<論説>鎌倉期における専修念仏教団の形成と展開 (特集 : 祈り)

Abstract

専修念仏教団の教団としての発展要因について、これまでの鎌倉新仏教論でも、顕密体制論においても、専修念仏側の思想的妥協によるものと位置づけており、その僧侶集団としての形成過程については詳しく考察されてこなかった。これに対して本稿は、鎌倉期を通じた専修念仏教団の展開について、各々の僧侶集団がいかなる契機により形成されることとなったのか、この点を軸として考察したものである。それらは大きく以下の三つのパターンに分けられるものと考えられる。第一に、何らかの外護者を得て拠点寺院を建立するパターン、第二に、延暦寺の別所周縁で僧侶集団を形成するパターン、第三に、祖師信仰の寺院として門流や貴賤の信仰を受けながら僧侶集団を形成するパターンである。各々、経済的側面や法系の安定的継承においては、独自の特色を有しており、鎌倉期を通じて形成されたそれぞれの僧侶集団としての特徴が、南北朝期以降の展開を規定していたものと考えられる。

During the early Kamakura period, Senju nenbutsu congregations, whose formation was closely linked to Honen, separated into many different schools and developed throughout the Ration. In regard to the development of these Senju nenbutsu congregations as separate congregations, previous scholarship employing the paradigms of New Kamakura Buddhism of the Exoteric-Esoteric System has generally understood this development as due to the Senju nenbutsu side making theoretical compromises and conforming to the system. In other words, it can be said that there has been an emphasis on theoretical aspects and the process of the formation of the clerical groups at the core of these congregations has not been sufficiently considered. This article then considers the impetus behind formation of these groups of monks and the temples associated with them as the axis of the development of the Senju nenbutsu congregations throughout the Kamakura period. I first considered the school of Shoku, one of Honen's most influential disciples. The clerical group that was formed during Shoku's lifetime split into two. One was a group of monks who used Shoku's activities as a reclusive monk (tonseso) as a foundation for their activities at the Seizan Ojo- in, near the Tendai satellite temple of Yoshiminedera, and at Jokyoji in Settsu province. The other group, which was made up of the monks of Kangishin-in and Kenko-in, had been formed under the protection of Go-Saga'in and Kujo Michiie, and these monks founded these temples and conducted Buddhist services in response to the requests of their protectors. In this fashion, Shoku had formed several clerical groups in the vicinity of Kyoto, but after his death, each of these groups of monks prospered or declined in their own way. For example, the monks at Seizan Ojo-in emphasized Tendai training in the selection of their abbot, and they remained under the influence of the head temple, Enryakuji, and noble sub-temple Shoren-in, maintaining themselves to the last as a clerical group formed on the margins as a Tendai satellite temple. On the other hand, for the groups of monks that had been formed due to the faith of Shoku's patrons and for those groups of Shoku's disciples who formed after obtaining new protectors, the relationships to these protectors were most important. In short, as long as these relationships went well, the clerical group could stably sustain itself, but if the relationship with protectors was ruined, and a new protector could not be found, the clerical group would not be able to sustain itself. In contrast, the disciples of Shinran and those of Ryochu (known as the adherents of the Chinzei principles), who were to show great growth during the Sengoku period, first formed clerical groups or groups of followers in regions removed from the capital, but eventually formed leading temples and clerical groups in Kyoto that differed in character from those of Shoku's school. These were temples founded on the principle of worship of the patriarch. Specifically, in regard to the followers of Shinran, Honganji, whose point of origin was the grave of Shinran, was precisely this type. Although it received a degree of support from aristocratic Shoren-in temple, Honganji was sustained as a temple based on faith in the patriarch Shinran, observing a Buddhist service on the anniversary of the death of Shinran. Also, in the case of the of Ryochu's followers of the principles of Chinzei, it was after their advance into the capital of Kyoto in the latter part of the Kamakura period that they collaborated with Nyoku, whose activities could be traced back in the clerical lineage to Genchi in Kyoto, and then proceeded on to Chion-in, a temple linked directly to the legacy of Honen. Chion-in had been destroyed in the persecution of the Karoku era (Karoku no honan) by the monks of Enryakuji, but, it was soon restored and thereafter administered by the monks of Shoku's school. When Nyoku praised the achievements of the patriarch Honen chiefly at Chion-in, he was also situating his own school as the orthodox successors of Honen and thereby maintained his clerical organization. As the clerical groups at Honganji and Chion-in did not have clear patrons from the first, financial difficulties accompanied the operations of the temple. However, having faith in the patriarch as a support, even if halls were destroyed in fires or warfare, they would be restored each time. As the ages passed, they gradually raised their status. In this way even if Senju nenbutsu congregations are lumped together, the strength of each lineage of followers and each clerical group expanded and contracted in response to the conditions in which they were placed, and it is unreasonable to seek a single theoretical issue as the cause of their development. It will surely be necessary to reexamine the process of the development of Senju nenbutsu congregations by focusing our sight on various social causes and the expansion and contraction in the number of members of these clerical groups.