 he had composed the work for his aged mother. This
would account for the claims made by Noma Sanchiku (see above).
One common criticism of the Seika thesis is that there is no mention of the Kana
shōri in Seika’s writings. Also noted frequently is that the Kana shōri was never included in
Fujiwara Seika shū. Here again it might have been that Seika insisted, out of respect for
Masanobu, that the text, or any later development of it, not be attributed to him. If the
bakufu, in the form of Hidetada, took the work seriously, it might have been offended by its
circulation under Seika’s name. Thus, the exclusion of the work from Seika’s corpus was
possibly intentional, meant to protect Seika’s followers, especially those in Kyoto.
It cannot be said, however, that Seika’s Neo-Confucian writings include nothing
comparable to the Honsa roku, Shingaku gorin sho, or Kana shōri. Indeed one of the most
conspicuous threads linking these works is their emphasis on “the way of heaven,” a theme
developed by Seika in his Goji no nan.51 There Seika defined “the way of heaven” as
rational principle (kotowari) residing in heaven, before it is endowed in things. The same
principle, according to Seika, is replete within the human mind (jinshin 人心) and is referred
to as human nature (sei 性) prior to the mind’s response to phenomena. Seika claims that if
people follow rational principles, they will accord with the centrality of heaven’s way,
making themselves one with heaven. If they indulge in selfish desires, then their virtuous
nature will be overcome. Seika alludes to the Doctrine of Mean in suggesting that those
who realize centrality and harmony stand by heaven and earth, assisting in the development
of the myriad things. Seika affirms that our minds penetrate those of the myriad things,
enabling humanity to impact decisively the development of all that exists. In offering this
51
Fujiwara Seika, Goji no nan, in Fujiwara Seika Hayashi Razan, pp. 91-95 (107-08). Also,
Fujiwara Seika shū, vol. 1, pp. 131-34. Moreover in Seika’s Wakashū 和歌集, in the essay
“Inkyo no koto” 隠居之事 (Retirement), he briefly discusses “the rise and fall of the way, what is
permissible and impermissible for humanity, and the overflowing, then emptying, of the way of
heaven (tendō).” Fujiwara Seika shū, vol. 1, p. 248. The latter theme, that of the overflowing
and emptying of the way of heaven, is similar to the main theme of the Kana shōri.
71
brief account, Seika explains that his task was to clarify the subtle relationship between
principle and the way of heaven that had been left unexplained by Confucius.52
Seika’s account of the way of heaven, as developed in the Goji no nan, was hardly
identical to that found in the Kana shōri. At the same time, it would clearly be mistaken to
suggest that Seika did not discuss the topic at all. Differences in his views might easily be
explained in terms of the progressive unfolding of his own thinking, or in terms of the
selection of authoritarian philosophical nuances, such as the identification of the way of
heaven and the ruler, by his daimyo patron. Indeed, one flaw of skeptics who deny that
Seika authored the Kana shōri is their assumption that Seika’s thought took monolithic
form, without developmental variation. While distinctive, indisputable parallels would be
more compelling evidence, it is significant that Seika did address the way of heaven and did
so in relation to the human mind, following principle, forsaking selfish desires, and the
essential identity of principle and human nature. Each of these topics is central to the Kana
shōri, making it as a text not unrelated to Seika’s thinking in the Goji no nan.
One of the more conspicuous linkages of the Kana shōri is that of metaphysics, as
developed in relation to the way of heaven, and politics, especially the political role and
responsibilities of the ruler. Similar linkages appear in the Goji no nan where Seika
discussed “disasters and calamities” (sainan 災難), suggesting that while they are the work
of heaven, they are also the work of humanity insofar as the Shujing 書經 (Classic of
history) indicates that “the way of heaven rewards the good, and visits misfortune on the
evil, sending calamities down on rulers in order to make manifest their crimes.” As
evidence, Seika notes that during the times of Yao, Shun, Yu, Tang, Wen, Wu, the Duke of
Zhou, Confucius, Yan Hui, Zisi, and Mencius, there were no major disasters or calamities.
He warns, however, that those who feign humaneness and rightness, preferring the approach
of the overlord, invite disaster upon themselves.53
The Kana shōri does not repeat this line verbatim, but it does, from a different angle,
remind rulers of the fate facing those who go to excess, drawing poetically upon the image
of an ancient vessel which supposedly spilled its contents when filled to the brim. The
message of the Kana shōri, most generally, is that rulers bring destruction upon themselves;
much the same can be said about the Goji no nan, where that theme is also closely linked to
the way of heaven. Again while verbatim repetitions of the Kana shōri in the Goji no nan,
or vice versa, would be more compelling evidence, the latter clearly addresses issues of a
kind otherwise explored in the former, making Seika’s authorship not improbable.
Another prominent theme in the Kana shōri is the dialectical nature of the processes
of reality, especially as they are manifest in reversals that take the form of retribution and/or
correction. This is especially clear in the Kana shōri’s examination of Minamoto no
Yoritomo 源賴朝 (1147-99) in Japanese history and the first Qin emperor in Chinese: both
brought ruin upon themselves due to their misdeeds. Similar themes are explored in the
Goji no nan, where Seika explains the meaning (jigi 字義) of inga 因果, a notion neutrally
52
Seika, “Tendō,” Goji no nan, pp. 92 (107). In the Analects 5.13, Zigong states that he was
never able to receive Confucius’ teachings on human nature and the way of heaven, though he did
receive those on culture and composition. This passage has often been interpreted as suggesting
that Confucius rarely if ever discussed human nature and the way of heaven. Seika views the
matter differently, implying that the topics were subtle and thus not often discussed.
53
Seika, “Sainan,” Goji no nan, pp. 93 (107).
72
translated as “cause and effect,” but often given a distinctly Buddhist nuance as “karma.”
Seika’s understanding, while perhaps grounded in his early training as a Buddhist, is closer
to “cause and effect.” In this context, Seika’s analysis suggests, drawing on the Mencius but
sounding highly Buddhistic, that what a person does comes back to them.54
Along related lines, the fourth section of the Goji no nan explains how those who are
just and honest often encounter poverty and low station, while the crooked and devious
often achieve wealth and exalted position. In the final section of the Goji no nan, Seika
explains how “evil people” (akujin 惡人) attain glory.55 Strikingly, one of the final sections
of the Kana shōri addresses the problem of why “evil people” sometimes attain wealth and
respect, while such is rarely the case with good people (zenjin 善人).56 Although the
analyses differ, the Goji no nan and the Kana shōri cite Jie of the Xia dynasty and Zhou of
the Yin (Shang), referred to in both texts jointly as Ka Ketsu In Shū 夏桀殷紂 (in the Kana
shōri, ō 王 [king] is added to Shū), as exemplars of evil men who prospered.57 Moreover, in
the Goji no nan, Seika suggests that the flourishing of evil men is so excessive that it
prompts their ruin. Wthout employing the formula that the Kana shōri does (“Heaven takes
from the full”), it implies along lines essentially the same as the Kana shōri that excessive
flourishing brings about reversal, even destruction, of the same.
The Goji no nan does not provide incontro