|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
雑誌『仏教』にみる明治期の仏教因果説論争=Controversies on the Buddhist Interpretation of Retributive Justice found in the Meiji Period Journal Buddhism |
|
|
|
| 著者 |
川口淳 (著)=Kawaguchi, Atsushi (au.)
|
|---|
| 掲載誌 |
印度學佛教學研究 =Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies=Indogaku Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū
|
|---|
| 巻号 | v.67 n.1 (總號=n.146) |
|---|
| 出版年月日 | 2018.12.20 |
|---|
| ページ | 188 - 193 |
|---|
| 出版者 | 日本印度学仏教学会 |
|---|
| 出版サイト |
http://www.jaibs.jp/
|
|---|
| 出版地 | 東京, 日本 [Tokyo, Japan] |
|---|
| 資料の種類 | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| 言語 | 日文=Japanese |
|---|
| キーワード | 西依一六; 境野黄洋; 大久保昌南; 加藤弘之 |
|---|
| 抄録 | This study examines how Buddhists in the mid-Meiji period responded to criticisms about Buddhist interpretations of retributive justice, especially that of Katō Hiroyuki 加藤弘之.
To examine this debate, I used the articles found in the journal Buddhism (Bukkyō仏教), published by the Keiikai 経緯会. Its members included Nishiyori Ichiroku 西依一六, Sakaino Tekkai 境野哲海, and Ōkubo Shōnan 大久保昌南, who were among the young, energetic stars of the Buddhist literary world. In this study, I consider their arguments and their respective role in the debate.
In conclusion, it may be said that, on the one hand they disliked fatalism, but on the other hand agreed that retribution spanned the three temporal worlds 三世因果. Nishiyori in particular understood that this is not fatalism or arbitrarism but causalism. Therefore, the authors considered claimed that the Buddhist notion of retributive justice serves to abolish superstitious practices. |
|---|
| 目次 | 一 はじめに 188
二 西依一六の仏教自由意志論 189
三 大久保昌南の加藤弘之への反論 191
四 境野哲海の加藤弘之への反論 192
五 おわりに 192 |
|---|
| ISSN | 00194344 (P); 18840051 (E) |
|---|
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.4259/ibk.67.1_188 |
|---|
| ヒット数 | 64 |
|---|
| 作成日 | 2022.08.10 |
|---|
| 更新日期 | 2022.08.10 |
|---|
 |
Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac)での検索をお勧めします。ＩＥではこの検索システムを表示できません。
|
|
|
