“A Lineage of Dullards” Zen Master Toju Reiso and His Associates

Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 1998 25/1-2 “A Lineage of Dullards” Zen Master Toju Reiso and His Associates Kato Shoshun This study concentrates on the relatively unknown Rinzai Mino line to illustrate the liveliness of Rinzai Zen practice in Meiji Japan. Even as struggles over the precepts and politics were being waged within the Zen denominations, some clerics attempted to carry on with their quest for awakening in relative isolation. Through a study of three monks, Toju Reiso, Tairyu Bun % and Seishu Shusetsu, strategies employed to preserve Rinzai Zen ^ spiritual legacy in the face of the turmoil of Meiji are high lighted. This article illustrates how these monks did their best to continue their eremetic existence and to pick up the pieces left by the widespread destruction of Buddhist temples and monasteries in early Meiji Japan. Among those familiar w ith Japanese Rinzai Zen it is a well-known fact that the lineage of Hakuin Ekaku 白隱慧鶴（1686-1769)— the lineage to which all contemporary Rinzai Zen masters belong— presently con sists of two branches, the Inzan 隠、山 branch and the Takuju 卓洲 branch. These were founded, respectively, by Inzan Ien 隱山惟琰 (1751-1814) and Takuju Kosen 卓洲胡傳（1760-1833)，two of the fore most disciples of Hakuin，s immediate successor Gasan Jito 峨山慈棹 (1727-1797). Less well known, however, is the subdivision of the Inzan line into two separate currents: that of Torin Somo 呆林宗侯 (P-1837)1 and Settan Shohaku S 潭紹璞（1801-1873)，2 and that of Taigen Shigen This essay is a translation of Gudon no keifu: Toju Reiso to sono shuhen 愚鈍の系譜一洞宗令聡とその周辺，published in Meiji no Zensho明治の禅匠，Zenbunka henshubu禅文化編集部 e d .(1981, Kyoto: Zenbunka Kenkyusho, pp. 271-90). The translation was done by Thomas Kirchner. 1 Translator’s note. According to the Zenrinsdbdden Torin died on Tenpo 8/11/10. His other surname is Soju 宗寿（Ogino 1973) See also Zengaku daijiten p. 733. (All subsequent notes are also the translator’s.) 2 The reading of Settan5s name and his dates in Zengaku daijiten p. 585 are wrong. See Kinsei Zenrinsdbdden (Ogino 1973)1，pp. 195-200. 152 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 25/1-2 太元孜元（1769-1837)3 and Gisan Zenrai 儀山善来（1802-1878). The lorm/Settan lineage was ongmallv centered m the domain or Mmo (present-day Gifu Prefecture), where Settan, the Dharma successor of Torin, established a sodo 彳曽堂(training monastery) at Shosren-ji i£ 目艮寺 near Ibuka 伊深，an area known for its close connections with Kanzan Egen.4 The Taigen/Gisan lineage is associated more with the Bizen district (present-day Okayama Prefecture), where Taigen and Gisan taught a number of outstanding disciples at the laree monastery of Sogen-ji曹源守 in the town of Okayama. The two lines are often referred to as the Mino school and the Bizen school, respectively, from the areas in which Shogen-ji and Soeen-ji are located. These two currents within the Inzan tradition have tended to be quite different in character.Ihe Bizen line has had a rather high profile, producing—particularly in the Meiji era— a succession of bril liant masters who were highly influential in the contemporary Bud dhist world. In addition to Lrisan Zenrai, Taieen shigen’s successors included such notables as Daisetsu Joen 大拙承演（1797-1855)，a fierce master nicknamed “Oni Daisetsu” of Shokoku-jiネ目^!守 monastery; and Dokuon Joshu 独園承珠（1819-1895)，who, as head of the Meiji Government’s Daikyo-in 大孝文院(Great Teaching Academy) during the period of Buddhist persecution known as haibutsu kishaku 廃仏毀釈， did much to soften the official attacks. Among the successors of Gisan were several remarkable figures including Ekkei Shuken 越渓守謙 (1810-1884)，who founded the sodo at the Myoshin-ji headquarters complex; Kosen Soon 洪川宗温（1816-1892)，who rebuilt the sodo at Engaku-ji 円覚寺 in Kamakura; Tekisui Giboku 滴水宜牧（1822-1899)， who was responsible for reviving" the Tenryu-ji犬育I 寺 branch of Rinzai Zen; and Bokuju Soju 牧宗宗寿（1820-1891)，who became the first rep resentative of the Hakuin line in the Daitoku-ji 大徳守 tradition oi Rinzai Zen. In contrast, the masters of the Mino line— masters like lairyu Bun，i 泰龍文彙（1827-1880)，Taigi Sokin 大義祖勤（1842-1880)，Toju Reiso 洞宗令聡（1854-1916)，and Yugaku Gimoku 熊嶽宜黙（1848-1918)— were virtually unknown in society at large, and seemed to prefer it that way. They tended to be taciturn in character (at least as far as we can tell from their official biographies), and seemed a bit self- conscious about their own lack of learning and sophistication. 3 Taigen’s dates follow Ka to 1967, p. 57. 4 Ibuka was the area in which Kanzan Egen (1277-1361), the founder of Myoshin-ji, is reputed to have done his post-enlightenment training, spending eight years laboring in the fields during the day and meditating at the edge of a high cliff at night. Shogen-ji was founded in commemoration of the 300th anniversary of Kanzan’s death. K a to ： Lineage of Dullards 153 The quiet, introspective lives of the Mino-line masters, so different from the brilliant careers of the Bizen representatives, are deserving of greater attention than they have heretofore received. I will thus expand the scope of the present study to include not only Toju Reiso but also several of the more important figures in the Inzan Mino line’s self-acknowledged gudon no keifu 愚鈍の系譜（“lineage of dullards”）. T o ju ，s Early Life Toju Reiso, the second child of a certain Ito Shinroku 伊月泰亲;T/、，was born on 1 January 1855 (Ansei 1.11.12) in the Owari domain of cen tral Japan (the present-day Nagoya area). In 1867，at the aee of four teen, he was oraamed under Kaigan Shuho 戒巌周奉，priest of ^aiho-ji 西芳寺(popularly known as Koke-dera 苔守，the Moss Temple), a Tenryuji- branch subtemple in Kyoto. Kaigan too was a native of the Owari region, which was probably the link that brought youne lo ju to Saiho- ji s gate. The Owari region has been known since ancient times as a Bukkyd okoku, a “Buddhist kingdom” where faith in Buddhism was particularly strong，and it was at one time an established custom for large families in the area to send at least one son off to a Zen temple to be raised as a priest. This was even more the case with impoverished farm families, for whom giving a son to a temple was not only an expression of devo tion but also an effective means of reducing the number of mouths to be fed. Although nothing is known of Toju5s childhood, there is little reason to assume that his entrance into the priesthood at Saiho-ji was motivated by anything more significant than this. Toju had never shown much intellieence as a young child, and at Saiho-ji things were no different. The sutras he memorized in the morning would be cleanly forgotten by nightfall. Kaigan’s way of teaching was not the traditional one, in which master and disciple, both sitting ramrod straight, would face each other across a desk and recite texts line by line. Instead, every morning he would join Toju in the earden pulling weeds, pronouncing a single line from the sutras for Toju to repeat every time he removed a weed. He did the same when the two of them worked m the hills behind the temple. Kaigan, exasperated as he was by Toju’s dullness, patiently continued with this approach, repeating every word as many times as was necessary. One rainy morning Kaiean, finally angered by T6ju5s inability to learn, grabbed a small desk by his side and threw it at his disciple, splitting the latter，s scalp open and leaving a scar that remained throughout Toju^ life. If anything, though, Toju himself was even 154 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 25/1-2 more frustrated than his teacher by his own lack of ability, and any number of times he decided to flee the temple. His plans were always discovered by Kaigan, however, so he had little choice than to remain. In 1872 Toju, then eighteen years old，entered the monastery at Enpuku-ji 円福守 in Yawata south of Kyoto, where he studied under Ian SoseKi惟庵宗碩 (n.d.). Soon afterwards, however, he was called back to Saiho-ji by Kaiean, who, fearing for the future of Buddhism under the government’s then-current policy of haibutsu kishaku, urged his disciples to leave the priesthood. Kaigan had two disciples in addi tion to Toju, one named Ryoeei 令芸 and the other Shuten 周恬. Shuten was still too young to make such a decision on his own, but Ryogei followed his teacher’s advice and decided to return to lay life. Toju, however, adamantly refused. “Even if they tear down every temple, can they tear down the Bud dha Dharma?” he asked. “Even if it becomes impossible to remain a monk, I ，ll continue my Buddhist training with my hair grown out. 1 hat’s the only road open to a dullard like me.” So saying, he rejected Kaiean’s suggestion and returned to Enpuku-ji, where, it is said, he applied himself to practice with untiring zeal. The environment for training was less than ideal at Enpuku-ji, how ever.

Load more