| Budget Amount *help |
¥1,100,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,100,000)
Fiscal Year 1987: ¥300,000 (Direct Cost: ¥300,000)
Fiscal Year 1986: ¥800,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000)
|
|---|
| Research Abstract |
It is an important theme that we should clarify the contents of medieval jikidan's commentary of Hokekyo, the situation of its formation and the relation with various fields of literature of those days. Because it helps us to explicate the situation of the literature, religion and culture in the late medieval period. In this field, however, the referential documents have not been investigated well enough. In point of its significance and position in the Japanese literature, we may admit that this field has an only value as the threshold. In this research I have collected and introduced jikidan's commentary on Hokekyo and its surrounding document and at the same time obtained several conclusions.
Jikidan's commentary bases its arguments on dualisitc understanding as jiri and hohi, etc. This characteristic can be found not only in "Tetsujinsho" and "Ichijo shugyokusho". It is interesting that this way of thinking is also found in other medieval literary works and possively recognized as a universal quality of medieval culture. Setsuwa (tales of fantasy) quoted here plays an important role as a detailed example against logic, which gives an answer for the question: what is setsuwa ? It means an affirmation of the similar basis throughout the wide ranged medieval culture to clarify the actual condition of circulation of setsuwa; for this reason the author would like to continue this research.
Secondly the author has clarified the actual condition of dangisho (dansho) where the Hokekyo commentary had formed and examined the contents of the cultural activities and writings and lives of dangi so as Sonshun, Jikkai, Eishin, etc.
Hokekyo Kashu (collection of poems) and gika which is a textbook for rongi (dialogue) are found in some works around the Hokekyo commentary, but the poems of Hokekyo kashu differs from the root of waka. Gika, treating with the same proposition, is more difficult than the Hokekyo commentary.
|
