翻刻
下之儀迷惑仕候就其慶長十八年より至元和元年
正祝息重次権祝職ヲ相拘申候処ニ慶長十九年ニ重説権
祝職口宣頂戴仕候然は権祝二人御座候別動之儀ニ而
御座候上は可申上儀も無御座候然共今度社司職ヲ氏
人等望申処ニ重説ニ被成下候口宣のみ只今之例申
上候其外之例は曽以無御座候此度被仰付候得は
社法混乱仕候儀何共迷惑仕候間社法相立候様
被仰付可被下候事
一 権祝職之口宣頂戴仕候忝儀ニ御座候得共神前之拝
賀をも不仕御札おも改不申神主同社官中ハ社法
をも不遂其上正体之神役ヲモ不相勤社司一家之
称号をも不致相続剰氏人之往来給田ニ相はまり
諸事氏人役相勤之段社司相背申候事
右條々再三如申上候社司家氏人家以其差別家々
之社役相定社例守伝記之旨家業相続仕神事
祭礼は任一社之縁起法式相勤申候処ニ此度社司ニ
氏人ヲ被成下候へは古今之社法相乱数百人之氏人も同
輩ニ罷成候儀何共迷惑仕候間如有来被仰付
現代語訳
（前頁より続く）……下し置かれた儀については迷惑（困惑）仕り候。それにつき、慶長十八年（1613）より元和元年（1615）に至るまで、正祝の息子・重次が権祝職を相拘（担当）申し候ところ、慶長十九年（1614）に重説が権祝職の口宣を頂戴仕り候。然れば権祝が二人御座候ことになり、別途の動きの儀にて御座候上は、申し上ぐべき儀も御座なく候。然しながら、今度社司職を氏人等が望み申し候ところ、重説に対して成し下されました口宣のみを、ただ今の先例として申し上げられますが、その他の先例はかつて御座なく候。この度お仰せ付けになりますれば、社法が混乱仕ることが、何とも迷惑（困惑）仕り候間、社法が相立ち（正しく保たれ）ますよう仰せ付け下されますようお願い申し上げます。
一、権祝職の口宣を頂戴仕ったことは、かたじけなき儀にて御座候えども、（重説は）神前への拝賀をも仕らず、御札をも改めず申さず、神主・同社官中は社法をも遂げず、その上、正体の神役をも相勤めず、社司一家の称号をも致さず相続せず、剰え（おまけに）氏人の往来・給田に相はまり（かかずらい）、諸事氏人の役を相勤めておる段、社司（のあるべき姿）に相背き申し候事。
右の条々、再三申し上げました通り、社司家・氏人家はその差別（区別）によって、家々の社役を定め、社例・守伝記の旨（趣旨）に従って家業を相続仕り、神事・祭礼は一社の縁起・法式に任せ相勤め申し候ところ、この度社司に氏人を成し下されますれば、古今の社法が相乱れ、数百人の氏人も同輩（同格）となり候儀、何とも迷惑（困惑）仕り候間、有来（これまで通り）の如くお仰せ付け……
（以下、次頁へ続く）
英語訳
*(Continued from the previous page)* …we find this matter of the granting [of the *kuzen*] to be most troubling. In connection with this, from the eighteenth year of Keichō (1613) through the first year of Genna (1615), Jūji, the son of the *Shōhafuri* (senior *hafuri* priest), had been serving in the position of *Gon-hafuri* (acting *hafuri*). Then, in the nineteenth year of Keichō (1614), Jūsetsu received a *kuzen* (imperial oral decree) for the position of *Gon-hafuri*. This resulted in there being two *Gon-hafuri* simultaneously, which was a separate and irregular development. As such, there is nothing further we can add on that matter. Nevertheless, regarding the current situation in which the *ujibito* are seeking appointment to the position of *shashi*, only the *kuzen* granted to Jūsetsu is being cited as a contemporary precedent; there is absolutely no other precedent for this. Should appointments be made in this manner on this occasion, it would cause great disorder in shrine law (*shahō*), which we find most distressing. We therefore humbly request that instructions be issued in a manner that upholds proper shrine law.
Item: Although we are humbly grateful for the receipt of the *kuzen* for the position of *Gon-hafuri*, [Jūsetsu] does not perform the ritual obeisance (*haiga*) before the gods, does not renew the sacred *ofuda* (amulets/votive tablets), the chief priest and other shrine officials do not fulfill shrine law, and furthermore, he does not carry out the proper and essential divine duties (*shintai no jineki*), does not succeed to the title of the *shashi* household, and moreover becomes entangled in the comings and goings and stipend fields (*kyūden*) of the *ujibito*, performing various duties of the *ujibito*. This conduct is contrary to the proper role of *shashi*.
Regarding the above articles, as we have repeatedly stated, the households of *shashi* and *ujibito* are distinct from one another, with the shrine duties (*shayaku*) of each household defined accordingly. Each has perpetuated its hereditary occupation in accordance with the import of shrine precedents and traditional records, and has faithfully performed *shinji* (divine rites) and *sairei* (festivals) in accordance with the founding traditions (*engi*) and ritual procedures (*hōshiki*) of the shrine. Should *ujibito* now be appointed as *shashi*, shrine law both ancient and modern will fall into disorder, and the several hundred *ujibito* will all become of equal standing—a situation we find most distressing. We therefore humbly request that instructions be issued as they have been heretofore…
*(Page ends here; text continues on the following page.)*