Explore the Royal decree of sanctity about the Kingship theory of this artwork.
The question of regarding Emperor Go-Daigo as an idealistic dictatorial monarch or a deformed emperor was first raised by the field of legal history research. From 1988 to 1992, Ichizawa Tetsu examined court cases in the western part of Japan at the end of the Kamakura period and pointed out that as the imperial court of the Kamakura period worked to reform the litigation system, the number of cases in which urban nobles relied on the ruler as a mediator in court gradually grew  In other words, he pointed out that the centralization of power policy promoted by Emperor Go-Daigo was not based on Go-Daigo's personal character and thought, but rather an extension of the concentration of power of the "ruler of heaven" through the reform of the court's litigation system, and that Go-Daigo was responding to the demands of the times .  Then, in 1998, Yoshira Ito rejected Sato Shin'ichi's theory of "imperial universalism" (the principle that everything is decided by the Emperor's private commands) . The term "imperial decree universalism" is said to have only appeared that way because Go-Daigo issued a large number of imperial decrees as a stopgap temporary measure at a time when no organization was in place immediately after the end of the Genkō War..He also pointed out that, in fact, it was the Miscellaneous Appeals and Decisions Office, etc., which Sato defined as the "setbacks of the new regime," that could be seen as the completion of the Kemmu regime as governance through impersonal institutions..Ichizawa and Ito's theory has been attracting attention since the beginning of the 21st century, and the reevaluation of Godaigo began in the 2000s. It has been pointed out one after another that there is continuity in the legal systems of the Kamakura, Kemmu, and Muromachi periods, and in the 2010s, Godaigo was evaluated as a realistic and excellent policy-maker in the Kemmu government.In addition, from 2006 to 2010, Buddhist art researcher Keiichi Uchida pointed out that Emperor Go-Daigo cannot be called an aberration in terms of Buddhist beliefs.
The "Shoten Ku" prayer, which Amino considered heretical and connected to this work, was actually a prayer for "breath of life" (the power of Buddha to calm illnesses and natural disasters), and had no dubious meaning..In the explanation of Shoten Ku, the phrase "to dispel grudges" is sometimes used, but it is a common phrase in Shingon esoteric Buddhism to pray for good health by dispelling grudges, so it cannot be considered as a curse on the Shogunate.Uchida also showed that the scene in this work is the "Yu-gi Kantou," the highest sacred Kantou (ordination ceremony) of the Shingon sect at the time, using the Seijokoji Record ("Genealogy of the Twelfth Sonkan Shonin"), the Yu-gi Dento Sho, and the Tohoki.
.Although there is no other example of a secular emperor receiving the Yu Gion Puja, he had steadily built up a career as a monk that was sufficient to receive it, and the process was not unique..He also pointed out that he was not a heretic in the emperor's family, but rather inherited the religious policies of his beloved father, as he used the treasures of his father's emperor, Emperor Go-Uda, to carry out this ceremony..In addition, Yoshihiko Amino, who advocates the heteronormative theory, criticized Godaigo for being more into religion than his father.、According to Uchida, the facts are the opposite..Go-Daigo is said to be a more moderate esoteric practitioner than his father, while Go-Uta has been secluding himself in the inner sanctum of Koyasan and taking disciples as a monk..He also rejected the theory of the martial sorcerer Bunkan, who was the beloved son of Go-Daigo, because he was actually a virtuous monk and an excellent scholar and painter.In 2018, "Taiheiki" scholar Hyofuji Hiroki also supported Uchida's results and strongly refuted the view of Go-Daigo as a deformed king and Bunkan as a deformed monk..Of the current "Taihei-ki", especially in Volumes 1, 12 and 13, it is presumed that there are falsifications from the first draft of the "Taihei-ki" with the intention of criticizing the Kemmu regime, and there is a tendency to slander even the personalities of Go-Daigo and Bunkan by bending the facts, and the idea of a different type of kingship is a false image rooted in these falsifications..Hyodo argued that there was nothing strange about the emperor's clothing in this image, pointing out that Go-Daigo's father, Go-Uta, had received the Dharma Sangha before he was ordained and practiced the Dharma as a celestial sovereign.According to Hyodo's argument, what is distinctive about this image is not so much the vestments, but the part of the head with both the normal crown and the crown..As pointed out by Sachiko Takeda, this is seen as an imitation of Prince Shotoku, who was regarded as a supreme being in both the sacred and secular realms at the time (#Taishi faith).According to a biography by his political rival, Emperor Hanazono (June 25, Genheng 4, "Hanazono-tennin-ki"), Go-Uta, the father of Go-Daigo, was a wise and powerful monarch and a patron of Shingon esoteric Buddhism, but he became too devoted to Shingon esoteric Buddhism and neglected politics after he became ordained in his later years. According to Hyodo's speculation, in response to his father, Go-Daigo took Prince Shotoku as his role model. He thought that the ideal image of a champion was Prince Shotoku, who was a patron of Buddhism but stayed in the secular world to maintain a balance between politics and Buddhism.
Kamakura period Taiheiki crown Buddhism Koyasan Yoshihiko Amino Genkō War Emperor Prince Shotoku Emperor Go-Daigo Kantou Bunkan Emperor Go-Uda