|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buddhist Kingship, the Kami, and Modernity : Comparative Considerations(Shinbutsu Shugo and Modernity)=仏教的王権論・神仏習合・モダニティ -- 比較文化論的考察( ＜特集＞神仏習合とモダニティ) |
|
|
|
| Author |
ランベッリ, ファビオ=Rambelli, Fabio
|
|---|
| Source |
宗教研究=Journal of Religious Studies=シュウキョウ ケンキュウ
|
|---|
| Volume | v.81 n.2 (總號=n.353) |
|---|
| Date | 2007.09.30 |
|---|
| Pages | (268) - (252) |
|---|
| Publisher | 日本宗教学会 |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
http://jpars.org/
|
|---|
| Location | 東京, 日本 [Tokyo, Japan] |
|---|
| Content type | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| Language | 英文=English |
|---|
| Keyword | Buddhist kingship; devaraja; Ryobu Shinto; lse Shinto; Indian culture-impact on Japanese culture |
|---|
| Abstract | In this paper I address the issue of Buddhist combinatory traditions (shinbutsu shugo) and modernity by focusing on Indian ideas on kingship and their impact on premodern Japanese emperorship ; by tracing their development and their ultimate demise, I attempt to suggest some political and cultural reasons for the rejection of Buddhist syncretism by the modern Japanese nation-state. In particular, the Buddhist discourse on kingship in Japan is usually treated as a single entity. However, I argue that it was in fact a plural formation in which Indian ideas on kingship developed in at least three distinct, if partially overlapping, areas. These three discursive regimes of Buddhist kingship are, respectively, a Buddhist discourse on ideal types of rulers (the "Great Elect" or Mahasammata, the Dharma-king or dharmaraja, and the Universal emperor or cakravartin) that was applied in various ways to the Japanese rulers ; a second Buddhist discourse on kingship, running parallel to the first one, which was intended mostly for internal use by religious institutions and had few direct connections with the imperium ; and a third, originally Brahmanical discourse on the "godking" (devaraja) which developed within so-called Ryobu Shinto and Ise Shinto. The first Buddhist discourse contains almost no combinatory (shinbutsu shugo) elements, which can be found instead in the second and third discursive regimes. While the first discourse has been studied in depth, the second and the third ones have been largely neglected despite their significant contributions to Japanese ideas on the ontological foundations and the symbolism of kingship. The third discourse (on devaraja) in particular, after it had been purged of Indian references, came to constitute one of the intellectual sources of the modern sacralization of the emperor.
本論は、王権に関するインド思想が前近代の天皇制に与えた影響に焦点を合わせることで、神仏習合とモダニティの問題を考えようとするものである。特に、日本において仏教的王権論は、単一の体系として扱われるのが通例であるが、それは実は多元的なものであり、三つの言説において展開してきた。支配者に直接適用された言説は神仏習合の要素をほとんど含まず、それらが見出されるのは寺社内部で利用された王権論とそのシンボリズム、そして両部神道や伊勢神道などで展開された「天王」(デーヴァラージャ)型王権論である。中でもデーヴァラージャ論は、インドとの関連を剥奪された後、天皇の近代的神聖化を支える知的源泉の一つとなってきたのである。しかし、神仏習合の弾圧は、これらの王権論を否定する意味もあった。本論では、こうした王権論の特徴を描くと同時に、日本のモダニティがそれらを否定した理由について幾つかの仮説を立てる。 |
|---|
| ISSN | 03873293 (P) |
|---|
| Hits | 1731 |
|---|
| Created date | 2009.09.02 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2019.08.12 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
