312
The Ryūsen-ji PetitionE

CHIGO-BŌ Nichiben andShimotsuke-bō Nisshū, priests of
Ryūsen-ji in Fuji Shimokata in Suruga
Province, state as follows.
The deputy chief priest of the said
temple, Hei no Sakon Nyūdō Gyōchi,hoping to conceal his own various offenses and keep them hidden, makes
spurious and untruthful charges against
us, charges that have no basis in fact.
In the complaint he has brought, hestates that Nisshū and Nichiben, calling themselves disciples of the priest
Nichiren, claim that the sutras otherthan the Lotus Sutra and the practitioners of the True Word teachings are all
ineﬀectual in bringing beneﬁt either
in one’s present existence or in theexistences to come. (This is the gist of
the charge.)
Regarding this matter, the Sage
Nichiren, the true teacher of Nisshū
and Nichiben, observing the great
comet and great earthquake1 that had
occurred since the beginning of the
Shōka era, examined all the various
sutras and came to this conclusion.
Under present circumstances, Japan adheres to Hinayana or provisional sutras
and fails to heed the true sutra. Therefore it will soon face two disasters thatare like nothing known in previous
times. These are the disaster of rebellion within the nation and the disasterof invasion by a foreign power.

Thinking of the welfare of the nation and of the need to take measures
to deal with these two great disasters,in the Bunnō era he submitted a document in one scroll entitled On Establishing the Correct Teaching for the Peace of
the Land to the authorities. All thethings that he predicted in that document have come true. Like the predictions regarding the future made by the
golden mouth of the Buddha, fulﬁllment has come as invariably as an echofollows a sound.
A non-Buddhist work states, “A sage
is one who fully understands those
things that have not yet made their appearance.”2 And in the Buddhist writings it is said, “Wise men can perceive
the cause of things, as snakes know the
way of snakes.”3
In view of the situation, is it notclear that this teacher is a sage? And
since this skilled leader is already present within the state, what need is there
to seek such a treasure of the stateabroad?
The non-Buddhist writings say,“When there is a sage in a neighboring
country, this is a matter of concern toits enemies.”4 In a Buddhist text weread, “Where there is a sage in theland, the heavenly gods will invariably
lend their protection.”5 And in another
non-Buddhist text it is stated, “In theworld, where there is a sage and wise822

THE RYŪS EN-JI PETITION

ruler, there will invariably be worthy
and enlightened ministers as well.”6
In the light of such passages, the factthat a sage is present in Japan should bea cause for great rejoicing in that country, and for great concern in the country of the Mongols. For the sage will
dispatch his dragons to drown the enemy ships in the sea. He will call upon
Brahmā and Shakra to capture theMongol ruler!
Since the ruler of Japan is a worthy
man, why does he not make use of thissage, instead of ineﬀectually worrying
about the threat of a foreign power?
Shakyamuni Buddha, the WorldHonored One of Great Enlightenment, foreseeing the inevitable era of
conﬂict that would occur in the LatterDay of the Law,7 described and left behind a secret technique for dealing
with the great disasters that would be
faced then. This is made perfectly clear
in the sutra passages.8
However, during the more than
2,220 years after the passing of the Thus
Come One, this secret was not yet
propagated in India, China, Japan, or
any of the other countries of the continent of Jambudvīpa. Thus the four
ranks of bodhisattvas, though they understood it in their minds, did not
expound it. T’ien-t’ai and Dengyō
likewise did not discourse on it, forthey knew that the time to do so had
not yet come.
The Lotus Sutra states, “In the lastﬁve-hundred-year period you mustspread it abroad widely throughout
Jambudvīpa.”9 The Great Teacher
T’ien-t’ai said, “In the last ﬁve–hundred-year period [the mystic way will
spread and beneﬁt humankind far into
the future].”10 Miao-lo said, “The ﬁfth
ﬁve hundred years . . .”11 And the Great
Teacher Dengyō said: “Speaking of theage, [the propagation of the true teaching will begin] in the age when the
Middle Day of the Law ends and theLatter Day opens. Regarding the land,

it will begin in a land to the east ofT’ang and to the west of Katsu. As
for the people, it will spread amongpeople stained by the ﬁve impurities
who live in a time of conﬂict.”12 This
passage clearly indicates that the east
will be victorious and the west will
suﬀer defeat.
This sage, the lord of the Law, understands the time, understands thecountry, understands the teaching, andunderstands the people’s capacity. For
the sake of the ruler, for the sake of thepeople, for the sake of the gods, and forthe sake of the Buddhas, he has pondered and set forth the steps to be taken
in dealing with these calamities anddisasters.
Not only is his advice not heeded,
however, but in addition, because of
the invidious words of persons who
would slander the Law, the sage has
suﬀered an injury to his head, his left
hand has been broken,13 and he has
twice been condemned to exile in a
distant region. His disciples in many
diﬀerent places have been shot to deathwith arrows, cut down with swords,
killed otherwise, wounded withswords, imprisoned, exiled, beaten, expelled, or subjected to abuse in severe
persecutions too numerous to describe.
Because of these actions, the entire
nation of Japan has made itself thearchenemy of the Lotus Sutra, and its
myriad inhabitants have all become
persons of incorrigible disbelief. And
as a result the heavenly deities haveabandoned the nation, the earthly deities have taken their leave, and there is
no longer any peace in the realm.
This is the state of aﬀairs as it has
been conveyed to us. And though weare lacking in ability, we oﬀer this document, unworthy as it may be, for consideration. A non-Buddhist text says,“If evil persons are present at court,
the worthy cannot advance.”14 And a
Buddhist work states, “If even a goodmonk sees someone destroying the823

THE RYŪS EN-JI PETITION

teaching and fails to reproach him, . . .
then that monk is betraying the Buddha’s teaching.”15
Rumor has it that the government
authorities have summoned eminent
priests and directed them to conduct
prayers for the defeat of the forces ofthe Mongol state. But an examinationof the records reveals that in the Genryaku era [of Emperor Antoku] and the
Jōkyū era [of the Retired Emperor Gotoba] the chief priests of Mount Hiei,
the prelate of Tō-ji,16 the supervisorsand chief oﬃcials of the seven major
temples of Nara and Onjō-ji, alongwith various True Word priests, were
summoned to the imperial court andin Shishin-den Palace conducted imprecations directed at the late Minamoto no Yoritomo, General of theRight, and the late Hōjō Yasutoki.
Conducting ceremonies of this kind
will, if the participants do so for theirown sake, bring about their demise,and if they are intended for more forceful aims, they will assuredly cause thedownfall of the ruler as well. Hence it
was that Emperor Antoku sank beneath the waters of the western sea;
Myōun, the chief priest of MountHiei, was struck and killed by a strayarrow; the Retired Emperor Gotoba
was exiled and abandoned on a barbarian island;17 the prelate of Tō-ji died on
Mount Kōya;18 and another chief priestof Mount Hiei19 suﬀered the shame ofbeing driven out of oﬃce. The penalties resulting from such ceremonies
appeared before people’s very eyes,
worthy men of later times were ﬁlledwith fear, and the sage of whom wehave spoken grieves over these eventsin his mountain retreat.
Next we would like to speak regarding assertions that one should carry out
devotions to the Amida Sutra at certain
ﬁxed times. Considering the matter,
we see that blossoms and the moon areadmired, water or ﬁre is used at times
when such actions are appropriate;

their use does not abide by previously
ﬁxed rules. And the same applies to thevarious Buddhist doctrines; they are
adopted or laid aside depending upon
what is appropriate to the time.
Moreover, the Amida Sutra,20 the
four-sheet text that you adhere to, isonly a minor sutra preached in the period about which the Buddha said, “In
these more than forty years, I have notyet revealed the truth.”21 The Venerable Shāriputra, known as the wisest
person in the continent of Jambudvīpa,
read and recited this sutra over a periodof many years but in the end was neverable to attain Buddhahood. Later,
however, he discarded this sutra, andeventually, when the Lotus Sutra waspreached, he was told that he would
become a Buddha named Flower GlowThus Come One. How, then, could
ignorant persons living in this evil ageof the Latter Day hope, simply by reciting the invocation Namu Amida
Butsu, to be reborn in the Pure Landin their next existence?
Therefore the Buddha was warning
us when he said in the Lotus Sutra,“Honestly discarding expedient means,
I will preach only the unsurpassed
way.”22 Shakyamuni Buddha, the lordof teachings, is in eﬀect saying that hehas discarded the Amida Sutra.
Again, the Nirvana Sutra states:“Though the Thus Come One does
not speak untruths, if I knew that byspeaking falsely [I could help living beings gain the beneﬁts of the Law, thenfor their sake I would go along withwhat is best and speak such words as an
expedient means].” This passage is saying in eﬀect that recitation of the nameof Amida Buddha is an empty practice.
The Lotus Sutra states: “desiring
only to accept and embrace the sutra of
the great vehicle and not accepting asingle verse of the other sutras.”23 The
Great Teacher Miao-lo says, “Moreover, the Flower Garland Sutra [contains a passage similar to that of the824THE RYŪS EN-JI PETITION

Lotus Sutra on the six diﬃcult andnine easy acts, but] it is a series of comparisons of the blessings to be received
and not in terms of the teaching to be
propagated, as set forth in the Lotus Sutra. Therefore the Lotus Sutra
says, ‘not accepting a single verse of theother sutras.’”24
The Flower Garland Sutra waspreached at the place where the Buddha achieved enlightenment and expounds the doctrine that the phenomenal world is the creation of the mind
alone.25 The superior text contains as
many chapters as the dust particles often major world systems. The middle
grade text contains 498,000 verses.
The inferior text contains 100,000
verses in 48 chapters.26 But if we examine the extant editions of the complete
collection of sutras, we see that there
are only an eighty-volume version, asixty-volume version, and a forty-volume version of this sutra.
In addition, there are various otherexoteric and esoteric Mahayana sutras
such as the Correct and Equal sutras,
the Wisdom sutras, the Mahāvairochana
Sutra, and the Diamond Crown Sutra.
But when we compare them with the
Lotus Sutra, we see that the Buddha
himself has said that they were preachedwhen he had “not yet revealed thetruth,” and that they represent a path“beset by numerous hindrances andtrials.”27
Therefore we should close the dooron them, should abandon them.28 And
how much more should we do so inthe case of the Amida Sutra! To compare it to the Lotus Sutra is like putting
an ant hill beside a great mountain andasking which is higher, or pitting a fox
or a rabbit against a lion and asking
which is stronger!
We, Nisshū and the others of ourgroup, have now abandoned these lesser sutras and read and recite only the
Lotus Sutra, recommending this practice to all the world and chanting

Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. Are we notexpressing fervent loyalty in doing so?
If there are any details relating to thismatter that remain unclear, we requestthat the authorities will summon various eminent Buddhist priests so that
we may debate with them and settle
the rights and wrongs of the aﬀair. This
was the practice followed earlier in India, China, and Japan in determining
what is superior and what inferior inmatters relating to the Buddhist teachings. Now, when we live in an age ofenlightened government, should thistime-honored practice of these threenations be discarded?
In his complaint, Gyōchi states thaton the twenty-ﬁrst day of the present
month a band formed of a number of
persons armed with bows and arrows
broke into the compound of the chief
priest, and that Shimotsuke-bō Nisshū,armed and mounted on a horse, alongwith a peasant of Atsuhara named
Kijirō, set up a notice board and thegroup then reaped the rice crop andcarried it oﬀ to the compound occupied by Nisshū. (This is the gist of thecharge.)These allegations are completely
false and without substance. Nisshū
and the others had been driven out of
their living quarters by Gyōchi and had
no place to go, so who would give credence to a notice board they had posted? And why would the local peasants,
who are weak and powerless, agree todo their bidding? If, as the complaint
asserts, Nisshū and the others had
armed themselves with bows and arrows and were planning some evil action, why did Gyōchi and others in thevicinity not disarm them, bring them
before the authorities, and report thedetails of the matter? These allegations
are wholly fallacious, and we ask thatthey be examined in a just and impartial manner.
Nisshū and Nichiben have for anumber of years been resident priests

825

THE RYŪS EN-JI PETITION

of Ryūsen-ji, the temple in question,and have carried out their Buddhist
practice in earnest, oﬀering prayers forthe longevity of the sovereign and thesafety of the land. But Gyōchi, while
acting as deputy chief priest of the sacred precincts of the said temple, addressed certain priests of the temple,
namely, Mikawa-bō Raien,29 Shō-bō
Nichizen, Nisshū, and Nichiben, insisting that the doctrines of the Lotus
Sutra are not trustworthy and ordering
them to cease at once reading and reciting the Lotus Sutra and to devote all
their attention to reading of the Amida
Sutra and recitation of the Nembutsu.
He stated that if they would prepare a
written pledge to this eﬀect, he would
insure them of a place to live.
When these orders were received,
Raien, obeying them, wrote out hispledge and was allowed to remain in
his quarters. But Nichizen and the others, because they did not present a
written pledge, were deprived of theirposition as priests of the quarters theyoccupied. Nichizen then left the temple entirely. Nisshū and Nichiben, because they have no other place to go,
have continued to reside in the temple
as they have in the past.
During the past four years, however,Nisshū and the others have not only
been deprived of their position as
priests of their respective quarters, buthave been forbidden to carry out important prayer ceremonies. And as
though that were not evil action
enough, steps have been taken to strip
them of their role as votaries of the Lotus Sutra, they have been schemed
against in other ways, and untruths ofvarious kinds have been circulated
about them. One would suppose that
Devadatta, who lived in the time of the
Buddha, were still alive today!
In general, these are the sort of actions carried out by Gyōchi. He had
Izumi-bō Renkai, the priest who oﬃciates in the Lotus Meditation Hall,

take the copy of the Lotus Sutra, tan
the paper in persimmon juice, carve it
up into ﬁxed shapes, and use it to repair the halls and smaller buildings.
Nichiben had been obeying a written
order instructing him to set aside eight
thousand inches of the twelve thousand
inches of upper rooﬁng, but Gyōchi
used it for his personal needs. Gyōchi
incited the oﬃcial in charge of the Shimokata administration oﬃce to attack
Shirō, a practitioner of the Lotus Sutra,with a knife and wound him at thetime of the religious rites in the fourth
month.30 And in the eighth month hehad the head of Yashirō cut oﬀ, spreading word around that this was the workof Nisshū and the others.31
After extracting ﬁnes from a witlessand talentless thief named Hyōbu-bō
Jōin,32 he announced that Jōin was aman of outstanding ability and appointed him as an oﬃciating priest. In
addition, he employed a number ofpeasants attached to the temple to catch
quail, hunt raccoon dogs, and slay adeer that had been caught in a boar
trap, and then had these creatures
served up as food in the quarters of thesuperintendent, the chief priest. He
also had poison placed in the pond in
front of the Buddhist halls, killing acertain number of ﬁsh thereby andthen dispatching them for sale in the
nearby village.
Of the people who observed orheard of these actions, there were none
whose eyes and ears were not alarmed,
so great was their grief at these ﬂagrantviolations of the Buddhist teachings.
As evil and unworthy actions such asthese on the part of Gyōchi continued
to pile up day after day, Nisshū and theothers, distressed in the extreme,sought to inform the authorities of thematter. But Gyōchi, anxious to hide his
various oﬀenses, resorted to a variety
of secret schemes, enlisting the aid of
his associates, circulating false rumorsthat have no basis in fact and attempt-

826THE RYŪS EN-JI PETITION

ing to bring about the ruin of Nisshū
and the others. The situation is so gravethat it deﬁes description. In the light ofboth the religious and the secular law,some form of remonstrance seems
surely to be required, does it not?
To sum up, if careful investigation ismade into the provisional and the truein terms of the Buddhist teachings andinto the truth or falsity of the charges
that are being brought, the entire inquiry conducted in accordance withthe golden words of the Buddha andthe provisions clearly set forth in thelegal codes,33 and appropriate measures
are taken to prevent further abuse, thenthe benevolent deities who protect thenation will cease their unusual behavior and the heavenly gods who guard
the correct teaching will smile once
again. Gyōchi, the deputy chief priest
of Ryūsen-ji, who carries out theseevil and unworthy actions, must be dismissed. If not, then it is doubtful thatthe chief priest of the said temple canescape grave censure as a result. One
should keep in mind that the example
of Ryūsen-ji is diﬀerent from what
happened earlier at Jissō-ji.34
We request, therefore, that the aﬀair
be settled in accordance with unquestionable principles of justice and that
Nisshū and Nichiben be allowed to occupy their assigned quarters, to repair
the halls and other temple buildings
and to devote themselves wholeheartedly to their duty as loyal subjects, offering prayers for the longevity of thesovereign and the safety of the land.
With this aim in mind, we respectfully
submit this document for the consideration of the authorities.
The tenth month in the second yearof Kōan [1279]
Presented by the shramanas Nisshū andNichiben

Background
This document from the priests Nisshū
and Nichiben was submitted to the legal court of the Kamakura government
in the tenth month of 1279. Later, it
was titled The Ryūsen-ji Petition, but recent consideration of the format andcontent shows it is not a petition but aletter of vindication submitted to thegovernment.
Nichiren Daishonin reviewed a
draft of the document written by Toki
Jōnin and revised it, substantially adding to the ﬁrst part. The ﬁrst half refers
to matters of doctrine and the latter todetails of fact.
This document was written during
the Atsuhara Persecution. The Atsuhara Persecution refers to a series of
oppressive acts and threats against followers of the Daishonin in Atsuhara
Village of Fuji District, Suruga Prov-

ince, that spanned nearly three years
and culminated in the execution of
three believers on the ﬁfteenth day of
the tenth month in 1279 (on the eighth
day of the fourth month in 1280 by another account).
Around 1275, after the Daishonin
had taken up residence at Minobu,
propagation of his teachings began toprogress substantially in the Fuji area
under Nikkō’s leadership. At Ryūsenji, a temple of the Tendai school in
Atsuhara, Nikkō converted several of
the younger priests̶including Shimotsuke-bō, Echigo-bō, and Shō-bō̶
who became the Daishonin’s disciples
and took the names Nisshū, Nichiben, and Nichizen respectively. And
these priests converted a number of
local farmers. Alarmed at the defection of the priests and lay supporters,

827

THE RYŪS EN-JI PETITION

Gyōchi, a lay priest and a member ofthe ruling Hōjō clan who acted as thedeputy chief priest of the temple, used
his connections with the authorities tosuppress their activities and expel theconverted priests from the temple.
Hence the Daishonin oversaw thecompletion of the document to besubmitted by Nisshū and Nichiben.
The text addresses the complaint
Gyōchi has ﬁled against them, countering his false charges. The complaintraises two major points and the text ofthe document can be divided into twoparts accordingly.
The ﬁrst part refers to the fact thatthe two calamities̶revolt within one’s
own domain and invasion from foreign
lands̶which the Daishonin had
prophesized in his 1260 treatise On Establishing the Correct Teaching for the Peaceof the Land, have in fact come to pass,
and asserts that the Daishonin should
be regarded as a sage to whom theleadership should turn for the means toprotect the nation. Then it points out

the futility of True Word prayers conducted for the defeat of the Mongol
forces, citing precedents from history.
This part ends with the refutation of
the provisional sutras, in particular the
Amida Sutra.
The latter portion of the document
seeks to expose the falsehood of thecharges lodged by Gyōchi that a number of armed persons broke into his
compound, reaped the rice crop, andcarried it oﬀ to the compound occupied by Nisshū. In addition, it cites
speciﬁc examples of Gyōchi’s unpriestly and criminal behavior such as instigating murder and hunting. Lastly, it
calls on the authorities to make careful
investigation of the charges in accordance with the Buddha’s teachings andthe legal codes, and to dismiss Gyōchi
from his position and allow Nisshū andNichiben to occupy their assigned
quarters. Such just actions in supportof the practitioners of the correctteaching, it says, will bring peace andsecurity to the country.

Notes
1. A reference to the huge comet that appeared in the seventh month of 1264 and thegreat earthquake that devastated the Kamakura area in the eighth month of 1257.
2. Exact source unknown, though statements of this kind are found often in worksof early Chinese literature.
3. The Annotations on “The Words andPhrases of the Lotus Sutra.”4. Source unknown.
5. Source unknown, but chapter fourteenof the Lotus Sutra says, “The heavenly beings day and night will for the sake of the
Law constantly guard and protect them [thevotaries of the sutra].”6. Source unknown.
7. This refers to “the age of quarrels anddisputes,” the last of the ﬁve ﬁve-hundredyear periods following Shakyamuni’s death,
which are described in the Great Collection Sutra. It corresponds to the beginningof the Latter Day of the Law. In the sutra,
Shakyamuni says that in the last ﬁve hundredyears quarrels and disputes will arise among

the followers of his teachings, and that thepure Law will be obscured and lost.
8. The “sutra” here is the Lotus Sutra. For
example, chapter ﬁve says, “Once these living beings have heard the Law, they will
enjoy peace and security in their present
existence and good circumstances in future
existences” and chapter twenty-six says, “I
will also shield and guard those who uphold
this sutra, making certain that they suﬀer nodecline or harm within the area of a hundred yojanas.”
9. Lotus Sutra, chap. 23.
10. The Words and Phrases of the Lotus
Sutra.
11. On “The Words and Phrases.”
12. The Outstanding Principles of the Lotus
Sutra. T’ang refers to China, and Katsu to a
Tungusic nation that ruled over northeastern
China and northern Korea in the sixth andseventh centuries. “A land to the east ofT’ang and to the west of Katsu” indicatesJapan according to old maps.
13. This refers to the Komatsubara Perse-

828THE RYŪS EN-JI PETITION

cution of 1264, when the Daishonin and his
party were attacked by the steward Tōjō
Kagenobu. In the ensuing ﬁght, among his
followers, Kyōnin-bō was killed, and Kudō
Yoshitaka died of the wounds he suﬀered.
The next sentence refers to the Izu Exile
from 1261 to 1263, and the Sado Exile from1271 through 1274.
14. Source unknown.
15. A summary of a passage in the Nirvana Sutra.
16. The prelate of Tō-ji most probably refers to the prelate of Omuro (Ninna-ji temple in Kyoto), Prince Dōjo, who was thecentral ﬁgure in conducting True Word
prayers for the defeat of Kamakura during
the Jōkyū Disturbance in 1221. The originalof this text can read either “the prelate [of]Tō-ji” or “the prelate [and] Tō-ji,” but theoriginal of another writing of the Daishoninincludes the expression “the chief priest of
Mount Hiei and the prelate of Tō-ji.” Thetranslators have adopted this interpretation.
The Daishonin referred to Prince Dōjo as
the prelate of Tō-ji probably in the sense thatTō-ji represents the True Word school orthat the prelate of Omuro virtually dominated Tō-ji as well.
17. Antoku, still a child at the time,drowned in 1185 during a sea battle at Dannoura, where the Taira met their ﬁnal defeat
at the hands of the Minamoto. Myōun wasrespectively the ﬁfty-ﬁfth and ﬁfty-seventh
chief priest of Enryaku-ji, the head templeof the Tendai school, on Mount Hiei. When
Myōun visited the Retired Emperor Goshirakawa at his palace in 1183, it was attacked
by forces led by Minamoto no Yoshinaka, ageneral of the Minamoto clan, and he wasstruck and killed by a stray arrow. In 1221,
the Retired Emperor Gotoba, together withthe reigning emperor and the two retired
emperors, attempted to overthrow the military government in Kamakura, but his forceswere defeated by those of the Kamakura regent Hōjō Yoshitoki, under the leadershipof his eldest son, Yasutoki. Gotoba was exiled to the island of Oki in the Sea of Japan.
18. That “the prelate of Tō-ji,” Prince
Dōjo, died on Mount Kōya is described in
The Biographies of Eminent Priests of Japan.
19. This refers to Sonkai, the seventythird chief priest of Enryaku-ji temple on
Mount Hiei. He was a son of the Retired
Emperor Gotoba. He was driven out of ofﬁce in 1221.
20. The one-volume Amida Sutra con-sisted of only four sheets.
21. Immeasurable Meanings Sutra.
22. Lotus Sutra, chap. 2.
23. Ibid., chap. 3.
24. The Treatise of Five Hundred Questions.
25. This statement is based on a passage inthe Flower Garland Sutra that says: “Themind is like a skilled painter, who createsvarious forms made up of the ﬁve components. Thus of all the phenomena throughout the entire world, there is not a single onethat is not created by the mind.”
26. This refers to the three versions of the
Flower Garland Sutra said to be kept at the
dragon palace, and which are mentioned in
The Annotations on “The Profound Meaning of
the Lotus Sutra.” Concerning the middle
text, however, the commentary says, “The
middle grade text contains 498,800 verses.”
27. Immeasurable Meanings Sutra. It says,“Though immeasurable, boundless, inconceivable asamkhya kalpas may pass, they [living beings] will in the end fail to gain unsurpassed enlightenment. Why? Because they
will not know about the great direct way
to enlightenment, but will travel perilous
byways beset by numerous hindrances andtrials.”28. A rephrasing of Hōnen’s statement in
The Nembutsu Chosen above All. He asserted
that one should discard, close, ignore, andabandon all teachings and practices otherthan those relating to Amida Buddha.
29. Virtually nothing is known about
Raien other than that he was a resident
priest of Ryūsen-ji.
30. “Religious rites” refers to an archerycontest held at Ōmiya Sengen Shrine on theeighth day of the fourth month, 1279. Shirōand Yashirō, who appear in the next sentence, were believers of the Daishonin’steachings and farmers of Atsuhara in the Fujiarea.
31. In the revised draft, the Daishonincomments that Nisshū and Nichiben should
put this phrase in the text, but in this translation it is inserted as he directed.
32. Nothing is known about Jōin otherthan that he was a priest of Ryūsen-ji.
33. “Legal codes” refers to The Formularyof Adjudications, which was a regarded as
symbol of fair and equitable law by the society of the time. Formulated in 1232, it was
the ﬁrst codiﬁcation of law established by
the Kamakura shogunate.
34. Jissō-ji was a Tendai temple at Iwamoto in Fuji. The third and fourth chief829

THE RYŪS EN-JI PETITION

priests of the temple lapsed into a pattern of
wanton misconduct. In 1268, Nikkō, who
was a resident priest there, ﬁled a complaint
against them with the Kamakura government. In the case of Jissō-ji, its chief priest
had no connection with the ruling Hōjōclan, but Gyōchi, the deputy chief priest of
Ryūsen-ji, was a member of the ruling clan.
He therefore was more likely to gain personal favors from the Kamakura government.

830