UG06OBG-T: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{DISPLAYTITLE:Uchiyama Gudō, “Memorandum”}} | {{DISPLAYTITLE:Uchiyama Gudō, “Memorandum”}} | ||
“Memorandum” ( | “Memorandum” (“Oboegaki” 覚書), written by [[Uchiyama Gudo|Uchiyama Gudō]] as resident priest of Rinsenji and addressed to the temple's three parish representatives, 1 February 1906. ([[UG06OB|Original Japanese here]].) | ||
<hr> | <hr> | ||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
== Source Note == | == Source Note == | ||
Uchiyama Gudō 内山愚童, 「覚書」 [ | Uchiyama Gudō 内山愚童, 「覚書」 [Memorandum], 1 February 1906. Reproduced under the editorial heading 「書翰及び『覚書』（他者に書き送ったものを中心として）」 [“Letters and ‘Memoranda’ (principally materials written and sent to others)”] in Kashiwagi Ryūhō 柏木隆法, ''Taigyaku jiken to Uchiyama Gudō'' 大逆事件と内山愚童 [The High Treason Incident and Uchiyama Gudō] (Tokyo: JCA Shuppan, 1979), 225–26. | ||
== How to Cite this Text == | == How to Cite this Text == | ||
| Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
<!-- AUTHORSHIP CHANGE LOG | <!-- AUTHORSHIP CHANGE LOG | ||
First version, 2026. Translation and annotation: Shields, James Mark.--> | First version, 2026. Translation and annotation: Shields, James Mark.--> | ||
Uchiyama Gudō (1906). “Memorandum” ( | Uchiyama Gudō (1906). “Memorandum” (“Oboegaki” 覚書). Translated and annotated by James Mark Shields. ''The Radical Buddhism Project''. Version of {{#time: j F Y | {{REVISIONYEAR}}-{{REVISIONMONTH}}-{{REVISIONDAY}} }}. <nowiki>http://radicalbuddhism.net/wiki/UG06OB-T</nowiki>. | ||
[[category:Uchiyama Gudo]] | [[category:Uchiyama Gudo]] | ||
[[category:Translations from Japanese]] | [[category:Translations from Japanese]] | ||
Latest revision as of 17:43, 7 October 2026
“Memorandum” (“Oboegaki” 覚書), written by Uchiyama Gudō as resident priest of Rinsenji and addressed to the temple's three parish representatives, 1 February 1906. (Original Japanese here.)
Memorandum
1. Those who wish to have funerary rites performed as parishioners and believers of Rinsenji are requested to agree to fulfill their obligations as believers while alive.[1]
Reason
I recognize that, as parishioners and believers of Rinsenji, you have traditionally accepted the obligation of maintaining the temple; yet, from the standpoint of one who holds responsibility for it, I cannot help feeling that this is somewhat insufficient.
Fundamentally, what is most important for a religious believer is to hear what that religion teaches, to believe it, and thereby make it a guiding principle for how one lives. This is a rule common to every religion.
Accordingly, the Administrative Bureau of the Sōtō school has established the following regulations concerning this matter:
- Regulations for Propagation, Chapter Four[2]
- Article 31. Branch temples shall each hold an instructional assembly at least once every month and guide their parishioners and believers. However, when local circumstances make this unavoidable, there shall be no objection to holding twelve or more such assemblies over the course of a year.[3]
- Article 32. When attending at the request of a parishioner or believer for a funeral or other Buddhist service, an appropriate time shall be set aside and preaching must invariably be conducted.
This is entirely proper for a religion, and not only the resident priest of a temple but also those who are parishioners and believers ought to observe it as their duty.
Yet if, as in the past, you regard your sole obligation as contributing to the maintenance expenses of the temple, and consider it sufficient simply to have funerals and other Buddhist services performed, this not only gravely dishonors the Sōtō school but must also be called the height of foolishness for you yourselves. I earnestly hope that, having understood the reasons set out above, you will agree to fulfill your obligations as believers while still alive.
2. That the matter of the Rinsenji support contribution, decided at the general meeting of 1 February 1904, be reinstated.
3. That a cemetery reorganization committee be established to distinguish individually owned grave plots from ownerless grave plots.
Reason
As the number of households increases, it is only natural that the need for grave plots should increase along with them. To wait until some need suddenly arises and then negotiate the matter each time is hardly commendable. I therefore hope that the matter will be put in order promptly so that there will be no cause for concern.
4. That, when a person maintains two households because of the establishment of a branch household or for some other reason, it be determined immediately whether the second household is to constitute a parish household.[4]
Reason
Because there has previously been no regulation concerning this matter, I recognize that a certain amount of confusion has arisen.
I respectfully request that, after discussing the foregoing provisions, you submit them to the general meeting.
1 February 1906
Resident Priest of Rinsenji
Uchiyama Gudō [seal]
Parish Representatives:
Watanabe Kan'emon
Hosokawa Sadakichi
Suzuki Shōzō
Notes
[edit]- ↑ Gudō uses danshinto 檀信徒, combining danto 檀徒 (temple parishioners) and shinto 信徒 (religious believers). His distinction between customary affiliation with a temple and the obligations of a believer is central to the argument that follows. The pointed expression seizen 生前 (“while alive”) contrasts such obligations during life with reliance on the temple for funerary rites after death.
- ↑ Gudō here appeals to the Sōtō school's own Fukyō jōrei 布教条例 (Regulations for Propagation). His argument therefore does not reject institutional Sōtō authority outright; rather, he invokes its regulations to insist that the relationship between temple and parishioner should involve religious teaching and practice as well as financial support and ritual services.
- ↑ The regulation uses kyōen 教筵 for an assembly or occasion devoted to religious instruction, and kedō 化導 for guiding or instructing believers through the Buddhist teaching.
- ↑ Danka 檀家 refers to a household affiliated with and supporting a Buddhist temple under the parish system. Gudō's concern here is therefore not simply whether a second residence exists, but whether a newly established or additional household is to have the corresponding status and obligations of a Rinsenji parish household.
Source Note
[edit]Uchiyama Gudō 内山愚童, 「覚書」 [Memorandum], 1 February 1906. Reproduced under the editorial heading 「書翰及び『覚書』（他者に書き送ったものを中心として）」 [“Letters and ‘Memoranda’ (principally materials written and sent to others)”] in Kashiwagi Ryūhō 柏木隆法, Taigyaku jiken to Uchiyama Gudō 大逆事件と内山愚童 [The High Treason Incident and Uchiyama Gudō] (Tokyo: JCA Shuppan, 1979), 225–26.
How to Cite this Text
[edit]Uchiyama Gudō (1906). “Memorandum” (“Oboegaki” 覚書). Translated and annotated by James Mark Shields. The Radical Buddhism Project. Version of 7 October 2026. http://radicalbuddhism.net/wiki/UG06OB-T.
