Imaoka Shin’ichirō-sensei’s (1881-1988) “My Principles of Living (revised)” (1973) and an NHK interview (1973)
Imaoka Shin’ichirō-sensei’s (1881-1988) “My Principles of Living (revised)” (1973) and two, important, associated essays
—o0o—
- I have faith in myself. I recognize my own subjectivity and creativity and feel the worth of living in life (生きがい ikigai). Subjectivity and creativity can be rephrased as personality, divinity, and Buddha-nature.
- I have faith in my neighbour. The neighbour is oneself as a neighbour. If I have faith in myself, I inevitably have faith in my neighbour.
- I have faith in a cooperative society (共同社会 kyōdō shakai). Both oneself and a neighbour, while each possessing a unique personality, are not things that exist in isolation. Because of this uniqueness, a true interdependence, true solidarity, and true human love are established, and therein a cooperative society is realized.
- I have faith in the trinity of self, neighbour, and cooperative society. The self, neighbour, and cooperative society, while each having a unique personality, are entirely one. Therefore, there’s no differentiation of precedence or superiority/inferiority between them, and one always contains the other.
- I have faith in the unity of life and nature. Life, which constitutes the trinity of self, neighbour, and cooperative society, further unites with all things in the universe. [What Imaoka-sensei later called “a universal cooperative society.]
- I have faith in the “church” (教會 kyōkai — i.e. the ideal community). The “church” is the prototype/archetype and driving force of the cooperative society. I can only be myself by being a member of the “church.”
- I have faith in a specific religion. In other words, I am a member of the Tokyo Kiitsu Kyokai. However, a specific religion (including the Tokyo Kiitsu Kyokai) neither monopolizes religious truth nor is it the ultimate embodiment of it.
- I have faith in free religion (自由宗教 jiyū shūkyō). While having faith in a specific religion, the endless pursuit and improvement towards universal and ultimate truth is the core of religious life. Such a dynamic religion is called free religion.
—o0o—
My Journey of Faith – NHK TV Broadcast Summary (1974)
Interviewer: Wakimoto Tsuneya (脇本平也), Professor at the University of Tokyo.
[Reading] “My Principles of Living (revised)” [私の生活信条（訂)]:
I have faith in myself.
I have faith in my neighbour.
I have faith in a cooperative society.
I have faith in the unity of self, neighbour, and cooperative society.
I have faith in the oneness of life and nature.
I have faith in the church.
I have faith in specific religions.
I have faith in free religion.
(Wakimoto) This is the eight-point statement of faith of Imaoka-sensei (今岡先生), but we will inquire about this in detail later. Sensei, you are 98 years old, and first, I would like to ask about your nearly century-long journey of seeking before you arrived at this faith, and then I would like you to explain the meaning of these faith principles in that context. Sensei, you were born in September of Meiji 14 (1881) in Shimane Prefecture. What kind of religious upbringing did you have?
(Imaoka) I came from a very devout Pure Land Buddhist family, and from a young age, I had to participate in morning rituals with my parents in front of the Buddhist altar, or I wouldn’t be allowed to eat. I memorized the Shinshū Nembutsu: (真宗念仏) and Gobunsho (お勤め Rennyo’s Letters), even though I didn’t understand their meanings. It was entirely external, not a conscious faith. My first conscious faith experience was when I received baptism in Christianity in my fourth year at Matsue Middle School (松江中学校). However, this was because I wanted to study English and joined an English class taught by a British pastor. While teaching conversation, the topic of Christ naturally came up, and I gradually became familiar with Christianity. When I was encouraged to join I did so without much thought. At that time, being a Christian in rural areas was seen as treasonous, so my parents were very angry and sad. It even led to the question of disownment. However, I didn’t back down, so you could say it was a conscious conversion.
(Wakimoto) What kind of Christianity was it?
(Imaoka) It was the Anglican Church of England, but I believed in it almost uncritically, as I was taught. However, the central theme was a sense of guilt, the idea that when you do something wrong, the anguish of conscience is the anger of God. I believed that through faith in Christ, you could be forgiven and saved.
(Wakimoto) So, your faith was centred on ethical issues. After that, you went through Kumamoto Fifth Higher School (熊本の五高) and entered the philosophy department at the University of Tokyo, specializing in religious studies. In that regard, you are my senior, and you received guidance from the renowned Professor Anesaki (姉崎教授). What kind of influence did you receive?
(Imaoka) Anesaki-sensei’s first lecture on religious studies was on mysticism, and it was very interesting. Although he was a Buddhist, he was well-informed about Christianity, and he often said, “I am a Buddhist, and that’s why I am a Christian, and I am a Christian, and that’s why I am a Buddhist.” In other words, he ultimately saw them as one. That’s how I began to see Buddhism with new eyes.
(Wakimoto) Until then, you were primarily focused on Christianity, but under Anesaki-sensei’s guidance, your mind expanded, and the idea that all religions are fundamentally and ultimately one, a free religious concept (自由宗教的な考え), began to take root in your mind around that time. By the way, you mentioned mysticism earlier. What was that about?
(Imaoka) When we talk about mysticism, there are various meanings and types, ranging from superstitious beliefs to philosophical concepts. However, Anesaki-sensei’s mysticism was of an academic and philosophical nature. It was about profound religious experiences and contemplation, similar to the likes of [Meister] Eckhart.
(Wakimoto) So, when you mention mysticism, it’s not about so-called miraculous and inexplicable beliefs, but rather about deep religious experiences such as encountering God or achieving unity with the Absolute.
(Imaoka) That’s right. The emphasis of Anesaki-sensei’s lectures was indeed on those aspects, and I was deeply influenced in that regard as well.
(Wakimoto) In such a mystical perspective, because it prioritizes one’s direct personal experiences, the self becomes the focus, right?
(Imaoka) That’s correct. Rather than worshiping God outwardly, you hold God within yourself. God and the self become one. That’s why the self becomes the central issue. Speaking of encounters with God and the unity of God and man, wasn’t there the famous Tsunashima Ryōsen’s (綱島梁川) “Experiment of Seeing God” (見神の実験) during that time?
(Imaoka) Yes, it was Meiji 37 (1904), right when I was attending lectures on mysticism. I read the “Experiment of Seeing God” in the magazine “Shinjin” (新人) and was deeply moved, realizing that there were real examples like Eckhart in Anesaki-sensei’s lectures. I specifically visited Tsunashima-sensei (綱島先生) on his sickbed to receive guidance.
(Wakimoto) Was that a Christian thing?
(Imaoka) Mostly, I suppose. Ryōsen (梁川) was baptized when he was young. However, he soon became sceptical of Christianity and distanced himself from the church, dedicating himself to literary criticism and ethics research. After contracting a terminal illness, he began to immerse himself in religious contemplation, eventually having an experience of seeing God. It wasn’t something you could simply label as Christianity or Buddhism. It transcended those, a vast and profound experience, not at all occult-like, but a vivid experience of a mysterious fusion between God, as the deep reality of the universe, and oneself.
(Wakimoto) After such studies, once you graduated from university . . .
(Imaoka) After leaving university, I became a pastor in Kobe. However, my doubts about Christianity grew, and after three years, I returned to Tokyo. Just then, an assistant system was established in the university’s religious studies department, and thanks to Anesaki-sensei, I became the first assistant.
(Wakimoto) Is that so? I also served as an assistant after the war, so in that regard, I’m your junior. I’ve heard that you went on to study at Harvard University in America . . .
(Imaoka) That was because Professor Anesaki was visiting Harvard as an exchange professor, and I went there to become his assistant. While assisting him, I was allowed to enrol in the university’s divinity school.
(Wakimoto) I’ve heard that the “New Theology” (新神学) was popular at Harvard at that time . . .
(Imaoka) Not just at Harvard, but at that time, liberal “New Theology” was gaining popularity in England, Germany, and other places. However, at Harvard it was Unitarian. While Unitarianism is a form of Christianity, it opposes the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity (the belief in God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit as three entities, yet one in essence [三位一体論]), asserting that God is singular (Unity [ユニティ]) and that Christ is not divine but human. Moreover, it had a rationalist inclination, not believing in the various miracles mentioned in the Bible.
(Wakimoto) With such studies, you gradually walked the path of modern free religion. Were there others who particularly influenced you? Could you please share?
(Imaoka) While I was a pastor in Kobe, I began to doubt orthodox Christianity and lost confidence in my pastoral work. It was during this time that I encountered Nishida Tenkō-san (西田天香さん). It was before he established Ittōen (一灯園), but he was truly Buddhist and Zen-like. When I was exposed to his way of life and philosophy, he seemed to live in a world entirely different from the religious people I had seen before. But he was also influenced by Christianity. For example, he literally practised the teachings of the Sermon on the Mount: “Take no thought for the morrow . . .” meaning, don’t worry about daily issues, but first seek the righteousness of God’s kingdom. Seeing that made me realize the uncertainty of my own life, and that’s when I decided to leave my pastoral duties.
(Wakimoto) I see. Did Tenkō-san formally practise Zen?
(Imaoka) I’m not sure to what extent, but after the collapse of his development project in Hokkaido (北海道), when he was troubled about how to overcome the profit-driven competition of modern society and human selfishness, it seems he had a significant experience with zazen (坐禅).
(Wakimoto) Have you ever practised zazen?
(Imaoka) I haven’t. However, on Tenkō-san’s recommendation, I practised the Okada-style method of Quiet Sitting (Seiza) meditation (岡田式静座法). I borrowed the Hongyo-ji (本行寺) temple in Nippori (日暮里) and sat every morning from six to seven. From the end of the Meiji [明治] period until Okada-sensei passed away in Taishō 9 (1920), I attended devotedly for about ten years. There was nothing but simply sitting, but that was, indeed, a kind of Zen, wasn’t it? It has been a rather important experience in my life, one that I’ve continued to practice to this day. It is my only training and also a method for mental and physical health.
(Wakimoto) It seems you also have a deep knowledge of Japanese Shinto.
(Imaoka) That comes from my encounter with a journalist from America named [Joseph Warren Teets] Mason, who was passionate about studying Japan, particularly Shintoism. He first came to Japan in Shōwa 7 (1932). I was asked by the Director of the Religious Affairs Bureau of the Ministry of Education (文部省宗教局), Shūichi Shimomura-shi (下村寿一氏), to act as [Mason’s] interpreter and help with [his] research. As we got to know each other, he turned out to be a delightful man, and we quickly became close friends. He came to Japan twice more, staying for extended periods, and once we spent a month touring and researching major shrines throughout the country. He published two books on Shintoism, which I translated and published in Japanese. We remained close friends for about ten years until he passed away in New York in Shōwa 15 (1940). He loved Japan, and as requested in his will, he’s buried in the Tama Cemetery (多摩霊園) in Tokyo. He asserted that Shintoism was inherently pacifist and was deeply saddened by the actions of the right-wing movements and military at that time. Thanks to him, I learned a great deal, but it felt like I was being taught about Japan by a foreigner.
(Wakimoto) The more I inquire, it appears that various religions reside within you, Sensei, and as a result, a “free religion” emerged. What is the fundamental idea behind this free religion?
(Imaoka) Every human possesses a religious spirit. I believe that religious desires are fundamental and universal to human nature. This is the fundamental idea. Each religion differs from the others, but they are all based on this fundamental religious spirit. They manifest it in different forms due to various historical and environmental conditions. While each has its own significance and needs to be distinguished, the essence is singular. We focus on this singular essence and value it.
(Wakimoto) Thus, while there are various religions, there’s fundamentally a common and universal essence, something that can be called “religion itself.” And as long as one is human, everyone inherently possesses this, right? This became the first principle of the statement of faith recited earlier as “I have faith in myself,” didn’t it?
(Imaoka) Exactly. Even if there is a deity somewhere, rather than relying and clinging to that, we should believe in our own nature and actualize it. Firstly, it’s about self-establishment. The foundation of personal dignity probably stems from this belief.
(Wakimoto) Regarding the principle “I have faith in myself,” you have added a note saying, “I recognize my own subjectivity and creativity and feel the worth of living in life (生きがい ikigai). Subjectivity and creativity can be rephrased as personality, divinity, and Buddha-nature.” I believe this is in line with concepts like all sentient beings possess Buddha-nature in Buddhism, or humans are children of God in Christianity. So, to have faith in oneself is to have faith in the sacred within oneself, isn’t it?
(Imaoka) That’s right. Generally, religions consider humans as children of sin and deny the self. It is common to preach notions such as selflessness or egolessness. What I’m saying might seem contradictory, but in a modern age where it is proclaimed that “God is dead” (Nietzsche) and atheistic tendencies are strengthening, I argue that even without God, there exists something precious. It’s humanity. Let’s believe in humans and cherish them. Let’s pursue a religion of humanism, a religion without gods. By doing so, I aim to save not only myself but also to respond to the modern trend of people distancing themselves from religion, and the arguments against the necessity of religion and anti-religious arguments.
(Wakimoto) I understand well. So, since this subjectivity and creativity of the self, or the Buddha-nature, is universal, naturally the second article, “I have faith in my neighbour,” and the third, “I have faith in the cooperative society,” emerge. You have faith in the “self” within the neighbour, and the “self” within the cooperative society.
(Imaoka) That’s right. A human cannot be a human on their own. Whether thinking about our immediate needs like clothing, food, and shelter, or considering our spiritual lives, it’s the same. Humans are fundamentally social beings. Therefore, the self, the neighbour, and the cooperative society are fundamentally one. This is what I call my trinity.
(Wakimoto) However, the next article, the fifth, states “I have faith in the unity of life and nature,” so nature comes into play. What is the relationship here?
(Imaoka) It is because humans cannot exist apart from nature. The self, neighbour, and cooperative society all exist within the universe and the vastness of nature, which is essentially the source of our lives. Even thinking about everyday, simple examples, it’s not just fellow humans who become our companions, but also birds, animals, plants, and trees. Normally, it’s said that nature does not have a heart, but isn’t it possible to think that it does? At any rate, we become companions with such birds and flowers. In the teachings of Christ, there’s a lesson to “look at the lilies of the field and the birds of the air.” Also, for instance, I think that sleeping might be a form of returning to nature. When we’re asleep, we are not conscious, which means we don’t exist, making it akin to death, but of course, we’re still breathing, and our heart is beating. Isn’t this one form of returning to nature?
(Wakimoto) So, the “kiitsu” (帰一 “returning to one”) of Kiitsu Kyōkai (帰一教會 “Unity Fellowship” or “Unitarian Church”) means not just that all religions are fundamentally, or ultimately, one — “the unity of all religions” — but also that the self, neighbour, and cooperative society become one. Moreover, it implies becoming one with everything under the heavens and on earth. It’s a word with many connotations, isn’t it?
(Imaoka) It might be a quadunity (四位一体 “shi-i-it-tai”) rather than a trinity (三位一体 “san-i-it-tai”).
(Wakimoto) Such a position is declared in the eighth article, “I have faith in free religion,” but before that, the seventh article states “I have faith in a specific religion.” What does it mean to have faith in both?
(Imaoka) Your confusion is justified. If you say that traditional specific religions are inadequate and that’s why we advocate for a free religion, that’s partly true. However, by “specific religion,” as mentioned here, it primarily refers to Kiitsu Kyōkai. Since Kiitsu Kyōkai is a member of the Japan Free Religious Association (日本自由宗教連盟), it’s undoubtedly a free religion. Yet, in aiming to realize the universal ideals and truths of a free religion that is neither Christianity, Buddhism, nor Shintoism, and which transcends them, we founded Kiitsu Kyōkai. Nevertheless, in practice, various unique aspects manifest, and it inevitably becomes a specific religion. However, universality can only manifest through particularity. Therefore, we have no choice but to create a specific Kiitsu Kyōkai and, through it, seek a universal free religion. Thus, the annotations to the [7th and 8th] statements of faith are: “A specific religion (including the Tokyo Kiitsu Kyokai) neither monopolizes religious truth nor is it the ultimate embodiment of it,” and “While having faith in a specific religion, the endless pursuit and improvement towards universal and ultimate truth is the core of religious life. Such a dynamic religion is called a free religion.”
(Wakimoto) Then, if all these traditional religions move forward with such a mindset, they’re basically practising free religion, wouldn’t you say?
(Imaoka) Yes, that’s right. In fact, organizations like the Japan Free Christian Church (日本自由キリスト教会) led by Pastor Akashi (赤司牧師), and the Shōsei-kai (正誓会) or Shōsei-ji (正誓寺) led by Revd Yamamoto Gen’yō (山本現雄師), all of which are members of this Association, exhibit this characteristic. Even those not affiliated with the Association, but who embrace the attitude of free thought and a free quest for the truth, seem to be surprisingly numerous both within and outside of established religious groups. We refer to them as potential free-religionists.
(Wakimoto) Recently, it seems that religious cooperation and interfaith dialogues, especially on issues like peace, have become popular. This would be genuine only if it’s based on the spirit of free religion, right?
(Imaoka) It is, indeed, commendable that there’s been an increase in interfaith cooperation. However, mere cooperation is not enough. If one maintains the basic idea that ‘my Buddha is the most revered’ and one obstinately clings only to one’s own traditions then, even when gathering together with others, it would amount to nothing more than mere socializing. One should humbly face the reality of one’s own religious group and reflect upon the fact that it does not monopolize the truth and, should, instead, be aiming for a higher truth, acknowledging that this higher truth is something common to all religions. Only when one discusses and pursues this truth can genuine dialogue and cooperation take place.
(Wakimoto) As I have been asking you about various things, I’ve come to feel that your thoughts seem to align with what is termed “pantheism” (汎神論) within religious studies. It seems you believe that everything in this world, be it individual humans or flora and fauna, are manifestations of a certain absolute being (絶対者).
(Imaoka) Yes, that’s right. I lost faith in a personal god (人格神) early on, so in that sense, while it might be blunt to declare [what I am talking about is a kind of] atheism (無神論), saying that doesn’t quite sit right with me. Perhaps it’s similar to how Buddhism and Confucianism are called atheistic, or perhaps pantheistic. My belief is that the revered (尊い), the worship-worthy (拝むべき), exists within humans.
(Wakimoto) Your Kiitsu Kyōkai, from what I understand, doesn’t have impressive facilities like typical churches or temples, and there aren’t any clergy people, such as pastors. You yourself have abandoned the title of “pastor” and maintain a stance as an ordinary member, just like everyone else. Do you reject the distinction commonly made between the sacred world and the secular?
(Imaoka) There might be some meaning in distinguishing the secular from the sacred. However, even within the secular world, I’ve seen many people, be they politicians, business people, scholars, artists, artisans, or farmers, whom I deeply respect. Conversely, I’ve seen many corrupt aspects within the religious world. I’ve come to believe that making a clear distinction between the two based on appearances is a mistake. I genuinely feel that mutual respect and interaction between fellow humans — a kind of “secularism” (俗人主義 lit. “Common-person principle”) — is authentic and inherently democratic.
(Wakimoto) You served as the principal of Seisoku Academy for a long time. What are your thoughts on the relationship between education and religion?
(Imaoka) It was quite some time ago, but when I became a principal, I intended to emphasize religious education and even to set aside a specific time for religious subjects. However, things didn’t seem to go well, and I began to think that teaching religion separately from other subjects might be a mistake. Instead, I came to the realization that religion should be integrated into regular subjects, or rather, true education inherently contains religion. One doesn’t necessarily have to label it as “religion” or even be conscious of imparting religious education. When I speak in this manner, it raises the question of what religion truly is. As [Paul] Tillich once said, if religion is humanity’s ultimate concern, then perhaps the most fundamental concern is to fully realize oneself as a human being. Hence, even without explicitly terming it as “religion,” an education that aims for the realization and completion of humanity becomes in itself religious education. True education is, in essence, religion. I believed that if one commits to the true essence of education with all one’s heart and soul, then there is no need specifically to invite religious figures to deliver their teachings.
(Wakimoto) We don’t have much time left, but finally, in a separate document you wrote as a “Charter” [for the school] it says, “We seek harmony between spirituality and intellect, and reject superstition and fanaticism” (「霊性と知性 との調和を求め、迷信と狂信を排斥します。」). Could you elaborate on this?
(Imaoka) The conflict between spirituality and intellect is essentially the clash between religion and science. Both are merely two facets of how our mind operates. Naturally, there shouldn’t be any conflict; they should harmonize. When the heliocentric theory emerged, if it’s an unshakeable truth, then religion should harmonize with it. The same goes for the theory of evolution. Stubbornly opposing these things from the standpoint of old traditions is a grave mistake. Even if religion concedes and appears to lose in such debates, it doesn’t affect the essence of religion. On the contrary, it can serve as an opportunity for genuine religion to be purified and elevated.
(Wakimoto) Briefly, could you also speak about eternal life (永遠の生命)?
(Imaoka) If by eternal life (永生), we mean what’s commonly referred to as the immortality of the soul (霊魂不滅), isn’t the only answer that we don’t know because we haven’t tried dying yet? But isn’t it fine not to know such things? What’s more important is how we live our daily lives in this present world, committing to our duties and leading a fulfilling life. I believe that in itself has eternal value, the essence of an indestructible life. Fearing the descent into hell (地獄) or yearning for the happiness of paradise (極楽) and thus believing in religion based on such calculations of gain and loss is a sordid thing, and that itself is a path to hell.
(Shōwa 54, 1974, “Mahoroba” 「まほろば｣ )
Comments