![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This paper attempts to read Nishida Kitarō (1870–1945) as a New Confucian, with a focus on his early moral philosophy. While the influence of Buddhism on Nishida’s philosophy is surely significant, this paper argues that it is actually Confucianism which plays a more important role. It is for this reason that fruitful comparisons can be made between his work and the so-called New Confucianism. I would like to explore three key questions with respects to this important yet relatively overlooked aspect: Firstly, in what way has Nishida conformed to Confucian discourse in his moral philosophy? Secondly, what elements of Confucianism has Nishida revisited? Thirdly, what lessons can Nishida offer to philosophy as a New Confucian? It is my suggestion that reading Nishida as a New Confucian may help to further open up the potential of Nishida philosophy, Confucian philosophy, as well as philosophy in East Asia in general.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1. In Ng’s book (Ng, Citation1998), he explicitly points out that the concept of absolute nothingness is grounded on Buddhism, especially Zen, p. VII.
2. See「韓図倫理学」(Kantian Ethics, a paper submitted for the examination given by Nakajima Rikijō 中島力造 at Tokyo Imperial University in 1893),「グリーン氏倫理哲学の大意」緒言第一編(An outline of Green’s moral philosophy, Prologue, Part I)『教育時論』(Comments on education), No. 362, May 5, 1895, 「グリーン氏倫理哲学の大意(承前)」緒言第二編 (An Outline of Green’s moral philosophy, Prologue, Part II), 『教育時論』(Comments on education), No. 363, May 15, 1895,「グリーン氏倫理哲学の大意(承前)」緒言·第三編 (An outline of Green Moral Philosophy, Prologue, Part III), 『教育時論』 (Comments on Education), No. 364, May 25, 1895, 「カント倫理学主義」 (Kantian ethical discourse),『北辰会雑誌』 (Journal of Hokushinkai), No. 29, April 3, 1901, 「倫理学説(一)」 (Ethical discourse I), 『東亜之光』(Tōa no hikari), Vol. 3, No. 3, March 1, 1908, 「倫理学説(二)」(Ethical discourse II), 『東亜之光』(Tōa no hikari), Vol. 3, No. 4, April 1, 1908,「倫理学説(三)」(Ethical discourse III), 『東亜之光』(Tōa no hikari), Vol. 3, No. 6, June 1, 1908,「倫理学説(四)」(Ethical discourse IV), 『東亜之光』(Tōa no hikari), Vol. 3, No. 7, July 1, 1908, and「倫理学説(五)」(Ethical discourse V), 『東亜之光』(Tōa no hikari), Vol. 3, No. 8, August 1, 1908. For details, see 『西田幾多郎全集 新版』 (Completed works of Nishida Kitarō, New Edition, hereinafter, NKZ), Iwanami Shoten, 2003–2009, Volume 24, pp. 181–183. In 2020, a supplementary volume of NKZ was published.
3. According to Ng Yu-Kwan, there seems to have an encounter between Tang Junyi (唐君毅, 1909–1978) and Nishitani Keiji (西谷啓治, 1900–1990) and did know each other in person well. See 吳汝鈞 (Ng Yu-Kwan). 《京都學派哲學:久松真一》 (The philosophy of the Kyoto School: Hisamatsu Shinichi). Taipei: Wenjin Chuban, 1995, p. (5).
4. Asakura Tomomi (朝倉友海) has been paying specific attention to the comparison between the Kyoto School and New Confucianism, especially Nishida Kitarō and Mou Zongsan (Asakura, 2004).
5. Regarding the background and various English translations of the Declaration, see John Makeham, ‘True Retrospective Creation of New Confucianism’, pp. 27–29, especially footnote 11.
6. The English translation of Zen no Kenkyū is taken from Abe Masao and Christopher Ives, An inquiry into the Good (hereinafter, IG). New Heaven and London: Yale University Press, 1990.
7. The original text in Chinese is: 「居下位而不獲於上，民不可得而治也。獲於上有道: 不信於友，弗獲於上矣; 信於友有道: 事親弗悅，弗信於友矣; 悅親有道: 反身不誠，不悅於親矣; 誠身有道: 不明乎善，不誠其身矣。是故誠者，天之道也; 思誠者，人之道也。至誠而不動者，未之有也; 不誠，未有能動者也。」See http://ctext.org (accessed on 1 July 2022).
8. This passage in Chinese is: 「心正而後身修，身修而後家齊，家齊而後國治，國治而後天下平 」(Ibid.).
9. The original text in Japanese is: 「カントは又Metaphysik der SittenとWolfのgeneral practical philosophyとを区別し、前者はpure willのprincipleのみを研究し、後者はvolition一般に関して其action & conditionを講究する者也。」.
10. The original text in Japanese is: 「吾人のwillはReasonに由て動かさるゝと共に、又feelingに由て動かさる者なり。」.
11. The English translation in IG for human nature is ‘individuality’, which indeed is not faithful.
12. The original text in Chinese is: 「飯疏食飲水, 曲肱而枕之, 樂亦在其中矣。」《論語·述而》 (Shu Er, The Analects) (http://ctext.org/analects/shu-erctext, accessed on 1 July 2022).
13. The original text in Chinese is: 「不義而富且貴，於我如浮雲」〈述而〉、《論語》 (Shu Er, The Analects) (Ibid.).
14. Fujita Masakatsu (藤田正勝) conveys that “’ ‘feeling’ (感情) is rearticulated as the ‘fundamental criteria’ (根本的条件) of establishing consciousness … .In Zen no Kenkyū, Nishida argues that all phenomenon of consciousness encompasses these three aspects, namely, knowledge, feeling and volition. Meanwhile, in 『意識の問題』(Problem of consciousness) and 『芸術と道徳』 (Art and morality), ‘feeling’ is taken as an aspect of the most fundamental consciousness (もっとも根本的な意識の相)” (Fujita, 2020, p. 161, paraphrased mine).
15. See Inoue Tetsujirō (井上哲次郎). 『日本陽明学派之哲学』(The philosophy of the Japanese school of Wang Yangming). Tokyo: Fuzambō, 1900, 『日本古学派之哲学』(The philosophy of the Japanese School of ancient learning). Tokyo: Fuzambō, Citation1902, and 『日本朱子学派之哲学』(The philosophy of the Japanese school of Zhu Xi). Tokyo: Fuzambō, Citation1905. Fujita Masakatsu points out that it is Inoue Tetsujiro who recommended Nakajima Rikizō to use ‘personality’ for translating ‘人格’ (jinkaku), which was closely related to cultivationism (修養主義), an intellectual current that spread out in early Meiji era (Fujita, 2022, pp. 120–121).
16. John Maraldo points out that “It was Nishi Amane (1829–1897) who … established its translation as ‘tetsugaku’ [哲学], a neologism composed of two sinographs that became standard for philosophy in China and Korea as well … .The sinographs may have been taken from a Confucian term (shi-kiken) [士希賢], for the ‘refined person’ who aspired to wisdom”,, in the eleven century Confucian work Tongshu (‘The All-Embracing Book’) by Zou Dungyi [周敦頣] … .The sinograph for gaku [学], meaning to study or to learn, likewise has ancient roots. It appears in the opening passage of the Analects of Confucius … .The word tetsugaku was thus a neologism that resonated deeply with Confucian ‘learning’”., in James W. Heisig, Thomas P. Kasulis and John C. Maraldo, eds., Japanese Philosophy: A Sourcebook. Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press, Citation2011, pp. 555–556.