PROVISIONAL TRANSLATION(December 2018)
Only significant errors of English in the translation
have been corrected––the content will be checkedagainst the original Japanese for accuracy at a later
date.

Scholarship and Thought about the Sacred City of Ise in Early-Modern Japan

MATSUMOTO Takashi1

The Grand Shrine of Ise, or Jingū, was greatly revered by common people in the Edo period, andas the practice of okage mairi (mass pilgrimages to Jingū) indicates, many people visited the sacredcity of Shinto, Ise City in Mie Prefecture. Ise was both the central place of faith and leading centerof scholarship and intellectual thoughts. This book focuses on selected scholars closely relating to
Ise including priests who served at Jingū, traces their scholarly works that blossomed, and examines
their important roles in the history of literary attainments in Japan.
The Development of Academic Thought at Gekū (the Outer Shrine of Jingū)
Watarai Nobuyoshi
At first, academic activities that occurred around Gekū during the early Edo period will be
introduced. It was Deguchi (Watarai) Nobuyoshi (1615-90) who not only contributed to theefflorescence of the sacred city but also paved the way for flourishing of Shinto studies. He was
first named as Nobuyoshi (the second Chinese character is different from his name), took Shinano
as his given name, and Chokuan as his sobriquet. He and his father, Nobutada, became gonnegi, orassistant priests, of Gekū at the age of six. Nobuyoshi enjoyed studying since he was young andwrote many books such as Yōbukuki, DaiJingūshintōwakumon, Jingūhidenmondō, IsedaiJingūshiniki,
Jindaikankōjutsushō, etc. Among these, Nobuyoshi’s main work is the Yōbukuki, consisting of twovolumes. He wrote it in 1650 when he was thirty-six years old as a survey of Shinto studies
describing his thoughts in a systematic way. “Yōbuku” of the title means “ichiyōraifuku” (returnof spring) and was given as the title because the book was written in November of the Japanese oldcalendar, when it gets warmer after the winter solstice. Later, it was submitted for Emperor GoKōmyō’s inspection.
In this book, Nobuyoshi states:
Shinto is intertwined with any daily activities, and there is no exception to it. When thesovereign the country based on Shinto, he is a benevolent ruler. When his subjects serve thesovereign based on Shinto, they are the loyal subjects. When a father nurtures his childbased on Shinto, he is an affectionate father. When a child assists his parents based on
Shinto, he is a filial child. It is advisable that relationships of a couple, brothers, and friends
1 THE AUTHOR is an associate professor of Japanese history in the Shinto Department in the Faculty of Letters at

Kōgakkan University. This chapter was originally published in Japanese in Matsumoto Takashi, “Kinsei no Shinto to
gakumon shisō,” Ise Jingū sūkeikai sōsho, 22 (2018).

1

should be based on Shinto. Besides, Shinto is found in an action of eating and drinking. It
is not the case that Shinto it not related to an action of raising a hand. If Shinto werelimited to activities of reading books on kami, remembering the names of kami, clapping
one’s hands in prayer, and reciting Shinto prayers, then Shinto would be a narrower paththan farming, medicine, and divination. (The Second Volume of Yōbukuki)
In other words, Nobuyoshi explains that Shinto is not a special path that only priests who clap hishands in prayer and recite Shinto prayers can follow but exists in ordinary people’s daily life andshould be a universal path for human beings to follow. He also states the correspondence of Shinto
teachings and a path valued by Confucianism that sovereign and subject, father and son, husband
and wife, brothers, and friends should follow.
Similarly, the beginning of DaiJingūshintōwakumon states:
It is wrong for people today to think that Shinto is a path for only priests and that even if
they understand it, it is not useful for them. Shinto is a path that should be followed bythose who were born in Japan. However, while a path introduced by oversea is revered, it
is such a pity no one practices Shinto except priests.
He also states that “Shinto is a path of daily life which is practiced by everyone from the sovereign
to ordinary people.” This shows that a way of living of the Japanese people is Shinto, which is themain point that Nobuyoshi emphasized most.
Furthermore, Yōbukuki states:
If one makes one’s heart like a mirror, one’s heart will be the same as that of
Amenominakanushi or Amaterasu Ōmikami....As it is said that a heart is like a residenceof kami, kami can stay in people’s heart. However, a dark heart is like a residence withclosed doors and a mirror with rust. You should open the doors of kami’s residence andremove the rust of the mirror.
“A heart is like a residence of kami” is a phrase appearing in texts of Ise Shinto, and Nobuyoshi
interpreted one’s heart and soul as part of spirit of kami given from kami; thus, he explained thatkeeping one’s heart and soul pure and achieving the same state of mind as the heavenly kami is a
Shinto way of cultivating one’s mind. While this overlaps with teachings of classic Confucian
writings or The Great Learning that one should clarify one’s inner virtue, it marks the features ofNobuyoshi’s ideas as a leading figure of Shinto theories of modern period in a respect of morally
recapturing the value of “purity” and “honesty” highly regarded by Ise Shinto since the medieval
period.
As shown above, Confucian thoughts obviously influenced Nobuyoshi’s ideas. On the other hand,
Nobuyoshi strongly criticized Buddhism. In short, Nobuyoshi formed an appropriate Shinto theoryof the early modern period by reinterpreting thought of Ise Shinto in a Confucian way andremoving Buddhist aspects from conventional thoughts of Ise Shinto which had contained
Buddhist elements. His ideas made a great impact on later thoughts of Shinto starting with Suika
Shinto (fusion of Shinto with Chinese elements).
This theory of Ise Shinto of the Edo period centering on Nobuyoshi is called “Ise Shinto of thelater period” in contrast with Ise Shinto of the early period during the Kamakura period. Besides,
Nobuyoshi contributed to the study of classical Shinto texts. Writings of Ise Shinto of the early
period, which are especially regarded as important are called Gobusho (five-volume apologia); they2are Hōkihongi, Yamatohime-no-mikoto seiki, Gochinzahongi, Gochinzadenki, and Gochinzashidaiki. Amongthem, Yamatohime-no-mikoto seiki was missing during the Edo period even in Ise. Nobuyoshi attempted
to find it and finally discovered the copy of it which had been passed down to Kyoto.
Furthermore, Nobuyoshi published Gōtōkojiki in his later life in 1687 at the age of seventy-three.
Although Kojiki is a classical text that anyone knows today, it did not spread yet at the beginning of
the Edo period; thus, it was hardly studied. The Kojiki was first published in 1644, but it has many
mistakes. Because of this, by using the Kojiki of 1644 as the original source, Nobuyoshi collated itwith other variant manuscripts which were available at that time, put guiding marks for Japanese
rendering, used many literary sources as references, and provided match-ups and explanatory
notes as headnotes. It can be said that Gōtōkojiki is the first edition with full-scale proofreading andannotations, and many part of the text have been used as a reference to this day. Its demonstrative
contents opened a door toward the study of classic texts of the new era and initiated the study ofthe Kojiki of the later period. It also greatly influenced Moto’ori Norinaga. Besides Gōtōkojiki,Nobuyoshi also revised one of the important classical texts of Shinto, Sendaikujihongi and published
Gōtōkujigi.
Yamazaki Ansai, who promoted Suika Shinto and is introduced later in this book, learned thetheory of Ise Shinto starting with a purification ceremony of the style of Ise Shinto; thus,
Nobuyoshi greatly contributed to the development of the thoughts of Shinto of the early modern
period. On the other hand, Nobuyoshi severely criticized the Shinto theory of Yoshida Shinto
which was dominant at that time. He sharply criticized that its founder Yoshida Kanetomo asserted
that the object enshrined in Jingū flew away to Kyoto and wrote a book titled Shinteki Yoshida
Kanetomo Boukeiki (The record of conspiracy of the enemy of kami Yoshida Kanetomo). Nobuyoshi
passed away in 1690 at the age of seventy-six. His cemetery is located in the graveyard called
Icchobō in Iwabuchi of Ise. (note that the present tombstone was rebuilt in 1919).
The foundation of Toyomiyazaki bunko (Toyomiyazaki Library)
The foundation of Toyomiyazaki bunko was Nobuyoshi’s greatest contribution. Since the ancient
times, there were two libraries at Jingū: Bunden at Naikū since the Nara period and Shinko at
Gekū since before the Kamakura period. Both libraries housed texts and manuscripts related to
Naikū and Gekū. However, Jingū declined during the Muromachi period, and especially due tothe dispute called Uji Yamada kassen, which occurred at the end of the fifteenth century, most of
the collection of books were lost. Nobuyoshi was deeply concerned about this situation and decided
to establish a library in order to “collect sacred texts, ancient records, and Japanese and Chinese
books for the sake of Jingū, reserve them for future generations, and encourage other people tostudy them (IsedaiJingūshiniki).” During the years of 1644–47, Nobuyoshi collected dispersed texts
related to Jingū, copied and collated them. He also found people who supported him such as priestsof Gekū, Yomura Hiromasa and Iwade Suekiyo, and raised a fund as an originator by getting
seventy advocates in total. Furthermore, with the support from Jingū saishu (the head chief priest
of Jingū) Kawabe Sadanaga, Daigūji (the major chief priest) Kawabe Kiyonaga, and townspeopleof Yamada, Nobuyoshi created “bunko reijou (rules of library)” in June 1648 regarding
management of the library, purchases of books, copy, and airing of books. In November of thesame year, he began to establish the facility and building of the library in the land of Toyomiyazakinext to Gekū (present address: 3 Okamotochō, Ise), and the library was completed on the 28th ofDecember of the same year and named as “Toyomiyazaki bunko” by taking the place name.
Nobuyoshi was thirty-four years old. In celebrating the completion of the library, Hayashi Razan,
who served the Edo bakufu and was Confucian, donated Shunjūsanden with his sentences about the3origin of the library titled “Ise bunko ni daisu.” Eventually, Nobuyoshi, Hiromasa, and Suekiyo
were given official ranks and titles by Emperor Go-Kōmyō in celebration of their achievement.
The central buildings of the library were a lecture hall and a stack room. Besides, a small shrineof Tenjin was built where Sugawara no Michizane was enshrined. Chinese poems, Japanese tanka
poems, and linked poems were offered there. Later, a small shrine where Nobuyoshi’s spirit was to
be enshrined was built. Bunko was managed by the fund contributed by members called sekichū,
and the Edo Bakufu donated to the library the 20-koku field via bugyō of Yamada Yagi Munenao.
Regarding to books of the library, not only the members but also non-members were allowed toaccess to them. The library received books donated by many people including court nobles, feudallords, and scholars; thus, the collections of books got gradually large.
At a lecture hall, lectures of the Shinto scriptures and Confucian texts were conducted by invitedlectures and scholars who visited the library on a fixed date of every month. Invited scholars were
Kaibara Ekiken, Itō Tōgai, Muro Kyūsō, Ooshio Chūsai (Heihachirō), and so on. Thus,
Toyomiyazaki bunko played a central role for culture and education of Ise and largely contributed
to the development of academic studies and culture. The library was sustained throughout the Edo
period and ended its role in the first year of the Meiji period. Its collections were handed down tothe present library called Jingū bunko. At the time of closing it, it is said that Toyomiyazaki bunko
housed more than 20,000 books.
The facility and building of the library remained after the closure, which was used as the schoolbuilding of “Miyazaki gogakkō.” Ozaki Yukio who is famous as “a god of the Constitution” also
graduated from this school. However, due to the fire of 1879, the hall of lecture was burned down,
and today a guest room, a stack room, Nobuyoshi’s small shrine, a gate and walls remain. In spring,
the site of the library was colored by cherry blossoms called “oyane zakura.” It is said that theoriginal cherry tree of these cherry trees was a nursery tree appearing on the roof of Nobuyoshi’s
house (Present location: back of the city hall of Ise).
The development of Nobuyoshi’s academic lineage
The following section deals with the ways in which Nobuyoshi’s academic thoughts were passed
down. First, we start with Nobuyoshi’s son Deguchi Nobutsune (1657-1714). Nobutsune became
an assistant senior priest of Gekū after following his father’s occupation and gained the rank andtitle of Shōshi’ige. His outstanding achievements include Jinmyōchōkōshō which considers the shrinesof the entire country listed in the Engishiki of the Heian period, Shinjizuihitsu which summarizes
Shinto rituals and historical sources of Jingū including hachidohai (bowing one’s head eight times inrespect of worship), etc. Like his father, Nobutsune also wrote a book to criticize Yoshida Shinto
titled Benbokushō (“boku” means “the Urabe clan” and the original name of the Yoshida family).
Next, some priests who were also scholars related to Nobuyoshi are introduced. Nakanishi
Nobuyoshi (1631-99) followed the academic lineage of Deguchi Nobuyoshi. He extensively wrote
commentaries of Shintōgobusho and created waka poems well. His collection of waka poetry Gueisōkō
contains more than four thousand poems, and he had more than two hundred forty students. He
also interacted with Keichū who was famous as a scholar of kokugaku and visited him while Keichū
had a secluded life at Enjuan in Osaka. His main book is DaiJingūzōseiwakumon. Nakanishi Naokata(1634-1709) is one of those who followed the academic lineage of Deguchi Nobuyoshi. He wasinvolved in the dispute with Naikū regarding the title of amulets of purification for which Gekūused part of the title of Naikū, and Naikū ended up suing Gekū. Gekū lost, and Naokata waspunished and had to go into exile. After wandering through some lands, he lived in Sada of Tamaru(present location: Tamaki of Watarai in Mie prefecture) and passed away there. He had a life of4

turmoil, but Naokata never changed his belief in the concept of Nikūikkō based on Shintō gobusho (afive-volume apologia of Shinto), which means that both Naikū and Gekū have equal divine virtue
and the unity of the two promotes the power of gods. He wrote many books about his unique ideas
about the exclusion of Buddha and training of mind. Especially, in Shintōanshinmonogatari andShidōhyakushu, he explains the Shinto view of life and death which takes the place of Buddhism andasserts that after death, neither paradise nor hell exists, and a man comes from kami and returns
to kami.
Kawasaki Nobusada (1634-1709) was an assistant senior priest of Gekū and his gō (pen name)was Seika. After studying also in Edo and Kyoto, he drafted Saikanshiki (the ritual procedures andrules) to correct the disturbance of regulations. He also got involved in compilation of Kanbunsengūki.
In his last book titled Hōeijūjō, Nobusada asserted the dignity of Gekū by presenting ten reasons
including the theories of “ryōkū gomeigi setsu” and “Nikūikkō” in terms of the dispute with Naikūat the time of Sengū or the renewal ceremony of the Hōei era. Also, in the same book, he advocatedthe value of Shintō gobusho, whereas a priest of Naikū Inomo Morikazu wrote Shinryakuki to criticize
it. Started by this, the argument about Shintō gobusho became active, and a Shintoist of Owari
Yoshimi Yukikazu’s Gobusho setsu ben appeared. After this, the argument about the enshrined deities
of Naikū and Gekū prolonged, and although Moto’ori Norinaga wrote Nikū sakidake no ben toreconcile it, the dispute was not resolved until the Meiji period.
Among generations of disciples who learned from Nobuyoshi’s original disciples, studies ofpriests of Gekū continued to be active. In 1712, priests of Gekū organized a society for research.
Its regular meeting was named as “Junichikōkai” because it was held once every ten days. Its central
figures were Kiso Kiyoari, Oda (Tachibana) Naritsugu, and Matsuki Tomohiko; there were morethan eighty members. In this society, various topics of Shinto were researched and discussed, which
resulted in many books written by them shown as follows. Kiso Kiyoari (1682-1736) served at
Takanomiya of Gekū as tamagushi-uchindo and learned Confucianism from Itō Koan and Shinto
from Nobuyoshi’s disciple Kurose Masuhiro. He wrote many books including Shinkyōbenmōshō,Maijimon, and Irokandan. In Nihonshokikōjutsushō, Kiyoari provided commentaries for the entire thirty
volumes of Nihonshoki, and such commentaries were available since Shakunihongi of the Kamakura
period.
Kiyoari also interacted with Itō Tōgai, and in 1711 when the Korean Emissary came to Japan,
he and Tōgai exchanged poems with the Emissary. Oda Naritsugu (1660-1716) was a secretary of
the family of daigūji and followed the academic lineage of Nobuyoshi. He created the unique theory
by using charts based on the ying-yang theory and wrote many books including Ōyashimazusetsu,
Amatsutsumizusetsu, and Isenigūisshaden. Naritsugu played a central role at the meetings ofJunichikōkai and was a leading figure of academic studies at Gekū from the Genroku to Shōtoku
eras.
Kushimoto Tsuneakira (1674-1752) was a son of Kawasaki Nobusada and became an adopted
son of Kushimoto Tsugihiko. He was an assistant senior priest of Gekū. His many books include
Shintōmeiben, Shinminsuchi, Nihonkokufū, etc. He wrote Shintōmeiben to make a counterargument against
Bendōsho that criticized Shinto, written by Dazai Shundai, a Confucian scholar of the school ofOgyū Sorai. In Shintōmeiben, Tsuneakira strongly criticized the trend among people valuing
Confucianism and forgetting Shinto, which is a native Japanese path, and asserted saisei i’itsu (theunity of Shinto rituals and politics) as the Japanese way of being. This book became an opener of
the argument, so-called kokujuronsō (the argument about an interpretation of “path” between
Shintoists and Confucians).
The hereditary occupation of Tsuneakira’s family was to serve at Gekū as a senior priest, but hedeclined an offer to become a senior priest, saying that “without climbing a mountain, I enjoy
5

drinking spring water at the foot of the mountain.” For, a senior priest was not allowed to go beyond
the Miyagawa river, which would prevent him from studying as he would like. Thus, Tsuneakira
devoted himself to studies throughout his life.
There was a scholar who was a contemporary of Nobuyoshi and expressed his own uniquethoughts, which were different from Nobuyoshi and others. This scholar was Ryū Hirochika (161693). His pen name was Shōsha, and he was born into the family of priests of Gekū and learned
both Shinto and Buddhist texts. His main books include Shinkokuketsugiron, Jindaikanhyōchū,Jindaiyōketsu, and so forth. Shinkokuketsugiron shows Hirochika’s standpoint of exploring deep
meanings of Shinto through Buddhist texts, i.e., shinbutsufugō. Based on their reading of one
Chinese character, priests of Jingū interpreted Amaterasu Ōmikami’s oracle of Yamatohime no
Mikotoseiki regarding Buddhism that Shinto and Buddhism should be separated from each other;
Deguchi Nobuyoshi also interpreted it in the same way. By contrast, Hirochika differently read thesame Chinese character, based on which he interpreted the same passage that things associatedwith Buddhism should be hidden at Shinto rituals in order to concentrate on serving Kami, but
this did not mean the denial of Buddhism. Hirochika’s view can be understood as the continuityof thoughts of Ise Shinto of the medieval era in contrast with thoughts of Shinto during the earlymodern era characterized by rejection of Buddhism.
In 1688, Matsuo Bashō, who visited to Jingū, went to see Hirochika for whom he made a haiku
poem: “Let me ask how a plant of reed is called here” (Oi no kobumi) with the title of “ryūshōsha.”Bashō created this poem by taking a famous poem of Tsukubashū into account, the collection of
renga during the period of Northern and Southern Courts: “The name of reed changes depending
on place; the reed of Naniwa is called hamaogi in Ise. It can be understood that Bashō’s poem wasfor expressing his respect to Hirochika.
Behind these studies, we should realize the existence of the book store that supported theacademic studies pf priests of Gekū: Kōkodō book store run by Fujiwara Chōbei. It was in
Yamadaichishichō, and Chōbei originally served as onshi of Gekū and named himself “Isshi
Fujiwara Tayū.” It seems that he began to also run the business of publication around when
Watarai Nobuyoshi was active at Gekū. Since then, the name of Fujiwara Chōbei continued overgenerations until before the Meiji period. This Kōkodō specialized in publication for Gekū, andmost of all books written by priests of Gekū starting with Nobuyoshi were published by it.
The Development of Academic Thought at Naikū
The influence of Suika Shinto
Compared with Gekū, which produced many scholars beginning with Deguchi Nobuyoshi, Naikū
was slightly behind. However, since the mid-Edo period, academic activities around Naikū became
active. It was the theory of Suika Shinto that influenced such trend. Suika Shinto became the main
Shinto ideas during the early Edo period. These Shinto ideas were asserted by Yamazaki Ansai(1618-82). He was at first a zen monk, but he left zen and supported Confucianism. While Ansai
became a leading scholar of Confucianism, he was also very familiar with Shinto. Ansai learned
the theories of Ise Shinto from Deguchi Nobuyoshi and Daigūji of Ise Jingū Kawabe Kiyonaga
and the theory of Yoshida Shinto from Yoshikawa Koretari. Ansai established his own Shinto ideas
by putting other scholars’ theories of Shinto.
The theory of Suika Shinto became elaborate by Ansai’s disciples. Its central idea is that a path
is what Amaterasu Ōmikami showed as a way for the emperor to govern; teachings are theteachings of Sarutahiko (kami who lead the way of Amaterasu Ōmikami’s grandson’s descent to6earth); both emperor and his subject should realize the ideal path (the unity of the emperor andhis subject; the fundamental path) together. This is close to the moral idea of Confucianism like
Deguchi Nobuyoshi, but the fact that Suika Shinto supported the Imperial Household as thefundamental core of Shinto made Suika Shinto the source of sonnō shisō (the thought of thereverence for the Emperor) leading to the Meiji Restoration in the end.
It can be thought that Suika Shinto was introduced to Ise around the Genroku and Kyōhō
periods, and Kiso Kiyoari’s Nihonshokikōjutsushō cites the theories of Ansai’s disciples Tani Jinzan
and Matsuoka Joan, which showa the influence of Suika Shinto on the studies of the priests ofGekū. Gekū, which had both the tradition of Ise Shinto since the Kamakura period and Deguchi
Nobuyoshi’s foundation of academic theories, did not have much necessity to adapt new thoughts
about Shinto. By contrast, Naikū was a little behind to establish thoughts about Shinto; thus, thepriests of Naikū might be more active than those of Gekū in terms of acceptance of Suika Shinto.
It was Happa Mitsumasa (1699-1773) who greatly contributed to the introduction of Suika
Shinto at Naikū. He was called Oribe, Takumi, or Sakyō, and his pen name was Yokusai and
Itsuhoko’ō. He was a son of Ōta Nagayoshi from Nagasaki and became an adopted son of a priest
of Naikū Happa Mitsunao by his request. Mitsumasa served at Naikū and learned Shinto from
Ansai’s disciple’s disciple Tamaki Isai, who followed the lineage of Suika Shinto. Jingū bunko
library houses many texts of Shinto that Mitsumasa copied, which shows how devoted he was tostudies. Takabayashi Suemitsu (dates of his birth and death are unknown; approximately aroundthe Hōreki and Bunsei periods) called himself Toneri, and his pen names were Kinkō, Isai, or
Ryōjō. He learned at Matsuoka Joan. Suemitsu was a vassal of Senshūji Temple of Ishinden, but
for some reason, he left there and taught his disciples at a school called Kawarakōkan, built at thebank of the Isuzu river. It seems that he mainly taught Confucianism, but as there was a recordthat he copied Suika Shinto’s hidden book Gyokusenshū compiled by Tamaki Isai and that lectured
the texts of Shinto such as the volume of the ages of kami of Nihonshoki, he seemed to have learned
Suika Shinto. Nakagawa Tsunetada, who is introduced later in this book, also learned both
Confucianism and Shinto from Suemitsu with other priests of Naikū when he was young.
Additionally, this is not directly related to Naikū or Gekū, but Sawada Rokumei, from present-day
Seta of Ise, also learned from Nishiyori Seisai, who belonged to the academic lineage of Ansai,
and his collection of poems is housed at Jingū bunko library.
Hōrai Hisagata and Takeuchi Shikibu
As we have seen, Suika Shinto was becoming influential around Naikū, which had much to do withthe existence of a scholar Tanigawa Kotosuga (1709-76) from present-day Tsu. Kotosuga came to
Kyoto and learned Shinto under the guidance of Matsuoka Joan, Tamaki Isai, and thier disciple
Matsuoka Yūgen. Therefore, Kotosuga was related to Happa Mitsumasa in terms of the sameacademic lineage, through which Kotosuga’s connection with priests of Naikū was extended.
Among the priest of Naikū, it was Horai Hisagata (1739-88) who was active most. He becamegonnegi an assistant senior priest of Naikū and served as a vice Ōmonoimi and Toshiyori of Uji.
First, he learned from Happa Mitsumasa, through whom he became Kotosuga’s student. Kotosuga
acknowledged Hisagata’s intellectual talent, and Hisagata became his son-in-law. Hisagata worked
together with Kotosuga to edit Kotosuga’s main books Nihonshokitsūshō and Wakunnoshiori.
Unfortunately, because the house of the Hōrai family was destroyed by fire in later years, books
written by Hisagata were not much left except collection of poems and miscellaneous notes like
Shosaikenbunroku. Hisagata supported loyalists and was intimately interacted with Karasaki
Kotochika, with whom he studied together under the guidance of Kotosuga. Kotochika was from7the family of Shinto priests from Akinotakehara and was known as a sworn friend of loyalist
Takayama Hikokurō. In later years when Hikokurō committed suicide by sword due to the bakufu’s
oppression, Kotochika also committed disembowelment in front of the grave of his ancestors.
Furthermore, Hisagata adored Kamo no Chōmei, who was a famous scholar of Kotosuga atthat time and became a devoted reader of Moto’ori Norinaga’s Kojikiden. In a previous year of hisdeath 1787, he formally became Norinaga’s disciple. Thus, it can be said that Hisagata played aleading role in introducing Kokugaku to ise. As Chapter 4 touches upon it, the studies of Kokugaku
became active in Ise during the later Edo period. In addition, Hisagata also tried to rebuild
Hayashizaki bunko library. This is further looked at later in this book. Next, Takeuchi Shikibu’s
visit to Ise is touched upon.
Takeuchi Shikibu (1712-67) was from Ni’igata. His given name was Takamochi and pen namewas Shūsai. Shikibu was his common name. He came to Kyoto and learned Confucianism of Ansai
school and Suika Shinto from Tamaki Isai and Matsuoka Yūgen. Later, he became a teacher of acourt noble Tokudaiji Kinmura. Many young court nobles became Shikibu’s students and were
taught by Shikibu that a reason why the court became declined and the political power was takenover by military families was due to lack of diligent study and virtue of an emperor and court
nobles. Shikibu asserted that if the emperor and court nobles continue to study, people’s respect
would be restored and the shogun would return the political power to the Imperial Court. By this,Shikibu encouraged court nobles. Shikibu’s thoughts were eventually delivered to Emperor
Momozono, and through court nobles, Shikibu lectured his theory about Nihonshoki to the Emperor.
However, Shikibu’s thoughts, which can be understood as the theory of the revival of the ancientregime, invoked suspicion and rebel among conservative Kanpaku, higher ranking court nobles,
and the Yoshida family whose specialty was taken over. As a result, his lecture to the emperor was
stopped, and in 1759, more than twenty nobles, who had learned from Shikibu, were severely
penalized; some were dismissed from the imperial court; some were forced to become monks; somewere ordered to be confined to a house. Shikibu himself was expelled from Kyoto. This is called
the Hōreki incident.
After this, Shikibu moved to Ise and stayed in Uji. It is thought that Shikibu received supportof Tanigawa Kotosuga and Hōrai Hisagata behind the scene, and it seemed that Shikibu often
stayed in Hisagata’s residence (present-day Isuzugawa kindergarten). It happened in later years
that Shikibu was expelled from Uji by Jingū saishu’s pressure; however, in general people of Uji
were supportive to Shikibu, and Shikibu often lectured at Hayashizaki bunko library. At present,
Jingū bunko library houses Shikibu’s lecture notes such as Nakatomi no harae, daigaku, Kinshiroku, etc.
The contents of these lecture notes show Shikibu’s characteristics that he valued actual deeds andmoved listeners.
Ukai Sadayoshi (1743-79), who was a retainer of Hisagata, also ardently learned from Shikibu
and invited Shikibu to his residence. Sadayoshi served at Naikū and called himself Tayuu and pen
name was Kisai. Shikibu’s lecture notes Nakatomi no harae kougi was written by Sadayoshi. In
1767, the Meiwa incident took place in Edo. Yamagata Daini, who asserted the thought ofreverence for the emperor, was executed, and Shikibu was also arrested because he was implicatedin the matter. Shikibu cleared this case, and yet his charge of crime that Shikibu stopped in Kyoto
in in his banishment was decided. He was sent to Hachijoo. In December of the same year, Shikibu
died from an illness. He was fifty-six years old.
Hayashizaki b¥Bunko library
In response to the foundation of Toyomiyazaki bunko library of Gekū, there was a movement to8

build a library at Naikū. This movement was pursued by councilors of an autonomous organizationof Uji, and Yamada-bugyō or a magistrate Okabe Katsushige also supported this and obtained
one hundred Japanese ‘ryo’ units of money from the bakufu. As a result, in 1687, Naikū library
was built in Maruyama the western bank of the Isuzu river. However, this place was very humid
and not suited to house books; thus, in 1690, the library was moved to the northern adjacent place,which is the present location of the library. At that time, the name was changed to Hayashizaki
bunko library. Not only Takeuchi Shikibu but also other renowned figures such as Hayashi Hōkō,
Itō Tōgai, Miyake Shōsai, Hōjō Kate, and Ōshio Chūsai lectured about texts housed there.
However, compared with Toyomiyazaki bunko library, the activities of Hayashizaki bunko
library were not so successful, and the facilities began to fall into ruin. It was Hōrai Hisagata who
was concerned about the condition of the library and tried to restore it. In 1782, he repaired thestorage, lecture hall, and study room. Furthermore, he tried to collect books as much as possible,
opened an intermediary site to obtain books in Kyoto, Edo, and Osaka, and called for support todonate books throughout Japan. A collector of books Murai Kogan (1741-86) from Kyoto was oneof those who responded to this call. He was a kimono fabrics dealer, and his pen name was
Kinshidō. When Kogan heard about the call for collecting books, he visited Hisagata in Ise with
Hikokurō and donated books in 1784. The number of his donated books exceeded more than two
thousand six hundred, and Hayashizaki bunko library obtained abundant collections of books.
Additionally, Moto’ori Norinaga, who interacted with Hisagata, gave his “Hayashizaki nofumikura no kotoba” to the library, and a Confucian scholar of bakufu, Shibano Ritsuzan gave his“Hayashizaki bunko no ki” to the library. Both were inscribed on a monumental stone andpreserved to this day. As for the existent buildings of the lecture hall, book storage, etc. werecompeted in 1823 after Hisagata’s death. In 1873 after the Meiji Restoration, the land, buildings,
and books of Hayashizaki bunko library were donated to Jingū Shichō (Administration of Jingū).
The number of the book was more than twenty-two thousand. In 1882, Kogakkan was establishedat the lecture hap of the library as the institute for children of priests of Jingū, which was the originof present Kogakkan University.
Scholars’ reverence of Jingū and their visit to the Shrine
The view of Jingū of Confucians
In ancient times, Jingū had a rule that offering of heihaku (sacred silk and other sacred materials)
was forbidden except the emperor. This is a rule so-called shihei kindan (nobody except the emperor
could go and pray at Jingū). However, on the other hand, common people’s visit to Jingū alreadybecame popular during the Heian period, and when the Edo period began after the Kamakura
and Muromachi periods, common people’s visit to Jingū was more active than before. In otherwords, Jingū had two characteristics: sōubyō or the mausoleum of the imperial ancestors and theobject of common people’ worship.
The two aspects of Jingū began to be discussed as the ideological issue during the Edo period
when Confucianism was flourished. As Confucius says in the Analects of Confucius, “It is a flattery to
hold memorial service for other’s ancestors,” one should not be involved in rituals for others’
ancestors according to Confucianism. In China, there was the Mausoleum where the emperor’sancestors were enshrined. If this is applied to Japan, Jingū of Ise where the ancestral deity isenshrined would be the mausoleum. Therefore, from the standpoint of Confucianism, somescholars viewed that it was rude that common people visited to Jingū as the imperial mausoleum
or they enshrine the amulets of Jingū at home.
9The representative theory to oppose common people’s visit to Jingū is the theory of Dazai
Shundai (1680-1747) who followed Ogyū Sorai’s school. He says in his book titled Seigaku mondō:
The Japanese people enshrined Amaterasu Ōmikami at home…. As Amaterasu Ōmikami
is the ancestral deity of the Emperor, this deity is not the one for common people toenshrine. The fact that they enshrine this deity exceeds their right.
In short, it is explained that the act of enshrinement of Amaterasu Ōmikami by common people ispresumptuous and disgraces the deity. Similarly, the feudal lord of Mito domain, Tokugawa
Mitsukuni (1628-1700), known as “Mitokōmon” greatly supported Shinto, but he remarked about
Ise shinkou (common people’s faith in Ise Jingū):Onshi (low-ranking priests who take care of pilgrims) of Ise delivered amulets to masters
throughout Japan every year by somehow making connections with them. I heard thatkami avoid impurity, and considering that Ise Jingū is the Mausoleum of Japan, onshi’s
offerings should not be distributed. They are too ignorant to keep Ise Jingū from impurity
and end up distributing the amulets and offerings to people. They do not know that weshould worship kami and keep distance from kami (Seizanzuihitsu).
In short, Mitsukuni stated his view that common people should not casually receive the amulets
from onshi. His view seemed to spread along with the flourishment of Confucianism to some extent,
but in the end, a modified view became central, of not applying Confucian ideas to Japan but ofsituating Jingū based on the faith and practices since the old times in seeking conformity with
Confucianism.
For instance, Watarai Nobuyoshi’s Yōbukuki states:
There is a distinction between imperial rituals and prayer. There are three families at bothNaikū and Gekū: the Ōnakatomi family is appointed to be saishu and daiguji; the Arakida and
Watarai families serve as negi. They conduct rituals according to the emperor’s orders, which
are not their own…. As for prayers, they are different from these imperial rituals as anyone
can pray for different reasons; some pray for cure of illness of their lord or parents with a senseof loyalty or filial piety. Kami would respond to such sincere prayer. Prayers can be offered tokami at a shrine or alter of home to avoid a disaster of the country or one’s own before they
face it. In short, while rituals are conducted by the emperor’s order, prayers can be offered bycommon people. The point is kami surely respond to the prayers with sincerity.
Similarly, Nakae Tōju (1608-48), who was called Ōmiseijin or a saint from Ōmi with respect,
initially did not support common people’s visit to Jingū, but in later years, he changed his view andvisited to Jingū for the first time at the age of thirty-four. He stated about it in Tōju-sensei nenpu:
I visited to Jingū of Ise with my three children in summer. The enshrined kami is thesupreme kami. Common people are afraid to even approach to noble men; thus, it is evenmore fearful for them to approach to supreme kami. Yet, I finally visited to worship thesupreme kami. After that, I continued to study and understood that common people canworship kami at home. If that is the case, then, they can also visit to worship kami. As Jingūis the origin of the establishment of our country, any Japanese people can visit there.

10The more Tōju researched, the more he was convinced that common people had a way to enshrine
kami on their own and that the Japanese people should visit to Jingū where the original ancestraldeity is enshrined. Tōju, who formed his unique religious view after exploring various thoughts
and idea, perceived the virtue of the enshrined kami of Jingū and changed his negative view aboutcommon people’s visit to Jingū.
The idea held by Dazai Shundai that only the emperor should worship Jingū remained minority
in the academic world, and most of Confucian scholars supported the Ise faith. In other words,
there was no strong objection about common people’s reverence of the imperial ancestral deity
enshrined at Jingū. This reverence is the characteristics of Japan with an unbroken line of sovereign,
which indicates nature of worship of Jingū differing from the Chinese system of the Mausoleum.
As known, common people’s worship of Jingū was getting more and more popular.
The Ise faith of the school of Yamazaki Ansai
In this section, we look at the faith of scholars during the Edo period. First, Yamazaki Ansai, who
was touched upon in the previous chapter as the founder of Suika Shinto, held deep faith in Jingūin his early life. He wrote an article titled “IsedaiJingū gishiki jo” at the age of thirty-eight in 1655:
Kami responds to a sincere prayer, and kami’s protection is realized by pure mind. If boththe emperor and his subject sincerely worship the enshrined kami of Jingū without any
darkness in their mind, they would surely perceive power of kami while Buddhism would
lose its position.
There is a famous passage at the beginning here, which is the oracle of Amaterasu Ōmikami
documented in Yamatohime mikoto seiki highly valued by Ise Shinto. In short, kami can be perceived
through a sincere prayer, and the divine protection is fulfilled by honest and pure heart. “Ansai”
is his Confucian pen name while his Shinto pen name is “Suika.” The theory he formed is called
Suika Shinto based on his Shinto pen name, and its theoretical basis is this oracle. Ansai firmly
took an oath that he would never doubt this oracle. Ansai asserted that if both the emperor and his
subject worship Jingū with a sincere prayer and honest and pure heart, the country will become abeautiful land like that of the ages of kami. The negation of Buddhism is also included in the oracle.
This all shows Ansai’s critical view of the syncretism of Buddhism and Shinto and favor of purityof Shinto.
Furthermore, according to Yamazaki-kafu (the record of the Yamazaki family), which Ansai
himself documented his personal record, Ansai visited to Jingū starting in Meireki 3, Manji 1,
Manji 2, Kanbun 3, Kanbun 8, and Kanbun 9. In total, he visited to Jingū at least six times. It is
not sure for which visit Ansai made a poem, but he made one titled “Sangūchōgin”:
The wave comes from the world of kami; there is a sound from the world of kami
A beautiful wind, land, and sunshine from Ise
After bathing, I see fish jumping out of the water
While walking in the forest, I heard a bird singing
Pines and cypresses stand tall to the sky
Cedars and camphor trees stand on the earth
Hundred emperors respected the virtue of the goddess
All beings have the heart of worship11Years have passed since its foundation
Rituals have been conducted since the ancient times to this day
People visit here
Kami influence people(Suikasō, vol.3)
In this poem, Ansai praises the pure land of both Naikū and Gekū acknowledging the great divine
virtue of Jingū indicated by the fact that people came from every part of Japan by the rituals that
continue since the ancient times.
Also, Ansai’s disciple’s disciple Wakabayashi Kyōsai stated that “Yamazaki-sensei (master)emphasized the importance of wearing the formal attire at the time of getting involved inAmaterasu Ōmikami.” Kyōsai documented Ansai’s last moment:
In the second year of the Tenna period, sensei was on a bed of illness. On the 15th of
September, he was very happy to hear arrival of an amulet from Ise and put a formal attire
on to receive it. He did not take the formal attire until his last moment. On the 16th, hisstudents softly recited nakatomi no harae (Shinto prayer). Sensei also softly recited it. In theevening, he passed away (Shinto sōsai karei).
Although he was on his back, Ansai appreciated the delivery of the amulet from Ise and received
it with wearing formal clothes. He passed away while reciting the Shinto prayer of Nakatomi no harae.
This prayer is present-day oharae no kotoba, and it seems that Ansai recited it in the manner of Ise.
According to the current version of oharae no kotoba, our bad deeds and impurity are purified bykami, while according to the manner of Ise, we purify our bad deeds and impurity and have kami
watch it. From this, we understand that the thought of Ise greatly influenced Ansai and that hisreverence for Jingū was deep enough to act on it mentally and physically.
Ansai’s reverence of Jingū was inherited to his disciples. Asami Keisai (1652-1711), who was
Ansai’s renowned disciple and critical of Ansai’s support of Shinto, stated in response to his
student’s question about whether one should visit Jingū:Everything in Japan including trees and grasses exists thanks to Amaterasu Ōmikami; thus,
even common people should visit Jingū to offer their gratitude for her kindness…. Japanese
Confucians do not know this and do not worship Jingū. But unlike China, everything
including natural objects of mountains, rivers, grasses, and trees is obliged to AmaterasuŌmikami (Keisai sensei yowa).
He criticized the Confucians who had a negative view about the visit to Jingū and asserted that inJapan, where Amaterasu Ōmikami’s descendants live, the Japanese people should visit Jingū as
Amaterasu Ōmikami sustains not only people but also nature such as mountains, rivers, grasses,
and trees.
Furthermore, Keisai’s disciple Wakabayashi Kyōsai (1679-1730) also supported his teacher’s
theory and stated:
Customs and manners of our country have been practiced thanks to kami; thus, to worshipkami or to offer gratitude to kami in mind after purifying one’s body, at the beginning of
the year or at the time of departing, should not be regarded as a bad manner. Kami
enshrined in Ise is the main deity of Japan, and her descendants have existed to this day.
12

Everyone has existed thanks to this deity’s virtue, so regardless of social status, it would not
be discourteous for common people to visit Jingū. In terms of a Shinto perspective, one
does not have to discuss it. Visitors wish for various reasons. It might not be proper for
visitors to place a votive picture of a horse for fulfillment of the hope. Jingū is a special place,so it is natural to worship there after purification.
Kyōsai states that to visit Jingū to pray for a personal matter is not encouraged as everyone receives
limitless blessings, but it is fine to purify a body and worship there. It is useless to merely logically
discuss in a way some Confucian scholars do. Today, it is often said that one should not pray for a
personal issue at Jingū. Kyousai’s words indicate this attitude of visiting Jingū.
What is common among three generations Ansai, Keisai, and Kyōsai is that one should recognize
the difference between Japan with the continuity of the divine lineage and other countries where
the imperial lineage discontinued due to series of revolutions; one should offer one’s gratitude forAmaterasu Ōmikami’s virtue to kami. Kyōsai was struck by the words of Kusunoki Masashige that
“if one has resentment for the emperor, one should recite the name of Amaterasu Ōmikami” andnamed his study room as “bounanken (bounan means respect to Masashige)” to revere Masashige.
His words mean that because our ancestors have been received blessings from AmaterasuŌmikami and the emperor, even if one has a feeling of resentment, such negative feeling soon
banishes. Kyōsai was impressed by the fact that Masashige accomplished his mission with suchdeep discipline. We can see that the blessings that our ancestors received and their deep realizationof the imperial blessings are the basis of the reverence of Jingū.
The View of Jingū of Kokugaku and Mitogaku
In this section, we will look at the view of Jingū of scholars of kokugaku. There are various figures,
so the selected two scholars are touched upon in relation to the issue about the visit to Jingū:Moto’ori Norinaga and Hirata Atsutane.
At first, it is widely known that Moto’ori Norinaga (1730-1801)’s theory of Shinto centers upon
Amaterasu Ōmikami. The concept of gratitude to her also developed through him. Norinaga
states:The people should acknowledge the divine virtue and blessings of Amaterasu Ōmikami.
Needless today, Amaterasu Ōmikami is the imperial ancestral deity. However, if the people
merely know it without realizing that we have received everything thanks to her virtue, thenit would be very sad (Ise nikuu sakitake no ben).
Norinaga also asserted the importance of realization about Amaterasu Ōmikami’s limitless blessing,which had been already recognized by the people at that time before Norinaga showed his view.
Norinaga developed this and explicitly stated that “Amaterasu Ōmikami is not the deity specific toJapan but also prevails in India, China, and beyond.”
p.38
He further stated:
The virtue and blessing of the enshrined deity of Naikū are received by not only the people
in Japan but also people of other countries; thus, Amaterasu Ōmikami is the deity to whom
the people in Japan and beyond should worship (Ise nikū sakitake no ben).

13

Norinaga acknowledged the great virtue of Amaterasu Ōmikami. Hirata Atsutane (1766-1843)
responded in his book titled Kishin shinron to a statement appearing in the Analects of Confucius “It isa flattery to hold memorial service for other’s ancestors”:
It is what Confucian scholars always criticize…. The Sun Goddess, whom the people revere,is enshrined at Jingū, which is greatly differs from the shrines of other countries in Asia
where the departed souls are enshrined. To compare Jingū with those shrines of the deadis a nonsense uttered by ignorant Confucian scholars.
In short, Atsutane does not value the idea of looking at Jingū in comparison with the mausoleumof other countries. Next, we look at the view of Jingū of scholars of the Mito School who statedsonnōjōi (reverence of the emperor and expelling the foreign powers.
One of the leading scholars of the Mito school Fujita Tōko (1806-55) stated in his book titled
Kōdōkan no kijutsugi:
Amaterasu Ōmikami is identical with the sun, and its spirit resides in the sacred mirror.
Jingū is the magnificent sacred place where the spirit of the imperial ancestral deity isenshrined; thus, the fact that successive emperors have worshipped Jingū also means thatthey have worshipped their ancestor. This is fundamentally different from the worship ofthe celestial being in China. In the case of Japan, successive emperors as AmaterasuŌmikami’s descendants inherited her virtue, and the subject have been grateful for it. This
state, which is realized only in Japan, should be revered by other countries.
Tōko’s view corresponds to Norinaga’s theory. Furthermore, a renowned scholar Aizawa Seishisai(1782-1863) stated about a reason why Emperor Sujin removed Yatanokagani, the receptacle of thespirit of Amaterasu Ōmikami, from the Imperial Palace in his book titled Shinron; this book was
widely read by loyalists:
If the kami was enshrined in the Imperial Palace, the reverence toward the imperial
ancestral deity remained unveiled. Therefore, the Emperor decided to enshrine the kami
outside the Imperial Palace and to publicly worship the kami with the people. The
Emperor’s reverence would be recognized by the people. The kami should be revered not
only by the Emperor but also by the rest of the society.
In other words, according to Seishisai, because to enshrine the kami in the Imperial Palace keeps
its rituals private, Emperor Sujin tried to show his reverence of his ancestral deity to the public andto worship the kami together with the people. In this, the origin of the way is clearly discussed, inwhich both the emperor and the people worship the imperial ancestral deity together.
The Visit to Jingū of Scholars and Writers
We have looked at the aspect of scholars’ thoughts during the Edo period. This section touches
upon scholars and writers who visited Jingū. Ōnishi Gen’ichi’s book titled Sangū no konjaku shows
various examples. Besides Nakae Tōju, Yamazaki Ansai, whom this book has looked at,
Confucians who visited Jingū include Yamaga Sokō, Kaibara Ekiken, Tani Jinzan, Itō Tōgai, Rai
Shunsui, Father and son of sanyō, Ōshio Chūsai, Saitō Setsudō, Ōtsuki Bankei, Yanagawa Seigan,
Yoshida Shōin, etc. In the case of scholars of kokugaku, Kitamura Kigin, Amano Sadakage, Kamo
14

no Mabuchi, Fujii Takanao, Ishikawa Yorihira visited Jingū. As for poets of haiku, starting with
Matsuo Bashō, Mukai Kyorai, Hattori Ransetsu, Kagano Chijo, and so on visited Jingū.
Here among these, only two figures are mentioned. First, Itō Tōgai (1670-1736) was a so of Jinsai
who was famous as a great authority of school of the ancient Confucianism. In Tōgai’s writings,
those about Shinto are hardly found. However, he made a poem at the time of his visit to Jingū:
Successive emperors have continued the imperial line and protected the people.
Japan is located far east, and the sun rises first here.
Both Naikū and Gekū are like the sun and moon.
The simple structure like thatch roof has not changed.
Rituals have continued in the peaceful society.
I came to Uji Yamada where Jingū stands still near the two rivers.
What should we pray for?
I prayed for the efflorescence of studies (“DaiJingū o haishite tsukuru (a poem composed
when visiting the Grand Shrine of Ise),” in Shōjutsu sensei bunshū).
Tōgai compared Naikū and Gekū as the sun and the moon and appreciated the simplicity of theshrine buildings and the continuity of rituals. He prayed further development of the academic
studies. In short, the Japanese people’s deep gratitude toward Amaterasu Ōmikami’s virtue madeJapanese Confucians overcome the Confucian opposition and lead them to the visit to Jingū.
The next figure is Ōshio Chūsai (1793-1837), who is known as Heihachirō. While serving as an
official of bakufu, he mastered Confucian study, mainly, Yōmei-gaku (neo-Confucianism based on
the teachings of Wang Yangming and his followers). In the end, he put the result of his long-term
studies together as a book titled Senshindōsakki. In 1833, Chūsai offered this book to Mt. Fuji andvisited Ise in order to report the completion of the work to the celestial beings by burning it at thesummit of Mt. Asama.
However, as the priest of Gekū Ajiro Nironori, with whom Chūsai interacted, opposed his plan
to burn the book, he donated his book Sakki to both Toyomiyazaki and Hayashizaki libraries. In
1834, Chūsai visited Jingū and lectured on Daigaku at Hayashizaki bunko library. In two years later,
as known in general, he rose up for farmers in Osaka and died.
Additionally, although Ōnishi does not mention it, this section concludes with a short description
about a loyalist Takayama Hikokurō (1747-93), who traveled on a pilgrimage throughout Japan.
His existent diary shows that he visited Jingū in 1774 and 1783.
About his first visit to Jingū, Hikokurō arrived in Yamada on the 5th of February and stayed in
Ise until the eleventh. Besides Naikū and Gekū, he went to Mt. Asama, enjoying scenery with atelescope and visited Ōmuiwa, Futami, and Toba. His lodging in Uji was the residence of onshi
Happa Ishidayū. At his second visit to Jingū, Hikokurō traveled together with Murai Kogan. They
arrived in Yamada on the fourteenth of September via the Tokaido Road from Edo and soon wentto Uji to visit Hōrai Hisagata. On that day, Kanmiso-sai ritual was to be held; thus, both Hikokurō
and Kogan visited Hisagata at Jingū, who was staying there for the ritual.
The next day, there was a ritual for the Okitama deity of Naikū, and Hikokurō worshipped at themain sanctuary, wearing a new attire of hemp. After getting the offered sacred rice wine, Hikokurō
finished worshipping auxiliary shrines locating to the east of the main sanctuary. He also
worshipped at Gekū and was guided to visit Uji Hisaoyu. Unfortunately, his diary discontinued
after this; thus, we do not know his movements after his second visit to Jingū.
The Efflorescence of Kokugaku at Naikū and Gekū
15

Selected families of Naikū
Let us look at Ise again. Since the middle of the Edo period, kokugaku became popular. Kamono
Mabuchi and Moto’ori Norinaga initiated the development of kokugaku, and their influence was
gradually found in Ise. Hōrai Hisagata lived during this transitional period of kokugaku. After this,the number of priests of Jingū, who seriously studied kokugaku, increased. Let us start with the sideof Naikū. Nakagawa Tsunetada (1742-1805)’s nick names were Bungo and Shōji, and his father
was negi of Naikū. In 1773, Tsunetada was appointed to be the eighth negi of Naikū, which madehim very happy and intend to complete the commentary of Kōtai Jingū gishikichō. Gishikichō is thefundamentally important research material of Jingū created in 802, and Tsunetada fulfilled his
intention by writing Dai Jingū gishiki ge. Tsunetada was intimately interacted with Norinaga, who
did proofreading of Dai Jingū gishiki ge and wrote its preface. This text, which became a starting
point of studies of Jingū, has not lost its value as a monument of learning of Jingū.
Norinaga asked Tsunetada to read Kojikiden and made a house call when Tsunetada was sick.
When Tsunetada visited Norinaga’s house, he made a poem to praise Norinaga’s dedication to
studies of ancient matters. Uji Hisaoyu (1746-1804) was a son of gonnegi of Gekū Hashimura
Masanobu, who was familiar with both Chinese and Japanese classical literature and produced
many books such as Kaikoku shinto kō. Hisaoyu became an adopted son of a priest of Naikū, Uji(Arakida) Hisayo and served as a gonnegi of Naikū. His pen name was Itsukinosono, and he went toEdo, studied under the guidance of Kamono Mabuchi, and respected Moto’ori Norinaga. Hisaoyu
had many students, who were priests of Jingū including Ajiro Hironori, Masuya Suehogi, etc, andcontributed to the development of kokugaku in the Ise region. It is said that Hisaoyu liked sake andan openhearted man. He continued his teacher Mabuchi’s study of Manyōshū and devoted his life
to it. As a result, he finished a book titled Manyōkō tsuki no ochiba and a collection of his poems titled
Tsukino ochiba shū as a good poet of the Manyō style.
In his book titled Tsukino ochiba kokoroyari, he asserted that the enshrined deity of Gekū is
Toyouke no hime and criticized the claim of the priests of Gekū that the enshrined deity is Kuni
no tokotachi no mikoto. In response to this, a priest of Gekū, Kōda Mitsutaka, offered acounterargument by writing Shinpū hatsumushū. Hisaoyu further wrote Shinpū hatsumushū ben with thename of his student and criticized that five fundamental texts of Ise Shinto, which priests of Gekūconsidered to be the basis, are forgery. This dispute continued until the death of Mitsutaka.
Sonoda Moriyoshi (1785-1840)’s nick name was Daini and pen name was Seien. He became anegi of Naikū in 1812 and got a rank of ju shi’i ge. He inherited the hereditary studies from his father
and studied both Chinese and Japanese classical literature. He was also familiar with the politicalsystem based on the ritsuryō codes of the ancient time. He especially devoted himself to the studiesof the ancient manners and practices of Jingū and completed entire forty-four volumes of Jingū
tenryaku, which can be said to be an encyclopedia of Jingū. Besides these books, he wrote Shinshakuryō no gige, Naikū negi nenpyō, Gekū negi nenpyō, etc.
Selected families of Gekū
Selected main scholar-priests of Gekū are mentioned here. Ajiro Hironori (1784-1856) called
himself Shikibu gondayū, and his pen name was Kankyo. In 1788, he was appointed to be agonnegi of Gekū and first became a student of Uji Hisaoyu and later learned waka poetry from a
court noble Shibayama Mochitoyo; he also became a student of Moto’ori Norinaga’s adopted son,Ōhira and Norinaga’s biological son, Haruniwa. He went to Edo and interacted with figures from16

prestigious families including Hayashi Jussai, Hanawa Hoki’ichi, Kariya Ekisai, Yashiro Hirokata,etc. Hironori made an effort to conduct bibliographical study of Shinto and Japanese history andproduced more than one thousand two hundred volumes of texts including Watarai keizu kōshō,Yachimata hoyoku, Manyōshū ruigo, Ryōno gige rui, etc. More than a few hundred students learned fromhim, from whom great figures appeared such as Matsuura Takeshirō, Hashimura Masatoki,
Mikannagi Kiyonao, Sasaki Hirotsuna, and so on.
In 1845, Hironori went to Kyoto and offered twenty-five books, including Shoku nihonkōki jinmei
burui, Sandai jitsuroku jinmei burui, Montoku jitsuroku koji seigo kō, etc., to the Imperial Court. Emperor
Ninkō at that time acknowledged them and gave him an inkstone.
Hironori, moreover, was concerned about the society; he tried to restore Toyomiyazaki bunko
library and preached that public morals should be corrected as onshi corrupted public decency. At
the time of famine of the Tenpō era, he involved himself in relief activity and interacted with Ōshio
Heihachirō, who rose up for farmers in Osaka, as we have seen. They must have shared a common
aspiration. At that time, Hironori was suspected whether he was involved in the Rebellion of Ōshio
and was summoned to Osaka, but he was not charged with it. Hironori’s ardent heart is expressedby his poem: “Once something happens, I want to be there no matter if I have to enter fire orwater, but I am very old.” At the end of the Edo period, he supported loyalists and received Yoshida
Shōin’s visit.
Hashimura Masatoki (1785-1837) called himself Danjō and served as a gonnegi andŌmonoimichichi at Gekū. He became a student of Moto’ori Haruniwa and Ōhira and devoted
himself to the studies on manners and practices of Jingū. As a result, he proceeded the writings
titled Gekū gishiki ge, but unfortunately, after writing four volumes, he could not finish it. Besides
this, he wrote books to try to correct corruption about rules of impurities and mourning, titled
Rujūbukkiryō and Hōsōshōshō. He went to Edo to study and was favored with the friendship of manyscholars, and especially intimately interacted with Hirata Atsutane.
Additionally, Masatoki wrote Bizenkoku oharai mondōki to argue against a Buddhist School, Jōdo
Shinshū. It was because Jōdo Shinshū declined to contribute amulets of Jingū in Bizen Province,
which is the place of the patron of Masatoki’s relative and onshi Bizendayū.
Mikannagi Kiyonao (1812-94) was called Shizuma and Shōsho, and his pen name was Hōen.
He was born as a son of kujō ōuchindo of Gekū, Sugihara Mitsumoto and became an adopted son ofMikannagi Kiyotomi; he was appointed to be mikannagi uchindo of Gekū and to be a negi of Jingū
after the Meiji Restoration. He was a student of Moto’ori Haruniwa, Ajiro Hironori, Hashimura
Masatoki and interacted with scholars of Kokugaku such as Ban Nobutomo, Suzuki Shigetane,Ōkuni Takamasa, and so forth. Kiyonao’s subjects of studies are diverse. His representative works
are the book of re-examination of the Shinto Gobusho (a five-volume apologia of Shinto) titled
DaiJingū honki kiseishō, the study of Saikū titled Saikūryō kōshō, and the study of Sendaikujihongi, whichfounded the base of the study of this text, titled Sendaikujihongi sekigi.
As the last figure, she might not be categorized as a scholar of Kokugaku, but Keitoku Reijo (17321806), who was famous as a female writer and poet, was also from Ise. Rijo was a daughter ofgonnegi of Naikū, Kamaya Taketo’o, and after being adopted by onshi of Gekū, the Keitoku family,
her husband Iemasa entered this family. She learned Chinese classical literature from Emura
Hokkai and was familiar with Japanese history and literature by reading books housed at
Toyomiyazaki bunko library. She was good at making waka, renga (linked verse), and haiku andgave lessons in renga at a session of renga held at the library. It is said that the number of hercollections of writings is more than four hundred volumes, and her representative works are
historical literature such as Tsuki no yukue and Ike no mokuzu. There is an episode about her andMoto’ori Norinaga. He read her Nonaka no shimizu and pointed out her errors of using archaic terms,
17but Reijo was upset about it and never accepted Norinaga’s correction.
Other than these scholars, there are more scholars to be introduced, but they cannot be covered
here. Note that the development of Kokugaku at both Naikū and Gekū, especially the study of theancient manners and practices of Jingū, established the foundation of the restoration of Jingū
during the Meiji period.
Conclusion
In Ise, as we have seen, various kinds of studies and thoughts blossomed, and many scholars
and writers visited Jingū, which lead to deepen the thoughts of reverence of Jingū. Every thought
and study shaped at Ise would not have been possible without the magnificent existence of Jingū;
in the depth of predecessors’ studies, their ardent reverence for the kami of Jingū was surely found.
We would like to keep the virtue and blessing of the kami of Jingū and continue to be grateful for
it in our daily life.
References
Sakakibara Yorisuke. Ajiro Hironori. Tsu: Chitosebunko, 1923; Jingūbunko enkaku shiryō.
Ise: Jingūbunko, 1934.
Umeda Yoshihiko. Shintōshisō bno kenkyū. Tokyo: Kaitsūsha, 1942.
Emi Kiyokaze. Shintōsetsuen. Tokyo: Meijishoin, 1943.
Itō Masao. Ise no bungaku. Ise: Jingūbunko, 1954.
Ōnishi Gen’ichi. Sangū no konjaku. Ise: Jingūbunko, 1956.
Kōno Seizō. Miyagawa zuihitsu. Ise: Jingūbunko, 1962.
Kubota Osamu. Shintōshi no kenkyū. Ise: Kogakkan daigaku shuppanbu, 1972.
Kitaoka Shirō. Kinsei kokugakusha no kenkyū. Ise: Kogakkan daigaku shuppanbu, reprint, 1996.
Nakanishi Masayuki. Ise no miyabito. Ise: Jingū shichō, 2001.
Yoshikawa Tatsumi. Senko no nagare: Kinsei Jingū kōshōgaku. Tokyo: Kōbundō, 2016.

18