抄録
The concept of Jikaku remains ambiguous. It is, I suspect, because two kinds of Jikaku have not been clearly distinguished. The one is Jikaku as self-consciousness, and the other is Jikaku in a true sense. The former works on the level of consciousness, which is like such a stubborn wall that only the latter can break through. The true Jikaku arises at the moment of the breakthrough and is united with the true reality (tathatā).
Both are not juxtaposed, and should be considered from two viewpoints of ordinary men and of Buddhas. Only viewed from the Jikaku united with tathatā, the two kinds of Jikaku are essentially identical.
This paper examines the structure of Jikaku in following proceedings. First, Nishida Kitaro tried to solve a contradiction of the pure experience in his Zen no Kenkyu (A Study of Good), in his later works in terms of Jikaku. His solution does not seem to me sufficient, for he did not clarify the qualitative leap of the Jikaku as self-determination of the Absolute Nothingness from the Jikaku as self-consciousness ( I ) . Next, I examine an epistemology in Yogācāra Buddhism. It helps to clarify both the relation of double nature of human existence to Jikaku, and Nishida’s concept of the Universal (II & III). Thirdly, explaining that our life is grounded not in the fictitious world but in the living Stream of Life (dharma), I ponder the connection of two kinds of Jikaku and the ground of the true Jikaku (IV & V).
Furthermore, I focus on the significance of gyo (practice) in Sinran and Dogen. Both Nenbutu in Shinran and Zazen (sitting meditation) in Dogen are respectively regarded as the gyo of Tathāgata. Their insight into gyo shows that they fully understood the qualitative difference of two kinds of Jikaku (VI). Finally, referring to Heidegger’s Was ist das—die Philosophie?, one of his later works, I compare his understanding of philosophy with the above-mentioned structure of Jikaku (VII).
