been little exaggeration in Ryoshun’s view that the ‘Arts of Peace’ were a prerequisite for achieving victory.

II You like to roam about, hawking and cormorant-fishing, relishing the purposeless taking of life.

There is an obvious Buddhist tone in this criticism. In his younger years Ryoshun had written a kind of ‘Upper-Class Living Manual’, containing, for example, guidance on hawking, but by now he was a Buddhist lay priest.[22] There is also a strain of Confucianism: a leader should not ‘roam about’, but care for his task of government.

III You have minor offenders put to death without trial.

In the Muromachi era there was a marked tendency to punish ‘preventively’. Compared to the standards prevailing under the Hojo rule of Kamakura, the penal system in general was becoming increasingly arbitrary, cruel and draconic. Ryoshun fought a losing battle against these tendencies.[23] The shugo in Ashikaga times were more autocratic than they had been under the Hojo, and as ‘martial law’ became the order of the day because of wars and banditry,[24] they increasingly tended to disregard the laws and the High Court of the shogunate.[25]

IV But out of favoritism you pardon grave offenders.

V You live in luxury by fleecing the people and plundering the shrines.

Such behavior was not uncommon among the shugo of the period.

VI In your actions you disregard the moral law by evading your public duties and considering your private benefit first.

VII To build your own dwelling, you razed the pagoda and other buildings of the memorial temple of our ancestors.

This, of course, would be one of the worst possible infractions against the dictates of filial piety. Further, according to the Chinese lore of geomancy, which was also part of Japanese medieval belief, a pagoda was supposed to protect the region against natural calamities. A lord who tore down a pagoda might face trouble from ired farmers, either immediately or at any rate the next time there was a failure of crops or an epidemic; they would attribute their plight to the lord’s impious proceedings. The act impute to Nakaaki would, in short, be utterly foolish.[26]

VIII You do not discriminate between good and bad behavior of your retainers, but reward or punish them without justice.

In Japanese feudalism, there were no institutionalized outlets for retainer’s grievances against his lord.[27] But it had been a firm tradition since the Kamakura era that a lord owed it to his retainers to be impartial in his dealings with them.[28]

IX You permit yourself to forget the kindness that our lord and father showed us; thus you destroy the principles of loyalty and filial piety.

Through his misrule Nakaaki imperils the clan’s hold on the province; toward the manes of his and his brother Ryoshun’s father, Nakaaki is disloyal according to the Japanese standards of feudal loyalty, and unfilial according to the Chinese standards of filial piety. The fusion of these standards became a basic tenet in Tokugawa ideology.

X You tell different things to different people and enjoy the trouble you stir up among them.

XI You do not understand the difference in status between yourself and others; sometimes you make too much of other people, sometimes too little.[29]

This is a grave criticism in a Japanese context. In a vertical hierarchy where initiative often comes from able subordinates, a leader need not be particularly masterful or brilliant; but if he does not play his status role satisfactorily, he cannot do well as a leader.[30]

XII You disregard other people’s viewpoints;[31] you bully them and rely on force.

XIII When making decisions you spurn wise retainers and favor flatterers.

XIV You should not envy those who prosper by wickedness, [32] nor should you take moral decay lightly.

XV You excel at drinking bouts, amusements and gambling, but you forget the business of our clan.

Intemperance was a common vice of the age; Ryoshun himself had a weakness not only for the beautiful sutra editions of the Koreans, but also for their brandy; while tandai in Kyushu he was an eager customer of both products.

XVI Deluded by belief in your own sagacity, you scoff at others’ advice in any matter

XVII When people come to see you, you feign illness so that no interview can take place.

According to Confucian rules of propriety, ‘diplomatic illness’ might easily be regarded as a deliberate snub.

XVIII In a high-handed manner[33] you force men into retirement without showing forbearance.

To force a person to retire in favor of a younger, more amenable relative was a common method of coercion. To Ryoshun, Nakaaki’s actions along this line may well have been particularly galling because they reminded him of the treatment that he himself had received from the Ashikaga.

XIX You provide yourself lavishly with clothes and weapons, but your retainers are poorly equipped.

Both shogunate and clan laws warned against luxury in these files: means which could have been used for defense would be squandered and military mores would suffer. As most sumptuary laws, they had little effect.

XX You live a life of ease, honoring what ought to be despised, not understanding that pride goes before a fall.[34]

XXI You ought to show the utmost respect to Buddhist monks and priests, and carry out the ceremonies properly.

This precept tallies with shogunate legislation and Ryoshun’s Buddhist upbringing.

XXII You impede the flow of travelers by erecting barriers everywhere in your territory.[35]

In Ryoshun’s time the shogunate made several well-meaning, but largely ineffectual, attempts to prevent local lords from setting up so many private tollgates that trade suffered and famine was aggravated.

XXIII A lord should scrutinize his own conduct as critically as that of his retainers.

This is a practical application of the important, but difficult, principle that one should measure oneself with the standard one applies to others.[36] To enunciate the principle is no feat within a society of egalitarian traditions, but is remarkable when it is propounded by a high-status holder in a society without such traditions.[37]

[With this sentence on ‘Know Thyself’, the kambun part of the Letter terminates and the kana-majiribun section begins. In the following translation, the punctuation is according to Professor Kakei’s edition, while the small letters for reference have been inserted by me.]

The above articles should be kept constantly in mind.

No matter who wrote the following precepts, this sentence shows that they were intended to explain and develop the kambun part, not to contradict it. But as will appear, there are some ideas in this second section which have no nucleus in the kambun part. Such independent additions may have been made by Ryoshun, or by somebody else; their existence does not solve the problem of authorship for any part of the Letter.

(a)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;       Expertise in archery, horsemanship and strategy[38] is the warrior’s routine.[39] What first of all makes him distinguished is his capacity for management.[40]

This is an idea related to, but not identical with, article I of the kambun part, which says that, for ultimate military victory, the ‘Arts of Peace’ are necessary in addition to those of War. The present sentence states quite explicitly that a warrior’s excellence reset on his administrative skill; military skill is necessary but not enough. This view could not help making Ryoshun a favorite of the Tokugawa, who faced the problem of changing the mood of the bushi from warlike to peaceful pursuits. The Letter was written in a situation where the Ashikaga, having just emerged victoriously from a life-and-death struggle with the ‘loyalists’, had to cope with cognate problems.

(b)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;       It appears clearly from the Four Books, the Five Classics, and the Military Literature that he who can only defend his territory but has no learning, cannot govern well.

Confucian philosophy of government distinguished between the ‘overlord’, who ruled by force, and the ‘true king’, who ruled by virtue. The hallmarks of the latter’s government were benevolence and righteousness.[41] Further, the Confucian canon taught that these qualities could be acquired by learning, that is, through study of the moral philosophy, the rituals, and the history of the ancients. When the court became totally subservient to the shogunate in the Tokugawa era, the Confucian scholars in the service of the government had difficulty in trying to define the status of the shogun in terms that did not label him as an ‘overlord’. No final solution was possible in the framework of traditional Chinese terms.[42] But the dilemma could be glossed over. One way was to have the shogun, the daimyo, and their bureaucracies, acquire and promote Confucian learning, because such learning would lead to that ‘virtue’ which was the quality distinguishing the government of the ‘true king’ from that of the mere ‘overlord’. Ryoshun’s words fitted these endeavors to perfection. The fact that there were more than 200 reprints and innumerable imitations of the Letter during the Tokugawa period is not surprising.

(c)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;        Therefore, from childhood you should associate with upright companions, and not for a moment submit to the influence of bad friends.

The conjunction ‘therefore[43]’ is in order, because the ultimate aim of the ‘learning’ to be acquired according to sentence (b) is more excellence.

(d)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;      It is indeed true that a man’s companions make him good or bad, just as water follows the square or round shape of a vessel.

The image is taken from Mencius’ discussion with the philosopher Kao. Like Kao, Ryoshun seems to have believed more in the formative power of a man’s surroundings than in Mencius’ ideas about the ‘innate roots of goodness’ in man.

(e)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;       That is why it is common knowledge that the shugo - who actually rules the province - favors men of wisdom and humanity, whereas the kokushi - who just preys upon the people - favors flatterers.

The shugo was the military governor installed by the shogun. The kokushi was the civilian governor appointed by the Emperor; in Ryoshun’s time this post was a sinecure, but during the short-lived restoration of imperial rule, 1334-6, some efforts had been made to reinvigorate the institution by appointing warriors to such offices. Since the Heian period the imperial provincial administration had been plagued by inefficiency, corruption, and rule by substitute. Many shugo were no whit better, only tougher. But the shugo had a recent tradition of good rule to live up to, that is, that of the local administration under the Kamakura Hojo. Ryoshun wanted the shugo to revert to that tradition. Early Ashikaga legislation had tried the same thing, also in vain.

(f)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;         IT is well known that if one wants to know a ruler’s mentality, one need only look at the companions he prefers, and find out what they think. [You too may be seen through in this way]. Indeed, you would then incur shame.

This view is also an echo of early Ashikaga legislation.

(g)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;       A wise and virtuous man favors friends who are better than himself, and shuns those who are worse.

This diction may have been taken from the Confucian Analects.

(h)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;       But do not infer from the above that you should be partial among your retainers.

This idea echoes a similar injunction found in Hojo Shigetoki’s instructions to his son Nagatoki.

(i)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;         What I intend is simply that you should not favor the bad ones.

(j)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;         Whether you are in charge of anything - such as a province or a district - or not, it will be difficult to put your abilities to any use if you have not won the sympathy and respect of ordinary people.[44]

This may seem a little trite to modern Westerners, but was probably a rather advanced view Ryoshun’s time. The Confucian canon contains the idea that a ruler ought to command some confidence among his people in order to be able to govern them peacefully, and that such confidence comes from his exercise of ‘virtue’. The canon, accordingly, focuses on the acquisition of ‘virtue’ by persons who wield authority. Ryoshun, on the other hand, deals with persons in private circumstances as well as with those who are ‘in charge of something’. As for the ideal way of action, the Confucian canon recommends action according to certain hallowed stereotypes, such as ‘ruler’, ‘father’, ‘friend’, etc., whereas Ryoshun puts the emphasis on ‘group harmony’. To act in harmony with one’s community, whatever one’s status, seems to be the ideal laid down in the present dictum. This view is still prevalent, and has been noted in present-day studies on human interaction among Japanese, for example, in the workplace. ‘Sympathy’ is won through reliability, and ‘respect’ through seniority; but within these coordinates one ought to do, and normally does, what the benefit of the group demands, with less consideration for customary division of work than is found in the West.


 * In the heavily stratified society of medieval Japan probably only a person who combined a thorough knowledge of Confucian philosophy, including its ‘populist’ Mencian wing,[45] with personal experience ranging over widely different layers of society, would have made observations transcending the barriers of class and status. Ryoshun met these requirements: he was among the foremost Confucian scholars of his time, and his personal experience ranged from that of a viceroy to that of an exile. Although nothing definite can be said on such vague grounds, the question of authorship may ultimately have to take into account also the inner criteria of ‘experience-range’.[46]

(k)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;       A skillful general understands that when one of his warriors is unpopular, it is a sign that this warrior does not first of all set his mind on battle. In much the same way, you should be able to discern the good and bad in your own mind. Regard it as good when people, high and low, come in crowds to you; but if everyone shuns you-although you invite them - and you are deserted, know then that this is because your inclinations are wicked.

Confucianism provided only introspection as the ultimate guideline of the conscience. When faced with the problem of how introspection could provide results other than ordinary reflection, Confucianists postulated ‘inner goodness’ as an innate quality in man; or else took to metaphysical ramblings about something resembling the ‘spark of divinity’ of Plotinism; or expressed their belief in the moral effects of internalized ritual. Ryoshun falls back on the principle of social harmony manifested in sentence (j): if you have some charisma among the people, you cannot be all wrong. The idea is refreshingly original for its time. Of course, it has only limited validity. It needs little reflection to realize that one can be besieged by crowds for reasons quite other than one’s charisma. Therefore, Ryoshun makes the following qualification:

(l)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;         Remember that there are two kinds of reasons why people may flock to you. [First, on account of popularity. Second,] even lawless and tyrannical lords will sometimes be in fear [and may come to ask for your support]; also, when retainers illegally fleece the people or gangs of thugs rob them, then the people will gather in crowds in front of the gates of the man who holds power [in order to ask his protection].

This, of course, is a shaft aimed at Nakaaki. In Ryoshun’s time rebellions of local warriors were common, while peasants’ rebellions were just about to flare up. The shugo were encroaching, partly by legal, partly by illegal, means on the remaining lands and income of the estates, this competing with the civil estate owners and the local warriors who preyed on them. For tactical purposes the shugo often supported the estate owners against the local warriors. Ultimately the burden of the exactions was passed on to the farmers.

(m)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;    When you can distinguish like this [between the symptoms of consensus and those of danger], you will be able to restrain the lawlessness of retainers, to rule according to precedents, and to lay down laws.

There is a characteristic philosophy of government in this dictum. First comes understanding the mood of the populace. Then the disciplining of the staff. The next step is to govern without innovation. Finally – and the order should be noticed – the ruler may legislate. In the sixteenth century, the era of independent daimyo domains, the Imagawa territories were among those which had an ordered administration, and were eventually subjected to systematic codes of law.[47]

(n)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;       There is a rule for the employment of all kinds of personnel. As the sun and moon shine impartially on vegetation and territories, so you should ponder day and night on how you can be benevolent when you reward of punish your retainers, whether they serve near to you or not. Include in your benevolence estate officials far away in the mountains and along the coasts, and make use of everyone according to his qualities.

These ideas seem strangely similar to those of enlightened absolute monarchs of Europe two centuries later.[48] They are probably derived from Mahayana Buddhism,[49] the Confucian canon, and Ashikaga legislation.[50]

(o)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;       One who leads many warriors but lacks wisdom, talent or training, or is just negligent, will be much criticized by his followers, both high and low.

This may seem rather tame to us, but it was probably not meant to be. To be criticized by underlings was a sign of danger for a shugo, for his allies were generally fickle. See (v) below.

(p)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;      Just as the Buddhist scriptures tell us that the Buddha incessantly strives to save mankind,[51] in the same way you should exert your mind to the utmost in all your activities, be they civil or military, and never fall into negligence.

Here is the characteristically Japanese view that diligence edifies. The Buddhist Ryoshun’s use of the Buddha metaphor demonstrates this. Strange at first sight is the comparison of the conscientious fulfillment also of military duties with the efforts of the Buddha to save men. However, the fact of being now a warrior was due to karma accumulated in former incarnations: even a warrior might be on the path to ultimate enlightenment. Furthermore, in a period of turmoil, firm warrior rule might legitimately be termed salvation for the anarchy-harassed people. Nor should it be forgotten that in medieval Japan the Buddha’s representatives on earth, the priests and the monks, particular of the Zen and the various militant sects of the late medieval ages, were often professional warriors in the service of their creeds, and as proficient in the military arts as had been the monk warriors who had held the court to ransom in Nara and Heian times. Finally, according to the ideals of Kamakura, even a warrior who knew the Buddhist commandments well enough to realize that his vocation headed him for hell and subsequent incarnation on a lower plane of existence, was supposed to kill for the sake of his lord, and thus to sacrifice salvation on the altar of loyalty.


 * In short, the comparison of the samurai to the Buddha is not incongruous, and may even reveal something of the symbiosis of Zen and warrior ideology current in Ryoshun’s time. Ryoshun’s educational background comprised years of schooling under Buddhists of distinction,[52] and he was a military man by birth and profession.

(q)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;       It should be regarded as dangerous if the ruler of the people in a province is deficient even in a single of the cardinal virtues of human-heartedness, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and good faith.

These virtues are the well-known government ideals of Confucianism. But from the context, which is a series of instructions for stable government, the dangers threatening the ruler who does not live up to the ideals are probably not to be understood as natural calamities, as in traditional anthropocentric Chinese cosmology, but as rebellions. Out of the semi-magical Confucian philosophy of government, hard-headed warrior rulers in Japan had begun to distill a rational science of government. It was this de-metaphysicized Confucianism which attracted the Tokugawa rulers,[53] and made its early proponent, Ryoshun, popular in their era.[54]

(r)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;        When you administer punishment in accordance with established governmental procedures, people will not resent it.

That is, if the application of law, however harsh it may be, is predictable and consistent, the community will accept the ruler’s decisions.

(s)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;        But when capital punishment is administered irregularly, there will be deep resentment.

The view is not one of morality but one of expedience: irregular killings will invite trouble. While tandai in Kyushu, Ryoshun had made Nakaaki stab a potential ally on unproven suspicion of double-dealing.[55] The affair may have contributed to Ryoshun’s downfall. He has been compared to Lord Chesterfield; his range of experience, however, seems to have been somewhat broader than that suave moralist’s.

(t)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;         For do you think you can escape the law of retribution?

(u)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;      The most important thing is to make sure whether your retainers are loyal or not; further, it is necessary to reward them sometimes.

Judging from the context, I think that this may be paraphrased as follows: Concentrate on maintaining high standards in your staff so that you can leave routine administration to their care, and devote yourself to policy making. For the moral of your staff it is important that you do not always punish, but sometimes also bestow rewards.

(v)         &nbs p;            &nbs p;       No matter how immense a man’s possessions may be, it is useless to give him a fief if he is no good for war, because he thinks of his own interests and spends the proceeds of the fief futilely providing for his wife and children. Nor should you enfeoff persons who have not a number of able-bodied men under them.

I think it is significant that Ryoshun teaches who should not be enfeoffed, but is silent concerning the positive criteria for bestowing fiefs. Most shugo were in a quandary. Their lands did not produce enough revenue to maintain a standing military force, yet such a force was necessary in order to resist the encroachments of other shugo, or of rebellious groups within the province. Nor could their revenue meet the expenses in which participation in Kyoto politics involved them, such as bribes and magnificent entertainment. But to stay away from Kyoto endangered the shugo’s title to his province if he should be defamed by enemies; this was the fate that had befallen Ryoshun, in spite of his power, glory and achievements. If shugo were sufficiently out of reach of Kyoto, they could with impunity misappropriate taxes due to the Ashikaga government; but their expenses would still tend to outrun their resources, because their bickerings with neighboring shugo often developed into full-scale wars.


 * For defense, a shugo had to rely on relatives and allies, and keep a delicate balance of power between them, and between them and him. He might choose to rely on rich land-owners; they had a vested interest in the safety of the province, but regarded themselves as his equals, would enrich their own families, and ultimately contest the shugo’s point of view. Or he might try to rely on smaller, local samurai.[56] They were individually less dangerous because they had few able-bodied men under them, and the shugo because they had relatively little to lose. Ryoshun presents no positive choices. Ultimately, the shugo class bled to death, literally and economically, during and after the Onin War, 1467-77, and were supplanted by their own relatives, or their own military commanders, who each grabbed some small, easily defensible territory, and set up as sengoku daimyo.[57]

(x)                You should follow precedent toward the various clans in your territory. Do not change the distribution of their fiefs; but you may, if necessary, increase or diminish a fief according to the present holder’s attitude toward you.[58]

In the face of the dilemma mentioned under sentence (v), maintaining the status quo was probably often the wisest thing a shugo could do. Only under the Tokugawa were the subinfeudation problems solved by the separation of warriors from commoners and the alienation of warriors from the land by converting their fiefs into rice stipends. These developments began in the strong, independent daimiates of the sixteenth century, were furthered by Toyotomi Hideyoshi, and completed by the Tokugawa.

(y)                You were born to be a warrior, but you mismanage your territory, do not maintain the army, and are not ashamed although people laugh at you. It is, indeed, a mortifying situation for you and our whole clan.

(z)                This is my letter of instruction.[59]

(aa)           Oei era, 19th year, 2nd month.[60]

That is, March-April 1412.

(bb)         The novice Ryoshun.[61]

The humble ecclesiastical title indicates that the author had taken the fundamental Buddhist vows and had received the tonsure, but was still a pious layman and not a priest.

[1] Clan rules and shogunate laws were often used for this purpose in warrior families; see Tokiomi Kaigo, Japanese Education, its Past and Present, Kokusai Bunka Sinkokai, Tokyo, 1965, p. 30.

[2] Some texts have only 22 articles, lacking the article here numbered as XII: Kakei, sanko-hen, p. 9, n. 1.

[3] Tokugawa schoolmasters at times spruced up their editions of the handed-down kana-majiribun text with homespun kambun renderings: Kawazoe, p. 251.

[4] Dore, pp. 280-90. There are no such pedantries in the Letter, and this it is plausible that the author was a warrior gentleman and no schoolmaster.

[5] He took the homyo Ryoshun in 1367: Kawazoe, p. 74. The standard work on Ryoshun in a Western language is Heide Wehlert, Imagawa Ryoshun und sein ‘Nigensho’. Ein Beitrag zur waka-Poetik der Muromachi-Zeit, Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden, 1969.

[6] These traditional dates are not certain: Wehlert, pp. 4-5 & Kawazoe, pp. 25-8. Birth 1326, death between 1412 and 1418, are also possible. At any rate, Ryoshun’s longevity and vigor were remarkable.

[7] According to Takayanagi Koju & Takeuchi Rizo, Nihon-shi Jiten, Kadokawa Shoten, Tokyo, 1969, p. 1005, Ryoshun was shugo of Totomi from 1384 to 1396 and Nakaaki from 1397 to 1399. But Sato Shin’ichi, Muromachi Bakufu Shugo Seido no Kenkyu, Tokyo Daigaku Suppankai, 1967, I, p. 101, concludes that Ryoshun was shugo of Totomi 1384-8 and Nakaaki 1388-93. Neither theory proves or disproves that Ryoshun wrote the Letter.

[8] Imagawa-ki: Kakei, Sanko-hen, pp. 3-4. This record was compiled in 1553 (Nihon-si Jiten, p. 73) and is thus rather late to rely on; nor does it clarify beyond doubt when Nakaaki was shugo of Totomi. Ryoshun was always a towering figure in his clan, even after his political eclipse, and Nakaaki was his former military subordinate (Kawazoe, p. 92). So there was nothing preposterous in Ryoshun’s sending the Letter nor in its tone.

[9] A manuscript version dated 1412: see Kakei, Sanko-hen, p. 4, and Watsuji, II, p. 92. The dating 1429 appearing in a widespread textual tradition is impossible, because Ryoshun was surely dead by then.

[10] Kakei, Sanko-hen, p. 4. This theory reconciles available textual evidence but does not prove that Ryoshun is the author. When, in what follows, I refer to the author of the Letter as ‘Ryoshun’, it is merely for the sake of convenience; he may actually be a ‘pseudo-Ryoshun’.

[11] In the kambun part of the Letter, the punctuation is obvious, because each admonition begins with a ‘hitotsi’.

[12] An elderly Japanese once explained to me that the Letter did not materially differ as to form from the letters of admonition which a Meiji father might send to his wayward son.

[13] Bundo

[14] Budo

[15] But see sentences (a) and (b) in the kana-majiribun part.

[16] The necessity to train future warriors in the Arts of Peace had been realized by the Kamakura shogunate at least by 1250: Kaigo, p. 20.

[17] Not only the classics but also the developed T’ang and Sung ideologies: Wajima Yoshikawa Kobunkan, Tokyo, 1965, pp. 169-70.

[18] The struggles between the court and warriors had made historical issues politically relevant; see Bruno Lewin, Japanische Chrestomathie von der Nara-Zeit bis zur Edo-Zeit, Harrasowitz, Wiesbaden, 1965, I, pp. 207 & 211-2, concerning Gukan-sho and Jinno-shoto-ki.

[19] Such knowledge, necessary for both war and administration, could at this time be gathered only from Chinese sources: Dore, pp. 136 & 145-7.

[20] In particular Sun Wu (Sun-tzu), and Wh Ch’I (Wu-tzu).

[21] To unify the warriors and make them pillars of the Ashikaga state were in the keynotes of Ryoshun’s political philosophy: Kawazoe, in Shigaku Zasshi, LXVIII, pp. 1440 ff.

[22] Hey had already taken the tonsure in 1367, but could not practice the vows while on active military service.

[23] The end result was the terroristic codes, or bunkokuhoten, prevalent in the developed, independent territories of the 16th century daimyos; see Wilhelm Rohl in Mitteilungen der Deutschen Gesellschaft furNatur- und Volkerunde Ostasiens, Band XLI, Teil A, Tokyo, 1960, pp. 7, 11, 21 & 28.

[24] Aggravated by local rebellions, or ikki,

[25] This trend began as soon as the stern Hosokawa Yoriyuki, Ryoshun’s friend, was forced out of office as the shogun’s prime minister: G. B. Sansom, A History of Japan 1334-1615, London, 1965, pp. 145ff., & Watsuji, Nihon Rinri Shiso-shi, II, p. 93.

[26] Warriors shared the same superstitions, and their clan ideology made them staunch upholders of ko (filial piety); the alleged misbehavior of Nakaaki does not seem entirely probable and the accusation may be nothing more than a cliché of unfiliality.

[27] Although in Ashikaga times his allegiance was revocable. Jouon des Longrais, L’Est et L’Ouest, Maison Franco-Japonaise, Tokyo, 1958, pp. 143 & 151.

[28] See, for example, Hojo Shigetoki’s instruction to his son Nagatoki, 1247, in G. B. Sansom, A History of Japan to 1334, London, 1964, pp. 365-7, & Kakei, Shiryo-hen, p. 19. The impartiality was part of the lord’s grace; there was no trace of ‘equal rights’ in the idea. Jouon des Longrais, p. 147.

[29] Nakaaki was a seasoned warrior and born into the ruling class; thus Ryoshun is probably not imputing to Nakaaki such feelings of inferiority as an upstart may develop, but he is criticizing his attitudes as a leader, e.g., that he was sometimes lavish to underservers and stingy toward those who deserved reward. This would tally with what we know about Nakaaki as an administrator; his record was inferior to Ryoshun’s and he was less respected. Kawazoe, pp. 130-1.

[30] Probably shugo leadership was often practiced circumspectly, for the shugo had to mediate between the shogunal government, the local samurai, and estate holders; the later, independent daimyo, on the other hand, dealt with a very weak shogunal government, independent villages, and disciplined warrior bands, in circumstances that called for a more autocratic leadership pattern resembling that of European princes trying to establish absolute monarchies. See John W. Hall, ‘Foundations of the Modern Japanese Daimyo’, in JAS, xx, 1960-1, pp. 320-6, and H. Paul Varley, The Onin War, Columbia U.P., 1967, pp. 45-8, 192 ff. & 204-5, for the political environment in which the shugo daimyo and later daimyo respectively operated.

[31] Ryoshun advocated strong shogunal and reduced shugo power; he wanted the small, independent, landholding local samurai, the kokujin, to have a direct relation of service and allegiance to the shogunate, thus bypassing the shugo, whose petty despotism, brawls and greed he resented. See Kawazoe, pp. 147-9.

[32] Hido may refer to pederasty or some other specific vice, but there are no clues about this in the extant records about Nakaaki; the hido no sho makes more sense if understood as ‘the prosperity of [i.e., won by] wickedness’ rather than if it is taken to mean ‘a flourishing state of immorality’.

[33] Dokumi wo konomi, i.e., arrogantly and for one’s own purposes, egoistically.

[34] Inga (no) dori wo wakimaezu, Inga can mean the physical cause-effect relationship or the metaphysical operation of karma; the former interpretation makes better sense here.

[35] Sansom, A History of Japan 1334-1615, pp. 213-4;Eucken-Addenhausen, p. 102.

[36] A main tenet in Confucianism; see The Great Learning, ch. X, paragraph 2.

[37] One should not that Ryoshun here applies the Confucian principle of shu, or reciprocity (for which, see Analects, Book XV, ch. 23) to the feudal relationship, which in Japan was fundamentally non-reciprocal. Jouon des Longrais, pp. 143 ff.

[38] Kyuba kassen tashinamu koto.

[39] Bushi no michi mezurashikarazu.

[40] Shikko wo itasu beki koto. Other texts have shugyo, ‘religious or intellectual training’, instead of shikko, ‘carrying out’: Kakei, Sanko-hen, p. 2, n. 1. The difference in meaning is only slight in this context, because both variants bring out equally clearly the importance of the non-military duties of warrior leaders.

[41] It could not but gladden the heart of territorial rulers of medieval Japan that the qualities of a ‘true king’ could be displayed even in a ‘territory of seventy [square] miles’: Mencius, Book II, part 1, ch. III.

[42] The Chinese theory of a revocable ‘Mandate of Heaven’ was basically irreconcilable to Japanese ideas about hereditary rule. Herschel Webb, The Japanese Imperial Institution in the Tokugawa Period, Columbia U.P., 1968, pp. 163-5, 177-80, & 190.

[43] shikosh*te

[44] shujin

[45] The ‘Mencius’ was well known and appreciated in Ryoshun’s time: Wajima, pp. 93 & 111.

[46] Ryoshun’s extant output is considerable, and he mastered several styles; formal literary criteria to determine the genuineness of a particular text are therefore difficult to apply.

[47] Codes enacted in 1526 and 1553; translated by Wilhelm Rohl in Nachrichten der Gesellschaft fur Natur – und Volkerkunde Ostasiens, Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden, 1959, fasc. 85/86, pp. 60-72.

[48] With the difference that most European absolute monarchs preferred civilian to military rule, whereas Japanese ‘princes’ remained essentially warriors. Jouon des Longrais, p. 208.

[49] See Wm. Theodore de Bary, ed., Sources of Japanese Tradition, Columbia U.P., 1968 ed., I, p. 126, where the great ecclesiastic Saicho (Dengyo Daishi) unfolds a Deity-Ruler parallelism worthy of a Bossuet.

[50] See Kemmu Shikimoku, art. 9, in TASJ, xxxvi, part 2, p. 14.

[51] For the Buddha’s ‘Original Vow’ to lead all living beings to salvation, see the Lotus Sutra, in de Bary, Sources, I, p. 122.

[52] Ryoshun’s religious affiliations were with Rinzai Zen and the Nembutsu Jishu sect. Kawazoe, pp. 47 & 272.

[53] Characteristic examples of the down-and-out rationalism of Ieyasu’s house philosopher Hayashi Razan are given in de Bary, Sources, I, pp. 348-51.

[54] The Imagawa had oppressed Ieyasu in his youth, but the family’s power came to an end following the defeat of Imagawa Yoshimoto by Nobunaga at Okehazama in 1560 (Sansom, A History of Japan 1334-1615, pp. 385 & 277). Ieyasu even granted a pension to Yoshimoto’s son Ujizane, and Ujizane’s descendants held salaried ceremonial posts at the Tokugawa court (Dai Nihon Jimmei Jisho Kanko-kai, Shimpan Dai Nihon Jimmei Jisho, Tokyo, 1940, I, pp. 329-30, for Ujizane, and Nihon Rekishi Daijiten, VII, p. 215, art. koke). In short, the Tokugawa had no reason to, and in fact did not, object to the wide distribution of ‘Imagawa’ books. On the contrary, the ideas contained therein bolstered their own brand of government philosophy.

[55] Sansom, A History of Japan 1334-1615, p. 111. Sansom reads the name as ‘Tadaaki’, whereas the sources available to me, and quoted above, call him ‘Nakaaki’. The genealogy given in Kawazoe, pp. 274-5, does not seem to record any relative of Ryoshun whose name could have been read as ‘Tadaaki’.

[56] For the development, gaining full force after Ryoshun’s death, of the kokujin class into leading figures in the rural communities, see Varley, p. 44, n. 17, and John W. Hall & Marius B. Jansen, ed., Studies in the Institutional History of Early Modern Japan, Princeton U.P., 1968, pp. 70 ff.

[57] Hall, in Hall & Jansen, Studies, pp. 41-5, lucidly summarizes the development in land-holding and political organization from the Shokyu Disturbance, 1221, up to the establishment of Tokugawa rule, 1603.

[58] From here until the end of the Letter, the Imagawa-ki (see n. 28) has a somewhat shorter version of the text: Kakei, Sanko-hen, p. 17, n. 4.

[59] Yotte hekisho kudan no gotoshi, The term ‘wall-writing’ may imply that the author threatened to publish his accusations if the recipient did not mend his ways: see Nihon-shi Jiten, p. 193, art. Kabegaki.

[60] The fact that no exact date is given does not indicate that the text found in Kakei Sanko-hen, pp. 7-17, is only a copy; I have seen similar dating formula even on a present-day Chinese document. But it is not known whether date and signature are in fact genuine.

[61] Shami; for the implications of the term, see Mochizuki Shinko, ed., Bukkyo Daijiten Hakkosho, Tokyo, 3rd ed., 1937, III, pp. 2178-9

About infobox
This article was listed at WP:JAPAN as needing an infobox. I am working through the backlog at the project and have translated some data from the corresponding Japanese Wikipedia article. Therefore some data in the infobox may not appear in the main text of the article. The image in the article is now in the infobox and the older file link can be deleted.

Furthermore I have not translated all the data in the infobox used in the Japanese article. This includes the consecrated Buddhist name given to the deceased, several common names traditionally used for this person between Imagawa clan members, and the names of his immediate relatives and descendants.

Please look over the information in the infobox and discuss any errors or changes you think is necessary. I can translate other data if there is a good argument to do so.

Dr.khatmando (talk) 07:31, 9 July 2017 (UTC)