In buddhism, overall, realizing is superiority and believing is inferior. Because getting enlightenment is realizing. "Believe" is medical lie. So, I think automatically Christian faith's dogma regarded as inferior and the deeper religious experience(like meditation) of Christian faith is regarded as superiority by Nishida.ãAnd his stance is that philosophy of religion precedes philosophy. In his case, that is, philosophy of enlightenment.
Nishida seems also to put Christian God into Buddhism, it is basically same logic as Taishaku's net. I suppose Christian faith without religious awareness would be a gem. Faith with religious awareness can be eternity. That I think through reading his essays is that he denied Christian dogma but he didn't denied the religion itself. That's why I criticize Christian dogma but I don't deny the religion itself. Of course the God would be different from Christians think of, but I do enjoy Bach's works. I learned about it from him. Well, putting aside about myself, I cite some from his essay.
Nishida said:
宿ã¨ã¯ç¥ã¨äººéã®é¢ä¿ã§ãããç¥ã¨ã¯ç¨®ã ã®èãæ¹ãã§ããã§ããããããããå®å®ã®æ ¹æ¬ã¨è¦ã¦ããã®ãæãé©å½ã§ãããã¨æããèãã¦äººã¨ã¯æã ã®å人æèãããã®ã§ããããã®ä¸¡è ã®é¢ä¿ã®èãæ¹ã«ç±ã£ã¦ç¨®ã ã®å®æãå®ã¾ã£ã¦ããã®ã§ãããç¶ãã°ãå¦ä½ãªãé¢ä¿ãçã®å®æçé¢ä¿ã§ãããããããç¥ã¨æã¨ã¯ãã®æ ¹åºã«ããã¦æ¬è³ªãç°ã«ããç¥ã¯åã«äººé以ä¸ã®å大ãªãåã¨ããå¦ãè ã¨ãããªãã°ãæã ã¯ããã«åãã£ã¦æ¯«ã宿çåæ©ãè¦ãåºããã¨ã¯ã§ãã¬ããããã¯ãããæãã¦ãã®å½ã«å¾ããã¨ãããããæã ã¯ããã«åªã³ã¦ç¦å©ãæ±ãããã¨ããããããããçå©å·±å¿ããåºã§ãã«ãããªããæ¬è³ªãç°ã«ããè ã®ç¸äºã®é¢ä¿ã¯å©å·±å¿ã®å¤ã«ç«ã¤ãã¨ã¯ã§ããªãã®ã§ããã
ãå®æã®æ¬è³ªããã
Religion is the relation between Human and God. Although we human kind has varied concept about what God is, I think a concept that God is the root of space is just as well. And the word "human" means personal conscious mind. Depending on concepts about the relation, diverse religions were established. Then, what true relationship with God is? If God and ourself don't have same essence, and if God is merely a greater power than human, we can't find our motivation toward God. Possibly, we would comply with the order out of fear, we would try to gain God's favor and request welfare. But all those are affairs referred from selfish spirit. The relation between existences has different essence each other can't stand on out of selfish spirit.
"The true nature of God"
å¡ã¦ã®å®æã®æ¬ã«ã¯ç¥äººåæ§ã®é¢ä¿ããªããã°ãªãã¬ãå³ã¡ç¶åã®é¢ä¿ããªãã¦ã¯ãªãã¬ããããåã«ç¥ã¨äººã¨å©å®³ãåãããç¥ã¯æããå©ãæããä¿è·ããã¨ããã®ã§ã¯æªã çã®å®æã§ã¯ãªããç¥ã¯å®å®ã®æ ¹æ¬ã§ãã£ã¦å ¼ãã¦æãã®æ ¹æ¬ã§ãªããã°ãªãã¬ãæããç¥ã«å¸°ããã¯ãã®æ¬ã«å¸°ããã®ã§ãããã¾ãç¥ã¯ä¸ç©ã®ç®çã§ãã£ã¦å³ã¡ã¾ã人éã®ç®çã§ãªãã¦ã¯ãªãã¬ã人ã¯åç¥ã«ããã¦å·±ãçã®ç®çãè¦ãåºãã®ã§ãããæè¶³ã人ã®ç©ãªããå¦ãã人ã¯ç¥ã®ç©ã§ãããæã ãç¥ã«å¸°ããã®ã¯ä¸æ¹ããè¦ãã°å·±ã失ãããã§ãããã䏿¹ããè¦ãã°å·±ãå¾ãæä»¥ã§ãããåºç£ãããã®çå½ãå¾ãè ã¯ããã失ãæãçºã«çå½ã失ãè ã¯ãããå¾ã¹ããã¨ããããã®ãå®æã®æãéãªãè ã§ãããçã®å®æã«ãããç¥ã¨äººã®é¢ä¿ã¯å¿ ãæ¯ã®å¦ãè ã§ãªããã°ãªãã¬ã
ãå®æã®æ¬è³ªããã
There must be a relation that God and human have same nature in all religions. That is, there must be a relation of "father and son". However, those religions which merely regard that God and human have same interest and God helps and protects us is not true religion. God must be a root of the space and must be a root of us. That we come to God is to come to the root. And God must be a purpose of all things and, namely, must be a purpose of human. Each people discover their true purpose from God. Like hands and foots are human's, human is God's. Although it seems that we come to God is losing ourselves, we obtain ourself on the one hand. Jesus Christ said "Those who obtain the life lose it, those who lost the life for me obtain it" This is most mature thing. In true religion, the relation between God and human must be so.
"The true nature of God"
æã ã®ç¥ã¨ã¯å¤©å°ããã«ç±ãã¦ä½ãä¸ç©ããã«ç±ãã¦è²ããå®å®ã®å é¢ççµ±ä¸ã§ãªããã°ãªãã¬ããã®ä»ã«ç¥ã¨ããã¹ããã®ã¯ãªãã
ãå®æã®æ¬è³ªããã
Our God must be the God that universe depends upon, the universe is given the position, all things depend it and are nurtured and must be an inside integration. There is no other God.
"The true nature of God"
ç¥ã¨ã¯å®å®ã®æ ¹æ¬ãããã®ã§ãããä¸ã«è¿°ã¹ãããã«ãä½ã¯ç¥ãå®å®ã®å¤ã«è¶ è¶ããé ç©è ã¨ã¯è¦ããã¦ãç´ã¡ã«ãã®å®å¨ã®æ ¹åºãèããã®ã§ãããç¥ã¨å®å®ã¨ã®é¢ä¿ã¯è¸è¡å®¶ã¨ãã®ä½åã¨ã®å¦ãé¢ä¿ã§ã¯ãªããæ¬æ§ã¨ç¾è±¡ã¨ã®é¢ä¿ã§ãããå®å®ã¯ç¥ã®æä½ç©ã§ã¯ãªããç¥ã®è¡¨ç¾ manifestation ã§ããã
ãç¥ããã
God is the root of the universe, as I said, I think God is not a creator transcending to out of the universe but directly I think God is root of our existence. The relation between God and human is not like the relation between an artist and its works, but the relation between true nature and phenomenon. Universe is not creature made by God but manifestation of the God.
"God"
èªç¶ã¨ç²¾ç¥ã¨ã¯å ¨ç¶æ²¡äº¤æ¸ã®ãã®ã§ã¯ãªããå½¼æ¤å¯æ¥ã®é¢ä¿ããããæã ã¯ãã®äºè ã®çµ±ä¸ãèããã«ã¯å± ãããªããå³ã¡ãã®äºè ã®æ ¹åºã«æ´ã«å¤§ãªãå¯ä¸ã®çµ±ä¸åããªããã°ãªãã¬ãå²å¦ãç§å¦ãçãã®çµ±ä¸ãèªããªããã®ã¯ãªãã®ã§ãããèãã¦ãã®çµ±ä¸ãå³ã¡ç¥ã§ããã
ãç¥ããã
The relation between nature and spirit doesn't have nothing to do with each. There is a relation have a close connection. We cannot help thinking about the integration between nature and God. That is, there must be a greater unifying power at the basis of the two. Both philosophers and scientists admit the integration. And the integration is the God.
"God"
God he said is, that is, Buddha theorized. Even though I'm not optimistic, if there is a way to integrate them, this become a meaningful essay. Then Christian must throw much more dogma than Buddhists. Those two essays are combined in åã®ç ç©¶(Zen no Kenkyu, which means "Study of Goodness"). The book was the first book of him. I studied about his final essay named "å ´æçè«çã¨å®æçä¸ç観" to make my graduation thesis at university. We can find difference concepts from Zen no Kenkyu, and it is more interesting but I need to explain with too long sentences to read, therefore I cited from Zen no Kenkyu which is easy to read. Oh, å ´æçè«çã¨å®æçä¸ç観 means "Logic of the field and interpretation of the world of religion". He practiced Zen and reading many Buddhist books and he theorized what he experienced and what he thought. Nishida was a classmate of Suzuki Daisetsu and he affected so much from Suzuki. Even though Suzuki doesn't have talent as philosopher, I think Nishida had it. If he live a longer life, Japan might be changed. He died in 1945, the WWII ended.
It is a photo of "Tetsugaku no michi" where Nishida often took a walk.
0 件のコメント:
コメントを投稿