Lacanian psychoanalysis is similar to Zen Buddhism in that both emphasize the human activity of language fundamentally and endeavor to gain access to the Real, that is, the dimension of the Thing-in-itself or Being itself. In Lacan's course of thinking, the kind of life the subject who succeeded in acquiring access to the Real would experience was examined. Lacan sub-sequently studied James Joyce, who wrote Finnegans Wake, which is filled with skillful play on words. When discussing Joyce, Lacan thought that the Symbolic, that is, the dimension of language activity, the Imaginary, namely, the dimension of images and the Real were tied together as the Borromean knot. Subsequently, Lacan considered that the aim of psychoanalysis was the identification of the subject itself with the fourth element, by which the three dimensions were able to be tied together as the Borromean knot. In this article, Dōgen's “dropping off body and mind (shinjindatsuraku)” is examined by referring to Lacan's discussion. It is surprising how boldly Dōgen interpreted the words in Buddhist texts in his own right or deconstructed-and-reconstructed them at will in The Treasury of the True Dharma Eye (Shōbōgenzō). One may ask what allowed Dōgen to do that. In this article, a few observations on the relationship between Dōgen's cosmology of language and his “dropping off body and mind” are made as well.

Kierkegaard emphasizes a division between neighbor love, which is directed at everyone equally, and preferential love, which is a love for a specific person founded in preferable characteristics that distinguish them from others. On the other hand, he insists that to love a neighbor is to love the individuality of others. Although his claim seems to be contradicting, the concept of “the individual (det Enkelte)” connects the individuality of others to the equality of every human. This article aims to clarify that there are two characteristics of others in Kierkegaard's works. One concerns the individuality given by God; the other concerns the individuality dissimilarly produced through comparisons with other people. The paper also argues that neighbor love is not based on a love of others because of dissimilarities but it is founded in others' individuality. Some commentators have regarded the equality of neighbor love as inclusive, stressing that neighbor love encompasses everyone as the object of love, even if those in need for help are displeasing. This commentary is not wrong. However, it blurs the difference between the equality of neighbor love and the equality of earthly concern. If practicing neighbor love means loving others with their individuality, accepting the equality of neighbor love means isolating each individual in forming any party with others.

In modern Egypt, the king could arbitrarily appoint a person as a “Grand ‘Ālim” to the upper house of the legislature, which began to be active after 1924. Therefore, a dispute over whether a person was really a “Grand ‘Ālim parliamentarian” could arise. This paper will analyze the controversy that arose in the parliament in 1927. The first part will outline the changing role of the modern Egyptian parliament and point out the significance of focusing on the debates among political actors in the parliament in the study of the relationship between state and religion. The second part will show how the relationship between state and religion, which has been regarded as ambiguous at the time of the enactment of the 1923 Constitution, was in fact concretized in a way that adjusted the power of the king through such means as the strict definition of the Grand ‘Ālim in the process of parliamentary debates.

This paper explores how monks and lay practitioners lived at Buddhist temples during the Tang Dynasty. It also clarifies the terminology related to different modes of residence at that time. A strict management system was implemented to manage the increase in clergy during the Tang Dynasty. The number of monks who lived at temples was limited. If temples needed more staff, however, they could also recruit new monks in residence on the basis of examinations. The process resulting in this form of residence is known as haijū (配住). Monks were also transferred from different temples (kijū 寄住). An official document was required to apply for a transfer. On the other hand, temples also accepted monks based on orders by the emperor (a process known as chokujū 勅住). The examination of recently discovered documents has brought to light that government officials and literati also frequently stayed at these temples. The reasons are still unclear at this point, but we may assume that laypeople supported the temples financially, by paying rent.

In this paper, I analyze the transition of Sectarian Shinto in the Meiji period as it emerged from the Kurozumikyō discourse of self-definition. This analysis is based on a reading of historical documents in light of the social position of Kurozumikyō at that time. The self-definition of “Shinto” as a “sect” in the early-to-middle Meiji period changed the statement of the “Order of Kurozumikyō,” which implied the “Order of Founder's Followers (Kyōso no michizure no kyōdan),” by the end of the Meiji period. Kurozumikyō overcame the lack of collective concepts in the Shinto tradition by introducing the word “order (kyōdan),” which was not commonly used at the time, acquiring a narrative that connoted a congregation based on its founder. This was a consequence of the “evolution” of pursuing a collective form during the external evaluation that Kurozumikyō was exposed to. Sectarian Shinto was a new form of Shinto that emerged in modern social change and was originally a policy-created office institution. The evolution of Kurozumikyō through the Meiji period reveals Sectarian Shinto transformed from a product of government into a more universal “missionary-type religious order.” This process marked a turning point in the modernization of Shinto.

Several recent studies have described the transformations Japanese Buddhism went through due to the modern appropriation of the Euro-American concept of “religion.” Nevertheless, when tracing these changes, scholars have often overlooked the role played by yet another new idea in the Meiji context: “faith.” Amid discussions involving the equally recent concepts of “science” and “superstition,” the problem of how to interpret Buddhist scripture in light of all these new discursive frameworks became one of the most pressing.

In order to gain further insight into this process, in this paper I will focus on the work of Sakaino Kōyō (1871-1933), a Buddhist intellectual who vigorously engaged in this (re-)construction of Buddhism during the Meiji and the Taishō periods. He was one of the main leaders of the so-called New Buddhism Movement of the late 1890s and, as such, advocated for “a sound faith” and “the utter extermination of all superstitions.” He was also a pioneer in the field of Buddhist history, having penned several ground-breaking works. Here, I will analyze his idea of “Poetic Buddhism” (shiteki bukkyō), developed in the 1890s as a method for interpreting scripture in general. That is, by showing the development of this method in relation to contemporary trends such as liberal theology and modern historiography, this paper intends to provide an insight into the complicated debate between “science” and “religion” in Meiji Japan.