@article{oai:icabs.repo.nii.ac.jp:00000200,
 author = {今西順吉},
 issue = {8},
 journal = {国際仏教学大学院大学研究紀要, Journal of the International College for Advanced Buddhist Studies},
 month = {Mar},
 note = {110006483127, Tetsuro Watsuji (1889-1960), author of "The Practical Philosophy of Early Buddhism" (1927), has been praised, along with Hakuju Ui, as a pioneer in Japan in the study of Early Buddhism. But to him the Buddhism was not a mere object of study. In his youth he studied Western Philosophy and published "A Study of Nietzsche" (1913) and "S. A. Kierkegaard" (1915). At the same time he was interested in literature, criticism and dramatic movement, contributing many articles to magazines and newspapers. Then, all at once, abstaining from these activities, he concentrated himself upon the culture and Buddhism of Japan and published "Ancient Temples Pilgrimage" (1918), "Ancient Cultre of Japan" (1920), 'Buddhist Monk Dogen' (1923). After these processes he tried to study early Buddhism in order to understand Japanese Buddhism and thoughts fundamentally. 1. Before Buddhist studies Watsuji studied in Tokyo Imperial University under Prof. Raphael Koeber, German philosopher, and acquired the mothod of classical philology, which was very useful for his later studies of early Buddhism. But while young, he sympathized with Nietzsche and wrote that he felt blood-relationship between the genuine Japanese and Nietzsche. He sent his book on Nietzsche to Soseki Natsume, who was a reprensentative novelist and critic of modern Japan and the most honourable person to him. But some weeks later Soseki cited a proverb from Nietzsche's work in his novel appearing serially in a newspaper, within a tragic context suggesting the destiny of Nietzschean thoughts. And in the next succeeding novel Soseki drew a person who reminds us Watsuji, and entrusted him with a philosophical subject. This was the turning point of the life of Watsuji. 2. The relation between T. Watsuji and H. Ui In the preface to "The Practical Philosophy of Early Buddhism" he says as follows: "this book was not written to be read only by Buddhist scholars. The author aims to introduce the unique practical philosophy, which is found in the early Buddhist texts and became the source of the Nikaya and Mahayana Buddhism, into the interests of researchers of philosophy in general. And the author's aim will be fulfilled, if the uniqueness of this tide of thoughts other than that of Greek philosophy be made clear through his study and this tide become to be taken always into consideration on the occasion of historical investigation of philosophy. At first this study was published in 11 parts in a magazine. When the sixth part was published, H. Ui bestowed in his comment the highest eulogiums on Watsuji's study and expressed his pleasure to find the concensus of the interpretation of pratityasamutpada. Ui was in communication with Watsuji, but he could not know about Watsuji's interpretation in detail, because Watsuji did not publish at this time the parts on pratityasamutpada yet. And Watsuji also, in his preface to the Practical Philosophy of Early Buddhism, expressed his thanks for having been encouraged by Ui. Based on these facts, probably, Ui's interpretation of pratityasamutpada is usually called 'Ui-Watsuji theory'. But it remains still a question, if both interpretations really agree. 3. Interpretation of pratityasamutpada in The Practical Philosophy of Early Buddhism 1) Examinations of earlier studies Negating the theory accepted traditionally in Japan, Watsuji evaluates the studies of Max Walleser and Bunzaburo Matsumoto. Then he introduces Ui's interpteration that the principal meaning of pratityasamutpada consisting of twelve parts is expressed by idappaccayata, i.e. the phrase "imasmim sati idam hoti, imass 'uppada idam uppajjati, etc." and the phrase means inter-dependent relation. His detailed investigation of Ui's interpretaion seems to show his agreement with Ui at a glance, but it covers actually his sharp criticism with a euphemism. 2) Watsuji's fundamental standpoint Watsuji points out various kinds of pratityasamutpada and understand that every part of pratityasamutpada is a 'condition' and pratityasamutpada means the conditioning relation. Watsuji does not refer to idappaccayata at all. If he agreed with Ui, this is impossible. We must suppose that idappccayata is according to him identical with pratityasamutpada and it has no special meaning other than pratityasamutpada. He refrained from expressing his criticism frankly. But he says, criticizing Ui, in a short note that sunyata and inter-dependence can be found only in Mahayana Buddhism and Nagarjuna. Thus Watsuji arrived at sunyata and inter-dependence, which become key words to his philosophical studies henceforth.},
 pages = {1--52},
 title = {和辻哲郎の縁起研究},
 year = {2004},
 yomi = {イマニシ, ジュンキチ}
}