Possible Precursors to the GENKI
All writers on the Genki agree that considering how quickly the work was put together, some sort of collection of Kasuga miracle stories must already have existed. Kondo (1958) insisted particularly on this point. Tale collections of all sorts were known then, and the example of Sanno reigenki has already been mentioned. Moreover, judging from an entry in Daijoin jisha zojiki (for Kosho 3.3.12 [1457], discussed by Nagashima [l977:50-51], a full-scale precursor to the currently known Genjo Sanzo e existed already in the time of Shin'en (1153-1224). The Kasuga Shrine still has accounts of shrine history older than the Genki, and these contain material that appears in the Genki. Some concrete evidence on the subject is available.
The earliest reference to a collection of Kasuga tales is in kan 7 of Kyokunsho(1233) by Koma no Chikazane (1177-1242) (ZGR: 179-80). Relating the story told in Genki 6. l, Chikazane attributed it to a mlyashiro no genki ("record of miracles of the shrine") compiled by Gedatsu Shonin. Eishun-kikigaki also mentioned this work, saying: "Some items in the Genki . . . are from Gedatsu Shonin's old record (kyuki), while some were gleaned from the records of a wide range of families. " The content of the Genki suggests that Gedatsu Shonin's record did indeed come to form the nucleus of the work. This subject is discussed in chapter 5, under "Gedatsu Shonin, the Genki, and Shaka" .
The diary of the Kasuga Wakamiya priest Nakatomi no Sukekata contains three relevan.t entries. Nagashima (1963:19) set them forth in convenient form. (1) On Bun'ei 6.4.20 (1269), erroneously cited by Nagashima as Bun'ei 4.4.20), Sukekata noted that Shinsho (1247-86) of lchijoin had summoned him and asked about the history of the shrine. Shinsho was on retreat at Kasuga at the time. When Sukekata answered as best he could, Shinsho pressed him with detailed questions. Then he ordered Sukekata to submit a written document or documents to him. (2) On Bun'ei 12. 1.4 (1275), Sukekata paid a new year visit to Shinsho, then superintendent, at lchijoin. Shinsho said: "A record of the Daimyojin's miracles (daimyojin no genki)must exist. You will have to send it to me." Sukekata said he would do so. (3) On 8. 17 of the same year (now designated Kenji l), Sukekata wrote that he had sent "the old record[s] of this shrine" to Shinsho, as requested.
Noting the persistence of Shinsho's interest, Nagashima attributed it partly to his family background. Shinsho's grandfather, Konoe lezane, had been deeply devoted to Myoe Shonin and to the Kasuga shrine that Myoe built at his temple, Kozanji. Shinsho's father, Kanetsune, had also been assiduous toward the Kozanji Kasuga shrine. Moreover, court interest in both Kasuga shrines had been heightened at about the time of Sukekata's diary entries by the Mongol threat.
Nagashima (1963:20) concluded that Shinsho stimulated the compiling of some sort of genki collection, probably put together by Sukekata in consultation with certain monks of Kofukuji. One might add that Sukekata and colleagues would surely have consulted the collection made by Gedatsu Shonin. This resulting work would then have been available to Kakuen, who would have had to add the material of Genki 19.1 and 20. l. If this is correct, then the material of 17.1-18.4 must have been specially edited for the Genki, instead of having been included in the older collection. Since a long, detailed account of these extraordinary events already existed (see the discussion following 18.4), there would have been no need to incorporate it into anything less than a full-scale, finished work.
Of course all of the above is speculation. No one can be sure about any sort of "proto-genki," unless he accepts that Kasuga go-ruk, or the version of it described by Takahashi Teiichi (1982), is that document.
Kasuga go-ruki (the manuscript of which is still owned by Kofukuji is very close indeed to the text of the Genki except that it lacks the material corresponding to scrolls 17 and 18. After positing the existence of one or more still earlier compilations, Kondo ( 1953, 1958) suggested that Kasuga go-ruki must be the work on which the Genki is most immediately based.
Takahashi, for his part, assigned just the same role to a manuscript he himself discovered, and which he dated no later than late Muromachi. It bears the interesting title Zennyu butsudoshu ("Collection on Gradual Entry into the Buddha's Way"). Takahashi's discussion of the manuscript and its significance is weakened by his silence regarding Kasuga go-ruki, which he seems not to have known about. At any rate, all his information about Zennyu butsudoshu, including a list of discrepancies becween it and the Genki text, suggests that it is none other than a copy of Kasuga go-ruki under another title. Unfortunately Takahashi's published text of the manuscript (in Bukkyo bungaku kenkyu, vol. 2, March 1964) is almost impossible to find; Miya, too (1983:21), noted that he had never seen it. For the time being, one can only assume that it is Kasuga go-ruki and say no more about it.
A detailed comparison of Kasuga go-ruki and the Genki text reveals many small discrepancies, the signifiance of which is obscured by the fact that Kasuga go-ruki has been published only in a transcription that may not be entirely reliable. The single most obvious difference (apart from the matter of scrolls 17 and 18) is that Kasuga go-ruki in the passage corresponding to Genki 3.3, speaks of Sukefusa and Gyoson; whereas the Genki has been visibly emended to name Sanetsune and Zoyo. For Kondo (1958:83-84), this proves that Kasuga go-ruki is indeed a previous state of the Genki text.
Even if true, however, the idea does not seem very interesting. In its present form, which includes the material corresponding to Genki 20. I , Kasuga go-ruki cannot be earlier than the end of 1304. Need it have been written before a full-scale Genki projected was conceived ? Moreover, if Kakuen, the main Genki compiler, had nothing more to do than pick up a copy of the text we now know as Kasuga go-ruki, he would hardly have deserved to be mentioned in the preface; and in any case Eishun-o-kikigaki, though relatively late, suggests otherwise. Kondo (1958:82) even proposed that Kasuga go-ruki was the kotobagaki of a fully illustrated genki that was differient from the one discussed in this book. He suggested, in other words (partly on the analogy of Sanno reigenki and its successors), that two complete Kasuga genki were made between 1304 and 1309. This seems wholly implausible. It is much more likely that if Kasuga go-ruki really is earlier than the Genki, it is simply an advanced draft of the Genki text itself-after all, there must have been one. However, Nagashima (1963:20), for his part, considered Kasuga go-ruki to be later than the Genki, The issue is difficult to decide.
In the meantime, Kondo (1957) proposed another piece of evidence regarding precursor collections. This was a single sheet he found in the Kanazawa Bunko, entitled Kasuga Gongen genki sho. The sheet contains rather disjointed notes corresponding mainly to Genki l.5 and 4.5. Kondo surmised that it is in the writing of Ken'a (1263-1338), the second abbot of Shomyoji in Kanazawa, or at least of a contemporary of Ken'a. He concluded (1957: 12, 1958:86) that these notes were taken from the document or documents that formed the basis for Kasuga go-ruki.
However, Kasuga Gongen genki sho seems at least as likely to be notes scribbled down, not always accurately, from hearing a reading of the Genki text. Moreover, if this is the kind of material the Genki or the Kasuga go-ruki compilers had to work with, one can only say that they were talented writers. It is perhaps well to remember that in proposing his ideas, Kondo never touched on--and seems to have ignored--the Kyokunsho mention of a miyashiro no genki and the material from Sukekata's diary. These omissions do not strengthen his case.