Philosopher's Ashes Return to Tokyo : Inoue
Enryo as Seen in Historical Roman Alphabet
Sources
著者名(英)
Rainer Schulzer
journal or
publication title
Annual report of the Inoue Enryo Center
number
20
page range
236-186
year
2011-09-20
“Philosopher’s Ashes Return to Tokyo”
Inoue Enryo as Seen in Historical Roman Alphabet Sources
Rainer Schulzer
The present collection of texts is a survey ofsource materials about INouE Enry6井 上円了during his lifetime from 1858 to 1919， The bibliographics ofiJe｛ENcKsTERN and NAcHoD contain a comprehensive account of the scholarly liter．ature on Japan in westcm ianguages during this period．1］［hankS to these detailed bibliographies it has been possible to cover the most important sources published both wi〔hin and without Japan． Unf（〕rtunately， Russian and other．non−Roman alphabet sources are not included．「丘xts in English， French and German have been cited、2 1n order to present a more nuanced and multifaceted picture oflNouE Enry6、 foreign language newspapers printed in Japan have also been searched and even short references and notices were included．3 Given the breadth of INouE Enry6’s activities and the range ofsource materials a compiete collection of such references is altogether impossiblc． Further， since the beginning of the 20th century the news agencies of the fast−growing Japanese press were integrated in thc international network of newsgathering agencies．4］his explains why there was a death notice of INouE Enry6 in the∧「ew｝∂泌Times in 1919［45］． But it a霊so means that the scope of materials， which were the object of this research， becomes even more complex around the turn ofthe century． rlhe result of this survey is a collection oftexts taken from 4 monographs and l2 different perio（licals． A more comp正ete collection of source materials might be possible in the fUture when digitalisation oftexts pregresses． But considcring the fact that in the presemed materials 15different variants of INouE Enry6’s name can be ”Phil°s°phe「．’Aslコes Re・urn t・・Toky〔・” R（236）fc）und（differenccs in transliteration，（hacritics， abbreviation and word order）， completeness will bc hard to achieve cvcn by means of digital research． When relevant additions to the collection become necessar｝｛、 an updated vcrsion will be made available online． Several articles， which consist completely or in large parts of texts by INouE Enry6 himselC were also found． lhey． will be published separately aE alater date． Texts［22］and［30］seemingly are translations too， but in fact are summarles． ”lhe prcsent collection is a patchwork of sources given in chronological order． ’lhe sources mention INouE Enry6 as founder ofthe L‘Academy ofPhilosophy”哲学 館（Tetsugakfean）［2］ ［17］， mostly as a progressive， but also as a conservative［35］ ［43］Buddhist scholar， as a Budd｝1ist activis［［16］［27］［33］［36］，as an opPonent of Ch「istianity［9］［10］，as a nati・nalist［36］，as Japan’s丘rst・“Doct・r・f Letters”文学 †専士（bungaβu hafeu∫hi）［21］，as a psychologist［45］and as a‘‘folklorist”［34］．The New．｝’o rk Times article also gives a rendition of the name， which is the name that INouE Enryb is best remembered by the Japanese people−Obake Hakaseお化け博 士一translated as“Ghost Doctor”［45］．INouE Enry6 was given this nickname by his contemporaries as the famous researcher of f（）lklorist stories about monsters and ghosts［14］［39］． INouE Enry6 was a many−sided individual， which is well reflected in the presented fragments． Ultimateiy， he developed al1 these aspects ofhis personality as afree thinking phiiosopher． By this survey［he diverse and geographicaily scattered traces〔he philosopher INouE Enry61eft during his iifetime arc brought back into the horizon of contemporary research． In this sense， the headline of the last text− “Philosopher’s Ashes Return to丁ヒ）kyo”［46］−has been chosen as the title of this collectlon．
Notes
1．）Fr． von WENcKsTERN：β励催仰勧〈ヅ吻卸πηびβE仰〃τ． VbL 1：Being a ασ・ψ∂砲・ゾ”8・・fl・，臨⑳鋤λ鋤・沈輪・卿・・μ邪・・鋼鳩吻’・D・i ∧lihon IGreat ／4pan．ノ・1859−1893， Leidcn：E． J． Br丘ll I 895。 vbL 2： Being aα・∬炉∂伽げα”㌦輪仇〃肋・卿・加解卿w’畑’・Dui・Nih・n・IGreat
fapzan 1． ／894−1906， Tokyo：Maruzen 1907、 Oskar NAcHoD：Bibliographie von ／apan．1906−1926， Stuttgart：Anton Hiersemann（reprint l 970）． 2．）For the reader， who is not faniliar with German， it shall be relnarked， that亡ext ［13］is a translation of［9］and［42］a summary of［34］． 3．）Most newspaper references were found in 7カe ／apan SVeek！y、Mail“Monthly summary of the Religious Press”（December 1891 to June 1894， July 1896 to Decembcr 1899）・other main English language newspapers printed in Japan have been searched f6r events in INouE Enry6’s l旋that were likely to draw public attenti・n． The articles on the “lncident・f thc Phil・sophy−Academy”哲 学館事件（Tetsugakkan7’ileen）of l gO2／3 have n・t been included． First， bccausc not all of them relate to INouE Enrア6 direcdy and second， because the importance of the incident demands a special treatment． A comprehensive bibii・graphy can be found in：MiuRA Setsu・三浦節夫1“。π幼惚后加”iβ8η。 bunken nempao−”「《哲学館事件》文献年表」（llTlhe・lncident・of・the・Phil・s・phy− Academy＞）． A Chronological Bibliography），Inoue Enryo− Sentd Neop）∂2008，vol． 17：p．93−154．4．）D．Eleanor WEsTNEY：／励励o〃and fnnovation．乃βTransfer of Western
Organizationa／ Pdtterns to Mei ’i／apan， Harward University Press l 98アSee“The Newspaper” P．195． ”Phito・ophe・’・ Ast・es Re・U・n t・ Toky・’． T（234）∼ ’ 1 ． f 1 L
雪oK亨｛礼 ㎜艮恥Y」 JUNE ］8， 1⑨【9 大正八年六A†入日 一R一勤口行 j］薗鈍fi
還蹴
ﾄ艦1酬μ晒OP蹴s罐鰐M叫
＿・ ，．− Z pl｛m由｛I Cd6｛｝ratiomg▲n．toari， dall M−8rked Victorlan C島皿・ ttt！xty−1B，醐Vo㎏廓．伍｛山 k ヒ 』dg・、 M・ur Zt・−T］：・pri。・，￥P・i ，r卓m叫三11⇔nmEvt・ion wit’k the 滅e］vaコ“uΦ《‘・Ecapil・c i）ay，’． W為i⑳ jS ン亘r wa巳 こhe ce勾t脚ry ot Lve．臼X’LqL心！i ’sぴ1th，Ψ球硲ぱmes eri’al‘致“町c住 「‘t WeヌtTU’tbSte「 bb町f◇」・命εefft｛rers arld maen・d ＞包 oΨきvseas nl va｝ 盟d 皿輌〕i㎏1．± ．1：es who feil 泌 ぴ6 VfaT， o頑 嚇『馨i▽団宴ごQXしhe vieteriou5じCtnr U点Ωロ、of 「上念 Viar“・ 三〔is遭ぴユeztv， iロ止■vntfo窮皿◇fぷ ．e］d bgesrsEal， Q．u母号n ltfれryゴQu臼㊥ 1瀦瀧㌧丘タ㌫錨：し監d鷺慧ぼ Ok’a4ti・s WCIe inロ腱Ct．ovgdE6☆o椋i dgattbe、 w展ch o｝y）b）．eludecT体．‘繋磁』蠕欝講熱
．l c匂止▲き， G摩aeral B）Txg endi othξ1’l sし三㎎毎血閲 ngval繊 military er）， F函命Ytem｛eT，廠θ貝t．互on．酎［±、遠匡灘還鳶欝蕊
zaLli≧・@］．esnnt且tli’ut．n」ld memhes’凪 BRI饗A，IH T⑪e6 TOKYe l OESEk’1遥． 畑1］i鳥t・びny．anti口9㎝匂・ MIP〔；t⇔巳㎡5｝B劾d WRS桓哀しLenrl− ∼ 芸ARびB図CP3 Sl・11ζi琶戯 ｛｝｛iALLO翻S O薮蕊竺黙三闇鯛羅踊認・竃
，nderぐd“r the Pommio狛s P・na．しL、．’L At 、L微Ll， tpふ1 M。惚・tM・・ab刻 ，iti llト抵τ an， wL he、 tho−santls ot 5も勾斑c・Ll 工 4h■ SPrimgtjme r．．・1 脳ヰ倉o誼惑宕ξC▲・lilウP｝＃1UE臥三“ oundiirt sEe，ヨヨoi． c抽頴a，イ｝1’ぶ盾 ㌫．、巴㌫：蒜；識：1鵠u忠ζ： ．〉元t．liv臼thp．七・｛be x， ’erLd m）宮hξヨ：ご 碗：tent・“町r）d lt t1 U］Et“ipr．aE乞癬亘Lt rt 恒1・h蘂采de己wroaぜ・ ThG．，＞Trhb’／3｝ρ，）’：’t］i．1・∫五武】r c己｛己・ 「．， ．1 ： ■ ．一．L‘rr．占L ユY F 瓢．駕忠∼㌻h忽鶉㌻㌫当 A炉e悶ent．AS Ouai ［ i l ier 野…口苔oc破1 A ［ 1 】一一 r｛ウku圏［ B｛Tect tt，iりckh◇1：：ら Jl．1づ己で 「r’． A f）．i）］M 撫vぴ圭 ミf．さt守s 三iΣカ1 口 iAggordiifi9加An銀ぴ冶￡2 ﹂ ∫c∋tholt，匙x］ llごiL、 ’e2eel uぷ a ふ、ξ山c品］ F、磁 ぶt証く．」），Tec］ ］thnd．Revsし竃簗麟璽籔纂罵鐸駕蕊繊ぷ｝
禽㎡）夕白治i穴 ◎｝il rFi・1｝羅区〔− 06瑚］腿2CO幻荘離1鴨目 P葦 tl−1ralStfift iI（oku■鉦▲ 1｝lre：「 三．￡．TL［染［t。ξuれ巴 o．一「r．h巳 eii w敬te｜t 》．as 1・吐t／tntiy 就、ur｝r、泌 ：｛自i・↓ISしatしl ir〈 「｝trb）tS｜L‘i1，fr 1呉 C．．．，：：nり、、「ing e｛ tllny sur∫身りぐ：：Lt ：hO i・aここ弓びf豹r・雪＞L lbn6 Llailv f「50rl、 臥 t｝L・［，tlt 窃e l‘．o了5 fC☆． D｜．lilinr， CD丑Li：L’“Lt．H・輌1
‖o璽翼＄掘且1瓢R菖 摺B瓢1懸圃mO薮翼 ．悟c±n眉e A日洞娯晶｝ D投ミ用ξi．■§溶 ufi 呂ロ狽藝巷Po「｛∼翻em鑓⑰n− BOfi阻s F之」aε翻；ICt‘8 工白］■lsal．紗irecl L切涌cn，」《1∼、C ］O・．・U后ute：］F・・lrl：fi 己eきnL．edi1：r ：熟：七 宅h尭 亡認南Lion三 t5尽 rLel♪ ；dar 11．ヅi；1 ．nc：㍊魯∪ zag−“．1SVIv．L．c− BntL；h 」ぶarS11．μ＞5 」｝ff 封a腿暮Oc，、 ／Eユ ‘」 a郎・ど琴Tr｝er，㌧ h ulldεψ ⊃・wbieh ．：⊂CYフPン’ 杜恨 茸uM＞ξ｜川旬 i∠・i tc ｝ l T」ELE（mA主江 ［，TFtlFU−；1 し ｜ A ヒ■｝鵠但肌fゴ17ヒtN・e・’・． 1」…O“Aa且Lug’昧恒Lhc 9θP．F 9、．靱1、 恒匝k尽 is rapt，Sl1♪「川︸ in ｝7、tttnsitぎ， a二“ 灼hm’O tt l◇f畑巧⇒伽r． GtiLl馳・＾ 1鵬el↑）mユs桓＿New；Yりrl‘占⊥． ：1］sc．vet．Y三巳’W Le］ξLtl’勘wnsウバ ，ot〈匁￡ ∼ヒri±ll：．， ．BDぴ・1王ミouahFl．AC．1・／−S三N CIT迅呂 o！iぴrCle’ve！AILti o邊mλ促t｝ご◇w 1由1己、∼・iMS．！☆f b■ntis ’眺噛：’eri［・mp，；ifi1『1・｛c・V Th摯 トρlties」a of bcrEfle ciと噛力 ，11’［，vvn tCht心f inミvectCT・vξ Immj象」 ロノi11 ．rぐ一一tlxi，ft a t：r」1． ・： ts． Thil IE 旦1 コhc ；｝o｝ic■ ぶ．稔 ll◇w l・ぷ・tこ糎い・．P・…し眈i・’州官u部・‘・・ti爬・・魂醍⑳〔 lhls；o㍗｝’nf．．竺竺亘［oo・Pt・「・・ ；二11r二Go朔1』☆エ㎝t心伍ci勾辻・ LoDdoロコ」吐tlc 3．−Thc’c IM PIこしzaoudi＝ar1 3e］1eぶ chΣ妄Li礼 bom㌔ ￠lp｜oaioV・9 VILtt．奪a s匂治、 rqostL．v ☆こ dert己吟t．口王puhiicウ郎cとび）ヌ， e こ）と◇ミ乞“・ho h自1注b∈絃曝acロス「．． eaerc．》・alLens ’1’hese吉江vる tu￡si、・e ds：nage、！）ut：he lo・ 1ltls h｜t？．GT：こo さり企n ⊂o江fir．θi ‘）ピ ：L． 已ritnl｝’La己and a es一 ノ1．1、ぞ ウ111ぐ］fils 且tac．ked i恥 巴。梁パ提垣㌔…mぷ・）’・ 〈iun：TJPtite．di 3し“．tes D）三t力． τ11◇mpεoロ↓ぬFittstrJl・9iヒ〉 ，Ohiθi JLiriff巡 x◇どkl COnξ治s翠n N竜iS「t・：：1、・＼tk・， il’〔as諺，）1．“The Japanese Philosophi（泊 Societダ’， 7ろe ／aρan Weekly ノ％4仏 8・ December l 888． L kis hεur（ily to bc expeαed that even the educated portion of the Japancse nation will fbr some gcneration take keen interest in the more abstruse and philosophic spcculations ofthe West． Neither their past history nor their prevailing tastes show anアtendency to idealism． They arc lovers of the practical and the rea1：ncither the fancies ofGoETHE nor the reveries ofHEGEL are to their liking． Our poetry and our philosophy and the m丘nd that appreciates thcm are alike the resuk of a network of subtle influences to which the Japanese are comparative strangers・ It is ma丘ntained by somc， and we think justly， that the lack of idealism in the Japanese mind renders the life of even the most cultivated a mechanical， humdrum 舐ir when compared with that ofWesterns． The Japanese cannot understand why our controversialists should way so fervent ovcr psychologica1， ethical， religious， and philosophical questions， failing to perceive that this fervency is the rcsult of the intense interest taken in such subjects、 Ihe charms that the cultured Western Mind 丘nds i加he w・rld・ffancy and r・mance， in questi・ns・themselves・i・respective・ftheir practical bearings， is fbr〔he most part unintelligible to the Japanese． vciith a view of doing something towards remedying this defect， the Japancse Philosophical Society（八「ihon Tetsugaflkwaのwas f6unded about fbur years ago． The Society seems to have met with as fair an amount ofsuccess as Societies of the kind usually do in this country． No published record of its early transactions exists． For sevcral years it contented itselfwith holding monthly meetings at which papers were rea（l or addresses given， fbllowed by a certain arnount of discussion． The first of its mon由ly／burnal ofTransactions was published in February，1887． It contains a hst of mcmbers， a general statement of thc objects of the society， the rules， and several interesting papers． The members at that time numbered seventy， ML KATo HIRoYuKI was， and stin is， the Presidellt of the society， and ML TbYAMA its Vice−PresldenL ？hil°soPher1・A・heli Rピ田rn・・T・ky・” V（232）
conspicuous in the list ofmembers given in the first voiume of Transaction∬tan（i the names・fsuch well一㎞・wn and experienced men as・−H，nLRA TANzAN， KANo JIGoRo，
kTABATAKE D6RYU、 MoRI ARINoRI， NAKAMuRA MAs刊Ao， NIsHIMuRA SHIGEKI、
sHIMADA JuREI， SHIMAJI MoKuRAI and TbR〔o KoyAエA． These have all spenτmany years in the study of philosophy． Among theアounger members， ARIGA NAGAo， CHITo SEIsHIN， INouE TETsuJIRo， INouE ENRY6、 HITAKA SHINJITsu， and KozAKI KoDO enjoy a high reputation fbr schotarship．［＿］（p．541−542） 2・“Monthly Sum皿ary of the Religious Press”，7he／4P4ηWeekly Mail，5・ December l 891． Principal Inouye Enryo， of the School of Philosophy in Hongo， writes in Hoko （Nichiren Buddhist）on“Revolution in Buddhism．”Japanese historians have paid but little attention to relig丘ous history， but as a matter of fact many of the great political and social changes have been more or less united with movements of religious rhought． It is not unnatural， therefore， to expect that， at such a time of social upheaval as the last 30 years have seen， there shouid bc also a decided disturbance of religious ideas． This is why thoughtfU▲men belief in the need of a reconstruction such as the New Buddhism is endeavouring to effect．（p．676） In DaWρo are found some“Hints to Thoughtiess Religious R．evolutionists，”which are apparently intended f｛）r Dn Inouye Enryo and his fellow−thinkers」t is admitted that Buddhism is just now at an ebb of infiuence；but the desirability of immediate recons［ruction is denied． Time mus show whether the conditions of religious hfと reaHy demand it． Washington and Socrates succeeded because they came when the time was ripe． Les us not rash in overturning the traditions of the past．（p．676）3．“Monthly Summary of the Religious Press”， Meノ吻4ηWeekly・4cfail，6・ February l 892． The bitterness of Buddhism in the conflict with Christianiry is a quality in the current discussion of whicll we have made mention。 But this is the eutcome of persond feelings naturally engendered under the circumstances． It is not inhcrent in Buddhism itself A quality of a reverse nature， and onc ofwhich frequent evidence appears in che literature ofthe month， is a catholicity， an adaptiveness， a rationalistic readiness to find good wherevcr i〔exists、 which is equally prominenr and seems permanently inherent in the doctrine of that cult． We see one aspect of it in the 后equency with which Buddhist writers of intelligence quotc Jesus， Socrates， and other names as authoricies f｛）r this or that sentiment or as examples ofa given virtue・ Buddliism seems to have no〔hing against Christ the T’eacher． Another aspect of it is the constant absorption ofdoαrines having a fbre輌gn source． Not to go out ofJapan or back in its history， assimilation ofthe Shinto Kzami witnesses this facility． That DL Inouye Enryo should think it possible to regenerate Buddhism f｝om within， and to dcvelop a modern philosophical religion which shall be as good as， if not superior to， Western philosophies， could hardly happen if the Velestern philosophy were not at hand， not consciously to imltate， but at least to profit by． ln the social and practicaI aspects still other instances occuE Thc prize scheme of propagandism， not▲ced last month， was palpably framed on Western teachings． As we also saw， the丘nger of approval was poinred at the work of thc Christians in the relief of the carthquake sufferers， and advice was given to the bclievers to do likewise．［＿］（p．182） 4．“］［he New Buddhism”，7カeJapan V％ψケルZ4払2． April 1892． In J叩an， where smoothness ofsocial life takes its place as one ofthe supreme virtues， it needs more than〔he ordinary couragc to dcclare oneselfdissatis丘ed wkh existing ideals and to assume the part of a disturbcr of peace by aggressively opposing i・ 垂?堰n。，。phぐ，・、 A・he・Return tt・T・ky・’1 X（230）
cstablished institutions． It is｛br this reason that Dr． INouYE ENRyo and My． NAKANIsHI GoRo seem to have won their places as the leaders of〔he New Buddhism movement． Thousands th．ink with them and are ready to最）Ilow， and there are pcrhaps others whose doαrinal views and intellectual atti〔ude would harmonize as wcll or bαter with the needs of出e tlme． But they have not have the courage to come out and raise the standard of re丘）rm；and in such times the courageous man easily comes to take the post of danger and responsibility．［＿］（p．450） 5・“Monthly Sum皿ary of the Religious Press”，7）6eノゆ幼IVeekly・Mail， 2・ Apri11892． In the Z）en・to（Shingon Buddhist），Dr． lnouye Enryo， writing on the“Future Religion ofJapan，”begins by refヒrring to the reacrion against fOreign civilization and pleads for a mid（Uc course． We do not become cows by eating beefi nor is there anアreason why we shoUld not assimilate whatever good we can obtain from abroad． Dr． lnouアe hastily review the Meiji era， and maps out the past and血ture as fbUows：、M醐‘1−10， the destruαion of religion；pol▲tics and materialism dominant；M吻∠11−20， Chridanity in favour；Buddhism neglccted；Mワ‘21−30， Reaction in favour of Buddhism；a negative era；Mワβ1−40， Positive era ofBuddhism， the New displacing the Old；M吻∠4L50， Final acceptance of Rcfbrmed Buddhism as thc religion of Japan．（P．447） 6．“Monthly Summary of the Religious Press”，乃εノllpan Weekly Mail， 30・ April I 892． In the Dento（Shingon sect）， Principal Inouye Enryo writes per丘皿αori］y under the title，“Hope fbr the Shingon Sect．”He eulogies the Saint Kobo， its founder， and rather awkwardly asks in conclusion why the scct does not produce another Kobo． （P583）
7．“Monthly Summary of the Religious Press”，7）be ／apan IVeekly Mail， 4． June 1892． Modcration and strictly constructive argument seem to be the order of the day in current religious literature． Doubtless the elements of antagonism are only latent； but we certainly丘nd littie indication of the fermenr stirred up by leaders like lnoue Enryo and Kanamori、［．．．］（p． 741） 8・“Monthly Summary of the Religious Press”，7万’ノbpan IVeekly Mail， 3． December 1892． The 5痴々γo（Uni〔erian）offers two well一㎞own names on its Iist， those of Principal Inouye Enryo and of Mr． Ko Yeizo． The fb皿er takes as a subject，“ls thcre a Matcrialist Religion∼”All true religions teach the irnmortality of the soul． But we 丘nd a competing set ofdoc〔rines known as Materialism． It denies， however， tha杜he soul is immortal． To this we cannot accord in the name of rcligion． No one doubts that in a certain sense Materialism has rendered great services to religion， namelいy stimulating true religion to greater efforts， by leading an attack which could be repelled only by great exertions． Bumone the less is it〔rue that Materialism is to−day the enemy；and the only grcat enemy of rcligion． Christianity and Buddhism have alike to meet and defeat this power丘11 f｛）e． 9．LudWig BussE：‘‘Streifleifge durch die japanische ethische Litteratur der Gegenwart”（1892）， Mitteilungen der Deutschen（；eseZaschaf｝ノ碗r∧「atur− undレ’ilkerkunde Osttzsiens，丁bkyo l 889−1892， voL 5， no．50：P439− 500． ［＿］Den“Neuen Budehi∫〃lus”vertreten vornehmlich INouYE ENRY6（Graduierter der Universitat und Director der von im gegrUndeten 7諭噸α』−kwai［sic］ ［philosophische Akademie］）， NAKANIsHI GyOR6（Redactuer der“Keiseihakugi”） ”Phi］e・ophe・’・A・he・Retu・n・o T・ky。”@11（228）
MATsuYAMA MATSuTAR6（MitgL d． Dend6kwai）u． a． Fifr Ref（）rmbuddhisten gelten auch MuRAKAMI SENsHO（Shinsecte， Lehrer an der Kaiserl． Uni∋Y（）sHITANI KAKuJu（Sh▲nscαc， Vorganger Murakamゴs）FuJIMA RYOoN u． a． Die Laien und Reformbuddhisten geh6ren fast alte derTetsugakukwai（philosophische Gesellschaft） an．［＿］ INouYE ENRY6 ist vielle丘cht der typischste Vertreter der Rdbrmbewegung im Buddhismus． Er ist einer der eil｝igsten Verfechter der Sachc des Buddhismus， den er sowohl wegen seines wertvollen Gehalts， durch den er nach seiner Meinung das Christentum weitロbertri舐， als auch aus politischen Grunden fiir Japan erhalten wissen will． Um das zu erm6glichen， muss aber der tiberlieferte Buddhismus refOrmiert und zu einem den Anforderungen der Wissenschaft der Gegenwart e斑sprechenden Systcm umgebiidet werden． Das ist m6glich， weil der Buddhismus kraft seines philosoph▲schen Gehalts besser als irgend eine andere rel▲gi6se Ve（eitanschauung mit den Ergebnissen der modernen Wissenschaft und Philosophie Ubereinstimm仁Vbn dem philosophisch regenerierten Buddhismus glaubt INouYE， dass er die zUkUn丘ige Weltanschauung der Japaner und die Religion des Landes， wcnn nicht der VVelt， werden und namentlich der Ausbre丘ung dcs ihm verhassten Christentums steuern werde． Diesen Buddhismus auszub輌lden und zu verbreiten， betrachtet er als die Aufgabe seines Lebens， ftir die er unermifdlich thlltig ist und mic Wort und Schri丘eintritt． Eigens zu diesem Zweck hat er eine buddhistisch− philosophische Akademie（Tetsugaku−flwan）gcschaffen， deren Director er ist． Seine Philosophie hat er in einer Re▲he von Schriften niedergelegt， von denen das grosse （bis jetzt）zweibllndige Werk ttber den Buddhismus，〈（仇殉δ一kwatsuron・｝
（Abhandhng Uber die Wiederbelebung des Buddhismus）1887−1891， das
bedeutendste ist． Ausser ihm seien hier noch das・（Tetsugafeu｝宕ヅ）〉（Kern der Philosophie）in 2 Bden，1887， eine allgemeine Theorie dcr Ethik（《、ノ∼inri 7弦アoπ））） 1887，und einc Darstellung der Philosophic der Shinsccte（〈・Shin∫hfi Tetsugaku）））erwlihnし Ein specula［iver Kopf und durch seine Universi［互tss［udien−er ist Graduierter der Kaiserlichcn Universitat＿mit der europtiischen Philosophic bekallnt geworden， benu［zt er Ideen der letzteren， um mit ihrer H削fとden Buddhismus zu einem idealistischen Pan［heismus umzugestalten． Zugleich aber bemUht er sicll auch， scinen Buddhismus den Nichtgelehrten schmackhaft zu machen． Wie bei seinen Bestrebungen natUrlich， geh6rt IN ouyE ENRy6 keincr bestimm〔ell buddhistischen Secte an． Sein Buddhismus ist eklekti∫ch， Er enthalt neben Elemcnten， dle an die Lehren der Kegon−ud Tendaisecte an］dingen oder an die zensecte erinnem， auch solchc， die Lehren der J6do−und shinsecte entsprechen． Dazu auch der brahmanischen und schlie信lich auch der europ5ischen Philosophie verwandte Idecn． Das Fundamentalprincip der buddhistischen Slttenlehre ist nach ihm das Streben nach Vereinigung mit dem Absoluten． Dieses Absolute（Shinnyo， das absolut Wahre）ist ihm ein abso［utes， cinheitliches P血cip， das aUem Wechsel und Werden der Erscheinungcn als gemeinschaftliches Substrat zu Grunde Iiegt． Wir treten vielleicht INou・y’E nicht zu nalte， wenn wir es als Weltseele bcrzeichnen， obwohl er diesen Ausdruck nicht braucht Im Gegensatz zu dem bestlindigen Scin dieses Grundes ist das Sein der in ewigem Wechsel en〔stehenden， werdenden und
vorgehenden Dinge ein unreales， sozusagen zwischen Sein und Nichtsein
oscillierendes． Diese Metaphysik， die an die Lehre dcr Elcaten， an neuplatonische Speculationen， an Spinoza und andere pantheistische Systeme erinnert， ist nicht die des ursprUnglichen Buddhismus． Letzterer hat Uberhaupt keine eigentliche Metaphysik． Die Frage nach den letzten GrUnden der Dinge lehnt er ab；er kennt nur（lie ewige∼宅rθechtung von Ursache und Wirkung， das unab』igc Werden und Wechscln der Dinge， aber keincn absoluten Grund．［＿J Mehrfach aber hat der Buddhismus im Laufe dcr Zeit wieder eine pantheistische Farbung angenommen． Auf dcm Boden des Brahmanismus erwachsen， hat er verschiedentiich s▲ch wieder ”Philosopher’s Ashes Retum tO Tek）．’01’ 13（226）den pantheistischen Ideenkreisen des ietzteren angeniihert．［＿］ In Japan haben die Kegon und die T’endaisecte eine pantheistische Metaphysik ausgebildet， indem lhnen zufolge das Bdi ta−tathtitti， das Absolute， als der gemeinschaftliche Grund von Materie und Denken allem Dasein inh互riert， Uberall thatig， Wesen， Kraft ulld Form zugleich is上（Fn． VgL R． FuJIsHIMA， lc Bouddhism japonais p． XVIII−XXIV．62f． u．78f．）Mit lhnen stimmte INouYE ENRY6 in der Annahme eines absoluten Princips als letzten umfassenden Grundes aller Uberein． Das Absolute ismun auch zuglelch unser inncrs〔es Wesen， der Kern unserer Natur． Aber wie das Licht des Mondes durch Wolken verfinstert wird， so wird auch unser eigcnes wahres Wesen verhUl正t durch IlIusionen， Unwissenheit und Leidenschaften， welche die Folgen unseres endlichen， unvollkommenen Daseins sind． Zicl und Aufgabe des Menschen ist es aber， den wahren Kern scines Wesens， der eins ist mit dem Absoluten， zum Durchbruch zu bringen， um so mit dem Absoluten v611ig vereinigt zu werden． Wir erlangen diese∼「ereinigung durch voilstandige Erkenntnis unscres eigenen Wcsens， indem wir in unserem eigenen vollstandig erkannten Wesen das Wcsen des Absoluten und die Wesenseinheit beider erkennen． Wie diese Erkenntnis selbst aus dem ticfsten lnnern unseres Wesens（dem ＜＜Gewisscm）entsptingt und uns ein Idealbild menschlichen Handelns（Buddha） zeigt， so bewirkt sie auch in dem， der sich mit ihr durchdrungen hat， eine Wiedergeburt seines ganzen Wesens， vollkommenes Handeln und die v611ige Vereinigung mir dcm Absoluten． Die Erkenntnis seiner selbst， von der INouYE hier spricht， ist natUrlich keine rationale， wissenschaftlich−psychologische， sondern vielmehr ein intuitives， alleVernunfterkenntnis Ubersteigendes， durch Comemphtion erworbenes Schauen， wie es 5hnlich die Zensecte lehrt， und wie wir es in der neuplatonischen Speculation， dem Mysticismus des Mittel証ters und mutatis mutandis auch in der〈（intellektuellen Anschau皿g・・der neueren deutschen SpecUlation wiederfinden．
Nun ist aber dic Erlangung des Shinn）ノo auf diesem Wege nur fi’r geistig besonders starke und befahigte Naturen m6glich；fUr den Durchschnittsmenschen ist dieser Weg（INouyE ENRy6 bezeichnet ihn als subjective Methode）zu schwcr． INouyE benutzt dalier die im ganzen Buddhismus Ubliche Einteilung des Heiisweges inノ方施und励々ゴ， d． i． den beschwerIichen Wcg， auf dcm man durch eigene Kraft， und den leichteren， auf dem man durch f｝emde（Buddha’s）kaft das Heil erlangt， um se三nen oben bcschriebenen esoterischen noch einen exoterischen， popuiliren Buddhismus， den er die objective Methode nenm， hinzuzufむgen． Er isr fUr alle diejenigcn bestimmt， denen die subjective Methode zu schwcr isむDiese m6gen， statt aus sich selbst ein Idealbild menschlicher Vbllkommenheit zu schaffen， den historischen Buddha， der die sichtbare Verk6rperung vollkommens〔cr TUgend ist， sich zum Vbrbild nehmen und darnach handeln． In den heiligen Schri丘cn hat Buddha ausdrUcklich gesagt， wie man hande▲n solL Der historische Buddha aber ist ldentisch mit dem absoluten Buddha， ist seinc Objectivation im Reiche dcr Erscheinungen， Wer ihm vertraut， an fhn glaubt und ihn sich zum∼brblld nimmt， wird auch die Seligkeit des Shin互γo erlangen． Das Ailembutsu thur es aiso schliesslich auch．＿Es braucht kaum bemerk〔zu werden， dass diese popullire Form von INouYE ENRY6’s Buddhismus sich an die Lehren dcr Jδdo−und Shinsecte anlehnt．（Fn． Nachtrtiglich sei noch bemerkt， dass I． E． kUrzlich in einem Artikcl im D6ηω （Shingonsecte）die Norwendigkeit der Reform im Buddhismus auf’s neue betont und dcn baldigen Sieg des Buddh． Uber das Christentum in Aussicht gestellt hat． （Japan Weekly Mai1 XVII p．446））［＿］ Es kann nicht meine Absicht sein， hier eine Kritik der Lehren der Re五）rmbuddhisten zu gcben． Ebensowenig beabsichtig〔e ich， in eine Er6rterung Uber die Frage， wieweit die Ansichtcn INouYE ENRY6’s und NAKANIsHI GyOR6’s noch dem Buddhismus entsprechen， einzutreten． Mir will aber scheinen， als sei diesen Bestrebungen， wie geringes Verstandnis fUr das eigentliche Wesen des alten ”Phil・s・pher’・A・he・Re・u・n・・T・kye’ @15（224）
Buddhismtis lhre Verortflihrer auch v三elleicht bekunden m6gen， eine innere Berechtigung nicht abzusprechen， und als sei der Reformbuddhismus eine Macht， mit der man frUhcr oder splitcr， mit der namentlich das Christenrum wird rechnen mUssen． Auch d丘es、 glaube ich，1江sst sich sagen， dass， wenn der Buddhismus ilberhaupt noch eine Zukun丘hat−und ich bin der Meinung， dass er sie hat−， sie in der pantheisitscみen］kichtung， die INouYE ENRY6 und NAKANIsHI GYUR6 elngeschlagen habcn， zu suchen ist． Das Verdienst， dics richtig一三ch m6chte fasr sagen， instinctiv ＿ herausgefi’hlr zu haben， kann rnan 玉hnen jedenfalls nich〔 abStrciten．［＿］（p．448−452） 10．‘℃orrespondence：Dr． lnouye”，7乃e／aρan Weekly Mail， 20． May 1893． To THE EDIToR oF THE“iapan Mai1．” SIK−It is a common boast among men of scicnce or among doctors of law an（i philosophy〔hat they stand on facts an（1 accept not theory without its demonstration， or make no assertions of principle without proofs． I believe“Doctor”Inouye， now 丘mous fbr his attack on Chrisrianity， is considered‘‘an advance（l scholar and enlighted philosopher・ In one ofhis articlcs on christianity andJapanese patriotism， ln speaking of the unstability of Christianity he made this assertion：“Roman Catholicism gave way to Protestantism， Protestanrism to Unitarianism．”This expression shows the depch of“Doctor”Inouye’s research and information， and to one really acqua．inted with the facrs， this philosopher’s sage assertions afford ground fbr laughtcr． Perhaps the Doctor would like to have some reliable information on the changeableness and decline ofChristianit｝i， as he pleased to term it． τhe tatest and rnost reliable statistlcs give 205，000，000 adherents to Roman Catholicism， including all babics born in Catholic familics， of course；and l50，000，000 believers in Protestantism．］lhe last United Sta〔es census fUrnishes thc fbllowing facts concerning Unitarianism in that country：Organizations 421，Church
edifices 424， communicants or mcmbers 67，749． Of these，34，610 are in Massachusetts alone， and while Massachusetts is a丘ne old state it Iacks a good deal from being the biggest part ofAmerica． Some Unitarians仕om there have been able to shoot big guns aDd make a big fUss in Japan， even to the upserting ofphilosophic minds like Dr、 Inouye’s． But many of the big guns shot these days are loaded with blank cartridge＿rhere is no lea（i． How would 67フ49 Unitarians show up in a proce∬ion of 4，980，240 Methodists；4，292，291 Baptists；1，229，012 Presbyterians，1，086，048 Lutherans， 491，985Congregationalists；and 480，176 Episcopalians∼丁hesc figures are taken 価mthe U．S． census fbr l 890． I suspect that lf philosophers and men of science were〔o analyse their own minds as o丘en as they do theories， they would hesitate befbre giving to the public some of their opinions． I am not a philosopher， but a lover of facts， and hope Doctor lnouye will pardon me ifl suggest that he peruse the above figures bef｛）re he asserts again Unitarianism is swaUowing up Protestantism． Very［ruly， WILL PATTILLO． May l 1由，1893．（p．596） 11．“Monthly Summarアof the Religious Press”，7）beノφα〃協ε砂ルlail， 3． June 1893． Thc conviction seems to be growing that the Columbian Exhibition at Chicago will fUrnish an uniqし1e opPortunity to all reiigions fヒ）r the display of their ideas and methods．［＿］Among Buddhists the active preparation， noted last month， fOr representation at Chicago sdll continues． No resuh seems to have followed the appeaho the Buddhist Union to secure o伍cial represen〔atives， but several individuals are going on their own responsibilit）」）and will be supported by at least the moral approval of the various seαs』［he Shinshu sects sends， in this manner， two priests and fo ur influential laymen， and the Tendai， Shingon， and Rinzai sects each send ”PhiE・s・Phe・’・A・he・Re・u・m・・T・ky・”@17（222）
one priest． Bukdyo， in giving this infor皿ation， adds that it is stated in the o伍ciaI circular of the Congress that Mcssrs． Naijo［sic〕Bunyu， Shimaji Mokurai， and Inouye Enryo are to represent Japanese Buddhism at Chicago；but of this 8μ走々γo knows nothing． The same papcr states that Shinco wiil be represented by Shibata Reizo， and that Messrs． Yokoi， Hiraiwa， Honda、 Ibuka， Kozaka， and Ebina will go in the inte・esr・fJapanese Ch・istianity．［＿］（P． 650） 12・“Monthly Summary of the Religious Press”，7抗ノhpan Weelely・Mail，2・ December 1893． In・th・Hansei Zasshi， for instance， we・read・that・Buddhism has n・t made g・・d use・f 出eopportun三ties it has had since Imperial Restoration． Faith among its guardians mustもe weak， f・r hteratur・is the ph・t・graph・f th・ught， and during M砂 Buddhistic Iiterature has not shown greatness of sincerity． Scholarsh▲p arnong〔he priests is P・・r−lc・is・fieither・critical・n・r・scienrific．・lts・effect・is・s・far inc・nsiderable・ Once Buddhists knew the value ofgood literature， but their knowledge is forgotten． There are some encouraging signs， however， apPearing now． Such men as Ouchi Seiran， Nakanishi Gyuro， Sasakj Kiosukc， Suge Ryoho， Inouye Enrio， Higashi Kwanyichi， Mayeda Keto， among the elders， and Takada Doken， Furukawa Isamu， Mori Naoki， Kikushi Kenlo， Sugimura Hirotaro， and others give promise of much better things chan the faith has had for a tong time．工f these men should unitc and establish a magazine great things might be accompl丘shed．（p．658）
13．Ludwig BussE：“Excursions through止e Japanese Ethical Literature of
the Present Time”， trans・by Hemy K MILLEK 7んノkρan Evangetist， Ybkohama， October l 893−AugUst 1895． Enry61nouye is perhaps the mos〔typical exponent of the ref（）rm movement in Buddhism． He is one of the most enthusiastic champions on Buddhism， which hebe▲ieves himsclf able tQ preserve to Japan， as well on account of its intrinsic value， which， in his opinion， far exceeds that of Chriscianity， as on account of political considerations． Bしlt in order that this may be done， traditional Buddhism must be ref・rmed・and・rec・ns［ructed int・a騨cm answering the requirements・f m・dern science． This is possible， because Buddhism， by virtue of its philosophi（二al contents， accords with the results of modern science and philosophy better than any other theory of the world． Inouye believes that this philosophically regenerated f（）rm of Buddhism will become the fhture view of thc wor】d丘）r theJapanese， andthereligion of the country， if not of the world， and moreover， put a stop co the spread of Christianiry， which he so greatly hates． Tb perfect and to spread this form of Buddhism he regards as his life work， in the prosecution ofwhich he is indefatigably active a皿d cnters the lists with both［ongue and pen． For this express purpose he has created a Buddhist philosophical academy（Tetsuga々ukwan）， of which he is the director． His philosophy he has set forth in a series ofwri〔ings， ofwhich the most important is his large work on Buddhism 8μ々勧δ一kwatsuron（“Essay on the Revival of Buddhism”）1887−1891， up to which latter date rwo volumes have appeard． Besides this work， are to be mentioned also the Tetsugaku｝鋤δ（“Kernel of Philosophy”）in two volumes，1887， and an exposition ofthe philosophy of the Shin sect（Shin∫hdi Tetsugaku）． Of a speculative turn of mind， and having， through his university studies−he is a graduate of the lmperial Universiry 一 become acquainted wi〔h European philosophy， he makes use of its ideas in order thereby to transfbrm Buddhism into an idealistic panthcism． At the same time he takes pains ro make his Buddhism palatable to thc unlearned． As is quite natural in view ofhis work， Enry6 1nouye beiongs to no particular Buddhist sect． His Buddhism is eclectic． Besides elements which accord with the teachings of rhe Kegon and Tendai sccts， or remind onc ofthe zen scct， it includes also such as correspond to the doctrines of the J6do and Shin sects；and， in addkion、 ideas akin to Brahmanical and，丘nall）」， to European “Phll…phe・．s A・he・Re・u・n t。 Toky・／／19（220）
ph三losoph｝」． According to In皿ye， the fundamental principie of Buddhist ethical［eaching is striving a丘er union with the absotute． This absolute（Sh in nyo， the absolutety truc，） he regards as an absolute、 unique principle which lies as a common substratum at the basis ofall beginning and change ofphenomena． Perhaps we do not misrepresent Inouye， ifwe designate it as the world−soul， although he does not use this expression． In distinαion f｝om the real cxistence of things in eternal Hux， originating， growing and paSSing away， IS画eaL・SCillating， aS it were， between eXiSrenCe and n・n− existence． This metaphysics， which accords with the teaching of the Eleatics， Neo− Pla〔onic speculations， Spincozism and other pantheistic systems， is not that of primidve Buddhism， which genera正1y speaking has no metaphysics properly so called． The quest三〇n as to the ultimate ground of things it evades；it knows only the eternal connection between cause and effect， the ceasdess beginning and change of things， but no absolute ground．［＿］But in the course of time Bud（lhism has again and again acquired a pantheistic coloring． Rcared on the soil of Brahmanism， it in ・ari・u・w・ys h・・uttim・t・ly apPr・ximat・d t・che 1・tte・’…ng・・f id・a・．［．一．］ InJapan〔he Kegon andTendai sects have elaborated a pantheistic metaphysics， in so far as， according［o their views， the Btita−tathat白， or the absolutc， inherent in ali that exists as the common ground ofmatter arid th皿ght， and everアwherc active， is at one and the same time essence and energy and form．（Fn． Compare R． FuJlsHIMA，“Le Bouddhisme Japonais，”PP． xviii−xx亘62 and 78．）Enry61n皿ye agrees with them in the acceptance ofan absolute principlc as ultimate， comprehensive ground of all th丘ngs． Now the absolute is also a〔the samc time卯r inmest being， the germ of our nature． But， just as the light of the moon is obscured by clouds， so our rαd， true being is veiled under iilusions， ignorance and passions， which are the resu▲〔s ofour 丘nite， imperfect existence．〕［his true germ of his being， whlch is one with the
absolute， it is the duty and destiny of man to develop， in order tha凸e may thus become fulIy united with the absolute． We attain to this unlon through complete understanding ofour real being、 since in our real being， when fhlly ullderstood， we pcrceive the being ofthc absolute， and the i（ientity ofboth． AS t｝1丘s pcrception itself arises out ofthe inmost depths ofour being（the“consciencのand shows us an ideal ofhuman conduct（Buddha）， so also in him who is pervaded by this㎞owledgc， it works out a regencration of his whole being， perfect conduct and complete union wkh thc absolu亡e．］his knowledge ofoneself， ofwhich lnouye here speakS， naturally is not of a rationaL scientific or psycholog三cal charaαer， but rather intuitive v三sion， transcending all perception［hrough contemplation．「lhe teaching of the Zen sect is similar to this， and we丘nd these ideas recur血g in Neo−Platonic speculation、 in the mysticism ofthe Mid（lleAges and mutatis mutandis also in the“intellectual intuition” ・fm・dern German speculati・n． The atta丘nmcnt ofShinnγo， howevcr， in this way is possible only for those who are intellectually of a strong and capable nature． For the ordinary run of men this wa）r）which Inouyc designates as the sublective method， is roo d猛culc Inouye， therefbre， divides the way ofsalvation， as is usually in al1 Buddlhism， intoノか泌， the di伍cult way， by which man attains salvation by his own strength， and tariki， the easier way， by which man is save（i by another’s（Buddha’s）poweL］［his distinction he makes in order to supplement his esoteric Buddhism above described by［he addition of an exoteric， more popular ft）rm， which he calls the objective method．］「he latter is intended for all those for whom the subjective method is too di伍cult． Such， instead ofcreating an ideal ofhuman perfection out ofthe depths oftheir own nature， may take as their model the historical Buddha， who is the visible embodiment of absolutely perfect virtue， and act accordingl）L In thc sacred scriptures Buddha has expressly told men how they are to aα． But the historical Bu（ldha is identical with the absolute Buddha． The former is ［he latter objectized in the region ofphenomena． ohil・s叩her「s A・he・Re山・n・・Toky・’幽 Q1（218）
He who confides in him， and makes him his cxample will also attain the felicity of S方inaγo・So also nemhutsu ［repeating the prayer Namza［sic］amidU butsu］fina正ly accomplishes the same end．＿It is hardly necessary to remark that this poptilar form of Enrア61nouye’s Buddhism inclines to the doctrlnes of the J6do and Shin sects． （Fn． By way of addition I wodd remark that rece∬ly Enry61nouye in an article▲n the D6η万（Shingon sect）has again emphasized the necessity ofa reform in Buddhism， and held out the prospect of a speedy triumph of Buddhism over Christianity． （“Japan Weekly Mai1．”）cvii．， p．446川＿］ It is not my purpose here to give a criticism of the doctrines of the refbrmed Buddhists’Just as little do I propose to enter upon a discussion of the question how far the views ofEnry6 lnouye arid G）厄r6 Nakanishi still accord with Buddhism． But it seems to me as if it were impossible to deny that these eff（）rrs arc intrinsically justifiable， however little understanding of the real nature of old Buddhism their promoters may betra｝弓and as ifrefbrmed Buddhism were a power with which sooner or later Christianity more especially will have to reckon． This also may be said， I belicve， that， ifBudclhism still has any fUture at ai1＿and 1 am of the opinion that it ha∫＿it musr be looked for in the pantheistic turn which Enry6 lnouアe and G）心rδ Nakanishi have given it． At any rate the credit ofhaving rightly−Imight almost say instinctiveiy＿traced this out cannot be wrested from them．（February l 894， voL 1， no．3， P．153−157）
14．“Monthly Summary of the Religious Press”，椛吻4〃屹砂M4i￡3．
March I 894． In rhe Dento Mr． Juko Sugiura complains that Budclhist schools are now paying too much attention to science and show too little interest in religion． Let the university care f（）r science；the religi皿s schools should make religious medi亡ati皿and discipline thcir principal object． The present condition of the priesthood is disgracefUL Priestare priests only in name． Form ordinary people they differ only by having shaven heads and peculiar robes． The first dury of Buddhist leaders to−day is to deliver the priests and priest students form their degradation． Mn lnouye Enrio is now studying peculiar phenomena． Mr． Talcahashi Goro says that for scholarship this investigation is good， but for religion especially， where a study of prayer is involved， it is suicidaL ［．．．］（p．276）
15．“Monthly Summary of the Religious Press”，7he／4ρ伽磁㌦〃M4払9・
June 1894． Turning to the current Buddhis〔press we enter an inteliectual atmosphcre wholly different from that which has been hitherto around us． For example， in the 7玩∫o々μ ML Inouye Enrio would compel the attention of government and people to thc following radical proposition for the religious improvement ofJapan． social welfare， he says， it is generally agreed， depends upon religious progress． But how shall religious progress in this country now be secured∼ At present i〔is wholiy neglected． Let the knowledge and virme ofthe priests bc advanced， he answers． Our pr輌ests are inferior now in these excellences to the common people． But who shall do this needed work．丁he priests themselves are powerless；the temples are too poor to educate them． People gencrally will not undertake the work． Other interests than those of rel輌gion engage them． The Government mus be depended upon to come to our aid． But in do▲ng this will net the object of the separation of Church and State be de企ated， and may not political disturbances thereby be generated which will affcct our f（）reign relations∼ Not so， ifthe Government does not interfere with matrer ofbelief， bur seeks to develop only that side ofreligion which assures the maintenance of social order． Our proposition is that the government establish a theological department in ［he lmperial University． ’lhe university sho uld have such a departmenし All European institutions of the kind have theological scminaries． In such a “Philo．sopher’s Ashes Return tO Tokyo” 23（216）departrnent our national religions， Buddhism and Shintoism， should be taught and not Christianity． As in the Gemman States， for example， where Roman Catholics are in the majority， there are Catholic departments in rhe Universities、 and vice versa in those States where the Protestan［s prevail， so， in Japan where Buddhists and Shinto丘sts are in the majority， it can nor be out ofplace to provide only f（）r Buddhists and Shintoists ill our universit｝・t｝ユeological course． Or， let one university bc established by uniting in it all the Buddhist sects and place this insritution un（］er government superintendence． Or， let［emples be given on正y to those students who have obtained certificates f｝om public or private schools recognize（i by the government， or from examining commissions appointed by the Government． This question wi［1 certainly become a parliamcntary matter三n the near future． At present we call to it the attention of Government and the people．（p．699）
16．“Refbrm of Religions in Japan”，7乃’ノ吻4ηEvangeliSt，’Yokohama，
August 1994， voL l，no．6． INouE ENRYo， who was graduated ln philosophy form the lmperia1 University， and subsequenrly travclled through America and Europe is now one of the foremost thinkers among the Buddhists ofJapan． He recent▲y delivered a long and interesting address on the sublect ofthe refbrm ofrelig▲ons in this country， the g量st ofwhich is as follows：−Among the many methods by which the ref（）rm of the religions of Japan may be effecred， the intellectual improvement of the priests themselves may be said t・h・ld the f・rem・st place． ln・rder t・be able t・lead and instruct the masscs， as priests are required to do， they must themselves be in knowledge and morals far above rhe average， and it ls just in these〔wo points that the Japancse priests ofto−day are essentially deficient． This is， howevcr，皿e of those theories that may be readily enunciated but are m・st・dificUlt・t・put int・practice． The lecture・ suggested that in this respect Government aid sheuld be solicited， this being probablythe only feasible and eficacious method． Were the co6peration of the Government secured， the programme he proposed might be carried out in three ways， eith劒（1） by establishing a special theological course in the Imperial University， or（2）by the 丘）しmding of a Ullion College through the loint exertions of the various Buddhist sects， thc college itself to be under thc immediate supervision of the Educational Department；or（3）by granting the post ofChief Priest ofa templc only to graduates of a certain school or ccrtain schools dαermined by the Governmem or to those who successfUlly pass an examination in certain required standards． Iflaw， medicine， etc． are necessit皿s to rhe welfare of the country and these sub．iects are given special courses at the Imperial University，［hen there is no reason why rellgion， which has such vital connection with the manners， customs and public peace of a coumrア， should not be accorded the same treatmenしThis argument was supported with ill ustrations taken from western precedents． The objection might be raised， continued ML Inouye， that， as Japari has no state religion and〔here is no one crecd publiciy acknowledged by the Government， there wωld be some di伍cul〔y in the choice of religions and there is no one creed publicly acknowledged by the Government， there would be some di伍culty in the choice of religions to be specially stud輌ed in the University． VC」hile nothing can with certainty bc predicted concerning the future， as ma〔ters now stand〔hc only creeds to be included in the University course are Buddhism and Shint6ism：and that correctncss of this view is practically acknowledged by the government， is proved by the existence of a Bureau fbr the Control ofTemples and Shrines in the Home Department． Christialiity is tolerated only；it has yet to reccive public acknowledgement． Viewed from the standpoint of expedienCy， che same argumen〔again holds true， fOr Buddhist and Shint6 believers 丘r釦t−number chose who profess the Christian faith． But should the establ▲shment ofa special Universiry course fail to be accomplished， rccoursc sh皿ld bc had to the second alternative， which， by carcfUI management might achieve the same result． ohii°soPhe・’s A・hes R・’・u・nωT・ky・’125（214）
”lhe lack of fUnds is rhe only difli．cul亡y in the way of this project；but even here there is no need to despair， for the Higashi Hongwanji has frequently succeeded in raising， in the space of one year， sums ranging f｝om one−half to a round million yen． The third and last method is similar to that already adopted by the governmem in hcensing medical practitioners and school−teachers． Mr． Inouye concluded by saying that he was convinced that this question of religions would， in the course of a few years， come up be fo re the Imperial Diet， and then be settled satisfactorily；still a good scheme is all the better for prompt realization and he could there島re not refrain from calling the ilnmcdiate attention of both government and people to these vlews・−7ヵe／ll少zan Dai！γ Mai／．（P・342−343）
17．Lafcadio HEARN：Glim少sesげUnfamiliar／ilpan，2vols．， Boston：
Houghton Mi田in l 894． ［．．．］Ido not think the Japanese without individuality；but their丘ndividuality is less superficially apparent， and reveals itself much less quickl｝いhan that of Western people． I am also convinced that much ofwhat weαdl“垂?窒唐盾獅≠撃奄狽凵hand‘‘force of character”in the West represents only the survival and recognition of primitivc aggressive tendencies， more or less disguised by culturc． Wha〔Mr． Spencer calls the highest individuation surely does not include extraordinary development ofpowers adapted to merely aggressive ends；and｝・e〔i〔is rather through these than through any othcrs that Westcrn individuality most commonly and read三ly manifests itself． Now there is， as yet， a remarkable scarcity in Japan， of domineering， brぱal， aggressive， or morbid individuality． What does impress one as an apparent weakness in戊apanese intellectual circles is the comparative absence of sPontaneity」creative thought， original perceptivity of the highest order． Perhaps this seeming de丘ciency 三sracial：the pcoples of the Far East seem to have been throughout their history receptive rather than creative． At all events I cannot believe Buddhism＿originallythe faith of an Aryan race＿can be proven responsible．丁he total exclusion of Buddhist influence from pubiic education would not seem to have been stimulating； fc）r出e mastcrs of’ the old Buddhist philosophy still show a far higher capacity f6r thinking in relations〔han that of the average graduate of the Imperial University． Indeed， I am incllned toもelieve that an intellectual revivai of Buddhism−a harmonising of its lofモier truths with the besc and broadest teachings of modcrn science−would have the most impor〔ant results for Japan． A native scholar， Mr． Inouye Enryo， has actua11y founded at］r6ky6 w三th this noble object in view， a college of philosophy which seems likely， at the prescnt writing， to become an infiuential insti〔ut三〇n．（voL II．，P．682−3， fh）
18．“Religiou⑨］［hought”，7he／apan五μ㎎8伝ちYbkohama， Apri11896， voL
3，no．4． The 5万励⑳oムcomplains of the lack of literary activity among the Buddhists」t says that many great subjeαs call五）r investigation， but there are few who seem to give satisfactory attention to the task， ML Enryo Inouye h田studied Buddhism in the lighr of Westem philosophy， and hast written some books；but they are incomplete and call血r血rthαstudy． ME Sensei Murakaml has made scholarly achievements in the history of Buddhism；but he is like a torch−light in a vast plain． Mr． Nanlo is a good Sanscrit scholar；but we know of nothing rhat he has accomplishcd． Profとssor Tetsuiiro Inouye is studying Buddhism；but thus far we have heard little about the results ofhis laboL Our country is㎞own as a Buddhist country， and yet these五川r represent thc best that we have ofBuddhist scholarship． （P．246） 19．‘‘Buddhists in Ybkohama”，7he／iZpan Wをβ彦獅ノ↓（ail，13． June 1896． ABuDDHIsT Lec田re Meeting was held in the Machigaisho， Ybkohama， on Sunday． ohiTosophe・．s A・hes Re・u・n to Tok｝・。’．27（212）The proceeding commenced at twelve o’clock（noon）and Inore than 800 persons werc then in attendamce， among them being some English gentlemen． Six lecmrers delivered addresses， three being of the priesthood， the othcrs laymen． Dr． Inouye Yenyro， a graduate ofan Ox五）rd College， dehvered a short ad（iress on the subject of Buddhism in▲ts relation〔o Philosophy． His spcech was very erudice and evoked considera〔e applausc（p．652）
