Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 2001 28/1–2 REVIEW ARTICLE After the Storm Matsumoto Shirõ’s Transition from “Critical Buddhism ” to “Critical Theology”

since the high point of “the storm”? That is how co-editors Jamie HUB-BARD and Paul SWANSON (1997) referred to the period of intense con-troversy concerning the movement’s methods and conclusions about “true ” or pure Buddhism based on causality versus “impure ” or cor-rupted Buddhism. According to Critical Buddhism, the contaminated „tmav„da-like doctrines of original enlightenment (hongaku û·), tath„gatagarbha (nyoraizõ Øû‰), and Buddha-nature (busshõ [§) have contributed to social deciencies in Japan, such as compliance with nationalism, militarism, emperor veneration, Japanism, and social discrimination. In the past few years the hyperbole of Critical Buddhism that dis-missed so many doctrines, schools, and individuals as heretical or un-Buddhistic has declined. The focus has largely shifted to a more localized debate on the role of theology (shðgaku;¿) within Sõtõ studies.1 MATSUMOTO Shirõ’s new book, Dõgen shisõ ron (Studies of Dõgen’s thought),2 which advocates a position he refers to as “Critical 1 The term shðgaku literally means “sectarian studies ” but has the broader implication of “theology ” in the sense used by David Tracy: “intellectual reµection within a religious tradition” that is situated between talk about God and historical studies (cited in JACKSON 2000, p. 2). 2 The rst half of Dõgen shisõ ron deals exclusively with Dõgen and the debate about Critical Theology, and the second half—which is not discussed in this review—examines nearly three dozen post-Hui-neng masters of Chinese Ch’an, as a follow-up to MATSUMOTO’s previous Theology ” (hihan shðgaku −|;¿), reveals the underlying theological agenda of Critical Buddhism and highlights an important discussion about how to conduct sectarian scholarship and appropriate the meaning of Dõgen’s life and thought. Other participants include Tsunoda Tairyð ¸,dN, who champions “Orthodox Theology ” (dentõ shðgaku)j;¿), Yoshizu Yoshihide Ÿ§ŠÄ, who seeks to relativize theological standpoints in terms of “Flexible Theology ” (yasashii shðgaku “[^J;¿), and Ishii Shðd