Zen Internationalism, Zen Revolution: Inoue Shūten, Uchiyama Gudō and the Crisis of (Zen) Buddhist Modernity in Late Meiji Japan

James Mark Shields

Zen Internationalism, Zen Revolution: Inoue Shūten, Uchiyama Gudō and the Crisis of (Zen) Buddhist Modernity in Late Meiji Japan

James Mark Shields

Bucknell University

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

Abstract

<p> In addition to the birth and development of “Imperial Way Zen,” late Meiji Japan witnessed the emergence of a number of young lay Buddhist scholars, priests and activists who attempted, with varying success, to reframe Buddhism along progressive and occasionally radical political lines. While it is true that groups such as the New Buddhist Fellowship (Shin Bukky&omacr; D&omacr;shikai, 1899–1915) were made up mainly of young men associated with the two branches of the Shin (True Pure Land) sect, several of its members did affiliate themselves with Zen, such as Suzuki Daisetsu (1870–1966) and Inoue Sh&umacr;ten (1880–1945). While the former’s work has been roundly appraised (and recently subject to criticism), the latter, an avowed pacifist and internationalist, has been relatively understudied in both Japanese and Western scholarship. A more radical contemporary figure, S&omacr;t&omacr; sect priest Uchiyama Gud&omacr; (1874–1911), has received more attention, due in no small part to his being executed as one of the 24 conspirators of the High Treason Incident of 1910–11. This chapter will compare and contrast the “radical” ideas of Inoue and Uchiyama, focusing on their use of Chan and Zen precedents to justify and explain their progressive positions, while setting their arguments in the broader context of Meiji intellectual debates, both within and outside of Japanese Buddhism. It will also explore the reasons why Zen was more often than not a “conservative” force in modern Japan.</p>

Original language	American English
Title of host publication	Approaches to Chan, Sŏn and Zen Studies: Chinese Chan Buddhism and its Spread throughout East Asia
State	Published - Nov 1 2022

Keywords

East Asian Buddhism
Japanese Buddhism
Politics

Disciplines

Asian History
Buddhist Studies
History of Religion
History of Religions of Eastern Origins
Intellectual History
Japanese Studies
Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion

Access to Document

Zen Internationalism Zen Revolution Inoue Sh ten Uchiyama Gud Final published version, 1.36 MBLicense: CC BY

Cite this

@inbook{047c7c8233b84908aea04a9a12590a8d,

title = "Zen Internationalism, Zen Revolution: Inoue Shūten, Uchiyama Gudō and the Crisis of (Zen) Buddhist Modernity in Late Meiji Japan",

abstract = " In addition to the birth and development of \“Imperial Way Zen,\” late Meiji Japan witnessed the emergence of a number of young lay Buddhist scholars, priests and activists who attempted, with varying success, to reframe Buddhism along progressive and occasionally radical political lines. While it is true that groups such as the New Buddhist Fellowship (Shin Bukky\&omacr; D\&omacr;shikai, 1899\–1915) were made up mainly of young men associated with the two branches of the Shin (True Pure Land) sect, several of its members did affiliate themselves with Zen, such as Suzuki Daisetsu (1870\–1966) and Inoue Sh\&umacr;ten (1880\–1945). While the former\’s work has been roundly appraised (and recently subject to criticism), the latter, an avowed pacifist and internationalist, has been relatively understudied in both Japanese and Western scholarship. A more radical contemporary figure, S\&omacr;t\&omacr; sect priest Uchiyama Gud\&omacr; (1874\–1911), has received more attention, due in no small part to his being executed as one of the 24 conspirators of the High Treason Incident of 1910\–11. This chapter will compare and contrast the \“radical\” ideas of Inoue and Uchiyama, focusing on their use of Chan and Zen precedents to justify and explain their progressive positions, while setting their arguments in the broader context of Meiji intellectual debates, both within and outside of Japanese Buddhism. It will also explore the reasons why Zen was more often than not a \“conservative\” force in modern Japan.",

keywords = "East Asian Buddhism, Japanese Buddhism, Politics",

author = "Shields, \{James Mark\}",

year = "2022",

month = nov,

day = "1",

language = "American English",

booktitle = "Approaches to Chan, Sŏn and Zen Studies: Chinese Chan Buddhism and its Spread throughout East Asia",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Zen Internationalism, Zen Revolution: Inoue Shūten, Uchiyama Gudō and the Crisis of (Zen) Buddhist Modernity in Late Meiji Japan

AU - Shields, James Mark

PY - 2022/11/1

Y1 - 2022/11/1

N2 - In addition to the birth and development of “Imperial Way Zen,” late Meiji Japan witnessed the emergence of a number of young lay Buddhist scholars, priests and activists who attempted, with varying success, to reframe Buddhism along progressive and occasionally radical political lines. While it is true that groups such as the New Buddhist Fellowship (Shin Bukky&omacr; D&omacr;shikai, 1899–1915) were made up mainly of young men associated with the two branches of the Shin (True Pure Land) sect, several of its members did affiliate themselves with Zen, such as Suzuki Daisetsu (1870–1966) and Inoue Sh&umacr;ten (1880–1945). While the former’s work has been roundly appraised (and recently subject to criticism), the latter, an avowed pacifist and internationalist, has been relatively understudied in both Japanese and Western scholarship. A more radical contemporary figure, S&omacr;t&omacr; sect priest Uchiyama Gud&omacr; (1874–1911), has received more attention, due in no small part to his being executed as one of the 24 conspirators of the High Treason Incident of 1910–11. This chapter will compare and contrast the “radical” ideas of Inoue and Uchiyama, focusing on their use of Chan and Zen precedents to justify and explain their progressive positions, while setting their arguments in the broader context of Meiji intellectual debates, both within and outside of Japanese Buddhism. It will also explore the reasons why Zen was more often than not a “conservative” force in modern Japan.

AB - In addition to the birth and development of “Imperial Way Zen,” late Meiji Japan witnessed the emergence of a number of young lay Buddhist scholars, priests and activists who attempted, with varying success, to reframe Buddhism along progressive and occasionally radical political lines. While it is true that groups such as the New Buddhist Fellowship (Shin Bukky&omacr; D&omacr;shikai, 1899–1915) were made up mainly of young men associated with the two branches of the Shin (True Pure Land) sect, several of its members did affiliate themselves with Zen, such as Suzuki Daisetsu (1870–1966) and Inoue Sh&umacr;ten (1880–1945). While the former’s work has been roundly appraised (and recently subject to criticism), the latter, an avowed pacifist and internationalist, has been relatively understudied in both Japanese and Western scholarship. A more radical contemporary figure, S&omacr;t&omacr; sect priest Uchiyama Gud&omacr; (1874–1911), has received more attention, due in no small part to his being executed as one of the 24 conspirators of the High Treason Incident of 1910–11. This chapter will compare and contrast the “radical” ideas of Inoue and Uchiyama, focusing on their use of Chan and Zen precedents to justify and explain their progressive positions, while setting their arguments in the broader context of Meiji intellectual debates, both within and outside of Japanese Buddhism. It will also explore the reasons why Zen was more often than not a “conservative” force in modern Japan.

KW - East Asian Buddhism

KW - Japanese Buddhism

KW - Politics

UR - https://digitalcommons.bucknell.edu/fac_books/262

M3 - Chapter

BT - Approaches to Chan, Sŏn and Zen Studies: Chinese Chan Buddhism and its Spread throughout East Asia

ER -

Zen Internationalism, Zen Revolution: Inoue Shūten, Uchiyama Gudō and the Crisis of (Zen) Buddhist Modernity in Late Meiji Japan

Abstract

Keywords

Disciplines

Access to Document

Other files and links

Cite this