The Philosophical Development of the Shin-Buddhist Life View : The Case of Akegarasu Haya

Akegarasu Haya (暁烏敏1877-1954) -- whose thought is commonly regarded as being in the tradition of Kiyozawa Manshi\u27s seishin-shugi, or \u27spiritualism,\u27(精神主義) -- has been accused of leading a great number of Japanese people into war in Kiyozawa\u27s name. Kiyozawa is an extremely important figure in the development of Shin thought in the Meiji period, and might rightly be considered a torch-carrier for the tradition. However, it is a fact that Akegarasu, a disciple of Kiyozawa, lead Japanese citizens in his role as a Shin-Buddhist preacher. This is a large stumbling block when one seeks to evaluate the ideological parameters of Shin. One may assert that there are some critical differences between Kiyozawa\u27s way of thinking and Akegarasu\u27s. The first point is the difference in their approach to the word \u27religion.\u27Kiyozawa, in his final essay "Waga-shinnen (我信念)," describes how he, through his efforts to lead an ethical life in the real world, came to a realization of how truly powerless he was as a person and how he finally came to an understanding of \u27religion\u27or, "the real faith of Shin-Buddhism." In contrast, Akegarasu confessed that he had feared death since he was a child and that he felt that he needed to be saved through the compassion of Amida Buddha. Differences, such as this, between the master and his pupil inevitably influence their sense of ethics. For Kiyozawa, matters of ethics are essential to his view of religion, as he acquired his faith through a deep sense of failure in ethics. He felt that in order to be liberated from the bonds of suffering it was necessary to seek for religious meaning while remaining in the everyday world. In other words, he couldn\u27t live without religion in his life. On the other hand, Akegarasu\u27s faith shows a striking contrast. As a matter of fact, his faith in Amida Buddha was necessary solely for overcoming his own fear of death. He insists that once people die they are sure to be reborn in Amida\u27s Pure Land, achieve eternal life, and even be reunited with their families and intimate friends. According to his belief, one needn\u27t worry about what one does in everyday life, whether it be good or bad, as one will unquestionably be saved by the prayer of Amida Buddha after death. This must surely explain why there seems to be no ethical element in Akegarasu\u27s interpretation of Shin-Buddhist thought. Their contrasting attitudes in regard to ethics may also be rooted in their understanding of Amida Buddha. Kiyozawa interpreted Amida as \u27Absolute Infinity\u27, whereas Akegarasu grounded Amida in reality, relating him to real-life elements such as the Emperor of Japan or the Empire of Japan. For Akegarasu, though he was a Buddhist priest, the Emperor was of more value to him. Actually, some who knew him well point out that he placed particular value on the idea of lineal purity and even became obsessive over the issue. Therefore, from his point of view, there was no need to argue points on the "great righteous cause" of Japan. Thusly, he was unswerving in his view that people must never hesitate to lay down their life and cut down all those that stand in the way in establishing the Pure Land in this world. Thus, one must take particular care when dealing with the concept of seishin-shugi