Religion in medieval JapanEarly medieval considerations: an era of belief and disbelief
Over the past two decades, scholars have increasingly noted that by the early medieval era
concern over Buddhist “merit” was directly related to aristocrats’ preoccupation with ritual and
related writing practices, as well as the advent of varying degrees of rule by retired sovereigns.
Aristocratic families specializing in knowledge of court ritual began the systematic writing of
journals (nikki, guchūreki). Historians Matsuzono Hitoshi and Kamikawa Michio have argued that
journals inscribed by members of clans such as the Northern House Fujiwara and those associated
with Kajūji reflect an aristocratic society in which possession of ritual knowledge was concomi-
tant to both acquisition of social standing and the resolution of an array of problems through
ritual patronage. In some cases, such families administered religious institutions, as can be seen in
the case of prominent figures like the early influential Shingon monk Kanjin (1074–1153) of the
Kajūji-ryū Fujiwara clan at Kajūji temple to the southeast of Heian- kyō. In other cases, a royal
such as the powerful prince- monk Shukaku (1150–1202) is known for writing journals (hinami
ki) on behalf of his administration within Ninnaji and also on behalf of his family.^5
For both lay and monastic believers, scripture- copying was an especially common mode of
acquiring merit. Rites for copying the Buddhist canon or otherwise completing the canon became
prominent, but meanwhile scriptural copying or inscription in general took on new and even
more explosive features. We can draw attention to just a few of these, bearing in mind that there
were multiple variations on scripture- copying in the era, including large bodies of works copied
in a single person’s hand (e.g., ippitsu issaikyō) and the kinds we note below. Kamikawa Michio has
also recently noted the connection of such practices to the influence of the East Asian concept of
the Latter Age of the Dharma (J. mappō; Ch. mofa), and suggested that it promoted the notion of
a religious commonality between Japan, with its established Kenmitsu Buddhists, and the East
Asian world, thereby representing the deepening of—and promotion of—the Kenmitsu
system.^6
At the same time, a series of scholars have come to suggest that the medieval era might also be
described as one of rising disbelief among the populace. Such “disbelief,” however, in fact sug-
gests belief of a particular kind—one that might be interpreted in both religious and legal terms.
A hallmark of religious works as well as written materials of a broad range of genres of the period
was the effort to legitimate written content—claims or, say, prayers—either by means of making
an oath or otherwise guaranteeing that the manuscript was written in the original hand of the
writer or, at least, based on his original hand. The oath, most commonly referred to as kishōmon,
testified before the kami, Buddhas, and other sacral powers that the person making a prayer was
truthful (the seiyaku promise in the so- called former half, maegaki) in his or her claims or inten-
tions and requested punishment should that not be the case (i.e, the second half, called the
shinmon). Satō Hiroo, in particular, has studied these oaths in great detail and argues that these
manuscripts come closest to representing a kind of “shared world- view of medieval Japanese”
across classes and, hence, beyond the limitations of discourses of “elite” thinkers such as famous
monks like Dōgen or Shinran.^7
Institutional religion: Kenmitsu Buddhism, the geographical and social
advent of Kamakura Buddhism, and Kami- Buddha combinatory discourse
The interaction between lay patrons and those in monasteries increased greatly with the northern
Fujiwara clan’s rise to eminence at court, but the court’s broader turn to more feverish support
of esoteric Buddhist practice came with the retired sovereigns’ establishment of the Dharma
prince system of monastic status and patronage of increasingly numerous Buddhist lineages