Culture as Power: Buddhist Heritage and the Indo-Japanese Dialogue 9780367313593, 9780429316531

Table of contents :
Cover
Half Title
Title Page
Copyright Page
Table of Contents
List of Illustration
List of Contributors
Foreword
Preface
Acknowledgements
Introduction: The Discovery of Buddhist Dialogues Between India and Japan—History, Culture and the State
Part I: The Indo-Japanese Dialogue
1 Buddhism as the Pinnacle of Ancient Indian Morality: Tagore and Vivekananda Interpreting the Figure of Buddha
2 Kakuzō Okakura in Cultural Exchange between India and Japan: Dialogue with Swami Vivekananda and Rabindranath Tagore
3 Japan in India’s Xenology: Negotiating Modernity, Culture and Cosmopolitanism in Colonial Bengal
4 India-Japan Dialogue in the 1920s: Buddhism and World Peace in the Young East
5 A.K. Coomaraswamy and Japan: A Tentative Overview
Part II: World Heritage and a New World Order
6 Cultural Heritage: From Nationalism to Internationalism
7 Globalisation and the Formation of East Asian Art Collections: The Freer Art Gallery
8 Survey Trips to China by Meiji Era Japanese Art Historians and the Development of Buddhist Art History in Japan – Through the Example of the Shaka Triad Image in Horyuji
9 Japanese Encounters with Ajanta
Glossary
Index

Citation preview

Culture as Power

This book presents new studies on intellectual and cultural interactions in the context of Buddhist heritage and Indo-Japanese dialogue in the late 19th and early 20th centuries on art, religion, and cultural politics. By revisiting Buddhist connections between India and Japan, it examines the pathways of communication on common aesthetic and religious heritage that emerged in the backdrop of colonial experiences and the rise of Asian nationalisms. The volume discusses themes such as Asian arts and crafts under colonialism, formation of East Asian art collections, development of Buddhist art history in Japan, Japanese encounters with Ajanta, India in the history of the Shinto tradition, Japan in India’s xenology, and Buddhism and world peace, and suggests paradigms of reconnecting cultural heritage within a global platform. With essays from experts across the world, this book will be an essential read for scholars and researchers of history, art history, ancient Indian history, colonial history, heritage and cultural studies, South Asian and East Asian history, visual and media studies, Asian studies, international relations and foreign policy, and the history of globalization. Madhu Bhalla is Former Professor of Chinese Studies, Department of East Asian Studies, University of Delhi, India. She is currently the editor of India Quarterly at the Indian Council of World Affairs. She has also taught at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, and Queens’ University, Canada. She has held a visiting fellowship at the Fudan University, Shanghai, and has been a visiting scholar at the University of Sichuan at Chengdu. She has published in the areas of international relations, Chinese foreign and strategic policy, and political economy. Her interests are in the connections between culture and power in foreign policy. She has been part of track two dialogues between India and China and is on advisory bodies for China studies in India.

Culture as Power Buddhist Heritage and the Indo-Japanese Dialogue

Edited by Madhu Bhalla

First published 2021 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2021 selection and editorial matter, Madhu Bhalla; individual chapters, the contributors The right of Madhu Bhalla to be identified as the author of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record has been requested for this book ISBN: 978-0-367-31359-3 (hbk) ISBN: 978-0-429-31653-1 (ebk) Typeset in Sabon by codeMantra

Contents

List of illustrations List of contributors Foreword

vii xi xv

BY S H YA M S A R A N

Preface Acknowledgements Introduction: the discovery of Buddhist dialogues between India and Japan—history, culture and the state

xvii xxiii

1

M A DH U BH A L L A

PART I

The Indo-Japanese dialogue

23

1 Buddhism as the pinnacle of Ancient Indian morality: Tagore and Vivekananda interpreting the figure of Buddha

25

V I C T O R A . VA N B I J L E RT 

2 Kakuzō Okakura in cultural exchange between India and Japan: dialogue with Swami Vivekananda and Rabindranath Tagore

49

E M I KO S H I M I Z U

3 Japan in India’s Xenology: negotiating modernity, culture and cosmopolitanism in colonial Bengal

69

A M I YA P. S E N 

4 India-Japan dialogue in the 1920s: Buddhism and world peace in The Young East J U D I T H S N O D G R A S S

85

vi Contents 5 A.K. Coomaraswamy and Japan: a tentative overview

109

S H I G E M I I N AG A

PART II

World Heritage and a new world order

133

6 Cultural heritage: from nationalism to internationalism

135

H I M A N S H U P R A B H A R AY 

7 Globalisation and the formation of East Asian art collections: the Freer Art Gallery

159

M I T S U T E RU N A R AYA M A

8 Survey trips to China by Meiji era Japanese art historians and the development of Buddhist Art History in Japan – through the example of the Shaka triad image in Horyuji

170

SU IJ U N R A

9 Japanese encounters with Ajanta

189

YA S U KO F U K U YA M A

Glossary Index

209 211

Illustrations

Figures 2.1 Okakura-Kakuzō at the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, ca 1904 © Izura Institute of Art and Culture, Ibaraki University 50 2.2 Ellora caves. Photograph by author, 2013 56 2.3 Rabindranath Tagore © Izura Institute of Art and Culture, Ibaraki University 58 2.4 Rokkakudo and Okakura’s house, ca 1907 © Izura Institute of Art and Culture, Ibaraki University 59 2.5 The White Fox written by Okakura-Kakuzō in 1913 © Izura Institute of Art and Culture, Ibaraki University 61 2.6 The catalogue of Bichitra bijutsu gakko Indo Gasyu (Bichitra art school Indian art book). Author’s personal collection 64 4.1 Rabindranath Tagore in Japan 1924, shown here at the Kabuki Theatre in Kyoto, June 16, 1924.  Asahigraph, 3:1 (July 2, 1924) 16.  The figure second to the right of Tagore is D. T. Suzuki who acted as his translator 90 4.2 Japanese pilots in Japanese planes complete the first ever transcontinental flight, evidence of the country’s technological achievements and symbolic of how Japan saw its place in the world. Cover image, Asahigraph 5:4 (July 22, 1925). The November 18 issue carried aerial images looking down on London. The flight had taken place in ­September 1924 91 4.3 A monument inspired by the Sanchi stupa seen here against Japanese grave markers and snow. It was constructed in 1927 at Adashino Nembutsuji in Northwest Kyoto, marking the shared heritage of India and Japan in the Buddhist humanism of King Asoka. Photograph by author 99 5.1 Yanagi Muneyoshi. Courtesy of the Nihon Mingeikan, Japan Folk-Art Museum, Komaba, Tokyo 115 5.2 Kwanfa Mung Gate. Postcard image, ca 1920s, Collection of the International Research Center for Japanese Studies, Kyoto 116

viii Illustrations 5.3 Asakawa Takumi (1891–1931) and Sardar Gurcharan Singh ­(1896–1995). Portrait photo, former collection S.G. Singh 120 5.4 Sinaber motif vase, Blue Flower, second half of the 18th century. Former collection Yanagi Muneyoshi, Collection of the Osaka Oriental Ceramic Museum 121 5.5 The Dance of Siva, Cosmic Dance of Nataraja, Brahmanical bronze, South India, 12th Century, Madras Museum (reproduced from Frontispiece. AKC The Dance of Shiva 1924) 123 5.6 “Krishna instructing Arjuna” by Surendra Nath Kar (reproduced from Myths of Hindus & Buddhists, 1913, p. 189) 124 5.7 Sardar Gurcharan Singh, A Piece with lotus motif, Blue Pottery Trust, Delhi 125 6.1 Dhamekh stupa at Sarnath with conserved remains of monastery in the foreground. Photograph by author 144 6.2 Chaukhandi stupa at Sarnath with a medieval octagonal tower on top. Photograph by author 145 6.3 Plaque showing list of donors in Mulagandhakuti. Photograph by author 148 6.4 Mulagandhakuti temple at Sarnath. Photograph by author 149 6.5 The bronze bell presented to the Mulagandhakuti by the Japanese. P ­ hotograph by author 150 6.6 Painting by Kosetsu Nosu relating to the life of the Buddha inside ­Mulagandhakuti Photograph by author 151 7.1 Gathering of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.: Purchase – Charles Lang Freer Endowment, F1921.1 160 7.2 Historical Buddha. Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.: Purchase – Charles Lang Freer Endowment, F1944.46 161 7.3 Waves at Matsushima. Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.: Gift of Charles Lang Freer, F1906.231 161 7.4 Thunder God. Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.: Gift of Charles Lang Freer, F1900.47 163 7.5 The Princess from the Land of Porcelain. Freer Gallery of Art, S­ mithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.: Gift of Charles Lang Freer, F1903.91a-b 164 7.6 The Peacock Room. Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.: Gift of Charles Lang Freer, F1904.61 165

Illustrations  ix 7.7 The inside of Binyangzhongdong in 1904, Bessatsu Taiyō Okakura ­Tenshin, Heibonsha, 2019, p. 27.  (Taiyo Okakura Tenshin-The Master of Modern Art, Heibonsha) 167 7.8 The head of bodhisattva from Binyangzhongdong (Masterpieces from the Osaka Municipal Museum of Art, Naniwa Printing, 1986, Plate 184). 168 8.1 Shaka triad in the Main Hall of Horyuji’s Western Complex. Seventh century. Nara. Courtesy of Tasaburo Yoneda. After Nara rokudaiji taikan kankokai [ed] Nara rokudaiji taikan dai 2 kan, Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1968, Plate 2 173 8.2 Buddha and attendants in the Binyangzhongdong. Sixth century. Longmen Caves. After Hiroshi Sofugawa, Ken Okada [ed] Sekai bijutsu daizenshu toyohen dai3kan sangoku nanbokucho 3, Tokyo: Shogakukan, 2000, Plate 216 181 8.3 Amitabha image from Maoxian, Sichuan Province, dated 483 CE. Photograph by the author. Courtesy of Sichuan Museum, Chengdu, Sichuan, PRC 186 9.1 Part of the painting of wall No. 6 at the kondō, Hōryūji (Asahi Shinbunsha (ed.), Horyu-ji Kondo Hekiga, 1994). Courtesy of Hōryūji and Benrido 191 9.2 Taikan Yokoyama, Sakya to Majo (The temptation of Mara’s daughters), 1903, Nagano prefectural Shinano Art Museum. Courtesy of ­Nagano prefectural Shinano Art Museum 192 9.3 Taikan Yokoyama, Shakya Chichi ni Au (Shakyamuni meeting his ­father), 1903, Currently whereabouts unknown (Ryuso Saito (ed.), ­Taikan Sakuhin-­shu, Tokyo: Nihon Bijutsu-in, 1925). Courtesy of Nihon Bijutsuin 193 9.4 A battle scene of Simhala avadana. Drawing by author 194 9.5 Kanpō Arai, Shakanyoraizu (Shakyamuni Buddha), 1918, Sakura-shi Museum – Kanpo Arai Memorial. Courtesy of Sakura-shi Museum – Kanpo Arai Memorial 199

Maps 8.1  Location of Ikaruga. Map data © 2019 Google, SK Telecom Imagery © 2019 TerraMetrics. Google Maps/ Google and the Google logo are r­ egistered trademarks of Google LLC171 8.2  Map of Horyuji Temple Grounds. Redrawn by author, based on ­‘Horyuji garan haichi zu’ on the first pages of Katsuaki Ohashi [ed] Horyuji ­bijutsu ronsou no shiten, Tokyo: Kabushikigaisha Gurafu sha, 1998172

Contributors

Victor A. van Bijlert has been a Lecturer of Indian Religions and Sanskrit in the Faculty of Religion and Theology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (University of Amsterdam), Netherlands since 2007. His research interests cover Indian philosophy, history, modern Hinduism, and Bengali literature. His latest book is a collection of Dutch translations of the Gauḍapada, Bewustzijn boven taal en dualiteit (Consciousness Beyond Language and Duality, 2016). He completed his studies in Leiden in 1987 with a dissertation on Buddhist knowledge and logic. He was earlier a Lecturer in Sanskrit, Indian Philosophy, Bengali, and the modern history of India. From 2000 to 2003 he was a Visiting Professor in Calcutta, at the Indian Institute of Management and the National Institute of Human Development, with a research assignment in Indian values for management. He has also translated Bengali poetry into Dutch. Emiko Shimizu is an Associate Professor in the Institute for University Education and Student Support at Ibaraki University, Japan. She received a Ph.D. in comparative culture from Ochanomizu University in 2008. She has authored numerous publications on Okakura Kakuzō, including Okakura Tenshin no hikaku bunka shi teki kenkyu: Boston deno katsudō to geijutsu shisō (A Comparative Study of Okakura Kakuzō: His Achievements in Boston and Philosophy of Art) (2012); Izura no Okakura Tenshin to Nihon Bijutsuin (Okakura Kakuzō and Nihon Bijutsu-in at Izura) (2013); and Yo Yo Mugen: Okakura Tenshin Kakuzō to Yoshisabrō (Boundless Expanse of Ocean: Okakura Kakuzō and His Brother Yoshisaburo) (2017). Her other publications include a contribution to Okakura Tenshi Album (An Album of Okakura Kakuzō) (2013) and Okakura Tenshin: Izura kara Sekai he (Okakura Kakuzō: from Izura to the World) (2018). In 2013, she was awarded the 64th Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology’s Art Encouragement Prize for New Artists in the field of criticism for outstanding achievement that had opened up new vistas. She is currently working on a research project on Okakura Kakuzō and his pupil Chūnosuke Niiro.

xii Contributors Amiya P. Sen is a Professor at the Centre for the Study of Comparative Religions and Civilizations, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, India, and Research Fellow, Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies. He has been an Agatha Harrison Fellow at the University of Oxford and Visiting Fellow at the Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla, and the Centre for Contemporary Studies, Nehru Memorial Museum & Library, New Delhi. For a brief period, he was also the Tagore Professor at Rabindra Bhavan, Visva Bharati, Santiniketan. Sen’s research interests relate to the intellectual and cultural history of modern India, and he has published 12 books. Judith Snodgrass is an Adjunct Associate Professor, School of Humanities and Communication Arts, and Honorary Researcher at Western Sydney University, Australia, and has taught Japanese history for 26 years. She has written extensively on the history of modern global Buddhism from colonial studies of the 19th century to the present. Her current research is on Buddhism in interwar Japan and the intra-Asian dialogue on Buddhism and modernity. Her area of research is the history of modern global Buddhism. It began with a study of the pioneering colonial scholarship on Pāli texts by T. W and C.A. F. Rhys Davids, which established the paradigm of Buddhist humanism fundamental to the phenomenon. Her 2003 book titled Presenting Japanese Buddhism to the West: Orientalism, Occidentalism and the Columbian Exposition covered the introduction of Mahayana Buddhism to West. The guiding theme in both studies was the East-West interaction consequent to the historical context of colonialism, Western intellectual developments, Asian modernity, religion, and nationalism. She has since published extensively on Buddhism and modernity in Asia, and Buddhism in Australia. Her current research on the Young East and the International Buddhist Society established in Tokyo in the 1930s follows the trajectory of the 2003 book, considering how Buddhism was used to negotiate Japan’s place in the world in the interwar period of the 20th century. Shigemi Inaga is the former Deputy Director-General and Professor at the International Research Center for Japanese Studies, Kyoto, and former Dean, Graduate University of Advanced Studies (Sōkendai) in Hayama, Japan. He majored in French 19th-century art history as well as comparative literature and culture. Since completing his Ph.D. in Paris (L’Université Paris VII) in 1988, his research has developed in cultural anthropology and intercultural ethics. His books include Pirate’s View of the World History: A Reversed Perception of the Order of Things (2017), In Search of Haptic Plastics (2016), Images on the Edge (2014), The Orient of the Painting (1999), and Le Crépuscule de la peinture (1997). Among the pieces he has edited in English are Crossing Cultural Borders: Beyond Reciprocal Anthropology (1999), Traditional Japanese Arts and Crafts in the 21st Century (2005), and Questioning Oriental Aesthetics and Thinking (2010). He co-edited the volume Monokeiro Mono-sophia (2010) at an exhibition held at the Kyoto University

Contributors  xiii Museum. He also curated the exhibition Receptacle du passage and organized an international symposium, Berceau du temps, Passage des ames at the Maison de la Culture du Japon (2015). Himanshu Prabha Ray  is an Honorary Professor, Distant Worlds Programme, Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich. She is the former Chairperson, National Monuments Authority, Ministry of Culture, New Delhi and former Professor, Centre for Historical Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, India. Her research interests include maritime history and archaeology of the Indian Ocean, the history of archaeology in South and Southeast Asia, and the archaeology of religion in Asia. Her recent books from Routledge include Archaeology and Buddhism in South Asia (2018); an edited volume, Buddhism and Gandhara: An Archaeology of Museum Collections (2018); Susan Verma Mishra and Himanshu Prabha Ray, The Archaeology of Sacred Spaces: The Temple in Western India: 2nd century BCE to 8th century CE (2017); and The Return of the Buddha: Ancient Symbols for a New Nation (2014). She is also the author of The Archaeology of Seafaring in Ancient South Asia (2003). Mitsuteru Narayama  is an Assistant Professor, Department of School of Culture, Media and Society, Waseda University, Japan. He has a Ph.D. in Literature and specializes in Chinese art history, especially of the Han dynasty. His publications include a book, Artworks of Shu: A study of Eastern Han Sichuanese Culture through Mirrors and Stone Relics (2017), as well as several papers. Suijun RA is currently appointed at Waseda University, Kyoto University of Art and Sciences, Japan, to teach Asian Buddhist Art History, while working on her Ph.D. dissertation. She received her BA in English literature from Sophia University (Japan) in 1999, an MA in Social Sciences from the University of Chicago (USA) in 2002, and an MA in Art History in 2008, from Waseda University. Specializing in medieval Chinese and Japanese Buddhist art history, she has particularly been focusing on the evolution of the worship and the images of Avalokiteśvara from Tang to Song China, especially that of the Thousand-armed Thousand-eyed Avalokiteśvara, and how the rituals concerning this deity affected the development of its images. She has published numerous papers in Japanese and Chinese on the subject, based on extensive fieldwork in rural China, including in areas such as Sichuan and Dunhuang, both known for their abundance of Tang Buddhist art. She also received the Research Fellowship for Young Scientists (DC2) from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, and has taught at several universities. Yasuko Fukuyama is an Associate Professor, Department of Global Studies, Faculty of International Studies, Ryukoku University, Japan, and has an MA and Ph.D. from Nagoya University. She has published on Ajanta paintings and her recent research focuses on the cultural complex at Jaffna in Sri Lanka.

Foreword

Culture as Power: Buddhist Heritage and the Indo-Japanese Dialogue, which has been so ably edited by Professor Madhu Bhalla, is a most valuable and timely contribution to the exploration of the myriad historical and cultural ties that bind India and Japan together. This volume puts together several seminal papers presented at the conference bearing the same title, convened at the India International Centre (IIC) on August 16 and 17, 2018. Participating in the conference were historians, political scientists and diplomats from both countries. It was sponsored by the IIC and the Embassy of Japan in Delhi. His Excellency, Kenji Hiramatsu, the Ambassador of Japan, delivered the inaugural address, in which he recounted the history of engagement between India and Japan through the centuries, reflected in Japanese aesthetics, its Buddhist heritage and, in more recent times, the shared sense of a larger Asian identity, in the revival of which both countries have played a major role. The idea for convening this conference emerged from a growing awareness that the period spanning the last decade of the 19th century and the early decades of the 20th was historically significant but has suffered relative academic neglect. It is a span of time that saw the rekindling of the longstanding but latent sense of affinity linking the countries of Asia together. This was an age of rediscovery, through archaeological finds and new linguistic studies, of ancient trade and cultural interchange. The art historian found aesthetic confluences and shared symbolism in the art forms that stretched all the way from the Indian subcontinent to the Far East, encompassing South-East Asia, China, Korea and Japan. It is Buddhist heritage, which became a platform for exploring shared identities and a philosophical, ethical and moral sensibility that distinguished it from the later Western impositions through colonial and imperial conquests. This obviously had a very important political dimension. Japan’s emergence as a modern nation with capabilities comparable to the West and, in particular, its defeat of Russia in 1904, had the effect of breaking the spell of Western invincibility. The impact that Japan’s emergence as a confident Asian power had on India’s own nationalist stirrings has not been fully understood. The later Japanese turn to right wing militarism and imperial pretensions had the effect of masking the more positive encounters from earlier, not only

xvi

Foreword

between India and Japan but with other Asian countries as well. The conference sought to look afresh at the earlier, more benign phase of interactions, anchored in the remarkable discourse between towering figures like Swami Vivekananda, Rabindranath Tagore and Okakura Tensin. The papers presented here convey some of the excitement scholars and artists felt both in India and Japan at the rediscovery of ancient connections between the two countries, even though these had been mediated through history by both China and Korea. The question is whether in our increasingly globalized and inter-connected world, this inherited legacy has value both for India-Japan relations, as well as the role the two countries can play together, collaboratively, on the international stage. The interest that the conference evoked not only in academic circles but also among diplomats leads one to believe that this rich heritage does have great value in advancing India-Japan relations and also reconnecting Asia in a contemporary context. There has been a growing awareness that in bringing countries together, relations at the government-to-government level constitute only one layer, to be strengthened through trade and commerce and through people-to-people contact. However, it is the last category that is often at the bottom of the list of priorities when it should perhaps rank much higher. We see how the growing familiarity in both countries of their rich cultural heritage and strong affinities has played a powerful role in promoting nationalist sentiment and national pride. The revival of cultural and aesthetic engagement has also led to a surge in artistic explorations and intellectual creativity. The original impulse behind this revival was inclusive, accepting of plurality and diversity of expression, with an underlying spirit of sharing. It reinforced nationalism in Asia but not in its narrow and exclusive form. That came later. So, this too is a lesson on how cultural revival can sometimes be yoked to authoritarian projects dressed in nationalist colours. For India and Japan, their shared cultural legacy is a field that still awaits deeper reflection and extensive research. The essays included in this volume should stimulate such work at academic institutions and be provided with support from our governments. Our scholars need to focus not just on India and Japan but also on the larger canvas encompassing Asia, which is an inspiring saga of continuous engagement that has left a deep imprint on all our cultures. The grievous and violent interruption of this engagement by colonial and imperial assaults on countries of the region is only now beginning to be overcome. Much more needs to be done and sustained exposure to what binds us together is a shared responsibility. It is my hope that the pioneering step that the India-Japan conference has taken will be followed by many more such interactions focusing on what is a most fascinating story of a period in history that continues to resonate in every aspect of India’s engagement with Japan and Asia today. Shyam Saran Former Foreign Secretary and Life Trustee, India International Centre

Preface

In September of 1893, the newly rebuilt American city of Chicago hosted the Columbian World Exposition to mark four hundred years of Columbus’ discovery of the Americas. The Exposition, as it was planned and executed, was an expression of America’s progress away from the political and social divisions of their Civil War and also a celebration of its material achievements in industry and science. Coming on the heels of other great expositions in Europe and England, it was meant to showcase the great innovations of Western science and industry at the height of Western colonialism. As such, the Chicago exposition was a coming of age event. As with other “world” expositions in Paris and London it affirmed a definition of civilization centered around Christianity and Western technology. For the Asian watching this event the significance of a universal Christian view of the world, married with technological advances, was not lost. A universalist Christian view of the world had already been suggested by the new American disciplines of anthropology and sociology, which provided the intellectual underpinnings for colonial ventures in the late 19th century. In addition, by the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the interest in “world religions” provided a view of eastern religions and civilizations valued largely for their antiquity, and western religions, Christianity in particular, for the ability to shape the future. This popular schema was applied to the organization of the pavilions at the Exposition. Apart from the main exhibits, the Exposition also had pavilions from forty-six countries and a parallel seventeen-day World Parliament of Religions.1 However, even as the Exposition was clearly an event to mark American exceptionalism and to forge a universal theology for a world that seemed within reach of an expansive Western modernity, the World Parliament of Religions brought together a disparate, although admittedly small, group of scholars and practitioners from across the non-western world determined to insert notions of cultural plurality into the dominant view at the Parliament. Full blown colonialism in India and the impact of Western expansionism in Japan and China meant that Asian intellectuals aware of the long history of their civilizations were forced to examine their beliefs and cultural values. Nowhere was this more evident than in the debates around

xviii

Preface

Asian religions and in the selective projections of beliefs that resonated with calls for Western modernity. The Parliament became a forum for meeting and dialogue among the Asian delegates and, brief as it was, it aroused an interest in each other’s culture and civilization and especially in a common Buddhist heritage. Hence, while the majority of papers (152 of the 194) were on Christianity, 39 speakers represented other religions, with the largest delegation representing Buddhism.2 Buddhism became the bridge for Asian intellectuals but the dialogue that ensued between Indian and Japanese intellectuals like Vivekananda, Rabindranath Tagore and the Japanese aesthetician Okakura Kakuzo is also particularly significant for the understanding of the impact of Indian art in Japan. And, more significantly perhaps, the dialogue lent itself to the discovery of the Asian roots of Asia’s art, culture and religion and became the founding idea for a notion of “Asianness.” As a result, in the latter part of the 19th and early 20th centuries the Indian Ocean “lecture circuit” saw many Asian intellectuals travelling across East Asia to interact with Asian audiences. These interactions invoked the historical movement of ideas, art forms and philosophies and contributed to a nascent idea of Asianness. These pathways of communication, while conceding the limitations of these interactions, were broken during World War II and in its aftermath when the notion of the unity of Asia came under attack. Revisiting 19th and early 20th century discourses and interactions between India and Japan reveals the unique diversity of cultural dialogues and practice in Asia. Clearly there were traditions of pluralistic dialogues and spaces for a discussion of faith and beliefs, dialogues less embedded in the urge for domination. These older strategies of dialogue, of transmission and exchange at a particular moment in history, rested not on hierarchy or vertical scales of power but acknowledged the horizontal fluidity of culture even as Buddhism was implicated in local power transitions in India, Japan and China at different times. These older cultural interactions also reveal the ability of culture to create discourses challenging the definitions of what it meant to be Asian and to create new cultural cartographies that bound Asia through material and cultural networks. While recent research has made clear the lineaments of a Buddhist world in the early years of the last millennium, the more recent revival of that idea is less clear. The chapters in this volume address the many impulses and intellectuals behind this 19th century revival. Hence, in a discussion of the intellectuals who shaped this discourse, Emiko Shimizu notes that the cultural dialogue between India and Japan in the early 20th century revolves, to a large extent, around three influential figures in both countries: Okakura-Kakuzō, Vivekananda and Rabindranath Tagore (Chapter 2). While Vivekananda’s influence can clearly be seen in Okakura’s widely read texts, The Ideals of the East and The Book of Tea, both Tagore and Okakura contributed to creating national schools of art. Tagore’s play, The Sacrifice, and Okakura’s final work, The White Fox, explore similar themes

Preface xix of self-sacrifice, humanism, religion, love and sorrow. Okakura’s discovery of the source of Japanese art in Buddhist remains in India helped him construct a history of art based on his belief in the unity of religion and art throughout Asia. From all accounts, the exchange of ideas with Vivekananda and Tagore influenced Okakura and represented a turning point in his life. Okakura’s view that Japanese Buddhist art had its roots in China became the foundation of his Asianist framework for evaluating Japanese art. His initial surveys in China, and later his visit to Buddhist shrines in India, reinforced this view, with long lasting impact on the direction of art history in Japan. Yasuko Fukuyama traces this impact to Japanese artists of the day and their view of Indian art as shaping a sense of Asian aesthetics. Japanese encounters with Ajanta began with the discovery of the caves and Japanese artists in particular tried to replicate the Ajanta paintings, leading to what Fukuyama notes was “nothing less than a direct and vibrant cultural exchange.” The essays in this volume, however, expand on the intercultural dialogue much beyond the Okakura-Vivekananda-Tagore interactions. Shigemi Inaga, for one, compares how two of Asia’s leading art critics, Ananda K. Coomaraswamy and Yanagi Muheyoshi, revived pan-Islamic and Korean traditional arts and crafts respectively, hitherto marginalized under colonialism (Chapter 5). In a search for the roots of their own aesthetic traditions, Japanese scholars like Tensin Okakura also made survey trips to China and were especially influenced by the similarity between the Shaka Triad image in Horyuji in Japan and the sculptures in the Longmen Grotto in the Henan province. As Suijun Ra notes, for some time the assumption of a linear connection between Chinese art and Japanese aesthetic traditions informed the direction of Japanese enquiries (Chapter 8). Over the years, the study of these sculptures has indicated the overlay of other influences from Asia as well. Hence, Japanese scholars and artists also made the difficult journey to Buddhist sites in north India and discovered a complex interconnection between Buddhist art across Asia. On a visit to the newly opened caves at Ajanta around the turn of the century, Japanese artists were impressed by the exuberance of the Ajanta murals. Aspects of Ajanta art were actively incorporated into their own works. This, as Yasuko Fukuyama notes, was “nothing less than a direct and vibrant cultural exchange, after a lapse of two millennia” (Chapter 9). However, revival was not the only concern in the late 19th century. As Asia slipped into conflict, its treasures began to be shipped abroad. In many ways, this fed the craze for Chinoiserie and Japonaiserie and Indian artefacts in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. With the globalization of transport systems and information, patrons across the West acquired East Asian art collections, especially Chinese artifacts. As museums and private collectors began to ship these to Europe and America, the fear of its loss for civilization prompted some to create institutions that could safeguard

xx

Preface

these treasures. As Mitsuteru Narayama notes (Chapter 7), one such collector, Charles Lang Freer, (1854–1919) later donated his collection to the American government. These were then installed in the Freer Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C. The gallery was to be a monument to the heritage of Asian civilizations and its collections were neither to be sold or loaned out to other museums or for display. The Freer Gallery stands testimony to a recognition of Asian traditions and has become foundational to examining and reconstructing Asian aesthetic traditions. Japanese connoisseurs also became collectors, as Narayama also points out. The collections in Japan and Europe varied, however, given the cultural value of Chinese Buddhist objects for the Japanese. Significantly, during this period, both Japan and India negotiated critical intellectual and moral challenges posed by their particular experiences of the West, as Amiya P. Sen argues (Chapter 3). He points to the consequences of a combination of cultural nostalgia, burgeoning nationalism and idealistic universalism in both India and Japan, which all but broke the two foundational ideas of this dialogue. The first was the casting off of Buddhism, which Okakura had argued was the binding glue of the dialogue. The second was the notion of pan-Asianism and new definitions of Asia outside the colonial matrix. This was revealed, in different ways, at the Chicago World Parliament of Religions, in the casting off of Buddhism. Here, Swami Vivekananda appropriated the Buddha as a great moral preacher but saw the religion itself as a mere breakaway from Hinduism, and the Japanese Buddhist scholar Hirai Kinza on his return to Japan embraced Unitarianism. In India itself, the Buddha was projected as a moral figure by both Vivekananda and Tagore, albeit with some differences, as Victor A. van Bijlert argues (Chapter 1). His ethics undergirded their different Hindu reform agendas, especially as they critiqued Hinduism’s social and religious orthodoxies. Over time, the notion of pan-Asianism also came under strain from Japan’s militarism and unbridled nationalism, with Tagore questioning Japan’s emulation of Western colonialism and expansionism. This put him at odds with Vivekananda, who supported Japan’s advances towards political self-determination and militarization. The dialogue between India and Japan was not confined to aesthetics and Buddhist philosophy only, but also took on more political overtones, as in the objectives of the English language journal published from Tokyo, The Young East. As Judith Snodgrass points out, the journal extended the Meiji Buddhist revival of the late 19th century but between the two world wars it devoted itself to projecting Buddhism as politically engaged in finding a solution to global conflict (Chapter 4). It represented the views of Japanese intellectuals who were committed to making Japan a strong regional power that could mediate rival Western interests. These were views that were well received by Indian intellectuals of the time, who associated themselves with the journal. The India-Japan dialogue, thus, had many dimensions, was a creature of a certain historical moment and floundered on political ambitions and

Preface xxi extreme nationalism. However, it also revealed enduring connections between culture, religion and the ability to change enabling political visions. The essays in this book reveal the rich and pluralistic foundations of this dialogue but also implicitly ask whether this dialogue can be revived and in what form, a hundred years from that earlier historical moment. Concepts of Asia are being revised once again, connections are being excavated from history and the Asian turn to globalization has brought the continent together in new and unforeseen ways since the last quarter of the old century. How, from the rich menu of opportunities before us, can we carry forward this dialogue? As Himanshu Prabha Ray argues, given the many dimensions of the India-Japan dialogue in the 19th and early 20th centuries, one way in which the legacy can best be carried forward is by a collaboration in proposing Buddhist heritage sites to be included in UNESCO’s World Heritage list (Chapter 6). These sites were important historically in the belief systems of both countries and remain important in reconstructing a cultural ecology based on a common heritage. The objective of this volume is to draw attention to the richness of these older interactions but also to suggest new paradigms for reconnecting Asian cultural heritage. Since the turn of the 21st century, India has begun to revive claims to Buddhism through its origins and subsequent development into an Asian religion. There is also a realization that Buddhism best provides the values and history to transmit temporal influence to neighbouring states and define the nation at home. Hence, a renewed focus on Buddhist sacred spaces and reconstructing a history of Buddhism through inclusion in heritage sites and global tourism has become the focus of state endeavours. Japan, in turn, has taken steps to have its major Buddhist sites included in UNESCO’s list of World Heritage Sites and has been for some time invested in Buddhist sites in India, and now Nepal. Within a global framework, such as the 1972 UNESCO World Heritage Convention Asian, states could jointly inscribe Buddhist heritage. This could form the basis of renewed links between the two countries. By and large, the Hepburn style of transliteration has been used throughout this manuscript, except for early titles that have used an earlier style of romanization. In the case of proper nouns, the transliteration reflects how they are commonly known in the English language.

References Masuzawa, Tomoko. The Invention of World Religions or, How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism. London: University of Chicago Press, 2005. Seager, Richard Hughes. The World’s Parliament of Religions: The East/West Encounter. Chicago: Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, 1st ed., 1893, Reprinted 1995.

Acknowledgements

The chapters in this volume draw on presentations made at a conference held on 16 and 17 August 2018 at the India International Centre (IIC), New Delhi on ‘Rethinking Cultural Heritage: Indo-Japanese Dialogue in a Globalizing World Order.’ The interdisciplinary conference was initiated by Ambassador Shyam Saran, Life Trustee, IIC, and was sponsored by IIC and the Institute of Chinese Studies (ICS), New Delhi. The coordinating committee included Ambassador Shyam Saran, Ambassador Ashok Kantha, Director, ICS, and Professors Madhu Bhalla and Himanshu Prabha Ray. We are grateful to IIC and ICS for their support, especially the late Ms. Premola Ghose, Chief Programme Officer at IIC, for her meticulous planning and eye for detail. We are obliged to HE Ambassador Kenji Hiramatsu, Embassy of Japan, for the keynote address and to Ambassador Shyam Saran for writing the foreword to this volume. Mr. Dnyaneshwar M. Mulay, Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, graciously agreed to present the valedictory address to bring the conference to a close. Thanks are also due to Prof. Partho Datta, Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), Dr. Ranjana Mukhopadhyaya, Delhi University, Dr. Reba Som, Author, and Prof. Radha Chakravarty, Ambedkar University, for chairing the sessions and for the smooth progress of the conference proceedings. It is regretted that Dr. Gitanjali Surendran, Dr.  Jyoti Atwal and Professors Fabio Rambelli and Lynn Meskell were ­unable to contribute to the volume. Researchers from the Centre for Historical Studies, JNU, and ICS participated in the lively discussions and also helped in many significant ways to make the conference a success. Reports prepared by Punita Kapoor, Vineeta Kumari, Anisha Deswal and Rekha Yadav of JNU were published as IIC Occasional Papers Nos. 91 and 93, thanks to the efforts of Ms. Omita Goyal and Ms. Rachna Joshi of IIC. A last but very important acknowledgment must go out to Professor V. Ramalakshmi, who meticulously scoured through the manuscript and advised us on the intricacies of transliteration from Japanese to English. It is to the contributors to the volume that we owe a tremendous debt for the timely revision of their papers and for making them publishable. It is

xxiv Acknowledgements hoped that this volume will be included in teaching programmes of universities and will invoke interest among students and scholars to develop the research themes further. Madhu Bhalla and Himanshu Prabha Ray

Introduction The discovery of Buddhist dialogues between India and Japan—history, culture and the state Madhu Bhalla The account of the dialogue between India and Japan in the 19th and early 20th centuries rests on interactions between some of the leading intellectuals in both countries. These were sporadic and short periods of interaction and the few players in these episodes seemed almost to have met by chance, given the rigour and expense of long sea journeys, the limited prior knowledge of the culture and history of each other and the fact that Western colonialism in the 19th century mostly directed Asian interests towards the Western world. In retrospect, these meetings were a discovery of each other. And they would have remained just that if the discourse on values, art and aesthetics, philosophy and Buddhism had not been involved in the search for “Asianness” and the development of Asian nationalism. Both of these emerged from specific interpretations of Indian and Japanese culture and were located in opposition to the cultural and historical onslaught of colonial narratives of Asia. While colonial geopolitics discouraged a “political” debate—narrowly defined—on rearranging the hierarchies of power, cultural dialogues masked concerns over power and the challenge to Western hegemonies through debates on aesthetics, the continuity of Asian art traditions, seen especially in Buddhism, and the universalist values of Asian religions and cultural traditions. The cultural turn in debates in the 19th and early 20th centuries carved out a space for uttering “seditious” views, the projection of values as a public good in dealing with asymmetries in power and for interactions between Asian intellectuals who saw culture as intrinsic to framing definitions of the state and politics in both India and Japan. Revisiting late 19th and early 20th century interactions between India and Japan reveals the unique diversity of cultural dialogues and practice in Asia. While this period saw the heyday of colonial narratives, the dialogues took place despite colonialism. Colonial subjects, and those who lay on the margins of the colonial framework and were yet affected by it, like Japan, retained agency through cultural dialogues even within a colonial or quasi-colonial context. An examination of these older cultural interactions reveals the ability of culture to create discourses that challenged the ordering of the Asian world.

2  Madhu Bhalla This chapter will discuss how, where and to what extent cultural narratives set the course of cross-national interactions and confronted, overcame and reoriented asymmetries of power. It will also discuss whether these dialogues have relevance for contemporary engagements between India and Japan and to what extent they are implicated in power. Therefore, it will examine whether the current focus on Buddhist connections by Asian states has begun to create a new cultural ecology in Asia, if the renewed focus on heritage has revived a “culturist” view of Asia, if new symbols of ancient Buddhist connections can become the basis of shared knowledge and values and what, if anything at all, Japan’s post-war “peace psyche” contributes to Asian dialogue.

Positioning culture In 1893 two important events took place, related to the participation of Japan and India in different parts of the Chicago Columbian Exposition. One was the projection of Japanese “civilization” at the Japanese pavilion, an act necessary to the renegotiation of its status with the West. The second was Vivekananda’s speech on Hinduism at the Parliament of World Religions, which made a bold claim of its universal values. The Parliament was itself an addition to the Exposition. Both events marked a turning point in the ways that influential figures in India and Japan began a dialogue with the world and between themselves. This dialogue reflected the effort to position their civilizations, its values and its achievements as important to any global conversation on civilization. While the language of the dialogue was cultural, relating to arts and aesthetics, religion and philosophy, and could be seen as an isolated and passing event, the political impact was the more lasting. The Chicago Columbian Exposition, 1893 and Okakura Tenshin and Vivekananda Japan’s participation in the Exposition was not the first exposition abroad in which it had participated, but it was by far the most significant. It came at a juncture in Japan’s modern history when levels of industrialization and modernization under the Meiji restoration had progressed rapidly. An emerging nationalist review of its civilization encouraged calls for a renegotiation of its relations with the West. The organizers of Japan’s exhibition at the Exposition, aware that Japan still lagged behind the West in material culture, made a determined effort to put “art in the service of politics.” As Judith Snodgrass points out, Japan was implicated in a complex discourse of “aesthetic nationalism,” which defined Japanese identity, displaced politics onto culture and created a cultural discourse that ran parallel to ­political discourse.1

Introduction: discovery of Buddhist dialogues

3

The movement for a “national appreciation of Japanese art” was spearheaded by three influential intellectuals in Japan: Okakura Tenshin, Kuki Ryuichi and the American art historian Ernest Fenollosa. Between 1882 and 1890, the three powered a movement to preserve the traditions of Japanese art and limit the impact of “Westernization” on it. Okakura saw Japan as a repository of Asian civilization with the responsibility to preserve Asia’s aesthetic traditions. Japan, he wrote, is a museum of Asiatic civilization; and yet more than a museum because the singular genius of the race leads it to dwell on all phases of the ideals of the past, in the spirit of living Adwaitism, which welcomes the new without losing the old. 2 He, along with Fellonosa and Kuki Ryuichi, evolved a defence of Japanese art in the latter part of the 19th century, challenging those who had lent support to the full-scale Westernization of art and architecture in the first few decades of the Meiji transformation. In 1882, Fenollosa offered suggestions on how the ends of Japan’s traditional art could be met through the establishment of a school of fine art, support for artists and by encouraging the appreciation of art by exhibiting it more widely. By the end of the decade, the Imperial Commission for Investigating National Painting, upon which Fenollosa, Okakura and Kuki had served, became the Tokyo School (Academy) of Fine Art. With Okakura as its head by 1890, the “school was fully nationalistic and offered study and training limited to Japanese traditions. It offered no instruction in the western styles,” although it later introduced some Western techniques.3 His report of the same year lay down six fundamental principles to be followed by Japanese artists: individuality, use of ancient Japanese techniques to enrich the artist’s background, a passion for art, the use of historical painting and Ukiyo-e to depict “admiration” for the country and reflect the contemporary concerns of people. He both restored the “Japanese” in art and kept the door open to new influences within this framework.4 This new self-respect in the field of aesthetics was a mirror image of political impulses at the national level. The challenge of the Western presence in Japan in the mid 19th century and the treaties forced upon it propelled the Meiji government into rapid industrialization, seen as a path to eventual equality. Hence, during the 19th century much of the Meiji government’s energy was put into repositioning itself as an equal to the West and renegotiating the unequal treaties signed after 1854. To this end, the Meiji project’s aims were two-fold: to industrialize/modernize and to project itself as a “civilized” nation. The issue of being in a state of civilization was complicated in Japan by the need to integrate its heritage with modernity. Two paths emerged, one was to escape from Asia and the other was to reject imitating the West and find a route to Asian unity. This tension was best displayed in Japan’s

4

Madhu Bhalla

participation in exhibitions abroad. Between 1867 and 1900, Japan participated in 27 international expositions; each time the intent was to display its commercial and industrial prowess and its arts. In the earlier exhibitions, Japan’s pavilion looked more like “a curiosity shop,” the exhibits a collection of bric-a-brac that were neither of any great material value nor presented to the world the best face of a refined civilization. By the 1890s, the political objective of participating in international exhibitions was more clearly defined. As Martha Chaiklin notes, “Expositions were… used to market Japanese civilization as equal to that of the West. Because in the 19th century they could not compete with machinery, aesthetics became the battleground.”5 The tasks of organizing the pavilion and the selection of articles were shifted from sundry foreigners to the Imperial Commission and put under the charge of Japan’s foremost scholars and artists. The discussion over whether Japanese exhibits should be art or manufactured goods, or even ethnographical displays, was resolved by the time the Chicago Exposition came around, with Okakura coming down definitively on the side of art and aesthetics.6 Notably, after Japan’s defeat of Chinese forces in 1895 and the renegotiations of its unequal treaties in 1898, the debate between culture and industry was closed. At the Paris Exposition in 1898, the Japanese stall focused on industry not civilization. For the Chicago Exposition, however, given the focus on “aesthetic nationalism,” immense effort went into conceptualizing the Japanese exhibition. The Japanese Imperial Commission took a direct interest in designing, planning and executing some of the art in the main exhibit, and involved Japan’s leading artists and artisans in recreating the best of Japan’s culture, many of them from Okakura’s Tokyo School of Fine Art.7 The Commission allocated $630,000 for the exhibition, a figure in excess of what most other countries spent at the time. This was clearly an opportunity to showcase not just Japan’s art but also its history and its view of its place in Asia.8 Intellectuals in Japan argued that if their nation could persuade the West that it was modern and civilized, it could expect the unequal treaties of the 1850s to be renegotiated. In fact, “reference to the treaties and Japan’s expectation of favourable renewal was explicitly made at the dedication of the building.”9 It was no accident, then, that the guidebook that Okakura wrote for visitors to the Japanese exposition was intended to take them through a tour of Japanese history from the Fujiwara through to the Tokugawa period, with each period in the arts indicating linear progression to more refined aesthetic qualities.10 The development of a “nationalist aesthetic” was intended to place Japan as equal to, even a partner of, Western states. In the opening statement of the guide, in part explaining the context for naming its exhibition “the Ho-o-den” after the mythical phoenix, Okakura wrote, Japan, the Land of the Rising Sun, has been from ancient times considered the birthplace of the Ho-o (or Phoenix). The United States of

Introduction: discovery of Buddhist dialogues

5

America, her neighbor and warm friend, has organized an Exhibition[,] which… is accompanied by all those tokens of success that are believed to follow the advent of the Ho-o. Japan… has come to the Exhibition laden with the treasures of that art which has been the heirloom of her people for the last thousand years. … Which though comparatively insignificant, may, it is hoped, in some degree contribute to the beauty of the World’s Fair.11 He went on to present Japan as an old civilization but a modern, civilized state. The Phoenix Hall itself was, in part, to be a replica of an 11th century temple at Kyoto. It presented an aesthetic tradition that went back a thousand years, implicitly juxtaposing it against the Exposition’s celebration of the mere 400th anniversary of Columbus’s voyage to the Americas. Yet, as Snodgrass points out, the paintings on the main exhibit from Japan, an enamel triptych of a censer and two vases, were suggestive of how Meiji Japan viewed its contemporary political environment.12 One vase showed chickens playing under a rising sun, depicting Japan as “leader of Asia and protector of Korea.” Moreover, the symbol of the dragon (China) hovering over roiled waters and shadowed by threatening clouds, the rise of the Russian eagle and a suggestive mixing of the American stars and stripes and the chrysanthemum, the emblem of Japan, to denote a closer friendship with the US spoke to the emerging debate within Japan on the changes in power relations in the East. “Nippon” no longer simply denoted Japan’s geographical position East of China-the source of the sun-but signified the land of new beginnings. The power of China had waned. Japan, no longer a satellite to China (Chugoku), literally the “central kingdom”, was assuming a position as leader of Asia in an international arena, allied with the United States against an imperialist Russia.13 But there was also the complicated issue of Japan’s relationship with Asia. While Okakura declared, “Asia is One,” there was a lively debate within Japan on whether it should turn away from Asia as it had left many Asian states behind by withstanding the challenge of Western imperialism and moving towards rapid industrialization.14 Many of the concerns over civilization and modernity were shared by leading intellectuals in South Asia as well. Swami Vivekananda, for one, with Rabindranath Tagore and the Sinhalese Buddhist Dharmapala Anagarika, became a major interlocutor in this debate in India. At the World Parliament of Religions at Chicago, Okakura and Vivekananda did not cross paths, their efforts directed at two different issues: religion and aesthetics. Even as Okakura projected Japan’s civilization through its arts, Vivekananda spoke of the universalism of Hinduism, a religion for all times and all peoples. His first speech at Chicago, a response to the welcome to

6

Madhu Bhalla

delegates at the Parliament, was an astute example of the marriage of spirituality and modernity. It was an appeal to the exceptional traditions and beliefs of the past, the position of India as a refuge for the oppressed of all religions and a critique of “sectarianism” and “fanaticism,” a reference to the colonial criticism of Hinduism.15 These two positions, on religion and aesthetics, were to come together later in a broader dialogue on the unity of Asia. Vivekananda’s path to spirituality led through the reformist Brahmo Samaj, which looked for rationality in Hindu traditions, practices and beliefs, often even rejecting religion itself, and had emerged as a direct response to the colonial critique of Indian society and beliefs. For Vivekananda, however, reason without spirituality was unacceptable. “Science,” he said, “has proved to me that physical individuality is a delusion, that really my body is one little continuously changing body in an unbroken ocean of matter; and Advaita (unity) is the necessary conclusion with my other counterpart, soul.”16 In his search for a spiritual teacher, Vivekananda moved away from the Samaj and yet, as part of the social reform episteme of 19th century Bengal, could not ignore the need for change in Hinduism as it was practiced during this period. It enabled him to speak, in the West, of the ideals of Advaita and defend Hinduism against charges of idolatry and polytheism.17 At home he critiqued it also for its archaic, regressive and oppressive aspects. Vivekananda’s objective was to persuade the West that Hinduism, the core of India’s culture as he saw it, was the outcome of a unique philosophy and faith. In his six addresses to the 1893 Parliament of World Religions, he used all the strategies of persuasion: projecting Hinduism as a dynamic force, casting it within the realm of science, as unthreatening to other faiths and as the answer for a turbulent world. “The Hindu,” he argued, may have failed to carry out all his plans, but if there is ever to be a universal religion, it must be one which will have no location in place or time… whose sun will shine upon the followers of Krishna and Christ, on saints and sinners alike… whose whole force, will be created in aiding humanity to realize its own true, divine nature.18 In sum, he constructed a new socially reformist, comprehensive and universalist Hinduism and offered a new image of it in the West by rescuing it from charges of superstition and irrationality. While his lectures abroad were in part “persuasion and admonishment,” he seemed to be fully conscious of the task ahead of him.19 He told one interviewer: The Parliament of Religions, as it seems to me, was intended for a “heathen show” before the world: but it turned out that the heathens had the upper hand and made it a Christian show all around. So the

Introduction: discovery of Buddhist dialogues

7

parliament of religions was a failure from the Christian standpoint… seeing that the Roman Catholics who were the organisers… are now steadily opposing (another parliament). But the Chicago Parliament was a tremendous success for India and Indian thought. 20 Vivekananda was acutely conscious of the way in which the Parliament had sought to position non-Christian faiths as beliefs that would succumb to the superior arguments of Christianity and, in speaking of Hinduism as he did, he intended to place Hinduism equally with, if not above, other faiths. As with Okakura, he used culture/religion as a tool to speak to power, to claim a place of equality with the West, while there remained an asymmetry of material and military power.

The dialogue between Japan and India: speaking culture When Okakura undertook a journey to Calcutta in 1902 to invite Vivekananda to a proposed Asian Parliament of World Religions in Japan, the individual positions that both had projected seemed to come together to create a dialogue that would use the conception of Asian civilization to reset relations with the dominant West. This train of thought seemed to be at the forefront of Okakura’s polemical book, The Awakening of Japan. “While we are grateful to the West for what she has taught us, we must still regard Asia as the source of our inspiration,” he wrote. 21 He pointed out that if Japan was influenced by anyone, it was China and India, whose influences “silted” on Japan, and he was contemptuous of those in Japan who identified eagerly with the West and regarded Asiatic civilization as “renegade.”22 The book itself became a powerful narration of the history of Japan’s ability to respond to the crisis of each historical period, especially its response to the “White Disaster” of the West. Much of this understanding had been channelled into Okakura’s earlier but still influential book, The Ideals of the East: With Special Reference to the Art of Japan (1903), which he finished writing while he was in Calcutta. The book presented an argument for an East defined by its “common” values. 23 Sister Nivedita, an influential disciple of Vivekananda, edited and wrote the introduction for his book, reflecting her swadeshi and nationalist inclinations. Fortuitously, the development of a complex idea of Eastern “unity” in Okakura’s work moved along the same trajectory as Vivekananda’s conception of Advaita (the Vedantic doctrine that identifies the Self with the Whole), which recognized the dualism between the East and the West and the need to balance Eastern tradition and history with new ideas from the West. 24 Okakura’s and Vivekananda’s positioning of their cultures found resonance with other intellectuals of the time as well. Okakura’s position in some of Japan’s leading institutions for the arts and official bodies for cataloguing and preserving Japan’s art heritage, and then at the Boston

8

Madhu Bhalla

Museum of Asian Art, allowed him to exercise influence among his contemporaries and his students at the Tokyo Fine Arts School. In Calcutta, the Tagore circle of intellectuals became the hub of discussions on Asian unity, nationalism and modernity. Many of the issues at Jorasanko, the Tagore establishment, became the basis for a larger intellectual debate between India and Japan, also bringing Buddhist aesthetics and politics into its fold. However, despite the engagement with these issues, the directions that the Indians and Japanese took were eventually different. As Amiya P. Sen argues in a chapter in this volume, the conditions of engagement with the West in both countries influenced the direction of debates. 25 Another important participant was Anagarika Dharmapala, the Sinhalese Buddhist monk and the driving force behind the Maha Bodhi Society and the preservation of Buddhist sacred spaces. Dharmapala, like Vivekananda and others who were involved in defining and propagating the concept of pan-Asianism, equated civilization mainly with religion. For Dharmapala, that religion happened to be Buddhism. He looked to its older Asian networks and saw a resonance with his contemporary world, where Buddhism was increasingly being defined as a world religion beyond national boundaries. Dharmapala became undeniably the most dynamic propagator of its modern reinvention in the late 19th century. That was also his task at the World Parliament in 1893. His energies had gone into foregrounding Bodh Gaya, the place of the Buddha’s enlightenment, as a sacred Buddhist site. Beyond setting up the Maha Bodhi Society and nurturing it in Calcutta and later at Bodh Gaya, his tours abroad were also directed at drumming up support for his cause. During a brief visit to Japan on his way back from Chicago, he gave lectures on Buddhism but on a later longer visit in 1913 he met with a number of Japanese Buddhist scholars and clerics and renewed connections with Shaku Kōzen, the co-founder of the Maha Bodhi Society, and Tachibana Shundo who had spent five years in Ceylon to study Pali and Sanskrit. Dharmapala’s writings on anti-colonialism and racism in the Japanese journal Michi also extended his reach into the Asianist community in Japan. 26 However, the fault-lines between Hindu and Buddhist Asianists were soon evident. Unlike Dharmapala, Vivekananda engaged with Buddhism through the lens of Hinduism. Vivekananda held Buddhism to be an offshoot of Hinduism. In his version of reformist Vedanta, he could concede that the Buddha was “God incarnate” but argued that Buddhism itself was the “fulfilment of Hinduism.” At a deeper level he rejected Buddhist materialism as philosophical apostasy, while acknowledging that the loss of Brahmanism in the separation from Buddhism was the loss of “sympathy and charity” for the poor.27 Vivekananda viewed Dharmapala’s speech at Chicago as derivative of British views of Buddhism and Dharmapala himself as a “poor speaker.” From the lofty perch of Advaita and reformed Vedantism, Vivekananda was singularly dismissive of both the Buddhist faith and its disciples. His views seem not to have changed much between 1893

Introduction: discovery of Buddhist dialogues

9

and 1902, when he met Okakura. On a visit to Bodh Gaya with Okakura, he wrote to Swami Swarupananda: A total revolution has occurred in my mind about the relation of Buddhism to neo-Hinduism. I may not live to work out the glimpses, but I shall leave the lines of work indicated, and you and your brethren will have to work it out. 28 The direction that “revolution” would take is implied in the same letter. The letter reveals Vivekananda’s disagreement with fixing the antiquity of Buddhist sites in Bodh Gaya and Sarnath, ignoring earlier and existing Shaiva practices, and the appropriation by Buddhists of Shaiva sites.29 Not surprisingly, Vivekananda weighed in against Dharmapala when the latter planned to acquire land to establish the Maha Bodhi Society at Bodh Gaya. For Vivekananda, Buddhism was marginal to his sense of India – it was a sect, but no more. Like Vivekananda, Okakura too blurred the differences between Hinduism and Buddhism. He wrote: The thing we call Buddhism cannot in itself have been a defined and formulated creed, with strict boundaries and clearly demarcated heresies, capable of giving birth to a Holy Office of its own. Rather must we regard it as the name given to the vast synthesis known as Hinduism, It was part of the interchange of ideas across the Asian region. “Not the Buddhaising but the Indianising of the Mongolian mind, was the process actually at work.”30 But for Okakura, the curator of Japanese art, an interest in Buddhism was related more to art than religion. On his journey to Buddhist sites he rued their degradation and admired the Buddhist art he saw. As on a previous trip to China to view Chinese Buddhist sites, his journeys in India also made him review the antecedents of Indian art, not in relation to faith but to aesthetics. In India, Okakura visited Buddhist sites with Vivekananda. The visit gave him a first-hand view of Indian art and sculpture and a chance to review the prevalent European conception of Indian art as wholly influenced by Greek influences after Alexander’s campaigns in the north-west of the subcontinent. Contrary to Alexander Cunningham and James Fergusson’s theory of Greek influence, he saw Asian art as originating from Indian art, a connection that would eventually support the notion of Asian unity that was already being discussed in intellectual Bengali circles in Calcutta.31 Instead, he argued, Indian art influenced Chinese and Japanese art by transmission through land and sea routes. Broadly, Okakura held that Japanese art was influenced by Chinese learning and Indian religion.32 As Ninomiya-Igarashi points out, notions of what could be defined as art shifted during the Meiji period and religious icons began to be considered

10

Madhu Bhalla

as art. A focus on Buddhist images in major temples in Japan, such as Nara and Horyuji, allowed Okakura to make the connection between Asian art conventions and the cultural origins of Japanese art in India. In this he may have been influenced by the work of Rajendralala Mitra, who questioned Cunningham and Ferguson and allowed him to develop further his view of Asian and Japanese national identities.33 The Ideals of the East, in particular, articulates the new insights gained from Okakura’s experiences in India. Buddhism, as a shared religion, is a running theme that consolidates Okakura’s Asia, despite the shunning of Buddhism for Shintoism under the Shogunate. The focus on the universality of Buddhism explained its spread across Asia, its racial origins and the intertwining of art and religion. Here, identity formulated on Buddhist grounds was able to find a common agenda with the search for a cultural identity that became a part of Asian nationalist nostalgias. For Okakura, the central position of India in this creation of Asian identity did not diminish. Soon after returning to Japan he dispatched two of his most prominent disciples, the painters Yokoyama Taikan and Hishida Shunsō, to India to “explore Japan’s cultural ancestry through a first-hand understanding of Asia’s past.”34

The idea of Asia While Okakura perhaps made the most direct reference to the idea of Asia by declaring in the first line of The Ideals of the East that “Asia is one,” the introduction to his book by Sister Nivedita, Vivekananda’s disciple, is no less significant in giving an indication of the reception of that idea in India at the turn of the 20th century. Given the many centuries over which the familiarity with each other had been diminished, “the idea of Asia” was to be constituted by viewing Asia as a whole, “not as the congeries of geographical fragments… but as a united living organism, each part dependent on all the others, the whole breathing a single complex life.” This was a major reorientation of the Asian world view.35 Okakura’s vision of the future of a unified Asia, however, was distinctly hierarchical. As the only country in Asia that was truly free and on the way to becoming a “modern power” it became Japan’s “mission” to preserve Asian traditions.36 Nivedita tried to balance Okakura’s view of Japan’s mission and primacy in Asia, but Hindu universalism and Japanese chauvinism sat uncomfortably with each other. Even the distance from the West was problematic, with Japan on its way to becoming a “modern power” and India still a colonized state. The EastWest dichotomy at the heart of Asian identity and unity was falling apart. Discussions among Calcutta intellectuals provided the inspiration and definitions for other forms of pan-Asianism in India. As Mark R. Foster points out, access to travel and contacts across the Indian Ocean region intensified this idea. While Vivekananda had defined Asian identity in spiritual terms, others like Bhudev Mukhopadhyaya were somewhat more expansionist. India, he wrote, was to “absorb all other Indian cultures and

Introduction: discovery of Buddhist dialogues

11

spread to Europe.”37 Between 1893 and 1920, Vivekananda and Tagore were active in the Indian Ocean lecture circuit. This gave them a firsthand idea of Asia and also enabled them to make contacts, often establishing long-term friendships. Japanese intellectuals who came to India, like Okakura and his students, likewise got a sense of the concerns of Indians. Okakura’s book was received warmly by his Indian audience at Tagore’s house at Jorasanko.38 The notion of Asia as a united and distinct cultural entity was also received well elsewhere. Ananda Kentish Coomaraswamy, who followed Okakura as curator at the Boston Museum, corresponded with Okakura although he never met him in person. Coomaraswamy was also a frequent visitor to the Tagore household at Jorasanko. His views in his influential books on Indian art and aesthetics upheld a view of Asian art that blurred the distinction between India and Asia.39 In the book he co-authored with Sister Nivedita, The Myths of the Hindus and Buddhists, he highlighted the eclecticism of Indian art by featuring contemporary Bengal painters who were experimenting at the time with different styles, some revivalist and others influenced by Japanese conventions, casting Asia as a unified cultural entity.40 Tagore’s trajectory followed a path from Swadeshi through to panAsianism, and eventually universal humanism.41 Visitors at Jorasanko like Okakura, his students and Coomaraswamy were part of the discussions and Tagore’s lectures in the Indian Ocean lecture circuit often raised issues of cultural unity, autonomy under the impact of the West and the dangers of the new political nationalism he saw in China and Japan.42 While arguing for the unity of Asian civilization and suggesting that India could best learn from the successes of Japan and China, his warnings on militant notions of nationalism did not go down too well with Japanese audiences, who were being subjected either to rationalizations of Japan’s need for lebensraum in Korea and Manchuria or to Japan’s “mission” in the region.43 Tagore’s humanism confronted a Japan that was inching closer to chauvinist nationalism and imperialistic thinking ,with the “distance from Asia” view now entrenched among influential groups like the members of the Kyoto School of Philosophy, who became the “regime[’]s chief apologists.”44 Tagore sounded regressive and outdated to the Japanese, where the rising ideology of imperialism no longer had any use for civilization. For some time, however, pan-Asianism continued to find resonance and Japan’s military and industrial successes remained the centre of discussions for those seeking to escape colonialism. Thus, Japan’s response to Western pressures as an “alternative model of modernity” and the life of Buddhism in Japan were the subject of much discussion and writing in the vernacular press in Bengal and in newer institutions like Tagore’s Viswa Bharati. However, after 1910, when Japan first occupied Korea, the idea of a united Asia was no longer credible and the argument of the East as a spiritual and a civilizational antithesis of the West collapsed. It was evident that many

12

Madhu Bhalla

of the arguments for civilizational unity and supremacy over a materialistic West fed into ultra-nationalism and support for war. The ethno-symbols created during these early decades broke out into full-fledged racism and the very geography of “Asia” seemed to drift. It is no accident that it took almost a century for the idea of Asian unity to be revived in the idea of an East Asian Summit (2009).

The death and revival of the dialogue By the first quarter of the 20th century the dialogue took off in different directions, already evident in the fault lines over conceptions of universal values, nationalism, the unity of Asia, the East-West dichotomy and even sub-civilizational debates like the ones between Dharmapala and Vivekananda. When intellectuals in Japan supported its imperial “mission,” the danger inherent in universalist claims and nationalist positions became all too evident. Cultural nostalgias and the search for Asian destinies now seemed to move along paths that, in their militancy, undermined the very cultural values privileged in the dialogue: inclusion, pluralism and equality. In India, the emergence of a national movement, centred largely on the Indian National Congress, veered conversations into more overtly political positions, although Gandhi, more than anyone else, was able to integrate culture into political discourse and action. More militant versions of nationalism combining “ethics and power” indicated – according to the offspring of one of Bengal’s leading litterateurs, Bankimchandra Chattopadyay  – a “point of departure” for nationalist thought in the 19th century.45 In Japan, Okakura’s argument for the nation’s mission in Asia was fulfilled by the 1930s, bringing an end to the notion of Asian unity. As the 20th century unfolded, war, revolution and diverse social and political movements for the capture of political space meant that the postulates of Western culture and power triumphed. After World War II, despite consequent turmoil in Asia, Asian states finally had agency over their own futures. Many of them were confronted with issues of national identity, the nature of new states and regional and global challenges. These concerns fed into Asianist notions, evident in the ideas behind the Bandung conference and in new conceptions of interstate behaviour as expressed in the Panchsheel principles. But it was not until the post-World War II political framework began to unravel in the 1990s that debates about culture and Asian unity began to resurface. Once again the focus was on Asian values, this time defined as civic values, on common heritage and on the idea of peace, which in Japan was related to culture.46 The idea of Asia since the 1990s has not been monolithic or universalist, with the scars of Japan’s co-prosperity sphere still running deep and many Asian states still in the process of defining their identities. In addition, in a post-Saidian and post-colonial world, the debate on Asian unity could not help but skirt universalism and lean towards cultural pluralism. The debate has, therefore,

Introduction: discovery of Buddhist dialogues

13

veered towards the recognition of Asian networks around Buddhism, now seen as a unifying thread. The re-creation of Buddhism in memory and practice has become significant to a new sense of Asianness. The function of memory, as Himanshu Ray notes in the context of the revival of Buddhism in India, is to mark the past as an immutable and “sacrosanct national experience that links traditional values to the individual’s experience, or makes larger claims for that experience/history.”47 One attempt to do this appeared in the discourses of the mid-19th and early 20th centuries. A current project has emerged in India and elsewhere to rewrite the history of Buddhism through the creation of an ever widening Buddhist circuit, and in Japan by transcribing Buddhist art as World Heritage. Both national projects serve contemporary ends: one to reclaim the origins of a religion that, by popular historical accounts, had perished in the 11–12th century, and the other, to connect its history to the larger project of mapping a global civilization. The rewriting of Buddhist history in India involves both claiming and defining Buddhist sacred sites in the Indian subcontinent and in projecting them as part of an Asian and even global culture. This view of Buddhist sites goes back to the first government of independent India, when the Maha Bodhi Society was given the rights to the temple at Bodh Gaya. The site at Bodh Gaya, as the place where the Buddha attained nirvana, was central to Buddhist eschatology, linked to India’s ancient history and was important to the sense of India’s connection with the ancient Asian world, a connection that the new leaders of the country sought to revive.48 “In the old days,” Nehru wrote, We were all tied together by powerful silken ties… Buddhism more than anything else laid the foundations of Greater India and established cultural unity of an abiding value between India and many parts of Asia. A free India can worthily strengthen and revitalize those contacts.49 Bodh Gaya has now become a “global Buddhist ethnoscape,” as David Geary notes, with the presence of Buddhists of every variety from across the world, a space that reconfigures pre-colonial connections. 50 These changes in sacred sites are not unique to India, which has expanded the Buddhist Circuit to 21 states.51Around the subcontinent and across Asia, Buddhists are changing the geography of Buddhism.52 As Geary points out, over the centuries these spaces have reproduced themselves from the initial four mentioned in the Mahparinirvana Sutra because of the distribution of the Buddha’s relics, the varieties of Buddhism practiced, the experience of devotees, colonial scholarship and “convergences with modern Asian Buddhist practitioners such as the Sri Lankan revivalist Anagarika Dharmapala and the Maha Bodhi Society.”53 Since the beginning of this century, India has also begun to revive claims to Buddhism through a narrative of origins and sacred spaces relating to

14 Madhu Bhalla the Buddha’s birth and journey. There is a realization that this narrative best provides the values and history to transmit temporal influence to Asian states where Buddhism is still a living religion. As Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi stated, “I would personally call India ‘Buddhist India’ as it has imbibed all the values and virtues of the teachings of Buddha by their (i.e., Hindu) religious scholars incorporating them in their literature.”54 Clearly, claims to Buddhism, its origins and development, values and history are being linked more directly to national identity. While Buddhism has been an accepted part of the soft power outreach of the Indian state since Jawaharlal Nehru, the current century has seen a flurry of activity around the claims to Buddhism by the Indian state. Between 2010 and 2014, the Indian Council of Cultural Affairs, an arm of India’s External Affairs Ministry, held around ten conferences on Buddhism, some of them in Asian countries. Its website announced that it planned to hold six in 2015 and had plans for a further 26 involving lay Buddhists, the sangha and scholars and policy makers across different East Asian states. As with the British, who earlier shored up support by sending the Buddha’s relics to South East Asian countries, especially Thailand and Burma, Modi has also made symbolic gifts of the Bodhi sapling to East Asian states.55 As part of Buddhist cultural diplomacy, Modi announced a framework, the panchamrit, that combined the sacred with the secular. Samman (dignity), samvaad (dialogue), samriddhi (shared prosperity), suruksha (regional and global security) and sanskriti evam sabhayata (cultural and civilizational links) were projected as seamlessly connected.56 Hence, a renewed focus on Buddhist sacred spaces and reconstructing a history of Buddhism through inclusion of heritage sites and global tourism has become the focus of state endeavours. Japan, in turn, has taken steps to have its major Buddhist sites included in UNESCO’s list of World Heritage Sites and has been for some time invested in Buddhist sites in India, and now Nepal. In the contest over appropriations, new narratives around Buddhism seem now to entrench the power of states, support claims to loyalty from subjects and create persuasive discourses for affinity with superior values and privilege, domestically and externally. India’s reinvention of Buddhism to make it compliant with the agendas of the state has developed in the context of a contest with other states over claims to Buddhism. Through these claims states seek the loyalty of citizens, a place within global civilization (an issue that the UNESCO’s register of World Heritage Sites encourages) and the economic gains from a political economy involving tourism around sites, but also investments in preserving heritage sites. Here all states combine the sacred and the secular, conceptions of identity, Asian unity, plurality and heritage diplomacy. Moreover, states seek the loyalty of citizens across states through a combination of an appeal to similar values, both religious and cultural. Culture and faith are both bent to national gains. Since the 1950s, India has appealed to the Buddhist sangha by providing patronage to Buddhist Congregations

Introduction: discovery of Buddhist dialogues

15

in South Asia.57 China, sensitive to the uses of soft power and in a bid to blur the distinction between Tibetan and Chinese Buddhism, has held meetings of the World Buddhist Forum sporadically since 2006. In an effort to place itself on the map of the sacred sites associated with the Buddha, it was a major force behind the International Peace Conference at the Buddha’s birth place in Lumbini in Nepal in 2012. These were historical strategies tested by Buddhist clergy in China. As Tansen Sen writes, “China’s perception of itself as a ‘borderland’ prompted Chinese clergy to use Buddhist paraphernalia and manipulate Buddhist texts and prophecies to transform China into a legitimate part of the Buddhist world.”58 With China, India finds itself in a contest for influence in South Asia, especially in the strategically important Himalayan region, where Buddhism is a living religion. Hence, the current contest over Chinese investments at Lumbini in Nepal where their presence threatens India’s cultural leadership both in preserving Buddhist sacred sites and controlling the direction of the pilgrimage circuit. The recent re-creation of Nalanda as a world university, evoking its older lineage as an important centre of learning in Asia, is another example of how the past has been reinvested with new agendas. As Jeffrey E. Garten notes, “Nalanda represents much of what Asia could use today – a great global university [that]… restores many of the peaceful links among peoples and cultures that once existed, and gives Asia… soft power of influence and attraction.”59 Nalanda is, at once, an “icon of Asian renaissance” and a reference for the older pan-Asian Buddhist identity.60 With Japan, on the contrary, the end of the Cold War and India’s eastward looking diplomacy has opened up spaces for interaction.61 Japanese investments in the Indian Buddhist Circuit are only one part of the story. What is of larger interest is the cultural turn in Japan’s official policy since 1988, when the erstwhile Japanese prime minister Noboru Takeshita committed to the strengthening of cultural exchanges as one of the “pillars of Japanese foreign policy.” As part of this commitment, the following year Japan deposited with UNESCO a Japanese Funds-in-Trust for the preservation of the world’s cultural heritage. It used part of this fund to conserve and repair destroyed Bamiyan Buddha statues in Afghanistan in 2003 and invest in the preservation of the Lumbini site in Nepal.62 At home, Japan has listed major Buddhist sites in the UNESCO Heritage register.63 In Japan itself there is an argument for Japan being more outgoing in its collaborations and engagements with the world. Article 9 of Japan’s constitution, in which Japan forswears war, has given Japan a “peace psyche,” a “peaceful identity” because of which “Japan can engage its partner nations in peaceful diplomacy while respecting their various positions, and collaborate with them in the fields of economy, culture, science and technology.”64 The “culturist” turn in Japan’s policy provides a basis for expanding a cultural dialogue with Japan on common heritage. The interest in Buddhist cultural heritage by India and Japan could also form the basis of renewing links between the two countries, through the

16

Madhu Bhalla

pathways of mythology, art and architecture, which are being revived in part in the Buddha’s sacred sites in India, not least on behalf of Buddhist communities in Japan (Ray 2014). In the context of claims to Buddhist origins and sacred sites by Asian powers, Buddhism has become central to a contest over cultural primacy. The intent of 21st century discourses in Asia, and the one from China in particular, has been to create monolithic cultural spaces, a consequence in many ways of hegemonic cultural and political mappings of Asia and a selective rendering of history. This has implications for the endorsement of cultural fundamentalisms that disregard the dialogical nature of culture and the multi-layered existence of the objects, mythologies and institutions of civilizations. If the object of a revival of a Buddhist ecology is Asia, the question of how Buddhism informs traditions, value systems, ideas and institutional forms becomes increasingly germane to an India-Japan dialogue. A retrieval of its historical dialogue could set a trajectory towards a plural, multicultural and multipolar Asian landscape.

Notes 1 This section depends heavily on Judith Snodgrass’s paper, “Exhibiting Meiji Modernity: Japanese Art at the Columbian Exposition”: 3–4. 2 Kakuzō Okakura, The Ideals of the East with Special Reference to the Art of Japan. 3 Ibid.: 342. 4 Geoffrey R. Scott, “The Cultural Property Laws of Japan: Social, Political, and Legal Influences”: 340. 5 Ibid.: 7. 6 Snodgrass, “Exhibiting”: 79. 7 Kakuzō Okakura, The Ho-o-den (Phoenix Hall): An Illustrated Description of the Buildings Erected by the Japanese Government at the World’s Columbian Exposition, Jackson Park, Chicago: 29–30. 8 Scott, “Japanese Vase from 1893 World’s Fair Was Hiding in Plain Sight.” Martha Chaiklin, “The Fine Art of Imperialism: Japan’s Participation in International Expositions of the Nineteenth Century”: 1–9. 9 Snodgrass, “Exhibiting”: 75–100. 10 Okakura, Ho-o-den. Another commissioned history by the Japanese Fair Committee was Frank Brinkley, (Transl.) Japan Described and Illustrated by the Japanese: Written by Eminent Japanese Authors and Scholars. 11 Okakura, Ho-o-den: 9–10. 12 Snodgrass, “Exhibiting”: 77. 13 Ibid.: 77–78. 14 Okakura, The Ideals of the East. Chaiklin, “The Fine Art of Imperialism”: 1–7. 15 Swami Vivekananda, “Paper on Hinduism,” 11 September 1893. Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol I. 16 Ibid. 17 Tapan Raychaudhuri, “Swami Vivekananda’s Construction of Hinduism.” in William Radice, ed. Swami Vivekananda and the Modernization of Hinduism: 1–16; Swami Vivekananda, “The Evils of Adhikarivada”, Complete Works, Vol. 5, Notes from Lectures and Discourses. Sugata Bose and Ayesha Jalal, eds. Modern South Asia: History, Culture, Political Economy: 111–112.

Introduction: discovery of Buddhist dialogues

17

18 Swami Vivekananda, “Paper on Hinduism”. 19 David B. Gordon, “Vivekananda and Okakura on What the East Offers West”: 50. 20 Swami Vivekananda, “Abroad and the Problems at Home”, The Hindu, Madras, February 1897, The Complete Works, Vol. 5. Interviews. 21 Kakuzō Okakura, The Awakening of Japan: 6. 22 Ibid.: 188. 23 Okakura, The Ideals of the East. 24 Kakuzō Okakura, The Book of Tea: 2. 25 Amiya P. Sen, “Japan in India’s Xenology: Negotiating Modernity, Culture and Cosmopolitanism in Colonial Bengal”. Paper in this volume. 26 Maria Moritz, “The Empire of Righteousness’: Anagarika Dharmapala and His Vision of Buddhist Asianism (c. 1900)” in Marc Frey and Nicola Spakowski eds. ASIANISMS Regionalist Interactions and Asian Integration: 36. 27 Complete Works, Vol. I. 28 Complete Works, Vol. 5. 29 Swami Vivekananda, “Letter to Swarup (Ananda),” 9 February 1902 in Makarand R. Paranjape, ed. Swami Vivekananda: 183–184. 30 Okakura, Ideals of the East: 3. 31 Inaga Shigemi, “Okakura Kakuzō’s Nostalgic Journey to India and the Invention of Asia,” in Susan Fisher, ed. Nostalgic Journeys: Literary Pilgrimages from Japan to the West: 119–132. 32 Masumi Ninomiya-Igarashi, Drawn toward India: Okakura Kakuzō’s Interpretation of Rájendralála Mitra’s Work in His Construction of Pan-Asianism and the History of Japanese Art: 59–70 and 72–111. 33 Masumi Ninomiya-Igarashi, Drawn toward India: 72–111. 34 Ibid.: 71. 35 Okakura, The Ideals of the East. Introduction and Ch. I: 4–6. 36 Ibid.: 64. 37 Prasenjit Duara, “The Discourse of Civilisation and Pan-Asianism”: 99–132. Mark R. Frost, “That Great Ocean of Idealism: Calcutta, the Tagore Circle and the Idea of Asia, 1900–1920”. 38 Frost, That Great Ocean of Idealism: 8. 39 Ananda Kentish Coomaraswamy, The Dance of Shiva: Essays in Indian Art and Culture. 40 Sister Nivedita and Ananda K. Coomaraswamy, Myths of the Hindus and Buddhists. 41 Rustom Bharucha, Another Asia: Rabindranath Tagore and Okakura Tenshin. 42 Coomaraswamy, Dance of Shiva: 135–139. Krishna Dutta and Andrew Robinson, Rabindranath Tagore: The Myriad-minded Man. Stephen N. Hay, Asian Ideas of East and West: Tagore and His Critics in Japan, China, and India. This eclectic period has been charted in Frost, op. cit. Sugata Bose, A Hundred Horizons: The Indian Ocean in the Age of Global Empire. 43 Tagore quoted by Hay, Asian Ideas: 48–49. On these subsequent voyages see Bose, A Hundred Horizons: 233–271. Okakura, The Awakening of Japan. 44 Hay, Asian Ideas: 118; see also 82–123. Frost. Atsuko Ichijo, “The Articulation of National Identity in Early Twentieth-century East Asia: The Intertwining of Discourses of Modernity and Civilisation”: 342–355. Thorsten Weber, Embracing ‘Asia’ in China and Japan Asianism Discourse and the Contest for Hegemony, 1912–1933. Carolien Stolte and Harald Fischer-Tiné, “Imagining Asia in India: Nationalism and Internationalism (c. 1905–1940)”: 201. See also, Kimitada Miwa, “Fukuzawa Yukichi’s ‘Departure from Asia.’” in E. Skrzypezak, ed. Japan’s Modern Century. Prasenjit Duara, “The Discourse of Civilization and Pan-Asianism”: 99–130.

18

Madhu Bhalla

45 Partha Chatterjee, Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World: 54–84. 46 The debate on Asian values emerged first from Singapore, the ultimate civic state. Kishore Mahbubani, Can Asians Think? Understanding the Divide between East and West. 47 Jawaharlal Nehru, Message to the International Buddhist Cultural Conference, Sanchi, 29 November 1952, quoted in Himanshu Prabha Ray, The Return of the Buddha. Ancient Symbols for a New Nation: 219. 48 Ray, The Return of the Buddha: 254–255. 49 Quoted in Ray, The Return of the Buddha: 219. 50 David Geary, The Rebirth of Bodh Gaya: Buddhism and the Making of a World Heritage Site: 6. 51 The government allocated Rs. 361.97 crores to states for projects related to the Buddhist circuit. (US$51,845,640) International Finance Corporation and Incredible India, Investing in the Buddhist Circuit, 2014–2018. 52 Toni Huber, The Holy Land Reborn (2008) quoted in Geary, The Rebirth of Bodh Gaya: 6. 53 David Geary, “India’s Buddhist Circuit(s): A Growing Investment Market for a “Rising” Asia”: 50. 54 Narendra Modi, Speech at Global Hindu-Buddhist Initiative on Conflict Avoidance and Environment Consciousness, New Delhi, September 2015. 55 Charu Sudan Kasturi, “Modi Govt Plans Buddhism Blitz in Cultural Diplomacy Refocus India Has a New Top Cultural Diplomat – And He Is Called the Buddha.” 56 Ashok B. Sharma, “Modi’s Buddha Diplomacy on Anvil.” 57 India supported the World Fellowship of Buddhists in Ceylon in 1950, the International Buddhist Council, Sanchi, India in 1952 and the Sixth Buddhist Council, Burma in 1954. More recently, as Buddhist diplomacy became a priority it supported the Global Buddhist Congregation, New Delhi in 2011 and the Fifth International Buddhist Conclave, Varanasi in 2016. 58 Tansen Sen, Buddhism, Diplomacy, and Trade: The Realignment of SinoIndian Relations, 600–1400: 13. 59 Garten, “Really Old School”. 60 Geary, The Rebirth of Bodh Gaya: 7–8. 61 Nikita Vashisht, “Japan, Korea Keen to Put Bihar’s Buddhist Circuit on River Cruise.” 62 Foreign Policy to Promote National and Global Interests. Section 2 Cultural and Sports Diplomacy. www.mofa.go.jp/policy/culture/public_diplomacy. html. Accessed February 4, 2019. 63 World Heritage/Agency for Cultural Affairs. www.bunka.go.jp/english/policy/ cultural_properties/. Accessed March 24, 2019. 64 An Appeal from the “Article Nine Association” June 10, 2004. http://www.9-jo. jp/en/appeal_en.html. Accessed March 5, 2019.

References An Appeal from the “Article Nine Association” June 10, 2004. http://www.9-jo.jp/ en/appeal_en.html. Accessed March 5, 2019. Atsuko, Ichijo. “The Articulation of National Identity in Early Twentieth-Century East Asia: The Intertwining of Discourses of Modernity and Civilisation.” Asian Studies Review, Volume 42, Issue 2, 2018. pp. 342–355. https://doi.org/10.1080 /10357823.2018.1443430. Accessed March 4, 2019.

Introduction: discovery of Buddhist dialogues

19

Bharucha, Rustom. Another Asia: Rabindranath Tagore and Okakura Tenshin, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2006. Bose, Sugata. A Hundred Horizons: The Indian Ocean in the Age of Global Empire, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009. Bose, Sugata and Ayesha Jalal, eds. Modern South Asia: History, Culture, Political Economy, New York: Routledge, 2004. Brinkley, Frank (Transl.). Japan Described and Illustrated by the Japanese: Written by Eminent Japanese Authors and Scholars, Boston, MA: J.B. Millet and Co., 1897. Chaiklin, Martha. “The Fine Art of Imperialism: Japan’s Participation in International Expositions of the Nineteenth Century.” Japan Studies Review, Volume 12, 2008. pp. 1–7. https://asian.fiu.edu/projects-and-grants/japan-studies-review/ journal-archive/volume-xii-2008. Accessed March 2, 2019. Chatterjee, Partha. Nationalist thought and the Colonial World, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1986. Coomaraswamy, Ananda Kentish. The Dance of Shiva: Essays in Indian Art and Culture, New York: Sunrise Turn, 1924. Duara, Prasenjit. “The Discourse of Civilization and Pan-Asianism.” Journal of World History, Volume 12, Issue 1, 2001. pp. 99–132. Dutta, Krishna and Andrew Robinson. Rabindranath Tagore: The Myriad-Minded Man, London: Bloomsbury, 1995. Frost, Mark R. “That Great Ocean of Idealism: Calcutta, the Tagore Circle and the Idea of Asia, 1900–1920.” Nalanda-Sriwijaya Centre Working Paper Series, No. 3, June 2011. Garten, Jeffrey E. “Really Old School.” December 9, 2006. www.nytimes. com/2006/12/09/opinion/09garten.html. Accessed March 5, 2019. Geary, David. “India’s Buddhist Circuit(s): A Growing Investment Market for a “Rising” Asia.” International Journal of Religious Tourism and Pilgrimage, Volume 6, Issue 1, Article 6, 2018. doi: 10.21427/D7PT46. Geary, David. The Rebirth of Bodh Gaya: Buddhism and the Making of a World Heritage Site, New Delhi: Dev Publishers, 2018. Gordon, David B. “Vivekananda and Okakura on What the East Offers West.” http:// aas2.asian-studies.org/EAA/EAA-Archives/19/3/1326.pdf. Accessed March 25, 2019. Hay, Stephen N. Asian Ideas of East and West: Tagore and His Critics in Japan, China, and India, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970. Inaga, Shigemi. “Okakura Kakuzō’s Nostalgic Journey to India and the Invention of Asia.” in Susan Fisher, ed. Nostalgic Journeys: Literary Pilgrimages from Japan to the West. Institute of Asian Research, University of British Columbia, 2001. pp. 119–132. International Finance Corporation. 2017. Investing in the Buddhist Circuit: Enhancing the Spiritual, Environmental, Social, and Economic Value of the Places Visited by the Buddha in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, India. World Bank, Washington, DC. © orld Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/26096 License: CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 IGO. JICA. “JICA Experts Share Key Insights at the International Buddhist Conclave 2018 to Enhance Tourism at Buddhist Sites in India.” https://www.jica.go.jp/ india/english/office/topics/press180824.html. Accessed February 4, 2019.

20

Madhu Bhalla

Kasturi, Charu Sudan. “Modi Government Plans Buddhism Blitz in Cultural Diplomacy Refocus India Has a New Top Cultural Diplomat – And He Is Called the Buddha.” https://www.telegraphindia.com/india/modi-govt-plansbuddhism-blitz-in-cultural-diplomacy-refocus/cid/1512830.31.08.15 Mahbubani, Kishore. Can Asians Think? Understanding the Divide between East and West, Vermont: Steerfort, 2002. Masumi, Ninomiya-Igarashi. Drawn toward India: Okakura Kakuzō’s Interpretation of Rájendralála Mitra’s Work in His Construction of Pan-Asianism and the History of Japanese Art. Unpublished Dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 2010. https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/record/uuid:e5fad436-5cd4-4907b3aa-479cbf684aac. Accessed March 10, 2019. pp. 59–70 and 72–111. Miwa, Kimitada. “Fukuzawa Yukichi’s ‘Departure from Asia’.” in E. Skrzypezak, ed. Japan’s Modern Century. Tokyo: Sophia University, 1968. pp. 1–40. Modi, Narendra. Speech at Global Hindu-Buddhist Initiative on Conflict Avoidance and Environment Consciousness, New Delhi, September 2015. www. narendramodi.in/text-of-pm-s-address-at-samvad-global-hindu-buddhistinitiative-on-conflict-avoidance-and-environment-consciousness-290614. Accessed March 5, 2019. MOFA. Foreign Policy to Promote National and Global Interests. Section 2 Cultural and Sports Diplomacy. www.mofa.go.jp/policy/culture/public_diplomacy. html. Accessed February 4, 2019. Moritz, Maria. “‘The Empire of Righteousness’: Anagarika Dharmapala and His Vision of Buddhist Asianism (c. 1900).” in Marc Frey and Nicola Spakowski eds. ASIANISMS Regionalist Interactions and Asian Integration. Singapore: National University of Singapore Press, 2016. pp. 19–48. Okakura, Kakuzō. The Awakening of Japan, New York: The Century Press, 1905. Okakura, Kakuzō. The Book of Tea, New York: Putnams, 1906. Okakura, Kakuzō. The Ho-o-den (Phoenix Hall): An Illustrated Description of the Buildings Erected by the Japanese Government at the World’s Columbian Exposition, Jackson Park, Chicago, Tokyo: K. Ogawa, 1893. https://archive.org/ details/hoodenphoenixhal00okak. Accessed February 24, 2019. Okakura, Kakuzō. The Ideals of the East with Special Reference to the Art of Japan, New York: E.P. Dutton & Co., 1904. https://oneasiaproject.org/?page_ id=824. Accessed February 10, 2019. Paranjape, Makarand R. ed. Swami Vivekananda, New Delhi: Routledge, 2015. Ray, Himanshu Prabha. The Return of the Buddha. Ancient Symbols for a New Nation, New Delhi: Routledge. 2014. Raychaudhuri, Tapan. “Swami Vivekananda’s Construction of Hinduism.” in William Radice, ed. Swami Vivekananda and the Modernization of Hinduism. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1998. pp. 1–16. Scott, “Japanese Vase from 1893 World’s Fair Was Hiding in Plain Sight.” https:// worldsfairchicago1893.com/2019/01/09/japanese-vase/. Accessed January 9, 2019. Scott, Geoffrey R. “The Cultural Property Laws of Japan: Social, Political, and Legal Influences.” Pacific Rim Law & Policy Journal, Volume 12, Issue 2, 2003. pp. 315–402. Sen, Amiya. P. “Japan in India’s Xenology: Negotiating Modernity, Culture and Cosmopolitanism in Colonial Bengal.” in Madhu Bhalla, ed. Culture as Power: Buddhist Heritage and the Indo-Japanese Dialogue. In press. Sen, Tansen. Buddhism, Diplomacy, and Trade: The Realignment of Sino-Indian Relations, 600–1400, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2003.

Introduction: discovery of Buddhist dialogues

21

Sharma, Ashok B. “Modi’s Buddha Diplomacy on Anvil.” The Millennium Post, November 03, 2014. https://mea.gov.in/in-focus-article.htm?24181/Modis+ Buddha+diplomacy+on+anvil. Accessed March 5, 2019. Sister Nivedita and Ananda K. Coomaraswamy. Myths of the Hindus and Buddhists, 5th ed. London: George G. Harrap and co., 1920, first published in 1913. Snodgrass, Judith. “Exhibiting Meiji Modernity: Japanese Art at the Columbian Exposition.” East Asian History, Number 31. June 2006. https:// cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/voices.uchicago.edu/dist/3/1229/files/2018/07/. Accessed January 4, 2019. Stolte, Carolien and Harald Fischer-Tiné. “Imagining Asia in India: Nationalism and Internationalism (c. 1905–1940).” Comparative Studies In Society And History, Volume 201, 2012. pp. 65–92. Swami Vivekananda, Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. I. http://www. vedanta-nl.org/CWSV.pdf. Accessed February 27, 2019. Swami Vivekananda, The Complete Works, Vol. 5, Notes from Lectures and Discourses. http://www.vedanta-nl.org/CWSV.pdf. Accessed February 27, 2019. Swami Vivekananda, The Complete Works, Vol. 5. Interviews. http://www.vedanta-nl.org/CWSV.pdf. Accessed February 27, 2019. Vashisht, Nikita. “Japan, Korea Keen to Put Bihar’s Buddhist Circuit on River Cruise.” @nikita_vashisht www.moneycontrol.com/news/india/japan-korea-keento-put-bihars-buddhist-circuit-on-river-cruise-map-2841751.html. Accessed August 14, 2018. Weber, Thorsten, Embracing ‘Asia’ in China and Japan Asianism Discourse and the Contest for Hegemony, 1912–1933, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. World Heritage/Agency for Cultural Affairs. https://www.bunka.go.jp/english/policy/cultural_properties/introduction/world_heritage/. Accessed March 24, 2019.

Part I

The Indo-Japanese dialogue

1

Buddhism as the pinnacle of Ancient Indian morality Tagore and Vivekananda interpreting the figure of Buddha Victor A. van Bijlert

Late 19th century In the late 19th century Buddhism attracted the interest of Hindu religious modernisers. For centuries, Buddhism seemed to have disappeared from India, the land of its origin. The resurgent attractiveness of Buddhism was a result of the recent discovery of the Pali Tipiṭaka in Sri Lanka and Thailand, and of Buddhist Sanskrit texts in Nepal, Japan and China. Editing and exploring this Indian language material enabled both Western scholars and Indian intellectuals to gain direct access to the narratives and soteriologies of Buddhism. The Indian modernisers of Hinduism especially regarded this exploration as regaining a spiritual resource that had been forgotten and lost in India for centuries. When Buddhist texts re-emerged on a large scale at the end of the 19th century, great minds like Rabindranath Tagore (1861–1941) and Swami Vivekananda (1863–1902) could not and did not wish to ignore this. Both were, in their own ways, major exponents of Hindu reform. Both tried to create a national Indian ideology of modernity based on ancient Indian philosophical and religious texts. The main textual tradition both looked up to was that of the ancient Upanishads, collectively designated as ‘Vedanta’. But beyond the Upanishads and Vedanta, both also looked up to the Buddha as a teacher of spirituality and as a great moral figure. In the course of this chapter we will look at the way Tagore and Vivekananda framed their views of the Buddha and how they turned him into a paradigm of ethics of Hindu modernity.

Tagore’s spiritual intents Tagore regarded himself as an ambassador of the highest spiritual values of Indian culture. His main inspirational source texts were the Upanishads. Of these ancient natural-theological documents of Brahmanism he presented new and personal interpretations. But next in importance to him was the Buddha, whose teachings he called – in his 1913 volume of essays Sadhana – ‘things of the spirit, and therefore endowed with boundless vital growth’.1

26

Victor A. van Bijlert

Throughout his writing career, Tagore paid tribute to the Buddha as a prophet of universal humanistic spirituality and as a symbol of social emancipation. Tagore always evinced a keen interest in presenting the message of the Buddha to a global audience. In order to do this, he (a) selected what he regarded as the essence of the Buddhist message; (b) presented the message in narrative and dramatic form through the above-mentioned poetry and dance dramas in Bengali and (c) speculated on how and why the essence of Buddhism could have spread over the rest of Asia. In all three points Tagore very much remained an independent thinker. But as he had a longstanding experience with the Hindu reform movement of the Brahmo Samaj, he could visualise by analogy how Buddhism could and should be made relevant for the modern world. It is perhaps too much to state that Tagore saw himself as a kind of modernising Buddhist missionary. Yet in his definition of the message of the Buddha and his strong urge to promote that message in India and abroad, one senses that he saw Buddhism as the full blossoming of the liberation and social emancipation that the 19th-century Brahmos had extracted from the Upanishads. In what follows we will first engage with what Tagore regarded as the essential message of the Buddha (and therefore of Buddhism) and how this accounts for its spread. In his discussion of the Buddha’s message Tagore also occasionally refers to the Western Buddhological scholarship of his day. It is remarkable that he foreshadowed two points of the present-day critique of Western scholarship on Indian ‘religions’: namely (1) confused terminology and (2) misrepresentations of Indian traditions.

Some critiques of Eurocentrism In the context of discussing Buddhism in a Western language, inevitably the use of the term ‘religion’ crops up. This is so not only in recent times, but was also the case in Tagore’s days. In fact, Tagore himself uses the term ‘religion’, albeit with caution and evident unease. This term can hardly be avoided in Western scholarly parlance, for instance when one speaks from the perspective of anthropology, sociology, philosophy or religious studies. ‘Religion’ has led and still leads to much heated debate, especially in the context of South Asian religions. This fact challenges us to take a brief look at recent scholarly discussions on Indian religion. A representative summary of recent discussions on Indian religion is found in Bloch, Keppens, Hegde (2010). Some scholars represented in this volume hold that ‘religion’ is a ‘category of the imagination’, a product of Eurocentrism and the ‘cultural imperialism of Christianity’. 2 This Christian influence is emphasised, for instance by Richard King who draws on the work of the famous historian of religions Jonathan Z. Smith. King also holds that the concept of religion is predominantly Anglo-Protestant in origin.3 Timothy Fitzgerald, on the other hand, argues that the word ‘religion’ is a misleading ‘reification’4 and that contemporary ‘usages misleadingly

Buddhism: pinnacle of Ancient Indian morality

27

suggest that “religions” are observable things in the world, which is a form of misplaced concreteness’ for, according to him, ‘religion is an act of the imagination which we are persuaded to believe in by the rhetoric of academics, politicians, media people, and by general discourse’.5 John Zavos agrees, claiming that religion as ‘a network of phenomena’ is implicated in the ‘epistemic violence of post-Enlightenment thinking exported to the rest of the world through European expansion’.6 For Buddhism, Zavos makes a remarkable exception; according to him Buddhism is ‘virulently anti-essentialist’ (ibid) and thus quite in line with postmodern thinking. S.N. Balagangadhara holds that Hinduism and Buddhism ‘exist… but they do so only in the Western universities’.7 Religion for Balagangadhara is a typically Semitic affair, which he defines as ‘explanatory intelligible account of both the cosmos and itself’.8 Jacob de Roover and Sarah Claerhout, following Balagangadhara, summarise their own position on Hinduism and Buddhism as follows: both are Western constructs that are mistaken for empirical realities, ‘not only by Western scholars and laymen, but also by the Western-educated classes of India and elsewhere’.9 Perhaps the only dissenting view on religion is put forward by David Lorenzen to the effect that religion is ‘any set of normative ideas about how society should behave’ and ‘so long as the source of authority for these normative ideas is considered to be supernatural or at least beyond reason’.10

Tagore on religion Against the backdrop of the debates referred to above, we are in a position to compare these with Tagore’s misgivings about scholarship on Buddhism. The problems concerning the term religion and its relation to South Asia have a history that goes back at least to the late 19th century. It was Tagore himself who understood the misunderstandings that the Western term ‘religion’ could give rise to in an Indian context. He indicates this in the volume of essays, Sadhana, referred to earlier: The Sanskrit word dharma which is usually translated into English as religion has a deeper meaning in our language. Dharma is the innermost nature, the essence, the implicit truth, of all things. Dharma is the ultimate purpose that is working in our self.11 In a much later book, The Religion of Man (1930), Tagore expands upon this general concept of dharma as religion: In the Sanskrit language, religion goes by the name dharma, which in the derivative meaning implies the principle of relationship that holds us firm, and in its technical sense means the virtue of a thing, the essential quality of; for instance, heat is the essential quality of fire, though in certain of its stages it may be absent.12

28

Victor A. van Bijlert

According to Tagore, dharma – or religion in an Indian context – means ‘innermost nature’, ‘relationship’, ‘the essential quality’. Religion for Tagore constitutes a social and cosmic principle of unity or coherence. By ‘religion’, he thus clearly understood something quite different from the Christian idea of religion as revealed (in book form) by an absolutely transcendent personal Deity. Dharma, Tagore argues, is what Westerners call the Indian ‘religion’, especially Hinduism. As the Western perspective usually associates religion with universal explicit commandments and norms, Tagore continues with the immanent normative aspects of dharma: Religion consists in the endeavour of men to cultivate and express those qualities which are inherent in the nature of Man the Eternal, and to have faith in him. … Religion has its function in reconciling… by subordinating the brute nature to what we consider as the truth of Man.13 The normative aspect of dharma is not available as a set of universal moral rules explicitly formulated by a transcendent Deity. Dharma’s normative aspect is implicit and intended to suppress or ‘sacrifice’ vital needs, that is to say: the desires of the ego. And this suppression of the ego eventually will bring out the good qualities or virtues ‘inherent in the nature of Man the Eternal’. With ‘Man the Eternal’ Tagore was probably alluding to the concept of the Hindu cosmos and the Hindu social order symbolised in the cosmic Man, as described in the famous hymn Rig Veda 10:90. It seems evident that Tagore, in perfect consonance with general Indian thinking, believed that dharma as norms and values is transmitted implicitly through socialisation, not through the study of revealed sacred texts. For Tagore, there was no fundamental difference between the Hindu and the Buddhist use of the term dharma.14 In Buddhism, dharma signifies the moral and soteriological teaching of the Buddha, and it seems to signify also the grand order of things (dharmadhātu), which the Buddha is supposed to have observed and fully comprehended.15

Buddha’s message of love In 1924 Tagore gave a lecture in which he looked back on his visit to Sri Lanka, a predominantly Buddhist country. He regarded the Buddhist religion primarily as a message of universal love: Dharma in Buddhism, or Dharma Kaya, as it has been termed in some of the Buddhist scriptures, is an eternal reality of Peace, Goodness and Love, for which man can offer up the homage of his highest loyalty, his life itself.16 This Dharma can inspire man with almost superhuman power of renunciation, and through the abnegation of self, lead him

Buddhism: pinnacle of Ancient Indian morality

29

to the supreme object of his existence… to dwell in the constant consciousness of unbounded love is named by Lord Buddha: BRAHMAVIHARA – moving in Brahma.17 According to Tagore, unselfishness and love are the essential normative aspects of Dharma and he regarded them as the foundation of the Buddha’s message. It is well to note that in Tagore’s view love as a moral principle is not an explicit rule or commandment, but rather an implicit unselfish emotion. Thus, love defines the main characteristic of normative dharma. Love means more than unselfishness, for the latter signifies the absence of something negative, while love is a positive emotion that exceeds unselfishness but needs unselfishness in order to be universal. In Sadhana, Tagore says about the Buddha’s love: The path Buddha pointed out was not merely the practice of selfabnegation, but the widening of love. And therein lies the true meaning of Buddha’s preaching.18 Tagore even identifies the Buddha’s awakening – the event that made prince Siddhartha into the Buddha, the Awakened One – with this unselfish love: What Buddha describes as extinction – the extinction of selfishness… is the function of love, and it does not lead to darkness but to illumination. This is the attainment of bodhi, or the true awakening.19 Tagore got this idea of love from the Metta Sutta, the discourse on friendliness (Sutta Nipata, Book I:8). This small sermon in verses probably belongs to the oldest layers of the Pali Tipitaka, or in Western parlance the Pali ‘canon’. Tagore very often refers to the Metta Sutta as his main source of Buddhist ethics. Already in 1904 in a lecture in Bengali, Utsaver Din (A Festive Day), Tagore extensively discussed the content of the Metta Sutta: Like a mother protects her son even with her life, thus one should develop an unlimited feeling of mercy (dayā) for all living beings. In the upward direction, in the downward direction, in [all] four directions one should develop with an unhindered mind, a mind free of violence, a mind free of enmity, an unlimited feeling of mercy for the whole world (jagat). Whether standing, or moving, or sitting, or lying down, as long as one is not asleep, one should be firmly fixed in this feeling of friendliness – this is called dwelling in Brahman (brahmavihāra). 20 These words[,] which Lord Buddha has spoken about “dwelling in Brahman” are not words from the mouth, are not words [based] on a morality practiced for a long time; we know that as truth they have risen from His life. In them we take our pride today. This all-pervading

30

Victor A. van Bijlert ever-wakeful compassion (karuṇā), this dwelling in Brahman, this power of friendliness (maitrī) which transcends all material necessities (avaśyak), which is spontaneous and immeasurable, has not within man remained merely words about words, but in some places it has become truth. We can no longer disbelieve this power. 21

Tagore often referred to the virtue of friendliness – metta in Pali, maitri in Sanskrit – in conjunction with the practice of Brahmaviharas or the four unlimited divine abidings. Metta is traditionally regarded as the first of these four. The remaining three are karuṇa (compassion); mudita (empathic joy) and upekkha (equanimity). Tagore often emphasised love as the cornerstone of these four. Some years later, in Sadhana, Tagore made the concept of metta the foundation of the Buddha’s ethics: The human soul is on its journey from the law to love, from discipline to liberation, [321] from the moral plane to the spiritual. Buddha preached the discipline of self-restraint and moral life; it is a complete acceptance of law. But this bondage of law cannot be an end by itself; by mastering it thoroughly we acquire the means of getting beyond it. It is going back to Brahma, to the infinite love, which is manifesting itself through the finite forms of law. Buddha names it Brahma-vihara, the joy of living in Brahma. He who wants to reach this stage, according to Buddha, ‘shall deceive none, entertain no hatred for anybody, and never wish to injure through anger. He shall have measureless love for all creatures, even as a mother has for her only child, whom she protects with her own life. Up above, below, and all around him he shall extend his love, which is without bounds and obstacles, and which is free from all cruelty and antagonism. While standing, sitting, walking, lying down, till he falls asleep, he shall keep his mind active in this exercise of universal goodwill.’22 At the end of this passage Tagore paraphrases Metta Sutta, verses 7–9 again, as he did in the Bengali text referred to above. The Buddha’s advice to love all beings like a mother loves her only child especially stuck in Tagore’s mind. Universal love remains Tagore’s key to the Buddhist doctrine. In Creative Unity from 1922, Tagore stresses this point once more: Those men who felt the love welling forth from the heart of Buddhism, as one with the current of the Eternal Love itself, were struck with the idea that such effluence could never have been due to a single cataclysm of history – unnatural and therefore untrue. They felt instead that it was in the eternal nature of truth, that the event must belong to a series of manifestations; there must have been numberless other revelations in the past and endless others to follow. 23

Buddhism: pinnacle of Ancient Indian morality

31

Also in one of his later religious writings, Man from 1937, Tagore still referred to metta, maitri, ‘friendliness’ and the Brahmaviharas as the essence of the Buddha’s teaching: Lord Buddha preached, ‘Cherish towards the whole universe immeasurable maitri in a spirit devoid of distinctions of hatred, of enmity. While standing, sitting, walking, lying down till you are asleep, remain established in this spirit of maitri – this is called brahmavihara.24

Buddha and Indian tradition Tagore was very keen to stress the Indian origins of Buddhism. In his opinion Buddhism was the culmination of the spirituality of the Upanishads. He mentions that he once read a book by a Buddhist author who was trying to prove that Buddhism owed nothing to the Indian mind. ‘In his zeal, the author is acrimoniously violent in the assertion that Buddhism as a religion is absolutely contrary to whatever preceded it in the religious history of India’. 25 But Tagore maintained that there ‘can be no question that Buddhism was one of the great products of the mother-heart of India’. 26 Furthermore, he considered ‘Buddhism to be one of the greatest religious achievements of man’. 27 With the mention of the universal abstract ‘man’, Tagore stresses the universal nature of Buddhism. Buddhism grew in Indian soil but can and did take root anywhere in the world. Therefore, Tagore underlines that Buddhism was not a (perhaps unrepeatable Indian) ‘freak of human nature, and that as a religion, utterly unlike any other religion in the world’. 28 For such a religion would be so unique and impossible to practice that it would not gain but a few followers. However, it did gain many followers in ancient India, followers that eventually spread Buddhism outside India. Buddhism, thus, is part and parcel of the Indian ethos; it emerged from Indian religious life. Buddhism, according to Tagore, ‘must have its inherent relation and resemblance to that spiritual endeavour in ancient India which led men to leave aside their material possessions and seek the fulfilment of their life’. 29 What the Buddha taught was ‘Dharma, difficult to be rendered in English… highest ideal of perfection’. Furthermore: The Buddhist Dharma does not consist in mere reason, blind and dark. It comprises within itself the highest spiritual enlightenment; it is eternally true for all beings; its laws are not restricted to any boundary of outward circumstances. Therefore it has the principle of reality, wisdom, and infinity. Likewise it has been said in the Upanishad: SATYAM, JNANAM, ANANTAM BRAHMA, Brahma is truth, wisdom, and eternity. Then again, Dharma has not merely its reality, like the universal force of gravitation; it has its moral value, it leads us to peace,

32

Victor A. van Bijlert goodness and love. Similarly the Brahma of the Upanishad, who is SATYAM, is also SANTAM, SIVAM, ADVAITAM, which means that in Brahma is peace, goodness and union.30

For Tagore, the teaching of the Buddha is ‘eternally true for all beings’. Thus Buddhism promulgates the highest moral values: it ‘leads us to peace, goodness and love’. But the Buddha’s teaching aimed at the highest spiritual aspirations that were already visible in the Upanishads. Tagore underlined the unity between the Buddha and the Upanishadic ethos. The words in capital ‘SATYM, JNANAM, ANANTAM BRAHMA’ (Brahman, God, is truth, knowledge and endless) and ‘SANTAM, SIVAM, ADVAITAM’ (God is peaceful, benign and without duality) are taken from the samadhan or ‘communion’ of the Brahmo liturgy. They are passages found in Taittiriya Upanishad 2.1 and Mandukya Upanishad 7 respectively. Thus Tagore stresses the similarity in intention and the common origin in the Indian genius of both Upanishadic spirituality (restored in the 19th century in Brahmoism) and the teachings of the Buddha. Tagore sums up: ‘I cannot allow the historical link of Buddhism with India’s mind to be ignored’. 31 About the proliferation of Buddhism, Tagore stated in 1924: ‘The great religion of Buddha had once spread its living spirit of Unity over the greater part of Asia. It drew races together and turned their hope and faith away from the turmoil of self-seeking’.32 The Buddha spread the highest message of India to the rest of Asia. In Tagore’s view, this was possible because the Buddha taught ‘respect for ordinary people’.33 In 1935 in a Bengali article, ‘Buddhadeb’, Tagore wrote that the Buddha’s everlasting appearance in human history transcended the geographical limits of India and was spread from country to country… fences of socio-religious class (varṇa) were washed away by the tidal wave of truth; India’s invitation reached all the communities (jāti) in all countries. China came, Burma, Japan, Tibet and Mongolia came.34 Buddhism meant a universal spirituality open to all humanity, respect for all living beings and a universal ethics of boundless love for all living beings. In Tagore’s view, these qualities of the Buddha’s message, a message born in the India of Brahmanism and the Upanishads, made it into a world religion that spread far beyond India’s cultural borders.

Tagore and Buddhologists In his many discussions of Buddhism Tagore did not refer to the manifold intricate Buddhist scholastic doctrines, the materials collected in the ‘canonical’ texts. This is the material on the basis of which Western scholars produced allegedly authoritative, scripturally founded interpretations

Buddhism: pinnacle of Ancient Indian morality

33

of the Buddhist doctrine. Tagore did not have the postmodern scorn for Western scholarship but he was perfectly aware of its limitations in understanding how Buddhism could have spread outside India. As early as 1911 in an article on Buddhist devotionalism he claimed: If we must understand a religion, we have to observe it in living form. Through antiquarian research one can collect elements of its history, but one does not gain a full experience of it.35 If we take Tagore’s advice to heart, it becomes clear that most Western Buddhological reconstructions of the Buddha’s message on the basis of scholastic written sources did not reflect what may have inspired Asians to turn massively to Buddhism. Even when Buddhism was made into a state religion in certain South-East Asian countries, the first encounter of local people with Buddhism must have aroused their genuine interest. In other words, the Buddhist message must have had a certain intrinsic value that attracted Asians in the first place. Buddhological constructions of this message on the basis of the ‘canonical’ texts often do not reveal the original inspiration behind the teaching but instead depend exclusively on the ‘canonical’ scholastic systematisation of doctrinal elements and their endless classification. As we will discuss below, this Western emphasis on written texts derives from a scriptural Protestant reflex (even with totally secularised scholars). Buddhism, in Tagore’s view, must be something living, something that was and is still practiced by millions, and not a piece of Western scholarly pedantry. In Tagore’s eyes, Western philologists act like ‘antiquarians’. They study ancient texts apparently disconnected from the social, historical and spiritual context in which these texts played their specific role. In order to illustrate his critique, Tagore tried to imagine the opposite case: Indians on the basis of mere textual study trying to understand Western Christianity as it is practiced: If those [Indians with an interest in Christianity] would only read old texts, join together certain utterances… then their situation would be like that of a blind man caressing a shape with his hands and try to establish its [visual impression]. … The colours of an object, its gracefulness, all the inexpressible manifestations of a thing, would totally elude [him].36 Obviously these Indians would fail to fully grasp living Christianity. The Western scholars of Buddhism find themselves in a similar position with regard to understanding Buddhism as a living tradition: In connection with the Buddhist religion this is our situation. We get acquainted with this religion through the dry pages of books written by foreign scholars (paṇḍit) who are well-read in ancient books and

34

Victor A. van Bijlert are antiquarian experts. But the minds of these scholars are not at all wetted with the flow of the delight (ras) of this religion. They have not received this religion in its completeness, like the flame of one lamp lights the wick of another lamp. Under such circumstances, what we receive from these [scholars] is an altogether coarse substance; it lacks brightness, it is blind, an experience caused by touch alone.37

This assessment of partially agrees with the later postmodern and postcolonial critiques of Western scholarship: namely the latter’s antiquarian and text-oriented character when dealing, for instance, with Buddhism. Buddhism, thus, literally exists ‘only in the [W]estern universities’.38 The outlines that Western Buddhologists sketch of Buddhism are based on texts; texts, to wit, that are considered to be the foundational documents par excellence of Buddhism. Buddhologists often favour the Pali Tipitaka as the oldest preserved version of the alleged original teachings of the Buddha.39 Thus, in the perception of many Western Buddhologists, the Pali canon, especially the section containing the ‘verbatim’ teachings of the Buddha, became something of a Buddhist New Testament. This is not the place to question this perception. It is enough to realise that in granting the Pali canon the status of being the Buddhist ‘New Testament’ there may have been a methodical error, for this overlooks the fact that the Pali canon, as well as other ‘Hinayana’ canons and the production of the earliest Mahayana Sutras (which also purport to report the teachings of the Buddha in his own words), were all committed to writing at about the same time (1st century BC).40 The simultaneity of the earliest occurrences of written texts implies that the Pali texts may not be more ‘original’ than other ones, like some Mahayana Sutras. Furthermore, the scholarly emphasis on written texts as the source of Buddhism presses it into the mould of Western Protestantism with its principle of faithfulness to God’s Word, the Bible. In such a view, the Pali canon acts as the canonical New Testament of Buddhism and the Mahayana Sutras play the role of the later Apocrypha. The famous Buddhologist Gregory Schopen made the point that Buddhology treats ‘canonical’ texts too much like Protestant theologians treat the Bible.41 It is interesting to note that Tagore did not discuss or condemn such scriptural approaches to Buddhism by Western scholars (even though he felt uneasy about the strict separation between alleged authentic Pali Buddhism and the ‘later’ Mahayana). He merely noted that the scriptural approach of Buddhologists who were his contemporaries was ‘antiquarian’, deficient and insipid. Contrary to postcolonial and postmodern critiques, Tagore did in fact regard Buddhism as a religion, a religion from which he expected spiritual nourishment, not pedantic pronunciamentos: Thus we do not get from such a bookish religion the thing which could supply nourishment to the deep hunger of our hearts. A certain religious

Buddhism: pinnacle of Ancient Indian morality

35

person had studied the Pali texts for a long time. From his conversation one day, I got the hint that this study did not give him delight (ras) and that he had wasted his time. And yet we cannot say that no-one gets any delight (ras) from this religion.42 The remark on the person studying the Pali texts once more indicates how little store Tagore set in dry enumerations of doctrinal content. Tagore thought he understood what the motivation behind the Buddhist message must have been, if it could spread over vast areas of Asia. His sources of information on Buddhist texts were limited but they sufficed for him to get the main drift of Buddhist gospel.43 It is to the credit of his genius that he needed little information on the basis of which he thought he could explain the impact of Buddhism as a charismatic message of hope, respect and universal sympathy. He seems to have understood that Buddhism as a world religion could not be disseminated with the help of scholastic tables and lists of doctrinal items. In other words, the Buddhist canonical texts did not and could not ‘work’ like the Bible in (Protestant) Christianity. For Buddhism to spread it needed something that could speak to the hearts of even illiterate people. For Tagore, the message of universal love, the message of the Metta Sutta, seemed eminently appropriate to draw people towards Buddhism.

Vivekananda on Buddha Let us now turn to Swami Vivekananda and his references to the Buddha and Buddhism. The first thing that needs to be remembered is that Tagore’s acquaintance with and references to Buddhism and the Buddha span more than half a century, i.e., from the end of the 19th century to the time of his passing in 1941. Vivekananda worked for a much shorter time: roughly between 1890 until his death in 1902. In this period, he was mainly engaged in teaching and preaching Vedanta in all its aspects, under the inspiration of his master Sri Ramakrishna. Like with Tagore, for Vivekananda Hindu or Indian spirituality was mainly found in Vedanta, in the Upanishads and in the interpretations of the Upanishads by Shankara. Of course, Tagore remained quite independent of classical Vedanta and never really interpreted the Upanishads in a classical Advaita fashion. But so was Vivekananda. Not Shankara’s writings per se, but his own direct experience of his master formed the background to his Vedanta. Even if Vedanta was the culmination of Indian spirituality and Hinduism, Vivekananda did not and could not ignore the figure of the Buddha and his indelible stamp on Indian religions and spirituality. However, like Tagore, Vivekananda did not have the very extensive Buddhological literature of later years at his disposal, so for his assessment

36

Victor A. van Bijlert

of Buddhism and the Buddha he had to rely on what was available at the time. Also like Tagore, Vivekananda was mainly impressed by the personality of the Buddha whose life story he seems to have learned from Edwin Arnold’s Light of Asia, a verse-translation of the Sanskrit epic poem on the Buddha’s life, Buddhacarita by Ashvaghosha.44 In Chicago in 1893 Vivekananda had already mentioned the Buddha as a great reformer and ethical figure. He attributed the institution of equality in the sphere of world-renunciation to the Buddha. He also suggested that the Buddha preached the hidden truths of the Vedas, presumably the doctrines of the Upanishads: The religion of the Hindus is divided into two parts: the ceremonial and the spiritual. The spiritual portion is specially studied by the monks. In that there is no caste. A man from the highest caste and a man from the lowest may become a monk in India, and the two castes become equal. In religion there is no caste; caste is simply a social institution. Shâkya Muni himself was a monk, and it was his glory that he had the large-heartedness to bring out the truths from the hidden Vedas and through them broadcast all over the world. He was the first being in the world who brought missionarising into practice – nay, he was the first to conceive the idea of proselytising. The great glory of the Master lay in his wonderful sympathy for everybody, especially for the ignorant and the poor.45 That the Buddha would have been teaching Vedanta is an idea that Vivekananda seems to have held for some years. In a lecture in 1895, he stressed the idea that the Buddha taught both Advaita and Vedanta: ‘Advaita was never allowed to come to the people. At first some monks got hold of it. … By the mercy of the Lord, the Buddha came and preached it to the masses’ (Vol. II: 138). In the same lecture, Vivekananda once more said: ‘Buddha brought the Vedanta to light, gave it to the people, and saved India. … By Buddha the moral side of the philosophy was laid stress upon, and by Shankaracharya, the intellectual side’ (Vol. II: 139). And yet at other times, he was critical of Buddhist doctrine and regarded Buddhism as inferior to Advaita Vedantism, as is clear from the assertion he made in 1896: One of the remarkable features of the Advaitist system of Vedanta is to harmonise the preceding systems. In many cases it helped the philosophy very much… not one of [the]… preceding ideas was rejected. The fault of the Buddhistic faith was that it had neither the faculty not the perception of this [347] continual expansive growth, and for this reason it never even made an attempt to harmonise itself with the preceding steps towards the ideal.46

Buddhism: pinnacle of Ancient Indian morality

37

This is not the place to question or qualify this observation. Clearly Vivekananda was not much enthralled by Buddhist doctrines, a point we will return to. Vivekananda probably wished to consistently distinguish between the Buddha, the man, and the subsequent doctrines of Buddhism. He admired the former and was critical of the latter. In these same years, Vivekananda did always emphasise the moral perfection of the Buddha’s character. The following exclamation made in 1896 is an assessment that recurs often in Vivekananda’s texts: The great Buddha never cared for the dualist gods, and… has been called an atheist and materialist… yet was ready to give up his body for a poor goat. That Man set in motion the highest moral ideas any nation can have. Whenever there is a moral code, it is a ray of light from that Man.47 Buddhist morality, according to Vivekananda, was not a reasoned out system but based on a super-sensuous state of consciousness: Buddhists find an eternal moral law, and that moral law was not reasoned out in our sense of the word. But Buddha found it, discovered it, in a supersensuous state. … All his teachings came through this, and not through intellectual cogitations.48

Vivekananda’s views on Buddhist doctrines Vivekananda attributed quite a number of ideas and seeming prejudices to Buddhism. Let us look at a few of them. In 1897, he gave a lecture in Lahore on Vedanta.49 In it he referred several times to the Buddha and Buddhism. He referred to the Buddhists’ denial of the existence of the Atman, the Self. According to him, the Buddhists denied substances and analysed everything in terms of properties.50 Also a personal God as creator of the universe did not exist. According to Vivekananda, Buddhists denied God in the metaphor of the potter and the pot. There is no God who creates the world like a potter creates a pot.51 In the same passage, he maintained that ‘Advaitists’ strive only towards truth, which is ‘the watchword of the Advaitist’.52 Vivekananda also claimed that Buddhists deny the existence of a personal God because believing in such a God is immoral ‘for it teaches man to be a coward and to seek assistance outside, and nobody can give him such help.’53 Moreover, teaching about a personal God is like telling a lie, according to Vivekananda’s interpretation of Buddhists’ position. He quoted the Buddha as saying, ‘What you think, that you are; what you will think, that you will be’.54 This is probably a reference to Dhammapada verse 1–2. Vivekananda also attributed the following to Buddhists: ‘Tyranny and priestcraft have prevailed wherever this idea [of a Personal God] existed,

38 Victor A. van Bijlert and until the lie is knocked on the head, say the Buddhists, tyranny will not cease’.55 Buddhists do follow the doctrine of karma: The Buddhist says, you have been perfectly rational… that everything is the result of the law of Karma. You believe in an infinity of souls, and that souls are without birth or death, and this infinity of souls and the belief in the law of Karma are perfectly logical no doubt.56 According to Vivekananda, the rebuttal of Buddhism comes from Advaita: ‘There is no difference between substance and qualities. You know the old illustration, how the rope is taken for the snake, and when you see the snake you do not see the rope at all’.57 In this latter statement, Vivekananda seems rather to refer to Gaudapada Karika 2.17–18. Although Gaudapada himself used the opposite meaning of the metaphor: one thinks one sees a snake but it is actually a rope. A dangerous animal turns out to be something harmless. Thus the world is actually truly the Atman.58 In another lecture held in 1900, entitled Buddhistic India, Vivekananda expatiated his views of the times of the Buddha and his influence. He claimed Buddhism was the first religion that did not confine itself to a particular ‘race’ like ancient Hinduism and ancient Judaism. 59 Buddhism started out to ‘conquer the world’ (idem). Orthodox Hinduism was bound by the Vedas.60 Hindu society, according to Vivekananda, was oppressed by regulations and the Brahmin priests.61 He believed the real philosophers came from the kingly caste. He mentioned Krishna and Rama by name.62 He also claimed that the Aryans were those belonging to the three upper castes (he actually used this word). The Shudras were not Aryan and they formed the vast masses of people.63 Then the Buddha was born, a historical figure. Even Krishna, ‘the Hindu prophet… is very mythological’.64 Thus Vivekananda contrasted Krishna with the historicity of the Buddha. The latter, according to Vivekananda, was ‘so pure that whosoever looked at his face from a distance immediately gave up the ceremonial religion and became a monk and became saved’.65 Vivekananda thought that the Buddha was a great innovator, but ultimately that Vedanta was superior in his estimation: [The] non-killing of animals and charity towards animals was an already existing doctrine when he was born; but it was new with him – the breaking down of caste, that tremendous movement. And the other thing that was new: he took forty of his disciples and sent them all over the world, saying, “Go ye; mix with all races and nations and preach the excellent gospel for the good of all, for the benefit of all.” And, of course, he was not molested by the Hindus. He died at a ripe old age. All his life he was a most stern man: he never yielded to weakness. I do not believe many of his doctrines; of course, I do not. I believe that the Vedantism of the old Hindus is much more thoughtful, is a grander

Buddhism: pinnacle of Ancient Indian morality

39

philosophy of life. I like his method of work, but what I like [most] in that man is that, among all the prophets of mankind, here was a man who never had any cobwebs in his brain, and [who was] sane and strong. When kingdoms were at his feet, he was still the same man, maintaining “I am a man amongst men.”66 Vivekananda did not see much in the Buddha’s teachings, but the Buddha’s moral force he greatly admired: ‘I do not sympathise with his metaphysics at all; but my mind is jealous when I think of the moral force’.67 He claimed that Buddhism created monasticism in India and this ultimately led to its downfall in India. There were too many monks and no-one was willing to procreate but the weak ones.68 He continued: I will tell you of this marvellous brotherhood. It is great. But theory and idea is one thing and actual working is another thing. The idea is very great: practicing nonresistance and all that, but if all of us go out in the street and practice non-resistance, there would be very little left in this city. That is to say, the idea is all right, but nobody has yet found a practical solution [as to] how to attain it.69 Between 1899 and 1901 Vivekananda published a series of Bengali articles in the Udbodhan. These articles were published in 1902 as a booklet under the Bengali title Prācya o Pāścātya (referred to here as Swami Vivekananda 1990). An English translation of that book under the title ‘East and West’ is found in Vol. V: 441–537. Vivekananda wrote about effeminate folk whom he considered to be ‘tamasik’.70 Then he wrote: ‘Coming under the influence of the Jains, Bauddhas, and others, we have joined the lines of those Tamasika people’.71 It seems that Vivekananda regarded the adherents of Buddhism as Tamasika people.72 The Buddha taught only a way to Moksha. Only the Vedas laid down ‘rules for the fourfold attainment of man, comprising Dharma, Artha, Kama, and Moksha’.73 Vivekananda actually blames Buddhism: The aims of the Buddhistic and the Vedic religions are the same, but the means adopted by the Buddhistic are not right. If the Buddhistic means were correct, then why have we been thus hopelessly lost and ruined? It will not do to say that the efflux of time has naturally wrought this. Can time work, transgressing the laws of cause and effect? Therefore, though the aims are the same, the Bauddhas for want of right means have degraded India. Perhaps my Bauddha brothers will be offended at this remark, and fret and fume; but there’s no help for it; the truth ought to be told, and I do not care for the result. The right and correct means is that of the Vedas – the Jâti Dharma, that is, the Dharma enjoined according to the different castes – the Svadharma, that is, one’s own Dharma, or set of duties prescribed for man according

40

Victor A. van Bijlert to his capacity and position – which is the very basis of Vedic religion and Vedic society.74

In the same passage, Vivekananda criticises Buddhism for the abolition of the Vedic caste-system. Obviously, he defends the late Vedic and Brahminical social hierarchy of the four varnas (ritually defined classes). It was in these same years that Vivekananda seems to have gradually changed his mind about Buddhism. In a letter dated 1902, he wrote about the references to Buddhism in Vedanta texts and vice versa: ‘There are references, though in Buddhistic literature, to Vedanta, and the Mahâyâna school of Buddhism is even Advaitistic’.75 In 1897 some conversations with Vivekananda were recorded, apparently also with a brother Swami. In the conversation Vivekananda suggests that the Buddha popularised the practice of sannyasa or world-renunciation: ‘Really speaking, the institution of Sannyasa originated with Buddha; it was he who breathed life into the dead bones of this institution’.76 His fellow Swami objects to the idea that Buddhism might have preceded the creation of the Hindu epics, the Dharmashastra of Manu and many of the Puranas.77 The counter-argument to recent dates for these texts is the fact that they hardly or do not at all mention Buddhism.78 But Vivekananda interjects: ‘Please read history, and you will find that Hinduism has become so great only by absorbing all the ideas of Buddha’.79 The editor’s footnote at the bottom of the page qualifies this statement: Evidently, during the argumentation, Swamiji was taking his stand on the conclusions of modern historical studies, thereby giving his encouragement and support to such new efforts and methods. But we know from one of his letters to Swami Swarupananda (C.W. Vol. V, p 171) that Swamiji broke off later on from the position of these modern scholars and worked out the pre-Buddhistic origin of much of modern Hinduism.80 The reference is incorrect. In the present edition the letter is on pp. 172–173. What the editor is referring to are the following points: I have had much light of late about Buddhism, and I am ready to prove: (1) That Shiva-worship, in various forms, antedated the Buddhists, that the Buddhists tried to get hold of the sacred places of the Shaivas but, failing in that, made new places in the precincts just as you find now at Bodh-Gayâ and Sârnâth (Varanasi). (2) The story in the Agni Purâna about Gayâsura does not refer to Buddha at all – as Dr. Rajendralal will have it – but simply to a preexisting story. (3) That Buddha went to live on Gayâshirsha mountain proves the pre-existence of the place.

Buddhism: pinnacle of Ancient Indian morality

41

[173] (4) Gaya was a place of ancestor-worship already, and the footprint-worship the Buddhists copied from the Hindus. (5) About Varanasi, even the oldest records go to prove it as the great place of Shiva-worship; etc., etc. Many are the new facts I have gathered in Bodh-Gaya and from Buddhist literature. Tell Charu to read for himself, and not be swayed by foolish opinions.81 These points made in 1902 do seem at least to indicate that Vivekananda had changed his mind about the European Indological dating and returned to a more Hindu chauvinist view that all Indian spirituality/religion originated with ancient Hinduism and that Buddhism was nothing but an imperfect off-shoot of the former. And yet it seems Vivekananda had always been rather critical of Buddhist doctrine. Vol. VI: 119–120 has a consecutive passage on the differences between Buddhism and presumably Vivekananda’s view of Vedanta. The passage is taken from a section called ‘Notes of Class Talks and Lectures’ and purports to represent notes taken down in Madras 1892–93. Buddhism proves nothing about the Absolute Entity. … What they call Karma is what we call the soul. … Buddhists do not postulate anything beyond the world. We say, beyond the relative there is the Absolute. … Buddha preached not the soul preached by others. According to the Hindus, soul is an entity or substance, and God is [120] absolute. … Present-day Hinduism and Buddhism were growths from the same branch. Buddhism degenerated, and Shankara lopped it off! Buddha is said to have denied the Vedas because there is so much Himsâ (killing) and other things. Every page of Buddhism is a fight with the Vedas (the ritualistic aspect). But he had no authority to do so. Buddha is expressly agnostic about God; but God is everywhere preached in our religion. The Vedas teach God – both personal and impersonal. God is everywhere preached in the Gitâ. Hinduism is nothing without God. The Vedas are nothing without Him. That is the only way to salvation. Sannyâsins have to repeat the following, several times: I, wishing for Mukti, take refuge in God, who created the world, who breathed out the Vedas. Buddha, we may say now, ought to have understood the harmony of religions. He introduced sectarianism. Modern Hinduism, modern Jainism, and Buddhism branched off at the same time. For some period, each seemed to have wanted to outdo the others in grotesqueness and humbuggism.82 Taken at face-value, such criticism sounds rather harsh. One could assume that the notes taken do not fully represent what was said. Yet it seems obvious that the constant factor in Vivekananda’s assessment of the Buddha is

42

Victor A. van Bijlert

that he was a great moral figure but philosophically insufficient and not up to the mark of the Vedas or Vedanta. These points are reiterated in a lecture Vivekananda gave in 1900 in the USA, entitled ‘Buddha’s Message to the World’.83 He stressed that Buddhism is a tremendous religious and historical movement, but not philosophically.84 He also claimed the Buddha came because India was then in need of a spiritual leader who would help them do away with superstitions and priests.85 Furthermore, Vivekananda claimed that the Buddha taught the gist of the philosophy of the Vedas to everyone86 and that the Buddha preached the equality of all humans.87 He abolished the differences between priests and the other castes.88 Vivekananda also claimed that the Buddha had tried to abolish ceremonials and God himself. The latter was a great mistake because ‘Hindus can give up everything except their God. To deny God is to cut off the very ground from under the feet of devotion. Devotion and God the Hindus must cling to’.89 The Buddha practiced the love of man, rather than loving God.90 Vivekananda thought that the Buddha’s doctrine of loving man and unselfishness could have been better formulated in the light of the Upanishads.91 He thought that the Buddha’s followers caused the downfall of Buddhism because they emphasised too much the negative aspects of the Buddha’s doctrine, namely the denial of the existence of God.92 Vivekananda exclaimed: ‘All my life I have been very fond of Buddha, but not of his doctrine. I have more veneration for that character than for any other’.93 And yet Vivekananda ended his lecture on a paean on the Buddha: Of all the teachers of the world, he was the one who taught us most to be self-reliant, who freed us not only from the bondages of our false selves but from dependence on the invisible being or beings called God or gods. He invited every one to enter into that state of freedom which he called Nirvana. All must attain to it one day; and that attainment is the complete fulfilment of man.94 Two main tendencies in Vivekananda’s assessment of the Buddha and Buddhism can be easily detected: a great admiration for the moral figure of the Buddha and little respect for the teachings itself.

Some sources on Buddhism This brings us to a last point. What might have been Vivekananda’s sources of knowledge about Buddhist doctrine? It is a fact that in the latter half of the 19th century the scholarly knowledge of Buddhist source-texts had begun to increase significantly. This is noticeable in the references to Buddhist doctrine both in Vivekananda’s and Tagore’s writings. Remarkably, Vivekananda may have been even better informed about details of Buddhist doctrine than Tagore during the last decade of the 19th century. One name

Buddhism: pinnacle of Ancient Indian morality  43 is important in this respect: Rajendralal Mitra, who wrote on Buddhist Sanskrit texts in Nepal95 and who prepared the first edition of a major Mahayana Sutra – the Ashtasahasrika Prajnaparamita in 1888.96 It’s clear that both Tagore and Vivekananda were familiar with at least one of these works. Tagore used Mitra’s book with summaries on Nepalese Buddhist texts for many of the Buddhist themes in his plays. In an 1889 letter, Vivekananda referred to the Prajnaparamita: ‘In the Tantra, Acharya Shankara has been called a crypto-Buddhist; views expressed in Prajnâparamitâ, the Buddhist Mâhâyana book, perfectly tally with the Vedantic views propounded by the Acharya’.97 This Mahayana book to which Vivekananda refers could be Mitra’s edition of the Ashtasahasrika (Mitra 1888, it was after all published in Calcutta). Unless it was Müller’s edition of the Vajracchedika published from Oxford in 1881 (Müller 1881), but this is less likely. In fact, what Vivekananda writes tallies quite well with the actual situation: early Vedanta owed to the Prajnaparamita. Vivekananda also referred to the Prajnaparamita several times in a letter to Akhandananda dating from 1890.98 In the same letter, he referred to Pali texts such as the Suttanipata and the Dhammapada. These were of course available in English translations in The Sacred Books of the East, Vol. 10, published in 1881. I have already mentioned Edwin Arnold’s Light of Asia (first published in 1879) for the life story of the Buddha, a book that was quite popular in the late 19th century. Tagore, as I have already mentioned, for Pali quotations relied mainly on the Bengali collection of Pandit Dharmaraj Barua (1893). In the last decade of the 19th century these works were available to both Tagore and Vivekananda and they must have used them.

Conclusion What conclusions can be drawn from the foregoing presentation of Tagore’s and Vivekananda’s views on the Buddha and Buddhism? When comparing the two writers and great public figures one is struck by the fact that both greatly admired the Buddha as a moral person. In this respect, there was no difference between Tagore and Vivekananda. It is in the realm of the doctrine that the differences lie. For Tagore, the Buddha represents or symbolises spiritual and moral emancipation from religious repression and from caste. For Vivekananda, the Buddha and Buddhism represent, at best, an imperfect version of Vedanta and at worst an aberration from true ­Vedantic Hinduism. Especially in respect to caste, both men seem to differ significantly. Vivekananda suggested that caste was not all bad and that Buddhism made a mess of society by trying to abolish it. For Tagore, this is precisely the main moral point of Buddhism: respect for all humans and an attempt to overcome the discrimination of caste. In Tagore’s play Chandalika this emancipation from casteism is very well portrayed in the figure of Chandalika, the Untouchable girl who gives water to the monk Ananda, who accepts it without fear of ritual pollution. Of course one cannot argue

44

Victor A. van Bijlert

that Vivekananda would not also have agreed with the main drift of this play, had he known it. Vivekananda was not an orthopractic Brahmin who feared ritual pollution. As a monk and renouncer, he had transcended the socio-religious norms of Hinduism. Yet his rather harsh criticism of Buddhist doctrine contrasts quite starkly with Tagore’s overall very positive assessment of Buddhist doctrine as far as morality is concerned. Vivekananda seemed somewhat dismissive of Buddhism and preferred Vedantic Hinduism, whereas Tagore seemed to more and more prefer Buddhism to Hinduism, even though he never claimed to be a Buddhist. Yet neither in Tagore’s views on Indian religion nor in Vivekananda’s is there any doubt that both looked primarily to Vedanta and the Upanishads as their main sources of inspiration. For both, Buddhism remained somewhat alien to their deepest religious needs. But Tagore was much more positive about Buddhism, whereas Vivekananda did not seem to care much for its doctrine. This is all the more remarkable as both writers expressed their admiration for the Buddha as major source of inspiration for the highest levels of morality. Vivekananda separated the person of the Buddha from the teachings, whereas for Tagore the personality of the Buddha is the origin and guarantor of the truth of the teachings.

Notes 1 The English Writings of Rabindranath Tagore. Volume Two: Plays, Stories, Essays. Edited by Sisir Kumar Das. 1996. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi. 2:278. 2 cf. op.cit:97–99. 3 cf.op.cit:105–106. 4 op.cit:115. 5 op.cit:115. 6 op.cit:56. 7 op.cit:138–139. 8 op.cit:144. 9 op.cit:170. 10 op.cit:36. 11 The English Writings, vol. 2:308. 12 The English Writings, vol. 3:144. 13 The English Writings, vol. 3:144. 14 To my knowledge there is no Indian ‘religious’ tradition that does not use the word dharma. Jainism also uses the same term with the same range of meanings. 15 In the last section of the Khuddaka Nikaya, Buddhavamsa 2:116 (edition Pali Text Society), the Buddha repeats what he had resolved to accomplish in one of his previous incarnations: Come on then, let me examine the dhamma’s (things, practices, characteristics) that produce an Awakened One (Buddha); [let me examine them] from all sides, from above and below and in all ten directions of space, as far as the sphere of reality (dhammadhātu) reaches. In Digha Nikaya 14.1.13, it is said that the Tathagata (the Thus-gone, the Buddha) has penetrated or mastered (paṭividdha) the sphere of reality (dhammadhātu). In the Sanskrit Mahayana Sutra, Gandavyuha it is stated that the

Buddhism: pinnacle of Ancient Indian morality

16

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

40

45

‘sun and moon of the great knowledge of the Tathagata has as its reach the sky of the sphere of reality (dharmadhātu)’ (Gandavyuhasutra, edited by P.L. Vaidya, p. 400:23–24). Suzuki identifies the Dharmakaya as the ultimate reality in Mahayana and compares it with God in Christianity and Brahman in the Vedanta. Suzuki attributes the qualities of karuṇā (love) and bodhi (intelligence) to the Dharmakaya (Suzuki 1907:46). These terms and their English equivalents are used by Suzuki himself. Suzuki, Daisetz Teitaro (the same as Suzuki, Teitaro). 1907. Outlines of Mahayana Buddhism. London: Luzac and Company. The English Writings, vol. 3:492, 763–764. The English Writings, vol. 2:309. The English Writings, vol. 2:312. Here Tagore translates verses 7–9 from the Metta Sutta. All translations from Bengali are my own. Ṭhākur, Ravīndranāth Ṭhākur. Beng era 1392 (1985). Buddhadeb. Kalikātā: Viśva-Bhāratī. 1985:54–56. The English Writings, vol. 2:320–321. The English Writings, vol. 2:521. The English Writings, vol. 3:214. The English Writings, vol. 3:490. The English Writings, vol. 3:490. The English Writings, vol. 3:491. The English Writings, vol. 3:491. The English Writings, vol. 3:491. The English Writings, vol. 3:492. op.cit:492. The English Writings, vol. 3:490, 761. Ṭhākur, 1985:66. Ṭhākur, 1985:13–14. Ṭhākur, 1985:36. op.cit:37. op.cit:37. Esther Bloch, Marianne Keppens and Rajaram Hegde. eds. 2010. Rethinking Religion in India: The Colonial Construction of Hinduism. London & New York: Routledge. p. 139. For good examples of Buddhological reconstructions, see introductory textbooks: Peter Harvey, 1990. An Introduction to Buddhism: Teaching, History and Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schumann, Hans Wolfgang Schumann, 1976. Buddhismus – Stifter, Schulen und Systeme. Olten: Walter Verlag AG. Charles S. Prebish, and Damien Keown. 2010. Introducing Buddhism. London and New York: Routledge. Contrast this with the anthropological approach to introducing Hinduism: C.J. Fuller, 2004. One could, of course, counter this by saying that Buddhism is after all a doctrine (of salvation), and that the Mahayana sutras especially stress the need to spread the doctrine by copying the written texts of the sutras. Copying sutras is considered a meritorious act of Buddhist piety. Tagore’s diatribe against the Western textual approach to Buddhism is perhaps not entirely justified. In fact, for more than a century Japanese Buddhist scholars practiced the same textual approach by critically editing numerous Sanskrit and Tibetan versions of Mahayana sutras. See Harvey, 1990:2–3 where it is mentioned that the earliest version of the Pali Tipitaka was committed to writing in Sri Lanka around 80 BC and the earliest Mahayana Sutras are dated around the 1st century BC. Charles and Keown 2010:98 date the earliest Mahayana Sutras around 100 BC while they claim that there is ‘less of a hiatus between early Mahayana and earlier Buddhism than previously thought’ (op.cit:81).

46

Victor A. van Bijlert

41 Gregory Schopen, 1997. ‘Archaeology and Protestant Presuppositions in the Study of Indian Buddhism’, in: Bones, Stones, and Buddhist Monks: Collected Papers on the Archaeology, Epigraphy, and Texts of Monastic Buddhism in India. Honolulu: The University of Hawai’i Press. Pp. 1–22. 42 op.cit:37–38. 43 For the Pali texts Tagore relied mainly on Pandit Dharmaraj Barua 1893. This book consists of a collection of small essential passages culled from the bulk of the Pali canon. Thus, it is organised somewhat like the Brahmo Dharma, which contains Upanishad quotations and was Tagore’s pillow-book as far as the Upanishads were concerned. I must express my gratitude to Dr. Shahida Akhtar from Dhaka, who kindly provided me with a xerox copy of Barua’s rather rare book. Pandit Dharmaraj Barua. 1893 (3rd reprint 2004). Hastasar ba Bauddha Mahaparitran. Bangladesh: Buddhist Research and Publication Centre. 44 This early Sanskrit poet might have lived around the 1st or 2nd century CE, see Patrick, 2009:xxi. Vivekananda’s references to Edwin Arnold’s translation occur in: The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda. Mayavati Memorial Edition. Vols. I–VIII. 2003. Kolkata: Advaita Ashrama. Vol. I: 86, 407; Vol. II: 61; Vol. III: 511; Vol. VI: 97; Vol. VII: 287; Vol. VIII: 97. Vivekananda also refers to the Lalita Vistara as a biography of the Buddha, Vol. II: 92. Henceforth referred to by volumes. 45 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. I:21–22. 46 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. II:346–347. 47 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. II:143. 48 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. II:61. 49 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:393–433. 50 cf. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:410. 51 cf. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:411. 52 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:411. 53 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:412. 54 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:413. 55 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:414. 56 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:414. 57 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:415. 58 Gaudapada Karika Book 4 definitely sounds Buddhist for it uses terms and ideas from Nagarjuna, Vasubandhu and the Diamond Sutra. For details see Victor. 2017. ‘Realistic Reasoning and the Unreal World: Gauḍapāda’s Use of Nyāya Methodology to Argue for Illusionism’. Religions of South Asia. 11.1. Pp. 28–52. 59 cf. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:511. 60 cf op.cit:514. 61 cf op.cit:518. 62 cf. op.cit:520. 63 cf. op.cit:52. 64 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:524. 65 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:525. 66 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:527. 67 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:529. 68 cf. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:533. 69 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III:534. 70 cf. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. V:452. 71 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. V:452–453. 72 Tamasika means in the mode of tamas, ‘inertia’, ‘darkness’. 73 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. V:454.

Buddhism: pinnacle of Ancient Indian morality

47

74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95

The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. V:455. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. V:172. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VI:508. cf. ibidem. cf. ibidem. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VI:508–509. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VI:508. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. V:172–173. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VI:119–120. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VIII:92–105. cf. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VIII:92. cf. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VIII:93. cf. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VIII:97–98. cf. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VIII:98. ibidem. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VIII:99. cf. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VIII:99–100. cf. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VIII:100–101. cf. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VIII:103. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VIII:103. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VIII:105. Rajendralala Mitra, 1882. The Sanskrit Buddhist Literature of Nepal. Calcutta: The Asiatic Society of Bengal. 96 Rajendralala Mitra, 1888. Ashtasahasrika: A Collection of Discourses on the Metaphysics of the Mahayana School of the Buddhists. Bibliotheca Indica 110. Calcutta: Asiatic Society of Bengal. 97 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VI:211. 98 The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VI:225–228.

References Bijlert, van Victor A. 2017. ‘Realistic Reasoning and the Unreal World: Gauḍapāda’s Use of Nyāya Methodology to Argue for Illusionism’. Religions of South Asia. 11.1. Pp. 28–52. Bloch Esther; Marianne Keppens. and Rajaram Hegde. eds. 2010. Rethinking Religion in India: The Colonial Construction of Hinduism. London & New York: Routledge. Fuller, C.J. 2004. The Camphor Flame: Popular Hinduism and Society in India. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Harvey, Peter. 1990. An Introduction to Buddhism: Teaching, History and Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mitra, Rajendralala. 1882. The Sanskrit Buddhist Literature of Nepal. Calcutta: The Asiatic Society of Bengal. Mitra, Rajendralala. 1888. Ashtasahasrika: A Collection of Discourses on the Metaphysics of the Mahayana School of the Buddhists. Bibliotheca Indica 110. Calcutta: Asiatic Society of Bengal. Müller, F. Max. ed. 1881. (Diamant Sutra) Anecdota Oxoniensia. Aryan Series. Vol. I. Part I. Buddhist Texts from Japan. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Olivelle, Patrick. trls. 2009. The Life of Buddha by AŚVAGHOṢA. New York: New York University Press, JJC Foundation.

48 Victor A. van Bijlert Pandit Dharmaraj Barua. 1893 (3rd reprint 2004). Hastasar ba Bauddha Mahaparitran. Bangladesh: Buddhist Research and Publication Centre. Prebish, Charles S. and Damien Keown. 2010. Introducing Buddhism. London and New York: Routledge. Schopen, Gregory. 1997. ‘Archaeology and Protestant Presuppositions in the Study of Indian Buddhism’, in: Bones, Stones, and Buddhist Monks: Collected Papers on the Archaeology, Epigraphy, and Texts of Monastic Buddhism in India. Honolulu: The University of Hawai’i Press. Pp. 1–22. Schumann, Hans Wolfgang. 1976. Buddhismus – Stifter, Schulen und Systeme. Olten: Walter Verlag AG. Suzuki, Daisetz Teitaro (is the same as Suzuki, Teitaro). 1907. Outlines of Mahayana Buddhism. London: Luzac and Company. Swami Vivekananda. 1990. Prācya o Pāścātya (The East and the West). Kolkata: Udbodhan Kāryālaẏ. Ṭhākur, Ravīndranāth. 1985. (Beng era 1392). Buddhadeb. Kalikātā: Viśva-Bhāratī. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda. 2003. Mayavati Memorial Edition. Vols. I–VIII. Kolkata: Advaita Ashrama. The English Writings of Rabindranath Tagore. Volume Two: Plays, Stories, Essays. Edited by Sisir Kumar Das. 1996. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi. The English Writings of Rabindranath Tagore. Volume Three: A Miscellany. Edited by Sisir Kumar Das. 1996. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi.

2

Kakuzō Okakura in cultural exchange between India and Japan Dialogue with Swami Vivekananda and Rabindranath Tagore Emiko Shimizu

Famed Japanese thinker Kakuzō Okakura (1863–1913) promoted the opening of the Tokyo Fine Arts School, museum administration, the foundation of the Japan Art Academy (Nihon Bijutsuin), and many cultural heritage preservation projects. He was an important figure in the Japanese art scene of the Meiji era. In the last decade of his life, Okakura moved to the Izura coast in the northern area of Ibaraki Prefecture, Japan, where he provided direction for the creation of new Japanese art as well as cultural heritage preservation. He also demonstrated his skills while running the Chinese and Japanese art division of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, USA, and engaged in many international activities (Figure 2.1). The year 1902 was a watershed year in the life of Okakura. In that year, he visited India. Okakura had been planning this since the previous year, in order to meet Swami Vivekananda (1863–1902). He came in contact with Rabindranath Tagore (1861–1941), Sister Nivedita (Margaret Elizabeth Noble, 1867–1911), and the Bengali painters and they established the foundation for a Japan-India cultural exchange. Okakura visited ancient Buddhist heritage sites and authored The Ideals of the East with Special Reference to the Art of Japan (hereafter, The Ideals of the East) in order to shed light on the origins of Japanese art. The Japan-India cultural exchange, the beginning of which was marked by Okakura’s visit to India, is the subject of discussion of this chapter. Besides this, the discussion will include the developments that took place after his death.

1 Okakura’s visit to India Why did Okakura want to meet Vivekananda? A woman who accompanied him on his trip to India introduced the two. This woman was Josephine Macleod (1858–1949). She had become a devotee of Vivekananda after she was deeply impressed by his lecture in New York and had made her way to India to devotedly support him. Around February or March 1901, she visited Japan, where she became acquainted with Okakura. It is believed that she attended Okakura’s lectures on Japanese art in the summer. One can easily imagine that she probably told Okakura about her

50 Emiko Shimizu

Figure 2.1 Okakura-Kakuzō at the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, ca 1904 © Izura Institute of Art and Culture, Ibaraki University.

venerable master’s philosophy and success. Okakura, who was a Buddhist devotee, had studied under Head Priest Kancho Maruyama (1843–1927), the founder of “Fujishinkyō.” The religious principles of “Fujishinkyō” were based on the concept of non-duality (two conflicting elements are fundamentally one) and aspired to ultimately bring together different Buddhist denominations. Okakura, who was trying to propagate “Fujishinkyō,” may have been impressed by Advaitism and “religious harmony” as taught by Vivekananda. He was very eager to invite Vivekananda to Japan. He sent Vivekananda an invitation and a check. Vivekananda replied from India on June 18 after receiving the check. DEAR FRIEND, ― Allow me to call you a friend. We must have been such in some past birth. Your cheque for 300 rupees duly reached and many thanks for

Kakuzō Okakura in cultural exchange

51

the same. I am just thinking of going to Japan, but with one thing or another and my precarious health, I cannot expedite matters as I wish. Japan to me is a dream―so beautiful that it haunts one all his life.1 However, Vivekananda cancelled his visit to Japan due to poor health. Therefore—along with Shitoku Hori (1876–1903), a young monk who was studying under Head Priest Maruyama—Okakura decided to accompany Macleod, who was returning to India, to see Vivekananda.

2 The situation surrounding the publication of The Ideals of the East Okakura published three English books in the United Kingdom and the United States over the course of his life. The first English book was The Ideals of the East, which was published by John Murray in 1903 in the United Kingdom. It was Nivedita who revised the draft and wrote the preface. As Nivedita had never visited Japan, her understanding of the characteristics of Japanese culture and their historical connection to India would have developed through personal contact with Okakura and familiarity with his writings. On the other hand, through his association with Nivedita and other Indian acquaintances, Okakura was able to gain insight into Indian culture. Without Nivedita, this book—which discusses Japanese art history— would not have been circulated internationally. She described the features of Japanese art, which she learned by reading Okakura’s manuscript, in the preface: It is well known that in the case of Japan the vital element in her national activity lies always in her art. Here we find, at each period, the indication and memorial of those constituents of her consciousness[,] which are really essential. It is an art, unlike that of ancient Greece, in which the whole nation participates; even as in India, the whole nation combines to elaborate the thought. … To him [Okakura], it is not the ornamental and industrial features of his country’s art which really form its characteristic elements, but that great life of the ideal by which it is hardly known as yet in Europe. Not a few drawings of plum blossoms, but the mighty conception of the Dragon; not birds and flowers, but the worship of Death; not a trifling realism, however beautiful, but a grand interpretation of the grandest theme within the reach of the human mind—the longing desire of Buddhahood to save others and not itself—these are the true burden of Japanese art. 2 Later, Okakura made the following assertion at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts: “Japanese and Chinese art require to be interpreted from within like European art, and their productions are to be treated neither as curiosities

52

Emiko Shimizu

nor phantasies [sic], except by the inattentive.”3 When reading the above extract, therefore, we can see that Nivedita had already developed a good understanding regarding the ideal of art appreciation as advocated by Okakura. On the other hand, while Okakura’s vision was of Buddhism passing eastward from India to China and then on to Japan (where, in ancient times, a Buddhist culture flourished), Nivedita emphasised the superiority of Hinduism. The difference in her thinking compared to Okakura’s is apparent in the way she repeatedly stressed the importance of Indian art as the basis for Japanese art. There is a strong sense that this is a writer who wished to help restore the pride of an India colonised by England. The publication and international promulgation of The Ideals of the East was certainly desirable not only for Okakura, but for Nivedita as well. The circumstances leading up to John Murray’s agreement to publish this book and the details of the negotiations that took place between Nivedita and the publisher remain unclear. However, Hidemi Kobayashi’s research has revealed one side of the situation surrounding its publication.4 He discovered two letters belonging to the John Murray Archive at the National Library of Scotland in the United Kingdom. The first letter was written by Sir John Murray IV (1851–1928), dated August 17, 1903, and was followed by the proceeds of The Ideals of the East to Okakura in the form of a check. In the letter, he expressed his opinion that books such as The Ideals of the East, which were academic in nature and introduced cross-cultural ideas, belonged to an unprofitable genre. However, the financial records of the archive show that approximately 1,000 copies of the book were printed on June 30, 1903 at a cost of 86 pounds. The number of copies printed for general books at the time was 500 at a time, so the number of copies produced for The Ideals of the East was twice this number. The book generated profits and was resold in 1904 and again the following year. From 1904 onwards, the book was also published by E. P. Dutton in New York and attracted more readers. The second letter, written by Okakura, is dated November 24, 1904. Dear Mr. Murray Mr. Dutton of New York has informed me that my book “Ideal of the East” is out of print and that you are going to have another edition of the same. I wish to ask you in that case to make the following alterations. 1 2

To spell my name as Kakuzō Okakura instead of Kakasu Okakura which is a mistake. To have the cover a plain one without the flower pattern which is on the present edition.

Hoping that this will not cause you much inconvenience.5

Kakuzō Okakura in cultural exchange

53

In this letter, Okakura made two requests to the publisher on the occasion of the resale of the second edition. The first request was to correct the spelling of his name, which had been printed as “Kakasu” in the first edition, to “Kakuzō.” The second was to remove the illustration of flowers from the cover. The publisher complied with these requests and the changes were made when the book was resold in 1905. Kobayashi sees this incident, in which Okakura promptly negotiated with Murray, as showing Okakura’s excellent adaptability as a cosmopolitan figure. He also points out that the publishers’ established information networks were involved in the international dissemination of Okakura’s work. Nivedita, who wrote the preface to the book, must have found the international distribution of The Ideals of the East desirable. Okakura may have acquired negotiation skills by watching the negotiations between Nivedita and the publishers.

3 Commonalities with the philosophy of Vivekananda, as seen in The Ideals of the East It has been pointed out by Shigemi Inaga and Yoshiko Okamoto that Okakura’s The Ideals of the East shares commonalities with Nivedita’s ideas.6 There was also a philosophical resonance between the master that Nivedita followed and Okakura. After arriving in Calcutta (now Kolkata) on January 6, 1901, Okakura met with Vivekananda at Belur Math. Vivekananda introduced Okakura to his devotee, Sister Christine (Christina Greenstidel, 1866–1930) as “a professor of art” and said that “the former came to see India, the Mother land of Japanese culture and art.” He also stated, “Now, I am going to try my hand in Japan and, if possible, in China.”7 We learn from this episode that Vivekananda started to actively consider the idea of visiting Japan, an idea that he had once given up, after meeting with Okakura. Okakura, meanwhile, instantly made up his mind that Vivekananda was a “notable person of the time with an outstanding mind, spirit, and knowledge” and that he, being a “truly valuable person,” was needed in the religious circles of Japan.8 Okakura was impressed by the Advaitism taught by Vivekananda. And where is that eternal sanction to be found except in the only Infinite Reality that exists in you and in me and in all, in the Self, in the Soul? The infinite oneness of the Soul is the eternal sanction of all morality, that you and I are not only brothers―every literature voicing man’s struggle towards freedom has preached that for you―but that you and I are really one. This is the dictate of Indian philosophy. This oneness is the rationale of all ethics and all spirituality. Europe wants it today just as much as our downtrodden masses do, and this great principle is even now unconsciously forming the basis of all the

54

Emiko Shimizu latest political and social aspirations that are coming up in England, in Germany, in France, and in America.9

Vivekananda felt the inner anguish of the people living in the civilised Western world, which was caused by the loss of spirituality—a result of the mechanistic and materialistic concepts of life promoted by the rapid scientific and technological development. Here, we recognise a common perspective that was also present in the conclusion drawn by Okakura, who had felt a sense of stagnation in Western thought during his study tour in Europe. He concluded that “European philosophy has reached a point where no advance is possible, except through mysticism. Yet they ignore the hidden truths on limited scientific grounds.”10 It is believed that the ideal of religious harmony taught by Vivekananda was part of the philosophy that inspired Okakura. To Vivekananda, all religions provided equally effective ways of guiding their followers toward reaching the same goal of attainment through various paths. He acknowledged the universal elements shared between Eastern and Western thought, while presenting his ancestors’ truth to the Western world, and hoped for a healthy exchange between the two. The idea of religious harmony must have captured the heart of Okakura, who continued with his struggle to combine Western and Eastern art in order to create a new Japanese art. In his book, The Book of Tea, published in 1906, he wrote, “In the liquid amber within the ivory-porcelain, the initiated may touch the sweet reticence of Confucius, the piquancy of Lao Tzu, and the ethereal aroma of Śākyamuni himself.”11 The “tea” Okakura discusses in this book does not refer to the “tea ceremony” but “tea” in “Teaism,” a word coined by Okakura himself. Wasn’t the essence of “tea”—the result of the harmony between Buddhism, Taoism, and Confucianism—a diversity that encompassed different thoughts without being attached to a particular denomination? Here, we see the commonality of philosophy that he shared with Vivekananda. Vivekananda founded Advaita Ashrama in Mayavati in the Himalayan Mountains in 1899 with the aim to live a life of spirituality by practicing non-duality. In May 1902, Okakura headed for Mayavati with Nivedita, Christine, Surendranath Tagore (1872–1940), Swami Sadananda (1865–1911), and other followers of Vivekananda. Having experienced a profoundly spiritual way of life at Advaita Ashrama, Okakura regained his vitality to confront the task of directing the Japan Art Academy. The Ideals of the East shows that Okakura came under the influence of staying here. He explained the concept of singularity within diversity and Advaita. The word advaita means the state of not being two, and is the name applied to the great Indian doctrine that all which exists, though

Kakuzō Okakura in cultural exchange

55

apparently manifold, is really one. Hence all truth must be discoverable in any single differentiation, the whole universe involved in every detail. All thus becomes equally precious.12 Okakura understood Advaita in this way and used it to describe Japanese art during the Meiji era. According to him, like the Vedas, which absorbed various denominations, Japan also assimilated Asian art that entered the country. Therefore, diverse Asian ideals and knowledge are “discoverable” within the “detail” of Japan, which is a “single differentiation.” He was trying to say that they were “equally precious.” On the foundation of Advaita, as taught in Vedanta, he felt a spiritual blending between Japan and Asia and became conscious of the singularity within the diversity. This means that Okakura’s thoughts were pointed in the opposite direction, that is, toward a direction where Japan would be positioned as part of Asia, or the “East,” in a social context where the concept of “deAsianization” was beginning to take root among the Japanese after the experiences of the Japanese-Sino War. Okakura was only able to write The Ideals of the East by positioning Japan as a part of Asia during his stay in India. For him, authoring the book was a project to reorganise Japan and the “East.” He was only able to engage in the dissemination of “Eastern” cultures in Boston because he compared Japan and the “East” to the “West” and restructured them while he was in India.13

4 Pilgrimage to Buddhist heritage sites and Indian art The pilgrimage Okakura undertook to visit Buddhist heritage sites encouraged him to establish his view of Japanese art history. In January 1902, Okakura and Vivekananda headed for Bodh Gayā and arrived in Varanasi by February. Okakura, who had already blended into the Indian way of life and culture, asked Swami Niranjanananda to accompany him and embarked on a journey to visit several Buddhist heritage sites spread across India. Among the sites Okakura visited, the Ajanta Buddhist caves were ones that were built between the 2nd century BCE and the 8th century CE, and they reflected the transition Indian art had gone through. After returning to Japan, Okakura, who had become convinced at Ajanta that the origins of Japanese art could be traced back to Indian art, stated that “the mural paintings of Ajanta share the same technique as that used for the mural paintings of the Kondō of Hōryū-temple in Japan” and that “there are mural paintings from the 6th and 7th century in the Ajanta caves, and they are in no way different from those of the Kondō of Hōryū-temple in their style.”14 Furthermore, Okakura—who had visited various heritage sites with religious art, including Buddhist, Hindu, Jain, and the Ellora caves—became

56 Emiko Shimizu convinced of the exchange and transmission of religion and art that had taken place between India, China, and Japan (Figure 2.2). He stated, The stone carvings of the Ellora caves are similar in style to the Buddha statues in the mountains of Longmenshan, Luoyang, China, or the three Yakushi statues in the Yakushi-temple in Japan. They are the result of a large number of Indians entering China as missionaries and also of monks, such as Dinnāga, Paramārtha, and Xuanzang, who traveled to India to learn the true teaching of Buddha and brought back the Indian style.15 The significance of Okakura becoming convinced of the unity of art and religion while he was in India cannot be downplayed. Subsequently, he began to introduce Japanese and Asian art to the American people. Speaking about Asian art in a Western society inevitably became almost equivalent to introducing them to the religions of the East. Art is always wedded to religion. Her greatest achievements have been in the clothing of religious thought. … Thus religion becomes an allimportant factor in the history of art. Nowhere is this true as it is in the East. The East is nothing if not religious. Her greatest achievement was in religious discovery; her chief contribution to humanity has been the production of religion.16

Figure 2.2 Ellora caves. Photograph by author, 2013.

Kakuzō Okakura in cultural exchange

57

Okakura also appreciated the beauty expressed in the lives of the general population. In a letter dated February 10, 1902, Vivekananda told his disciple Sara Bull (1850–1911) of the interest of Okakura in Indian art: Mr. Okakura has started on his short tour. He intends to visit Agra, Gwalior, Ajanta Ellora, Chittore, Udaupur, Jaipur, and Delhi. A very well-educated rich young man of Varanasi, with whose farther we had a long-standing friendship, came back to this city yesterday. He is especially interested in art, and spending purposely a lot of money in his attempts to revive dying Indian arts. He came to see me only a few hours after Mr. Okakura left. He is just the man to show him artistic India (i.e., what little is left), and I am sure he will be much benefited by Okakura’s suggestions. Okakura just found a common terracotta water-vessel here used by the servants. The shape and the embossed work on it simply charmed him, but as it is common earthenware and would not bear the journey, he left a request with me to have it reproduced in brass. I was at my wit’s end as to what to do. My young friend comes a few hours after, and not only undertakes to have it done but offers to show a few hundreds of embossed designs in terracotta infinitely superior to the one Okakura fancied. He also offers to show us old paintings in that wonderful old style. Only one family is left in Varanasi who can paint after the old style yet. One of them has painted a whole hunting scene on a pea, perfect in detail action! I hope Okakura will come to this city on his return and be this gentleman’s guest and see a bit of what is left.17 Okakura stated in The Ideals of the East, “The simple life of Asia need fear no shaming from that sharp contrast with Europe in which steam and electricity have placed it to-day.”18 He praised the traditional Indian way of life and culture, which were characterised by compassion and kindness, as he interacted with the Indian culture and the people before him.

5 Rabindranath Tagore and Kakuzō Okakura Rabindranath Tagore opened a small school (now Visva-Bharati University), modelled after the ancient forest schools, in Shāntiniketan in 1901; here, he provided education in his mother tongue, Bengali (Figure 2.3). Around April or May 1903, approximately half a year after returning from India, Okakura visited the Izura coast, located in the north of Ibaraki Prefecture. He instantly took a liking to the area and decided to purchase a piece of land there. In 1904, he moved to the United States and started working at the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. In 1905, he built Rokkakudō in Izura. In 1906, he moved the first division (the painting production department) of the Japan Art Academy, which was seeing little activity, to

58 Emiko Shimizu

Figure 2.3 Rabindranath Tagore © Izura Institute of Art and Culture, Ibaraki University.

Izura for a comeback. Until he passed away in 1913, Okakura moved back and forth between Izura and Boston. Thus, Okakura desired to reside in the countryside, away from the cities, and moved the Japan Art Academy to Izura in an attempt to realise his ideals. When we look at Izura as a new starting point for Okakura and the Japan Art Academy, the relationship with cultural exchange between him and his Indian friends comes to light. It is inferred that the ideal education Tagore was providing resonated with Okakura, as he valued the concept of an education involving a small number of people in a place detached from cities.19 In addition, Izura was also similar to the Advaita Ashrama founded by Vivekananda, where education amidst nature was at the foundation. Encounters with Tagore and Vivekananda gave Okakura the idea of creating a space where one could remove oneself from the secular world and focus on art. Rokkakudō, designed by Okakura, brings together three architectural styles and bodies of thought. They are teishi, which is located on the

Kakuzō Okakura in cultural exchange

59

waterside in China and commands a view; a Buddhist hall, which has vermillion walls and enshrines a Cintamani on the rooftop; and a tea-room with an alcove. The culture and philosophy of China, India, and Japan were thus merged in one building. This is exactly the Asian culture Okakura introduced to the Western world in The Ideals of the East. There is a photograph, taken around 1907, of Rokkakudō and Okakura’s house from the seaside (Figure 2.4). There, stone steps leading to the ocean and an artificially maintained stone hedge can be seen. In a letter Okakura sent to the Japan Art Academy right after arriving in Calcutta, he praises the view of Belur Math, which faced the Hooghly River.20 At Belur Math, there is a ghat that faces a river. Okakura must have seen ghats everywhere by the rivers when he travelled in India. This must have left an impression on him. For instance, in Cape Comorin, a sacred Hindu site located at the southernmost tip of the Indian subcontinent, followers perform ablutions in seawater as they pray to the sun. Okakura too went down the stone steps to bathe in the ocean. After returning to Japan from India, Okakura sent Taikan Yokoyama (1868–1958) and Shunso Hishida (1874–1911), artists belonging to the Japan Art Academy, to India. Taikan’s Ryūtō (Floating Lantern, 1909), a famous piece based on his experience in India, depicts the lantern festival he witnessed while staying in Varanasi. The customs he witnessed on the riverbanks and the stone hedges of the ghats left a strong impression on him. Okakura wrote The Ideals of the East in a similar manner to how Taikan projected the intense impression he received during his stay in India.

Figure 2.4 Rokkakudo and Okakura’s house, ca 1907 © Izura Institute of Art and Culture, Ibaraki University.

60

Emiko Shimizu

Furthermore, when we think about the spatial design of Izura as an expression of Okakura’s experience in India, it appears that the stone steps and stone hedge were artificially constructed with the ghats in mind. 21 Rabindranath Tagore left a large number of plays to posterity. At Tagore’s House (Rabindra Bharati University) in Jorasanko, there is a theatre where his songs and plays are performed. Tagore began writing at the age of 20. The work representative of his early period is Bisarjan. The story begins with the lamentations of a poor girl known as Aparnai, whose beloved goat has been taken away from her to be used as a sacrifice for the goddess Kali. Pitying the girl, the king forbids the performing of sacrifices at the temple. The priest, Raghupati, is incensed and orders his pageboy, Jaisingi (whom he loves as a son), to kill the king. Experiencing anguish as a result of his loyalty to both the king and the priest and his feelings for the girl, Jaisingi decides to offer his own blood to the goddess to compensate for the foolishness of man’s thirst for the blood of living creatures. Raghupati, having lost his only treasure, despairs at his mistake and smashes the statue of the goddess. Consoled kindly by Aparnai, Raghupati sees in her the image of the mother-goddess, realising that she in fact represents the final gift of Jaisingi. The original Bengali title—Bisarjan—does not carry with it the English connotation of sacrifice as an offering of a life to a god. Rather, it means to sacrifice oneself or let go of something very important. The central theme of this story, the self-sacrifice of Jaisingi, offers us a window into Tagore’s particular perspective on religion. He sought the divine within human beings. In fact, the opera The White Fox—which was to be Kakuzō Okakura’s last work—contains a similar storyline: the character Koruha becomes a saviour through self-sacrifice, having given up both his family and his magical powers (Figure 2.5). In The White Fox there is a pilgrim’s chorus that pleads for the salvation of Kannon: “Namuya daihino Kannon samayo, Jewel of the Lotus Resplendent! In thee our deliverance, To thee our adoration.” Similarly, Bisarjan contains a song wherein citizens praise the goddess Kali. After one citizen calls out: “Come, come, we are called,” the entire group begins to sing. Victory to Mother! The dread Mother dances naked in the battlefield, Her lolling tongue burns like a red flame of fire, Her dark tresses fly in the sky, sweeping away the sun and stars, Red streams of blood run from her cloud-black limbs, And the world trembles and cracks under her tread. 22 On the stage at Jorasanko, Tagore played the role of the priest Raghupati; in 1900, he invited the feudal lord of Tripura to perform as Jaisingi. It seems

Kakuzō Okakura in cultural exchange

61

Figure 2.5 The White Fox written by Okakura-Kakuzō in 1913 © Izura Institute of Art and Culture, Ibaraki University.

likely that Okakura enjoyed Tagore’s plays in his salon, where artists from Bengal gathered. Self-sacrifice and salvation, humanism and religion, love and sorrow were themes with which they were familiar. In Bisarjan and The White Fox we can sense the harmony of these two poets. In the recital text distributed at the funeral held at Isabella Stewart Gardner’s house after the death of Okakura, four poems selected from the collection of English translations of Tagore’s poetry, Gitanjali, were read. When Tagore visited Japan for the first time in 1916, he went to Izura to pay his respects at the grave of Okakura and meet with his family.

62

Emiko Shimizu

6 Art exchanges between Japan and India In 1903, Taikan Yokoyama and Shunso Hishida stayed with the Tagore family. They deepened their engagement with local artists, held exhibitions in Calcutta and Darjeeling, and drew the Hindu gods and Buddhist images using their own styles of expression. At the time, movements for independence were taking place in the Bengal region; alongside nationalist movements, a Bengali renaissance in the cultural sphere was also taking place. After his contact with Taikan and Shunso, Abanindranath Tagore (1871– 1951), a Bengali artist, became interested not only in Indian traditions but also in traditions of the East, especially Japan and China. He incorporated new expression styles, including washing and ink washing, into his own art. Abanindranath started teaching at a government-owned art school in Kolkata in 1905 and his students went on to form the Bengal School of Art. Gaganendranath Tagore (1867–1938), Nandalal Bose (1882–1966), Asit Kumar Haldar (1890–1964), Mukul Dey (1895–1989), Surendranath Ganguly, and Kshitindranath Majumdar belonged to the Bengal School of Art.23 Nivedita, who was actively involved in political activities, vigorously critiqued the works of young artists. In the preface in The Ideals of the East, she stated, Art can only be developed by nations that are in a state of freedom. It is at once indeed the great means and fruitage of that gladness of liberty which we call the sense of nationality. It is not, therefore, very surprising that India, divorced from spontaneity by a thousand years of oppression, should have lost her place in the world of the joy and the beauty of labour. For Nivedita, art played an indispensable role in the founding of her adopted country and she believed that it would play a similarly important role in its restoration. This conviction was exhibited in her efforts to promote the work of young artists. Nivedita introduced the work of Abanindranath Tagore, Bharat Mata, offering a favourable review of this painting that seemed to usher in a new age in Indian art. She introduced Abanindranath as the artist who had given expression to a purely Indian idea, and she appreciated this work as the first masterpiece by which an Indian artist had succeeded in disengaging the spirit of motherland.24 Nivedita highlighted the value of Abanindranath’s work in the introduction of The Passing of Shah Jahan, in which she included a quotation from Ananda Kentish Muthu Coomaraswamy (1877–1947): It was said of Abanindranath Tagore the other day, by one whose name is likely to be much heard in the future, as that of a great Indian

Kakuzō Okakura in cultural exchange

63

art-critic, that “not only is he what could not have been expected in India at present, but also probably of first rank in Europe”. And Dr. A. K. Coomaraswamy’s praise is understood by even the most unlearned who sees the superb original of the drawing reproduced in this number, “The Passing of Shah Jahan”.25 In 1912, Okakura visited India once more to purchase artistic works for display at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts. His intention was to add a section on Indian art to the Department of Chinese and Japanese Art. Okakura met with Abanindranath and Gaganendranath once again and requested their assistance in collecting local artworks. The following year, some ancient paintings of the Kangra School—sent by Gaganendranath—arrived in Boston. Okakura subsequently requested him to double the amount spent to acquire even higher quality works. 26 Although he proceeded with preparations for making the Boston Museum of Fine Arts a centre for the promotion of Asian art within America, Okakura unfortunately passed away in 1913, leaving his work half completed. The establishment at the museum of the first section on Indian art in America was not to occur until 1917, under the supervision of Coomaraswamy. Art exchanges between Japan and India, which were initiated by Okakura and his Indian friends initially, continued after his death. In 1916, Rabindranath Tagore visited Japan for the first time and arrived in Tokyo in June. He was greeted by Okakura’s younger brother, Yoshisaburo Okakura (1868–1936), who was a scholar of English, and Taikan Yokoyama at Tokyo station. They accompanied and entertained him during his stay. On June 10, Tagore gave a talk on art at the Japan Art Academy in Tokyo, where Yoshisaburo acted as an interpreter. On the following day, June 11, an exhibition by the artists of the Bichitra art school owned by the Tagore family was held at the research institute of the Japan Art Academy. Watercolour paintings on paper by artists of the Bengal School of Art, including Abanindranath and Gaganendranath, who Kakuzō met in India, were displayed. In July, “Bichitra art school Indian art book” (Seika-sha), which included the 29 pieces displayed at the exhibition, was published. “Essay on Art,” a talk on art by Tagore, as “translated by Yoshisaburo Okakura” was included as an introduction in this art book (Figure 2.6). 27 Tagore also visited Izura to pay his respects to Kakuzō’s grave and gifted the Sanskrit letter “om,” which he had written, to Kakuzō ’s family. Inspired by Tagore’s visit to Japan, Japanese artists such as Kampo Arai (1878–1945) and Nampu Katayama (1887–1980) visited India and produced Indian-themed works.

64 Emiko Shimizu

Figure 2.6 T he catalogue of Bichitra bijutsu gakko Indo Gasyu (Bichitra art school Indian art book). Author’s personal collection.

7 Conclusion In an age during which Western civilisation prided itself for its overwhelming dominance, Okakura, Vivekananda, and Tagore—representative intellectuals of Asia—strove to share the art, religions, histories, and cultures of their respective countries with Western society in the hopes that they might be better understood and appreciated. Through their investigations of domains such as art and religion, they sought to articulate the universal elements of the so-called West and East while desiring a healthy exchange and

Kakuzō Okakura in cultural exchange

65

balance between the two. We see an example of this approach in Okakura’s The Book of Tea. Let us stop the continents from hurling epigrams at each other, and be sadder if not wiser by the mutual gain of half a hemisphere. We have developed along different lines, but there is no reason why one should not supplement the other. You have gained expansion at the cost of restlessness; we have created a harmony which is weak against aggression. Will you believe it? — the East is better off in some respects than the West! Strangely enough humanity has so far met in the tea-cup. It is the only Asiatic ceremonial which commands universal esteem. The white man has scoffed at our religion and our morals, but has accepted the brown beverage without hesitation. The afternoon tea is now an important function in Western society. In the delicate clatter of trays and saucers, in the soft rustle of feminine hospitality, in the common catechism and sugar, we know that the Worship of Tea is established beyond question. 28 According to Okakura, we can identify a coalescence of Eastern thought in the Japanese tea ceremony, which has been elevated to the level of a near-religious experience. Yet, at the same time, Okakura believed that a similar spirit could be found in the tradition of “afternoon tea,” which enjoyed popularity in contemporary Western society. For Okakura, the two practices pointed to an underlying harmony between the East and West. For the author of Ideals of the East India was the country where Buddhism originated and, at the same time, where he found the origins of Japanese art. Kakuzō Okakura’s trip to India became not only a turning point in his life but also a starting point for Japan-India cultural exchanges. Okakura’s thought was influenced by his encounters with Vivekananda, Tagore, Nivedita, and many others. It has been pointed out that Okakura’s The Ideals of the East shares commonalities with Nivedita’s ideas. This was also an expression of the philosophical resonance between Vivekananda’s thoughts and Okakura’s own ideas. After his return to Japan, Okakura purchased a piece of land in Izura, started work in Boston, and involved himself in the revival of the Japan Art Academy. In Okakura’s life, the visit to India marked a turning point from failure to success. Also, artists from the Japan Art Academy visited India after Okakura went back, and they were able to deepen their engagement with Bengali artists and influence each other. Exchanges between Japan and India, formed in this way, continued even after Nivedita’s and Okakura’s deaths. The exhibition by artists of the Bengal School, held at the Japan Art Academy with the help of Taikan and Yoshizaburo Okakura when Tagore visited Japan, is a testament to this.

66

Emiko Shimizu

Notes 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Swami Vivekananda. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, vol. 9:159. Sister Nivedita. “Preface to The Ideals of the East”:40–41. Kakuzō Okakura. “Japanese and Chinese Paintings in the Museum”:87. Hidemi Kobayashi. “Significance of Being Published by John Murray — Kakuzō(Tenshin) Okakura’s The Ideals of the East”:1–10. Ms.40888. John Murray Archive, National Library of Scotland, see: Kobayashi. op. cit.:9–10. Shigemi Inaga. Images on the Edge: A Historical Survey of East Asian Cross-Cultural Modernities:149–200. Yoshiko Okamoto. “Bengal no Minsyusyugi to Tenshin Okakura Kakuzō”:100–124. On the other hand, Rustom Bharucha suggests that Nivedita is the ghost writer of the text and eventually fell out with Okakura on the sensitive issue of the authorial ownership of Asia itself (Bharucha, Another Asia: Rabindranath Tagore & Okakura Tenshin:35). Swami Vivekananda. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, vol. 9:176. Kakuzō Okakura. Letter to Tokunou Oda, 1902, Okakura Tenshin Zensyu:149. Swami Vivekananda. “The Mission of the Vedanta.” The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, vol. 3:189. Clara Louise Kellogg. Memoirs of an American Prima Donna:224. Kakuzō Okakura. “The Book of Tea.” Okakura Kakuzō Collected English Writings, vol. 1:270. Kakuzō Okakura. “The Ideals of the East.” Okakura Kakuzō Collected English Writings, vol. 1:128. For more information on Okakura’s activities and achievements in Boston, see: Emiko Shimizu. Okakura Tenshin no hikaku bunkashi teki kenkyu: Boston deno katsudou to geijutsu shisou. Kakuzō Okakura. “Indo Bijutsu dan.” “Shigaku kai sekijo no Indo kenkyu dan.” Okakura Tenshin Zensyu, vol. 3.:263, 267. Kakuzō Okakura. “Indo Bijutsu dan.” Okakura Tenshin Zensyu, vol. 3:263. Kakuzō Okakura. “Religions in East Asiatic Art.” Okakura Kakuzō Collected English Writings, vol. 2:133. Swami Vivekananda. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, vol. 5. 174–175. Kakuzō Okakura. “The Ideals of the East”:129. Shinya Koizumi. “Why Tenshin Choose Izura?” The Izura Bulletin, vol. 18:22. Nihon Bijutsu, vol. 37, Tokyo: Nihon Bijutsu sha, 1902:45. For more information on Okakura’s life and activities in Izura, see: Emiko Shimizu. Izura no Okakura Tenshin to Nihon-Bijutsuin. Rabindranath Tagore. “Sacrifice”, The Complete Works of Rabindranath Tagore. Shino Sato. Moroh no Jidai:190–221. Sister Nivedita. “Appreciations: Abanindranath Tagore, Bharat-Mata.” The Complete Works of Sister Nivedita, vol. 3:58. Sister Nivedita. “Appreciations: Abanindranath Tagore, The Passing of Shah Jahans.” The Complete Works of Sister Nivedita, vol. 3:64. Kakuzō Okakura. Letter to John E. Lodge, 21 April 1913, Okakura Kakuzō Collected English Writings, vol. 3:205. For more information on association between Tagore and Yoshisaburo Okakura, see: Emiko Shimizu. Yo Yo Mugen: Okakura Tenshin Kakuzō to Yoshisaburo:171–177. Kakuzō Okakura. “The Book of Tea”:272–273.

Kakuzō Okakura in cultural exchange

67

References Bharucha, Rustom. Another Asia: Rabindranath Tagore and Okakura Tenshin. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2006. Inaga, Shigemi. Images on the Edge: A Historical Survey of East Asian CrossCultural Modernities. Nagoya: The University of Nagoya Press, 2014. Kellogg, Clara Louise. Memoirs of an American Prima Donna. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1913. Kobayashi, Hidemi. “Significance of Being Published by John Murray —Kakuzō (Tenshin) Okakura’s ‘The Ideals of the East’.” The Izura Bulletin. Vol. 25. Mito: Izura Institute of Art and Culture Ibaraki University, 2018. Koizumi, Shinya. “Why Tenshin Choose Izura?.” The Izura Bulletin. Vol. 18. Mito: Izura Institute of Art and Culture, Ibaraki University, 2011. Okakura, Kakuzō. “Indo Bijutsu dan.” “Shigaku kai sekijo no Indo kenkyu dan.” Okakura Tenshin Zensyu. Vol.3. Ed. Kenjiro Kumamoto et al. Tokyo: Heibonsha Limited Publishers, 1979. ———. “Japanese and Chinese Paintings in the Museum.” Okakura Kakuzō Collected English Writings. Vol. 2. Ed. Sunao Nakamura. Tokyo: Heibonsha Limited Publishers, 1984. ———. Letter from India, Nihon Bijutsu, vol. 37, Tokyo: Nihon Bijutsu sha, 1902. ———. Letter to John E. Lodge, April 21, 1913, Okakura Kakuzō Collected English Writings. Vol. 3. Ed. Sunao Nakamura. Tokyo: Heibonsha Limited Publishers, 1984. ———. Letter to Tokunou Oda, 1902, Okakura Tenshin Zensyu. Vol.6. Ed. Kenjiro Kumamoto et al. Tokyo: Heibonsha Limited Publishers, 1980. ———. “Religions in East Asiatic Art.” Okakura Kakuzō Collected English Writings. Vol. 2. Ed. Sunao Nakamura. Tokyo: Heibonsha Limited Publishers, 1984. ———. “The Book of Tea.” Okakura Kakuzō Collected English Writings. Vol.1. Ed. Sunao Nakamura. Tokyo: Heibonsha Limited Publishers, 1984. ———. “The Ideals of the East.” Okakura Kakuzō Collected English Writings. Vol. 1. Ed. Sunao Nakamura. Tokyo: Heibonsha Limited Publishers, 1984. Okamoto, Yoshiko. “Bengal no Minsyusyugi to Tenshin Okakura Kakuzō.” Okakura Tenshin Sisou to Koudou. Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kohbunkan, 2013. Sato, Shino. Moroh no Jidai. Tokyo: Jinbun-syoin, 2013. Shimizu, Emiko. Izura no Okakura Tenshin to Nihon-Bijutsuin. Tokyo: Iwata shoin, 2013. ———. Okakura Tenshin no hikakubunkashitekikenkyu: Boston denokatsudou to geijutsushisou. Kyoto: Shibunkaku, 2012. ———. Yo Yo Mugen: Okakura Tenshin Kakuzō to Yoshisaburo. Tokyo: Ribun Shuppan, 2017. Sister Nivedita. Preface to The Ideals of the East. The Complete Works of Sister Nivedita. Vol. 3. Calcutta: Ramakrishna Sarada Mission, Sister Nivedita Girls’ School, 1955. ———. “Appreciations: Abanindranath Tagore, Bharat-Mata, The Passing of Shah Jahans.” The Complete Works of Sister Nivedita. Vol. 3. Calcutta: Ramakrishna Sarada Mission, Sister Nivedita Girls’ School, 1955. Swami Vivekananda. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda. Vol. 5. Calcutta: Advaita Ashram, 2001.

68 Emiko Shimizu ———. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda. Vol. 9. Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1973. ———. “The Mission of the Vedanta.” The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda. Vol. 3. Calcutta: Advaita Ashram, 2011. Tagore, Rabindranath. “Sacrifice”, The Complete Works of Rabindranath Tagore. http://www.tagoreweb.in/Render/ShowContent.aspx?ct=Plays&bi=72EE92F5BE 50 - 40 C7-F E 6 E - 0F 741066 4DA 3&ti=72E E92F5-BE 50 - 4F E7-E E 6 E 0F7410664DA3&ch=c (accessed on 22 June 2018).

3

Japan in India’s Xenology Negotiating modernity, culture and cosmopolitanism in colonial Bengal Amiya P. Sen

In the 19th century, much of Asia came to be characterised by several contrary pulls and pressures. It was a time when, in the face of political and cultural aggression from the West, nationalisms jostled with universalist ideas and the fear of cultural alienation grew alongside trans-cultural postures. During this time, both Japan and India were forced to negotiate with Western modernity that threw some critical moral and intellectual challenges at them. The post-Enlightenment West, deeply influenced as it was by the twin notions of reason and utility, viewed Asian societies and cultures as sites of serious social inequity and underdevelopment, burdened by archaic, irrational beliefs and oppressive rites and customs. The modernist discourse emanating from the West was notoriously anti-tradition and tried to posit a common development chronology for all human societies and pre-determined paths to social advancement, wherein modernity was expected to wipe out traditional ways of life. In substance, the challenge before Asian intellectuals lay in negotiating modernity on terms that were contemporaneous, progressive and at the same time not culturally alienating. In other words, they were keen to chalk out a path to modernity that was adequately respectful of past traditions and believed in models of transition in which tradition was allowed to co-exist with modernity, not dramatically collapse under or capitulate to it. In colonial India the indigenous counter-discourse believed that the collective will and imagination of the colonised had to make their tradition the very edifice on which to rest the vitally important notions of identity and selfhood. In reporting his impressions of modern Japan, Swami Vivekananda (1863–1902), a figure critically important to this chapter, used an interesting metaphor. The Japanese girl never broke her doll, he observed, in the belief that her dolls would be animated only if they were loved with all her heart. An ancient civilisation like India too would awake and come alive, the Swami prophesised, if we were to sincerely love its people and their traditions.1 There is indeed a case for comparing the Indian discourse on modernity with that of Japan but, sadly, this still remains a rather neglected subject. Such comparison, one imagines, would contribute to our understanding not only of the differences in cultural narratives or strategy adopted by the

70

Amiya P. Sen

two countries in respect to negotiating the West but would also bring out more sharply the different historical trajectories that they were forced to follow, resulting from a perceptible difference in the degree of Western colonial control. Quite clearly, Japan escaped the effects of full-blown colonialism and the far reaching effects of an unrelenting colonial exploitation of its society and economy. Essentially she fought or contested unequal treaties, not the rigours of colonialist extraction. By comparison, India, which was increasingly tied to the interests of Britain’s global empire, produced a very different set of experiences. It is my argument, therefore, that notwithstanding some similarities in their historical experiences, the cases of Japan and India are incomparable beyond a point. For one, the important distinction between modernisation and Westernisation that the intellectual and cultural awakening in 19th-century India consistently grappled with was relatively blurred in contemporary Japan. The first recorded impressions of Japan and the Japanese by an Indian are available in a travelogue titled Sketches of a Tour round the World (1884) by Protap Chunder Mozoomdar (1840–1905). Mozoomdar was a missionary of the reformist religious organisation the Brahmo Samaj who travelled extensively in the USA, Europe and in Asia, almost a decade before a sizeable Indian contingent visited the USA on the occasion of the World Parliament of Religions held in 1893. Mozoomdar’s observations are interesting and acutely perceptive in places but it is only in the 1890s that Indians appear to have acutely awakened to differences between Japan’s fate and that of India, as evident from the travel notes of Swami Vivekananda, passing through the Far East en route to America and, still later, in the writings of Rabindranath Tagore (1861–1941) who visited Japan thrice between 1916 and 1929. For all practical purposes, the study of India’s early responses to Japan has to greatly rely on the writings and speeches of the above-mentioned figures. On Japanese perceptions of contemporary India and the West, very little is available in English. All the same, I do draw upon the lives and works of some selected Japanese individuals, however sketchily, to draw out a comparative framework.

Re-nascent India and the dubious trope of religious universalism In this chapter I begin with the argument that in resisting Western assumptions about their society and culture, colonised Indians found an effective weapon to frame new discourses in religion of which the underlying spirit was claims of universalism and cosmopolitanism. Here, there was a recurring emphasis on the ubiquity of the human condition and existential problems commonly faced by humanity, as also the claim that historically the Indian civilisation had always been open and permissive towards a variety of invading peoples and cultures that, over time, had made India their home. This discourse was clearly meant to morally contest the agonising

Japan in India’s Xenology 71 political subjugation of one people by another and arrogant claims of racial superiority made by Europeans against non-Europeans. Such ideas and arguments also served to progressively contest Western assumptions about the unfitness of Asiatic or African peoples for self-rule or scathing, evangelist critiques of ‘heathen’ idolatry and superstition. However, I also argue that these were, on one level, highly idealistic tropes that, as I shall demonstrate below, attempted not so much to obliterate religious and cultural differences as assert the political claim that all communities and cultures ought to be treated on an equal footing and be judged by common standards of assessment or evaluation. The Hindu-Bengali intelligentsia of Bengal was anxious to ensure that India had no less to give to the West than what she took from it. In Vivekananda’s opinion, this was imperative for a people seeking to re-establish the self-respect of a nation whose spirit and genius had run aground under many centuries of alien rule. ‘We shall not be students always but teachers also. There cannot be any friendship without equality and there cannot be any equality when one party is always the teacher’. 2 Deeply permeated as this was by advancing nationalist sentiment, universalist postures in India were practically limited by their failures to overcome culturalism. Thus, the tract titled The Universal Religion (1829), authored by the pioneering Indian reformer Raja Rammohun Roy (1774–1833), is based almost entirely on Hindu-Brahmanical sources. For a man who was just as familiar with the theology of Islam, Judaism and Christianity as with Hindu, this prima facie looks surprising. Later in the 19th century, the Bengali mystic and saint Ramakrishna Paramahamsa (1836–86) revealed a highly ecumenical attitude towards various religious faiths and yet felt that it was sanatan (eternal, timeless) Hinduism that would ultimately outlive the others. For many Hindus, as I shall presently argue, the revival of an interest in Buddhism in the late 19th century only fulfilled certain discursive needs arising within the Hindu revivalist movement itself. For one, they refused to see it as a religion independent of Hinduism; in one of his speeches delivered at the World Parliament of Religions held in Chicago (1893), Swami Vivekananda was to describe Buddhismas only the ‘fulfilment’ of Hinduism.3 However, if Indian claims at universality were somewhat tendentious in intent, so was the growing Western interest in Asiatic religion. It has now been sufficiently established that Orientalism itself, with its avid interest in Indian history, religions and culture, was never free of cultural assumptions nor was politically innocent. On the contrary, it was often moved by considerations of hegemony and power and claimed to understand the substance of Indian religions better than the Indians did themselves. The well-known Orientalist Sir William Jones (1746–94) not only took a condescending view of his Indian informants and co-workers but also openly doubted their integrity. On one level, Orientalism was deeply concerned with issues of effective governance, as can be made out in Governor

72

Amiya P. Sen

General Warren Hastings’ introduction to Charles Wilkins’ translation of the Bhagavad Gita, where he candidly confesses to how an affective interest in works such as these helped ‘soften’ the bonds of colonised subjection and make it more acceptable.4 Even Unitarians in Europe and America, who imbibed Enlightenment cosmopolitanism and otherwise dissented from the dogma and institutions of the Church, were essentially motivated by the idea of examining non-Christian religions from a Christian perspective. In 1867, Boston Unitarians convened the Free Religious Association where ‘freedom’ was construed more in a symbolic sense than a substantive one and, in 1881, the Princeton Theological Seminary established a Chair in “Relation of Philosophy and Science to Christianity”, also in the name of a study of comparative religion.5 The interest and excitement that English and American Unitarians showed in the life and works of Rammohun or the Brahmo missionary Keshab Chandra Sen (1838–84) were greatly determined by growing expectations in these circles of such visitors eventually embracing Christianity and by the prospects of Christianising India. The Unitarian scholar and social activist Sophia Dobson Collet (1822–94), best known for her pioneering biography of Rammohun, was greatly offended when upon his return to India after a brief tour of England (in 1870) Keshab increasingly veered around to accepting typically Hindu religious ideas and symbols in his church and even ‘Hinduizing’, to an extent, Christian rituals like baptism and the Eucharist. John Henry Barrows (1847–1902), Minister of the First Presbyterian Church at Chicago and Chairperson of the Reception Committee of the World Parliament of Religions convened in 1893, called the proposed Congress ‘non-sectarian’ and yet spoke on very different lines when delivering an address at Carnegie Hall in 1892, barely a year before the Parliament actually convened: Christianity claims to be the true religion fitted to all…let us record here the conviction that the divine way of building up the kingdom of Christ in America is to engage with fresh ardour in efforts to Christianize India and Africa, Turkey and China…let no one fear that the solar orb of Christianity is to be eclipsed by the lanterns and rush light of other faiths.6 Barrow’s liberalism and declared interest in comparative religions is also suspect in view of the fact that he strongly opposed the idea of keeping the Columbian Exposition open to the public on Sundays.7 However, it is important to bear in mind that the Indian reformist discourse on religion was on occasions appreciably different from that being professed in the West. Contrary to the commonplace belief that the Indian rhetoric was founded entirely in ideas thrown up by the European Enlightenment, there remained discernible areas of difference and disagreement. Even in the first flush of exciting cultural exchanges with the West, Indian thought tried to chalk out an independent path for itself. Thus, while admitting that religious life had to be determined by reasonableness and

Japan in India’s Xenology 73 practicality, some early Indian reformers also rebelled against the ‘surfeit’ of reason, arguing that the domain of the spiritual was quite autonomous of the material or that the transcendental could not always be reduced to everyday human experience. Rammohun Roy, who argued that a reformed religion would yield ‘political advantage and social comfort’8 for modern Hindus, also believed in the authority of scripture and in revelation, a position that perceptibly distances him from some major thinkers of the European Enlightenment. Rammohun also appears to have also stayed aloof from deism, quite popular in contemporary Europe and that postulated a detached and distant God not implicated in his creation. In the deist view, the work of God (nature) was just as important as his word (scripture). The raja’s faith, in visible contrast, was deeply theistic and relied greatly on textual hermeneutics. Curiously, while Rammohun shared the Anglican Protestant critique of asceticism and valorised the life of the pious householder (Brahmanistha Grihastha) in his songs and poetry, he also repeatedly referred to the ‘unreality’ of the world, the ephemeral nature of all life and called upon his friends and followers to practice self-control and detachment (bairagya), ideas typically associated with High Hinduism.9 In his religious thought, Rammohun was clearly influenced by traditions from contemporary Europe based on historicism and a critical study of scriptural sources and attempted to advance a universalism that located the common bases of all religions by carefully chipping away all irrational accretion that had allegedly accumulated over time and through human misapprehension of the Divine. It was a universalism based on subtraction and not, as it were, the joining together of varied ideas and practices. In his method, the raja was eclectic, not synthetic; his essential purport was to broaden man’s exposure to the varieties of religious experience and not to synthetically create a new religion that would be acceptable to all. It is interesting therefore, that with the passage of time, universalism based on locating common bases in all religions should give way to the more complex process of synthetic and selective fusion, whether in a symbolic sense or a substantive one. This shift is best exemplified by Keshab’s Naba Bidhan (New Dispensation Church) founded in 1880, which is comparable to an aesthetic arrangement of flowers, each characterised by its unique colour, texture, form or fragrance. This arrangement was democratic in character, insisting more on the self-representation of various religious systems than on their mutual compatibility. In essence, it took all religious systems to be equally true and worthy of acknowledgement. This, as Swami Vivekananda was to put it before the Parliament of Religions in 1893, sharply controverted any claims of any one religion to be the ‘true’ religion. In this instance, his accusing finger was clearly pointed at Christianity. Speaking at the final session in Chicago (27th September 1893) Vivekananda observed: Much has been said of the common ground of religious unity. … But if anyone here hopes that this unity will come by the triumph of any one of the religions and the destruction of others, to him I say “Brother,

74

Amiya P. Sen yours is an impossible hope”. … [The Parliament] has proved to the world that holiness, purity and charity are not the exclusive possession of any church in the world.10

By his own admission, Vivekananda was looking to establish a religion that had no location in place or time, which will be infinite like the God it will preach and whose sun will shine upon the followers of Krishna and of Christ, on saints and sinners alike, which will not be Brahmanic or Buddhistic Christian or Mahommed an but the sum total of all these and still have infinite space for development.11 This was inclusivism at its best and, when couched in mathematical language, suggests a subtle shift of paradigms from locating the lowest common denominator to establishing the highest common factor. In substance, it also substitutes historicism with philosophical abstraction. Arguably, modern America too cast its spell on Vivekananda, for in the same breath he can be found dismissing Asoka’s council as sectarian and the one convened by Akbar as only a ‘parlour meeting’. It was left to America, he concludes, to proclaim to all quarters of the globe that the Lord was in every religion.12 Here it would be instructive to compare the experiences of Vivekananda in Chicago with those of his fellow delegate, Hirai Kinza (1859–1916) of Japan. Kinza, a lay Buddhist preacher, was one of the earliest people to represent Japanese Buddhism in America.13 Arriving in Los Angeles by 1892, helectured extensively at local gatherings before moving to Chicago in time for the Parliament. His “Talks on Japan” won press coverage in the Los Angeles Herald of 4th July 1893. Prima facie, his speeches in Chicago reveal startling similarities with the substance of what Vivekananda was to state himself. In both instances there was a sharp critique of the role played by Christian missionaries in misrepresenting the countries and civilisation of Asia. Kinza himself was associated with an anti-Christian movement called Kiyu Kai (Society for warning against foreign aggression). Since at the time of his American visit, Japan was also anxious to secure a just treatment from the West by way of suitable revision of existing political treaties, Kinza’s discourses were really enthused by two related concerns. First, there was the keen desire to present a realistic image of Japan before the nations of the West: Kinza alleged that even noted Western scholars and sympathisers of Buddhism like Edwin Arnold had been guilty of misapprehension. Second, it was Kinza’s intention to get the West to recognise the diversity inherent in world cultures. Up to this point Kinza appears to have fully shared Vivekananda’s own anxieties and concerns; where they eventually diverged was in the very different personal trajectories that they revealed after the Parliament of Religions. Ironically, the Parliament of Religions

Japan in India’s Xenology 75 strongly reinforced Vivekananda’s patriotism and bred greater scepticism about there ever being a truly universal religion. Also, going by his own admissions, his true intentions behind travelling to America was much less about the representation of Hinduism and more about the pressing desire to secure adequate resources and help that might suitably improve material conditions in India: bring education to the masses, remove poverty and unemployment, but above all disseminate feelings of self-pride and dignity among a subject race. By contrast, on his return to Japan, Kinza formally joined the Japan Unitarian Association and from a nationalist he soon turned into an occultist. His detractors even accused him of betraying the cause of Buddhism. Vivekananda had the opportunity to meet three other (anonymous) scholars from Japan in 1900 at the Paris Congress of Religions. Of this episode in his life, however, very little is known.14

The failure of religious universalism: Swami Vivekananda on the Buddha and Buddhism In the late 19th century, a section of the Hindu intelligentsia was quick to relate the persisting social and moral ills of contemporary society to a decadent Buddhism. Esoteric and radical practices within Tantra and the free mixing of men and women in quotidian cults were both seen to stem from a corrupted Buddhism on the retreat. At one place, Vivekananda even went on to advance the thesis that in the Indian province of Odisha, it was the success of Chaitanya Vaishnavism that rescued the Jagannath cult from being tainted by grossly obscene Buddhist practices.15 And yet, following in the footsteps of early Orientalist interest in the Buddha and Buddhism, Bengal became a major seat for the study of Buddhist religion and culture. In 19th century India, some of the leading names in the field of Buddhist research were all based in Bengal: Rajendralal Mitra (1824–9), Hara Prasad Sastri (1853–1921) and Ramdas Sen (1845–87). However, the Indian religious community that most productively served the cause of Buddhism and Buddhist studies was the Brahmo Samaj, based, again, in Calcutta. Among these, the outstanding figure was that of the Brahmo missionary Aghorenath Gupta (1841–81), whose magnum opus, Sakyamunicharita O Nirbantttwa (1882), was a meticulously researched work based on the study of extant commentaries in Pali and Sanskrit. This was also when new Buddhist institutions were established; for instance, the Mahabodhi Society, founded in Colombo by the Sinhalese Buddhist Anagarika Dharmapala (1864–1933) in 1891 and which subsequently shifted to Calcutta; the Baudha Dharmankur Sabha in 1892 by Kripasharana Mahasthavira (1865–1926) and the Pali Text Society by Sarat Chandra Das (1849–1917) in 1893.16 Paradoxically enough, friction between Hindus and Buddhists also started around the same period and sharpened considerably after the World Parliament of Religions. On his tour of Buddhist shrines in India,

76

Amiya P. Sen

Anagarika Dharmapala was struck by the neglect and disrepair that such shrines had fallen into but was even more horrified by the discovery that the Bodh Gaya temple itself had been taken over by a Saivite priest. Here it is important to note that both Vivekananda and his chief disciple, the Irish-born Margaret Noble, later given the name Sister Nivedita (1867– 1911), were to side with the Saivites over the controversy surrounding the Bodh Gaya temple. In Vivekananda’s perception, Saivite worship antedated Buddhism and subsequently ‘Buddhism tried to get hold of sacred places of the Saivas but failing in that created new spaces as at Bodh Gaya and Sarnath’.17 Buddhism was represented at the World Parliament of Religions by the Sinhalese Dharmapala and a fairly large team of scholars from Japan18 but about whose experiences very little is known, either though the officially compiled history of the Parliament or from observations made by fellow delegates. Vivekananda, incidentally, took a rather patronising view of Dharmapala. Writing to a fellow disciple on 2nd November 1893, he rated Dharmapala as a poor speaker who could muster only quotations from Max Muller and Rhys David in support.19 Elsewhere, he condescendingly addresses Dharmapala, only two years his junior, as a ‘fine boy’ with ‘not much of learning’. 20 Of the several delegates from India itself, Vivekananda mentions only Protap Chunder Mozoomdar, to whom we briefly referred earlier, as one of the two delegates representing the Brahmo Samaj of India, if only because he suspected Mozoomdar of sullying the good name of Vedanta Hinduism but worse still, driven by feelings of personal jealousy. One reason why Vivekananda became increasingly suspicious of Buddhist fellow delegates at the Parliament was their drawing closer to the Theosophical movement, then led by Annie Besant (1847–1933) and Charles Webster Leadbeater (1854–1934). The Swami deeply distrusted the mystique associated with Theosophists, who allegedly practised occultism and spiritualism, all of which he took to be quite antithetical to ‘true’ religion. 21 For Vivekananda, the Buddha was indeed a kind-hearted reformer possessed of selflessness and compassion. On the other hand, he utterly failed to produce a metaphysical view of Reality, dismissing the concepts of the soul and of God as mere superstitions. Speaking at San Francisco on 18th March 1900, he observed how all his life he had been fond of the Buddha but not of his doctrine. 22 For one, like the sage Kapila, the founder of the Hindu school of Sankhya, the Buddha was allegedly obsessed with negative thoughts about the world, always projecting it as an abode of unmitigated grief.23 In subtle ways, Vivekananda also denied Buddhism a distinct identity and standing as an autonomous religion. Buddhism was historically important, not philosophically. It lacked originality of thought and conception, since in effect it merely presented the gist of the Vedas. That made the Buddha a great ‘Vedantist’ and Buddhism only an offshoot of Vedanta. 24 In essence, Vivekananda’s view of the Buddha conforms to the neo-Hindu understanding of Christ. They were both outstanding moral preachers but

Japan in India’s Xenology 77 with no claims to divinity and here, one may aptly recall how Rammohun’s Unitarian leanings and the refusal to treat Christ as ‘son of God’ led to a sharp disagreement with his Baptist friends in the Danish colony of Serampore. 25 Vivekananda himself remained somewhat sore over the fact that the Buddha had no clear conceptions of religion and this, in his opinion, disabled him from espousing the cause of a universalist religion for humanity. ‘The Buddha, we may say now’, he once complained before a Western audience, ‘ought to have understood the harmony of religions. He introduced sectarianism.’26 Evidently, neo-Hindu discourse felt that Hindus had good cause to be tutored by Christians and Buddhists in moral activism alone, not religion.

Changing Indian perceptions of modern Japan In modern times, the Indian intelligentsia does not appear to have taken much notice of the rest of Asia until after the 1870s, by when India was fully integrated with the new capitalist global empire controlled by Britain. Improvements in international travel and communication would no doubt have complemented this. Of Japan relatively less was known until after the Meiji Restoration but which, when established, became an important point of reference for Indian intellectuals debating the path of development and modernisation that colonised economies like India ought to take. Interestingly though, there had arrived, even in the 1830s, something like a panAsian consciousness, which attempted to bring out the ethnic and cultural distinctiveness of non-European cultures. On his visit to England, Rammohun complained about Christ being painted as a white man whereas in truth he had to have had the countenance of an Asiatic.27 The most emphatic claims on these lines, however, originated with Keshab Chandra, who in his celebrated lecture, “Jesus Christ Europe and Asia” (1866), applauded by a good number of Europeans present in the audience, first publicly drew attention to the fact that Christ was indeed an Asiatic. This was followed by an even more popular lecture on “Asia’s Message to Europe” (1883). Thus, while a pan-Asian consciousness is believed to have considerably strengthened after the Japanese art historian and cultural figure Kakuzō Okakura (1863–1913) visited Bengal in 1902 and collaborated with Vivekananda and members of the Tagore family, among others, there is a pre-history to this that must also be reckoned with. However, simplistic or problematic this might now appear, at the time, several important intellectuals spread across Asia believed that there were certain distinctive features about Asian peoples and their cultures that quintessentially separated them from their European counterparts. In this section, I focus on two prominent individuals from modern India who had occasion to visit Japan and have left behind their impressions of the country and its people. Of the two, Swami Vivekananda had only fleeting glimpses of Japan en route to the Parliament of Religions. Even

78 Amiya P. Sen so, he appears to have toured several Japanese towns: Nagasaki, Kobe, Osaka, Kyoto and Tokyo and his first impressions of these visits were consistently positive: ‘The Japanese are one of the cleanliest people on earth’, he wrote with some enthusiasm back to his friends and followers in India, ‘the short-statured, fair skinned, quaintly dressed Japs, their movements, attitudes, gestures, everything is picturesque. Japan is the land of the picturesque!’28 Given his ill-concealed contempt for priesthood, a quality that he seems to have derived from both Anglican Protestantism and the reformed Brahmo Church in India of which he was once a member, Vivekananda was pleasantly surprised to find that the ‘modern race for progress had penetrated even the (Japanese) priesthood’. 29 This he followed up by a critique of colonised Indians and their misdirected habits, which may justly be called unduly harsh: I want that numbers of our young men should pay a visit to Japan and China every year. Especially to the Japanese, India is still the dreamland of everything high and good, And you, what are you? … [T]alking twaddle all your lives, vain talkers what are you? Come see these people and then go and hide your faces in shame. A race of dotards you lose your caste if you come out. …And what are you doing now?…[P]romenading the seashores with books in your hands– repeating stray bits of undigested European brainwork, and the whole soul bent upon getting a thirty rupee clerkship or at least becoming a lawyer—the height of young India’s ambition—and every student with a whole breed of hungry children cackling at his heels and asking for bread! Is there not water enough in the sea to drown you, books, gowns, University diplomas and all?30 What is also noticeable here is Vivekananda’s acknowledgement of Japanese advancements in modern industrialisation and militarism: The Japanese seem now to have fully awakened themselves to the necessity of the present times. They have now a thoroughly organized army equipped with guns which one of their own has invented and which is said to be second to none. Then they are continually increasing their navy.31 Especially on the latter development, his fellow Bengali Tagore was to later express grave reservations. Both Vivekananda and Nivedita had brief brushes with Okakura, who was hosted by the Tagore family in Calcutta. It was a time when Okakura had launched into a trenchant critique of a thoughtless imitation of Western ways of life and believed that sharing in Western glory only meant humiliation for Asia. Published just on the eve of the Russo-Japanese naval war, his The Ideals of the East with Special Reference to the Art of Japan

Japan in India’s Xenology 79 (1903), which Nivedita carefully edited and even prepared a press copy of, made him a powerful voice within the movement for an Asian resurgence. Tagore was to later reminisce on how Okakura’s visit coincided with ‘one of the most fruitful period of our modern history’ and how he creatively contributed to revitalising Bengali art and culture by making personal visits to village fairs displaying a variety of folk art.32 In a letter dated 10th February, Vivekananda himself noted how the Japanese Okakura would be admitted to Hindu temples and be permitted to touch the symbol of Shiva in Varanasi but not the Irish Annie Besant.33 Two other eminent Japanese visitors arrived in Calcutta, close on the heels of Okakura: Yokoyama Taikan (1868–1958), a major painter of the pre-World War II era who helped establish the Japanese Fine Arts Academy (Nihon Bijutsuin), and Hishida Shunso (1874–1911). Both were pupils of Okakura and actively collaborated with Indian painters, particularly Abanindranath Tagore (1871–1951), a cousin of Rabindranath who was associated with the nationalistic Bengal School of Art. Such collaborations had the support of both Vivekananda and Nivedita, who, at the time, were contesting Orientalist theories about Greek influences on early Indian art and sculpture.34 By the time Tagore first visited Japan in 1916, Indian perceptions about Japan had undergone a series of successive changes. The rapid modernisation of Japan and her growing military strength might have impressed Indians but also left room for some critical reflection. Initially, Bengal was particularly enthused by the shining example of Japan’s naval victory over Tsarist Russia in 1904–5 at the battle of Tsushima Bay. This was seen to not only explode myths of white ‘superiority’ but further intensify anticolonial agitation in Bengal following the infamous partition of the province by Viceroy Curzon. Contemporary Bengali newspapers were full of news about Japan, public funds were collected for the aid of Japanese war victims and local Bengali children were named after Japanese leaders. 35 Even so, nationalist euphoria soon gave way to sombre reservations. Worried at the growing tide of militant nationalism and xenophobia at home, which rejected moderation and resorted to the use of violence against the ‘repressive’ colonial police and the bureaucracy, Tagore quietly penned his thoughts in an epoch-making novel, Gora (1909–10), which sought to substitute cultural arrogance and insularity with a return to universalism. Quite tellingly, the main protagonist in the novel, the young man called Gora, is a fierce patriot who prides himself on his Hindu cultural heritage, only to eventually discover that, in truth, he was born of Irish parents but brought up in a Hindu household. Gora’s new life and awakening thus revolves around a vision that is humanist, patient, accommodative and trans-cultural. Arguably, the novel provided the backdrop to Tagore’s subsequent disenchantment with aggressive nationalism. The colossal loss of life and property during the First World War that soon followed only strengthened such convictions.

80 Amiya P. Sen Tagore’s initial impressions of Japan are available in his Japan Jatri (Traveller to Japan) published in 1919, which relates to his first visit to that country. By then, Japan had also secured an impressive naval victory over neighbouring China, which had led even the poet to remark how they had emerged as the first country in Asia that had effectively demonstrated how the Europeans might be resisted only through the exercise of military power. The work also goes on to elucidate on the hidden sources of Japanese skill and strength. In what may appear to be amusing passages, Tagore observes the startling absence of commotion on the streets of Japan, which are otherwise congested. Even young boys in Japan could not be heard crying and what could offer a greater contrast to India than the fact that in Japan even when two vehicles collided accidentally, leading to injury, the affected parties did not pause to quarrel but simply brushed off the dust from their garments and resumed their journeys! Tagore heard his Japanese friends say that such self-control had been derived from Buddhism, which then led the poet to quip how even Buddhism had failed to produce such public behaviour in India!36 Tagore’s optimism about Japan setting the pace for an ideal synthesis between the East and the West progressively soured with time. Even as early as 1915, prior to his tour of Japan, he had expressed some apprehension at the social ideals of Japan being progressively defeated by her politics, alleging also that she had turned more European than modern, since true modernism represented the freedom of mind, ‘not slavery of taste’.37 A few years later, speaking to the Indian trading community in Japan, he was to frankly admit that it was in that country that he first encountered the nation in all its ‘nakedness’ and that the heroic mood in contemporary Japan was no better than self-exaggeration. 38 This sense of anxiety and disquiet was at its sharpest in 1938, manifest in a series of letters exchanged between Tagore and the influential Japanese literary figure Yone Noguchi (1875–1947). Like Hirai Kinza, Noguchi underwent a radical switch of ideological loyalties in late life and by the 1930s was seriously drawn into advocating Japan’s imperialist objectives in East Asia. It was also with that purpose in mind that he visited India between 1935 and 1936. In hindsight, the timing of the visit appears to have been inopportune; by the mid-1930s, the Indian National Congress, leading the anti-imperialist movement in India, had critiqued fascist movements in Europe and Asia and had developed socialist wings of its own, which supported political movements led by workers and peasants. Support for an anti-British camp came sporadically from breakaway groups led by Rashbehari Bose (1886–1945) and later still by Subhash Chandra Bose (1897–1945), whose charisma and organisational skills were rendered ineffective by the changing military situation in much of East Asia. On returning to Japan, at a time when the war with China was in full swing, Noguchi developed the thesis that Chiang Kai Shek and the

Japan in India’s Xenology 81 Kuomintang were mere puppets in the hands of the West, which, in his opinion, justified Japan’s continuing war against them. This is the substance of what he wrote to Tagore in July 1938. The poet, somewhat taken aback by the self-righteous aggression in Noguchi’s letter, anxiously pointed to how in Japan ‘the passion of collective militarism’ had overwhelmed even an creative artist like Noguchi himself, bringing great human suffering and humiliation to the people of China and Korea. Noguchi also accused Tagore of inadvertently encouraging communism and the military designs of Soviet Russia, to which the poet wrote back saying that the bogey of communism need not be feared so long as there was just treatment of poor workers. 39 Integral to the entire debate on nationalism are two points of criticism that are distinctive to Tagore. First, it was his feeling that what modern Japan visibly lacked was a religious culture: what she had were only moral and social conventions, a feature that he then contrasted to the ‘greatness’ of Europe, which itself was founded on spirituality. In substance, Tagore argued that Japan’s modelling herself on European modernity remained incomplete and misdirected for that very reason. Prima facie, this inverts the entire Indian nationalist rhetoric, which persistently maintained that the West had to seek spiritual instruction from India but more generally from the ‘Orient’, if only to suitably contain her aggressively materialist urges.40 Second, his experiences in Japan also led Tagore to seriously qualify his earlier penchant for an identifiable ‘Asiatic culture’. In 1924, addressing the Indian community in Japan, he stated the following: Though I uphold the fundamental unity of the Asiatic mind, I must confess I do not believe in any characteristic which is exclusively Oriental, bearing no intimate relation to the Western mind. All great human ideals are universal, only in their grouping, emphasis and expression do they differ from one another. It is therefore necessary, while developing our individual character, to come into close contact with other races, which may view from their own standpoint that truth which is also truth for us, but which has with us a special interpretation due to our special experience. It is the mission of all great countries to complete their view of truth, not by merging their characteristics in those of another people, but by revealing their own personality. There can only be a co-ordination of truth, when the differences in the human world are cultivated and respected.41 It occurs to me that though he was enthused by a cosmopolitan idealism, Tagore’s views were considerably qualified by considerations of selfunderstanding and culture.

82

Amiya P. Sen

Notes 1 Letter to Sarala Ghoshal, dated 6th April 1897, reproduced in Letters of Swami Vivekananda: 324. Hereafter called “Letters”, followed by the relevant page number. 2 Swami Vivekananda cited in Amiya P. Sen, Swami Vivekananda:83. 3 See his third address to the Parliament of Religions on 26th September, 1893. Reproduced in The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda. Mayavati Memorial Edition, Calcutta: Vol. 1. Advaita Ashrama, 1971–72, hereafter called “CWV”, followed by the relevant volume and page numbers. 4 For a detailed argument see Kate Teltscher, India Inscribed. European and British Writings on India. 1600–1800. 5 Information on American Unitarians and the growth of an interest in comparative religion is available in Sunrit Mullick, The First Hindu Mission to America. The Pioneering Visits of Protap Chunder Mozoomda:50–72. 6 Barrows cited in Mullick Sunrit, The First Hindu Mission:99. 7 Sunrit, The First Hindu Mission:99. 8 Rammohun Roy to John Digby, letter of 18th January 1828. Reproduced in Rammohun Rachanavali (The Collected Works of Rammohun Roy). Ajit Kumar Ghosh (ed.):412. 9 See Bipinchandra Pal, “Brahmasangute Brahmatattwa” (Notions of the Absolute in Brahmo Songs). Included in Bipinchandra Pal, Sahitya O Sadhana (Miscellaneous Essays), 2 volumes combined:158–172. 10 CWV. Vol. 1:24. 11 CWV. Vol. 1:19. 12 CWV, Vol. 1:19. 13 Information on Hirai Kinza is almost exclusively drawn from the very interesting article by Nozaki Koichi, “Hirai Kinza and Unitarianism”: Japanese Religion:155–170. See www.japanese_religion.jp/publications/assets/JR342_ Noazaki.pdf. viewed on 25.5.2018. The other delegates from Japan representing various internal schools of Buddhism were Jit Suzen (1841–1921), Shaku Soen (1859–1919), Yatsubuchi Bannyu (1848–1926), Toki Horyu (1834–1921), Shibata Raichi (1840–1920), Kozaki Hiromichi (1856–1938) and Kishioto Nobuta (1866–1928). 14 A brief report on the event appears under the title “The Paris Congress of the History of Religions” in CWV Vol. 4:422–429. 15 See “Conversations and Dialogues”, CWV, Vol. 7:119. 16 Information on the Buddhist revival in Bengal is drawn from Gautam Neogi, Sadhu Aghorenath O Adhunik Banglay Bauddhadharma Charcha (Saint Aghorenath and Buddhist Studies in Modern Bengal):22–44. 17 See Vivekananda’s letter dated 9th February 1902, Letters:452. 18 See foot note above no. 13. 19 Letters:57. 20 Letters:80. 21 “In India Theosophists and Buddhists are non-entities. They publish a few papers and make a big splash and try to catch occidental ears”. And again, “I am greatly convinced that what they call Modern Hinduism with all its ugliness is only stranded Buddhism. Let the Hindus understand this clearly and then it would be easier for them to reject it without murmur”. The same letter refers Dharmapala’s being ‘very wroth’ about Vivekananda’s remarks about ‘degraded’ Buddhism. To see Vivekananda’s letter dated 5th May 1897, refer to Letters:335. 22 CWV, Vol. 8:97–98, 103. 23 Letter to Akhandananda, dated February 1890, Letters:18.

Japan in India’s Xenology 83 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41

CWV, Vol. 8, p. 92; “Inspired Talks”, CWV, Vol. 7:59. Amiya P. Sen, Rammohun Roy. A Critical Biography:83–90. Notes of Class Talks and Lectures. CWV. Vol. 6:119–120. Amiya, Rammohun Roy:90. Letters:36. Letters:37. Letter:37. Letters:36. Rabindranath Tagore, “On Oriental Culture and Japan’s Mission (1929). Reproduced The English Writings of Rabindranath Tagore, pp. 605–610. Vivekananda adds: “Okakura just found a common terracotta water-vessel here used by the servants. The shape and the embossed work simply charmed him”. Letters:453. Letters:452. Amiya P. Sen, An Idealist in India. Selected Writings and Speeches of Sister Nivedita:25–32. Sumit Sarkar, The Swadeshi Movement in Bengal, 2nd reprint. 1977:28–29. Sarkar adds that he knew of at least three ‘Togos’ and one ‘Nogi’. Rabindranath Tagore: “Japan Jatri”. Reproduced in Rabindra Rachnavali (The Collected Works of Rabindranath Tagore) Vol. 10:422, 428, hereafter called EWR followed by the relevant volume and page numbers. Rabindranath Tagore: “The Spirit of Japan” (1915). Reproduced in EWR, Vol. III:368. Rabindranath Tagore: “To the Indian Community in Japan” (1924). Reproduced in EWR, Vol. IV, Nityapriya Ghosh (ed.):528, 532. The correspondence between Tagore and Noguchi is reproduced under “Tagore and Noguchi”. EWR, Vol. III:834–845. Rabindranath Tagore:“Japan Jatri”:435. Rabindranath Tagore: “To the Indian Community in Japan” (1924). Reproduced in EWR, Vol. III:326.

References Das, Sisir Kumar (ed.). The English Writings of Rabindranath Tagore. Vol. III, New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi, 2008. Ghosh, Ajit Kumar (ed.) Rammohun Rachanavali (The Collected Works of Rammohun Roy). Calcutta: Haraf Prakashani, 1973. Ghosh, Nityapriya (ed.) Rabindranath Tagore, “To the Indian Community in Japan” (1924). Reproduced in EWR. Vol. IV, New Delhi: Sahitya Aakademi, 2008. Mullick, Sunrit. The First Hindu Mission to America. The Pioneering Visits of Protap Chunder Mozoomdar. New Delhi: Northern Book House, 2010. Neogi, Gautam. Sadhu Aghorenath O Adhunik Banglay Bauddhadharma Charcha (Saint Aghorenath and Buddhist Studies in Modern Bengal). Kolkata: Bengal Buddhist Association, 2016. Nozaki, Koichi. “Hirai Kinza and Unitarianism”: Japanese Religion. Vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 155–170. see www.japanese_religion.jp/publications/assets/JR342_ Noazaki.pdf. viewed on 25.5.2018. Pal, Bipinchandra. Sahitya O Sadhana (Miscellaneous Essays).2 volumes combined. Calcutta: Yugayatri Prakashak, 1959. Sarkar, Sumit. The Swadeshi Movement in Bengal. New Delhi: Peoples Publishing House, 2nd reprint, 1977.

84

Amiya P. Sen

Sen, Amiya P. An Idealist in India. Selected Writings and Speeches of Sister Nivedita. Delhi: Primus Books, 2016. Sen, Amiya P. Rammohun Roy. A Critical Biography. Delhi: Penguin Viking, 2012. Sen, Amiya P. Swami Vivekananda. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2000. Swami Vivekananda. Letters of Swami Vivekananda. Kolkata: Advaita Ashram, 2013. Swami Vivekananda. The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda. Mayavati Memorial Edition, Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, Vols. 1, 4, 7, 8, 1971–72. Tagore, Rabindranath. Rabindra Rachnavali (The Collected Works of Rabindranath Tagore). Kolkata: Viswabharati, Vol. 10, 2004. Tagore, Rabindranath. “The Spirit of Japan” (1915). Reproduced in Sisir Das, et. al eds. English Writings of Rabindranath Tagore (EWR) (Sahitya Akademi), Vol. III, p. 368. “Tagore and Noguchi”. EWR, Vol. III, pp. 834–845. Teltscher, Kate. India Inscribed. European and British Writings on India. 1600 –1800. New Delhi: Oxford India Paperbacks, 1997.

4

India-Japan dialogue in the 1920s Buddhism and world peace in The Young East Judith Snodgrass

The Young East of this chapter’s title was a Japanese journal published in English for international distribution. From the time of its founding in June 1925 until its temporary demise in March 1930, it provided a forum for the exchange of ideas among Buddhists and socially concerned others around the world. India was strongly represented. Though its masthead declared it to be a ‘Journal of Buddhist Life and Thought’, what The Young East offered was not Buddhist philosophy but a socially and politically engaged Buddhism, one that aimed to address the problems of the modern world so evident in the catastrophic Great War and the failure in the years since to resolve international tensions. The ‘Buddhist life’ of the Young East was an active ‘Buddhism in the world and for the world’; ‘Buddhist thought’ was the perspective of Buddhists on current world problems. The Young East was, in its aims, personnel, and networks, a continuation of the Meiji Buddhist revival that had sent the delegation to the World’s Parliament of Religions—including the extended contacts between Japan and India that had been established—but it was also very much a reflection of the historical context of the mid-1920s. The Young East appeared at a time when Japan was an acknowledged world power, one of the five permanent members of the League of Nations; when the government and liberal intellectuals, such as the journal’s founders, were committed to active world citizenship. By this time, however, the euphoria that had followed the cessation of fighting had dimmed; hopes for the efficacy of newly founded institutions such as the League of Nations were fading, and it was becoming increasingly evident that the tensions that had caused the war had not been resolved. Internationally minded Japanese people felt both a right and an obligation to assist in solving world problems, and the only hope for enduring peace, as the Young East saw it, was in spreading the culture, philosophy, and faith of Mahāyāna Buddhism. This was not, for them, a matter of conversion. The Young East’s mission began with a Japan-led reinvigoration of Asia through education and social and political reform based in the principles of Eastern Buddhism—a movement already underway in Japan—to create a strong Asian regional power

86

Judith Snodgrass

that could, in turn, exert a positive influence on the West. It aimed to create an Asian power to mediate between Europe and America. It was a mission that resonated with many and the pages of the Young East testify to strong international support from both the East and West. Prominent among its Indian contributors was the revolutionary intellectual Lala Hardayal, whose vision for social reform in India and challenging colonial rule was similarly based in an engaged, humanist Buddhism, if not the Mahāyāna. The 1920s was also a crucial time in India. Mohandas Gandhi published his journal, Young India, between 1919 and 1932, supporting the campaign for Indian independence. Social reform, East-West understanding, and establishing a basis for enduring peace were overriding concerns internationally, and more than a few in the West looked eastward, and specifically to Buddhism, for answers. India figured prominently in the Young East from its inaugural issue. In the table of contents we see a transcript of a speech by Rabindranath Tagore, notice of the Japanese translation of Tagore’s novel Gora, and notes on a Japanese event with distinctive reference to India in its name: the ‘Lumbini’ festival. The festival is worth a short note here because of the way it encapsulates the importance of India in the modern Buddhism of 1920s Japan.1 Celebrating the birth of the Buddha Shakyamuni had been a feature of the Japanese ritual calendar dating back to 606 AD, but since then had traditionally been observed in a simple ceremony held at neighborhood temples, which involved bathing an image of the infant Buddha and offering flowers—hence its common name, the hanamatsuri, or Flower Festival. The Lumbini festival was celebrated differently, the event transformed into a national festival that took over the capital city.2 It ran over a week and included radio broadcasts, public lectures, concerts, actors performing the life of the Buddha, and a procession of 10,000 people parading across the city, which culminated in a mass public celebration in Hibiya Park near the Imperial Palace. Newspaper photos show an image of the Buddha enshrined in the bandstand, a military band playing before it. An airplane, piloted by a Buddhist priest, flew overhead and blessed the event by dropping thousands of paper lotus petals. It was a performance of a very modern Japanese Buddhist identity, incorporating the latest in transport, technology, and uses of public spaces. Calling it the ‘Lumbini festival’, invoked the historical and geographic reality of the Buddha Shakyamuni, the long-standing cultural links between Japan and India, and Japan’s brotherhood with Buddhist nations across Asia. The prominence of India is not surprising, given that the founding editors were Indophiles, had visited India, and were inspirational in the founding of the Japan-India Association. More importantly, however, it signifies the centrality of India, the birthplace of the Buddha, in Japanese Buddhist modernity and in supporting the pan-Asian mission of the Young East, which was based on a rhetoric of the shared heritage in this religion of Indian origin. The fact that Shakayamuni was an historical figure, located in time and place, was also central to the colonial construct of Pure Buddhism,

India-Japan dialogue in the 1920s

87

upon which the international esteem for this Eastern religion was based3 — an esteem that underpinned the national and international projects of both India and Japan. Articles, notes, and reports on India in the Young East came from both Japanese and Indian scholars, as we will see below. Of particular significance was Hardayal’s presentation of his ‘neo-Buddhism’: a modern, rationalized and scientific system of ethics that was to be the basis of social reform in India and beyond. His vision of Buddhism as a force for political change had much in common with the mission of the journal, but his view on just what shape this universal Buddhism should take was sufficiently at odds with that of the Young East, enough to stir a strong response from one of its founding editors, the eminent Sanskrit scholar Takakusu Junjirō. These differences reflect the Buddhist heritage and contemporary geopolitics of the respective countries to which these men belonged and illustrate the difficulties to be overcome in establishing a universal, or even pan-Asian, Buddhism.

The founding mission of the Young East The Young East was founded late in the careers of three very distinguished Japanese Buddhist scholars and reform leaders with a long history of shared enterprise in the promotion of Buddhism at home and abroad: publisher Sakurai Gicho (1869–1926) and the scholar priests Takakusu Junjirō (1866–1945) and Watanabe Kaigyoku (1872–1933). It was their third journal enterprise. The first was Bijou of Asia (English language, London 1887). Next came the Hansei Zasshi (forerunner of the Chūō kōron, which still exists). They were also connected with the Japanese language journal Kaigai Bukkyō (Tidings of Buddhism Overseas).4 The founders were senior statesmen of the Meiji Buddhist reform movement from which the delegation to the World’s Parliament of Religions and the Eastern Buddhism presented there had emerged.5 All three had been students at the Buddhist university the Nishihonganji College (now Ryukoku University), which played a large part in the early days of the Meiji Buddhist reform. Takakusu was among the students there who befriended Anagarika Dharmapala when he accompanied Henry Steele Olcott to Japan in 1889.6 By the 1920s, both he and fellow founder, Watanabe Kaigyoku, were professors of Sanskrit; Takakusu at Tokyo University and Watanabe at Toyo University. Toyo also had strong links with Meiji Buddhist reform. It had been founded by Inoue Enryō, whose book Bukkyō Katsuron (Revitalizing Buddhism) had done much to set the agenda of the New Buddhism of Meiji Japan (Shin Bukkyō). Both these men had doctorates from Western universities: Takakusu had studied under Max Muller at Oxford and Watanabe at Strassburg. They were at this time coediting the compilation of the Taisho Tripitaka, the complete Mahāyāna sutras (85 volumes) immaculately edited and referenced according to the dictates of international academic protocols. This monumental work, now in digital form, remains the basis of Mahāyāna Buddhist scholarship.7

88

Judith Snodgrass

The third member of the trio, Sakurai Gitcho, was a successful publisher with strong links to India. Sakurai had visited India in 1901 and on his return founded the Japan-India Association to promote cultural ties and trade between the two countries. He subsequently hosted many Indian VIPs in Japan including Anagarika Dharmapala on his third trip in 1902, and later Rabindranath Tagore. Sakurai was well connected; the association officially attributes its founding to the then-prime minister, two viscounts, ‘and others’. All three Young East founders were so, as the numerous contributions to the journal from senior statesmen and government officials, especially the Foreign Ministry, indicate. The life mission of the Young East’s founders was the interconnected projects of reviving Buddhism as the religion of modern Japanese society and disseminating knowledge of Buddhism to the West. This was a continuation of the project of the delegation to Chicago. The encompassing and universally orientated Eastern Buddhism of the Young East had been first formulated in English to be presented there. It was not simply ‘Japanese Buddhism’, but a version of the New Buddhism of Meiji reform. New Buddhism had emerged as a domestic response to Japan’s need for a religion compatible with its modern society; one that was acceptable to its Western-educated elite. It was imbued with the imperatives of modernity, a religion relevant to modern society, lay focused, non-sectarian, rational and scientific, stripped of ritual and superstition. Eastern Buddhism shared all this but had been further shaped by the Chicago project of presentation to the West. It encompassed all that Western intellectuals approved of in the Pāli construct of Theravāda, distanced itself from the criticisms of negativity and otherworldliness, and emphasized the perceived parallels between Japanese Mahāyāna and German idealist philosophy. In 1893, this universal Buddhism, the religion for the modern scientific age, was to be Japan’s gift to the world. Western acceptance would endorse it among the educated elite at home, would win esteem for Japan as a civilized nation, and thereby achieve recognition of its rightful place among the community of nations. By 1925, three decades later, Japan had largely achieved this recognition, if to some extent through military victory in the Russo-Japanese War. In the 1920s, a different set of historical contingencies precipitated by the First World War presented an opportunity and an obligation—even perhaps an imperative—to renew the mission. The Young East was founded as a vehicle for it.

Winds of change: Japan in the world, 1925 The Western interest in Buddhism that had begun in the late 19th century grew significantly after the First World War as people searched for an alternative world order, the basis of permanent peace referred to above. The protracted and destructive war confirmed the moral crisis of the Eurocentric world order and undermined the legitimacy of Western dominance and

India-Japan dialogue in the 1920s

89

the mission to civilize that had been used to justify colonial rule. It was evidence of the decline of Western civilization. Pan-Asian movements that had started after Japan defeated Russia in 1905 took on a new force.8 Japanese Buddhist reformers, firm in the belief that Eastern Buddhism was the answer to the world’s problems, renewed their efforts at making Mahāyāna Buddhism better known. The Suzukis—Daisetz Teitarō Suzuki and his wife Beatrice—founded the Eastern Buddhist in 1921 to this end. As the inaugural issue observed, many in the world were turning to Buddhism at this time, but because of the neglect of Mahāyāna studies in the West, all that was available to them was the Theravāda, it was therefore incumbent on Japanese Buddhists to make the greater wisdom of the Mahāyāna better known. The Young East emerged four years later, and it is no accident that the first two issues contain excerpts from a speech Rabindranath Tagore had given during his visit in June the previous year. This had been Tagore’s second visit. The first, in 1916, had not been a great success. The Japanese, proud of their rapid modernization, had not been particularly receptive to his warning that Western influences were threatening the Japanese soul. In 1924, however, the mood was rather different. Tagore’s visit coincided with public outcry against the American Exclusion Law of that year.9 The law restricted immigration to those eligible for US citizenship, and therefore prohibited immigrants from Japan. The Japanese saw this as a deep racial insult. The outcry in the press had started in April 1924 and was followed by public demonstrations, the boycott of American goods—even Hollywood films—several suicides, and protests at the highest levels. Tagore’s visit in June could not have been better timed. The Japanese public welcomed his critique of the US and, in this anti-Western atmosphere, his call for Asian unity. As Tagore put it, ‘the need for spiritual unification of Asian peoples has never been more acute than at this time of racial persecution at the hands of American lawmakers’.10 Japan’s alignment between Asia and the West was always fluid, and the decision to join the League of Nations had been contested, but the liberal cosmopolitan attitude had prevailed. Japan took the decision to join the League in the belief that its best interests would be served by being an active international citizen. It was committed to the Geneva ideals and was an effective member of the organization.11 Continuing evidence of discrimination underlined the reality that it was nevertheless ‘an Asian in a European club’.12 Tagore’s visit in 1924 tipped the scales towards aligning with Asia (Figure 4.1). The Exclusion Law was particularly painful coming, as it did, four years after Japan’s recognition as a world power, the only Asian member of the League of Nations (Figure 4.2). It was a final straw in a history of such incidents the Japanese perceived as based in racism: the unequal treaties imposed in the 1850s, disenfranchisement of Japanese citizens in Hawaii in 1892, the Triple Intervention of 1895, and, more recently, the failure of its proposal for a racial equality clause at Versailles in 1919. Japan was a world power, but

90

Judith Snodgrass

Figure 4.1 Rabindranath Tagore in Japan 1924, shown here at the Kabuki Theatre in Kyoto, June 16, 1924. Asahigraph, 3:1 (July 2, 1924) 16. The figure second to the right of Tagore is D. T. Suzuki who acted as his translator.

it was still not equal. Another blow came in 1923 when the Anglo-Japanese Alliance of 1902 came to an end. Within a very short time, the British, who remained in partnership with Japan as a member of the League, announced plans to build an immense naval base in Singapore. In an article in the Young East, ‘British Menace to Japan’, Itoh Masanori, a naval expert who had reported on the Versailles peace talks and the Washington Arms Limitation Conference, described it as an insult to Japan: ‘Cold water thrown on the memory of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance’. Who but Japan could such a base be directed at? he asked.13 Itoh’s paper may not be the kind of content you would normally expect to find in a journal with the masthead ‘A Journal of Buddhist Life and Thought’, but it was very characteristic of Young East’s content, which ranged from the political to the literary, aiming to let the world know what was happening in Japan and what the Japanese were saying about matters of world concern. It offered English translations of key articles from the Japanese press and speeches made by Japanese statesmen to provide a window into Japanese opinions on world issues. There were statistical reports on all aspects of Japan’s development, trade, finance, and population. It was not a journal about the life and thought of the Buddha, but of what living, contemporary, politically concerned Buddhists were doing and thinking about world issues. The Young East frontispiece carried a message ‘to its Friends and Readers’, a strident and passionately written manifesto.14 In essence, the message was that the world was facing a crisis and Japanese Buddhists had a duty to do something about it. As they saw it, the world civilization, based as it was in Western ideology, was ‘more a curse than a blessing’. The only hope for the world was a radical change; the principal change that needed to be

India-Japan dialogue in the 1920s

91

Figure 4.2 Japanese pilots in Japanese planes complete the first ever transcontinental flight, evidence of the country’s technological achievements and symbolic of how Japan saw its place in the world. Cover image, Asahigraph 5:4 (July 22, 1925). The November 18 issue carried aerial images looking down on London. The flight had taken place in September 1924.

made was to overcome the inequalities caused by the prejudice of the West in regard to race, religion, and politics. The remedy for this, as the Young East saw it, was ‘to spread to the West the culture, philosophy and faith of Buddhism’; to implant in their minds the spirit of the Buddha ‘whose love extends to all living creatures in earth’. The manifesto set out an agenda of integrated missions for East and West. These began in Japan with a Buddhist-based program of education, health, and labor reform, to provide ‘sound moral ideas’ and ‘the means of making a decent living’ for the population. This model, emulated across

92

Judith Snodgrass

Asia according to local needs—the program for China listed famine and disaster relief; medical aid to those wounded in war; promotion of industry by establishing factories; land reclamation; aid for the elderly, the crippled, and helpless widows; road works and street lighting; free ferry services; and public utilities for travellers15 —would result in a morally strong Asian power, one that could mediate between America and Europe, between communism and capitalism. The mission for the West was to disseminate knowledge of Eastern Buddhism there. This, not just Buddhism in general, but the modern Eastern Buddhism described above, was fundamental to the vision. Education was the basis of the program, both for the general public and for the clergy. This was to be secular public education, including education for women. On top of this, Buddhist clerics were to be trained according to newly compiled textbooks designed to ensure standards and to train them in the modern Buddhism of the movement. While the sectarian systems of clerical training remained central, there were also to be university courses in Buddhist studies and Western philosophy, established to teach Buddhism as it was taught in the West. These were to enable Asian Buddhists to have a voice in Western academic discourse. Japanese Buddhists such as Takakusu lectured at universities in Europe and America; many others published academic monographs. As a move towards overcoming the not-inconsiderable differences in regional beliefs and practices, exchanges were to be set up across the region. As a result, many Asian priests did in fact come to Japan for training and a number of Japanese priests studied in various parts of Asia. The manifesto called on ‘our Asian brothers and sisters’ to throw off ‘the chains of moribund traditions’; to ‘put fire to dead or dying leaves and welcome in their place fresh buds full of life and vigour’; to ‘bring back to life the old East, the sick East, the dying East’. The journal was to be a tool in this mission. But for all the passion of its message, the Young East’s attitude was liberal and international. The journal stressed that it was not ‘anti-Western’ as such, but transcending the East-West divide, claimed the rights of a global citizen. ‘Western civilization is no longer the exclusive possession of the white race’, and ‘Orientals’ as participants in it, have the right and responsibility to contribute to finding a solution to the current crisis. Writing on ‘the meaning of the Young East’, elder statesman of the Buddhist reform movement, Nakanishi Ushirō, expressed deep and permanent gratitude to the West and to Christianity for its contribution to Western society, the benefits of which Japan shared. However, as he wrote, this civilization had also given rise to inequalities in wealth and power ‘bringing in its train communism and socialism and class strifes’. These had caused the devastation of the First World War and now threatened ‘to involve mankind in merciless and bloody feuds of unprecedented magnitude’. The title of Nakanishi’s article is pertinent to the mission of the journal. By 1925, the high hopes that had been held for the League of Nations had

India-Japan dialogue in the 1920s

93

faded; world tensions were increasing once again. In the Young East’s view, the roots of tensions that had given rise to the Great War were still present as they lay in the fundamental problem of the Western ‘prejudice and pride in regard to race, religion, and politics’. Inequality, and therefore world peace, would not be overcome until this was removed, and Eastern Buddhism held the answer. Reaction against the Exclusion Law occupied considerable space in the journal over 1925 and 1926, but there were also accounts of Western prejudice more generally. S. Yonemura, writing about Jim Crow laws and racial problems in the US, offered the 1,552 lynchings ‘shamelessly committed by Americans’ between 1900 and 1922, as evidence of ‘America’s lack of sympathy with living creatures’.16 Juxtaposed with such content, the import of the otherwise platitudinous claim that ‘the Buddha’s love extends to all beings’—the basis for the claim that Buddhism was the answer to the world’s ills—becomes evident: if to all beings, then necessarily it was extended to all human beings, regardless of race or religion.

India in the Young East Tagore’s speeches on his second visit, at least as recorded in the Young East, were not about Japan’s Westernization and nationalism, but about the need for strengthening spiritual links across Asia. Takakusu, for his part, wrote a series of articles on Japan and India, specifically endorsing this idea—‘What Japan Owes to India’—emphasizing the long standing cultural and spiritual bonds. Poetry and words of wisdom from Tagore, Ramakrishna, and other Indian sages fill the space throughout. There are notes on Japanese translations of Indian classics such as the Mahabharata, and of new publications from India in English.17 The editors gave a very substantial presence to India in the Young East. The Young East’s combination of a proud Asia, one with a claim to equal world citizenship and its agenda for social reform and world peace, appealed to many. There was an impressive and diverse range of submissions from India. Some wrote of Buddhism as a solution to social problems. Ganga Charan Lal, who declared himself to be a Buddhist, localized the Young East message calling for ‘Buddhist Renaissance for India’, based in a form of Buddhism that ‘interprets the message of the Master to India’s needs’, one that will ‘free us from the entanglements of castes and sub-castes, abolish… untouchability’, do away with purdah, emancipate women, and abolish child marriage and polygamy.18 Some spoke of the fundamental unity of Hinduism and Buddhism. This was the topic of a speech by India’s first anthropologist, Yale graduate Panchanan Mitra (1892–1936), delivered at Pabua Town Hall (May 16, 1927),19 a region of India with a substantial Buddhist population. Some also reflected the encompassing tolerance of Buddhism, a religion that Hindus could find a place within. Letters from Lahore and Bangalore reported

94

Judith Snodgrass

on building Buddhist viharas to remedy communal violence. Shiva Charan Lal wrote that Hinduism could not solve the problems of India without help from Buddhism. 20 Still others subsumed Buddhism into Hinduism. Mahatma Gandhi, quoted in the February 1928 issue, equated the Buddha’s teachings with the best of Hinduism. The Buddha had been a reformer of Hinduism: ‘His [Shakyamuni’s] great Hindu spirit had cut itself a way through the forest of meaningless words which had overgrown the golden trough with us in the Vedas’. 21 For all, Buddhism was a source of pride, a proud heritage that all Indians could relate to, and therefore a force for national unity. The Young East carried notes and reports on many Buddhist activities expressing this, including a large public celebration of Vesak in Kusinagara (May 26, 1926), attended by Mrs Sarojini Naidu, then President of the Indian National Congress. Though also attended by monks from Burma and China, the form of the event was Hindu: a ten day mela with a procession carrying a Buddha image from the Mahaparinirvana Temple to the Kasia Hindu Middle School. 22 Hindu nationalists picked up on the world prestige of Buddhism at the time. Because the Buddha and his teachings were internationally admired, the Indian origin of Buddhism was a source of pride. Because Buddhism, in its many forms, was the religion of so much of Asia, its pilgrimage sites were the basis of a pan-Asian alliance. That fact that Buddhism was no longer a living presence in India, and therefore did not favor any existing community at a time of communal tension, made it a useful source of national unity. It was a proud heritage that all Indians could relate to, especially in the non-religious humanist mode that had been created by Western scholarship. This was the Buddhism of science, the Buddhism of Asoka, which offered an encompassing ethical system characterized by religious tolerance. As Daljit Singh Sadharia wrote, it would be impossible to unite India without the ‘destruction of religion’ therefore Buddhism, which as he saw it, was a ‘non-religious moral system based on science’, offered an alternative. 23 The Young East’s mission for Asia nevertheless caused some concern for at least one contributor: A Mr Subrahmanya Iyer welcomed the ideals but warned Japan against Western-style imperialism and expansion into China. 24 Such was the diversity of Indian presence in the journal.

The dialogue: Lala Hardayal and the Young East The dialogue between India and Japan, as distinct from their mutual presence in the journal, was most clearly exemplified in the exchange between Takakusu and Lala Hardayal, an Indian nationalist, anti-colonial activist, and social reformer. Dayal was at that time living in London while writing a thesis on Buddhism in Sanskrit texts at the School of Oriental and Asian Studies. The two men had much in common. Both were scholars of Sanskrit, Western educated, cosmopolitan, and nationalist; both were

India-Japan dialogue in the 1920s

95

committed to propagating a new, socially engaged Buddhism. Their visions of Buddhism had much in common, at least in a general form. Hardayal first appears in the Young East when Takakusu comments approvingly on his views of the Mahabodhi issue, which had been published in the Indian journal The Modern Review.25 In this article, Hardayal proposed that the Hindus should keep the existing monument at Bodh Gaya, the Buddhists should buy land nearby and ‘erect a noble shrine and grander monument for the future’, ‘one worthy of the faith of so many great nations’. In his view it ‘should represent the enlightened, reformed and progressive Buddhism of the future’. It should be a wonderful Vihara and Stupa of this century, everything built of pure marble. There should be a temple, a library, a research institute, a hostel for Buddhist pilgrims and scholars, and ‘a museum of Buddhist art, ancient and modern’. Such a magnificent center would be ‘welcomed by Buddhists around the world including in the West’ and would be the focus of a new international association. 26 This rather than ‘the woe-begone old temple’, was the right way, wrote Hardayal, to honor the Buddha in this century (178–179). The proposal seemed principally instigated by a desire to see the issue resolved. He was worried that the prolonged controversy over ownership of the old pilgrimage site, the monument to the Buddha’s Awakening, might adversely impact on India’s relations with Asian states. ‘The sympathy of the Buddhist world is a priceless asset for India’. As he explained to his Indian readers, Bodhgaya ‘is not a religious issue for us’ but one of ‘national prestige and influence of moral values, even of political gain and loss for centuries to come’ (168–169). Building a monument to modern international Buddhism was both a solution to the problem and a gesture towards fostering stronger links among the world’s Buddhists, links centered on India as the birthplace of Buddhism. Without doubt there was much in Hardayal’s proposal that aligned with the Young East’s call to throw off the past and bring in a new Buddhism for the modern world, one with an emphasis on education, research, and pan-Asian Buddhist co-operation. Hardayal, invited or encouraged by Takakusu’s response, contributed seven articles to the Young East between May 1926 and January 1929. 27 The first paper was called ‘Buddhism and the Future’ in which he defined his ‘neo-Buddhism’.28 Civilization needs religion, he declared, but it must be one that modern educated people can accept. What he outlined was clearly based in the Buddhist construct of colonial orientalists such as T. W. Rhys Davids and the Pāli Text Society working on Theravāda texts. It celebrated Buddhism as a scientific religion, one that did not depend on belief in God, creation, divine intervention, or immortal soul; one that promoted self-culture through meditation, study, and a life of frugality; a religion of self-reliance rather than prayer; one that was encompassing and tolerant. It was thoroughly based in the physical world. The Buddha, Gautama, was a historical teacher who had lived and taught in India, nothing more than an exemplary man. For Hardayal, as for Rhys Davids, nirvana was simply

96

Judith Snodgrass

deliverance from sin and sorrow in this life; the Jataka merely folklore. Hardayal’s neo-Buddhism added to this a number of socially progressive features; for example, gender equality (ordination open to both men and women) and married clergy (celibacy is unnatural, antisocial, and leads to mental impurity and other evils.) He insisted that vegetarianism was to be a matter of personal choice. Hardayal presented his neo-Buddhism under nine points, each elaborated at length, and it was in these elaborations that the problems appeared. Takakusu’s response extended over two issues.29 The first dealt with the first three points—no superstition, no God, no soul—and showed none of the enthusiasm he had had for the Bodhgaya piece. He calls the proposal shallow and ill informed: Buddhism interpreted with the view of a narrow-minded Western scientist. What hurt was that Hardayal’s neoBuddhism, based as it was in the Western construct of Pāli scholarship, maintained its prejudices against the Mahāyāna. It showed equal ignorance of the subtlety of Mahāyāna teachings and of the reforms that had taken place in Japan in the previous half century.30 What was particularly galling for Takakusu, a priest of the Jōdoshinshū (True Pure Land Sect), was that in expanding on the first point, ‘no superstition’, Hardayal had specifically dismissed belief in ‘supernatural Bodhisattvas’ and ‘the Western Paradise of Japan’—both central to Jōdoshinshū practice—as examples of ‘outmoded absurdities’ that the modern educated populace could not accept. For Takakusu, this was a very personal attack. In his response, he entirely agreed on the need to destroy superstitions, but, as he explained, Japanese Pure Land believers had no superstitions whatsoever. (60) Amida’s Western Paradise exists only in one’s own mind. Furthermore: Japanese believers in the Shinshu sect do not believe in the God of creation; they do not believe in the last day of judgement by God; they pray neither to Buddha nor to gods… they do not believe in anything pertaining to superstition. In this sense the first proposal of Mr. Har Dayal has long been in practice among Japanese believers of the Shinshu sect. (59) Even more important to Takakusu, however, was that the Young East’s vision of social and political reform through Buddhism depended on these concepts as understood in the Mahāyāna. In Mahāyāna Buddhism, a bodhisattva is not just the individual working towards the personal attainment of buddhahood, but the being who has already attained Awakening and, as an act of compassion for others, opts to work in this world for their salvation. This conception of the bodhisattva was the basis of the Young East’s socially active, engaged Buddhism; the paradigm of practice to create the Pure Land in this world through social reform. It was also the basis of the distinctively Mahāyāna concept of nirvana, the positive definition so

India-Japan dialogue in the 1920s

97

central to countering Western accusations that Buddhism was nihilistic and to the mission for world peace. In Eastern Buddhism, attaining nirvana is not extinction or retreat from the world, Takakusu explained. Quite the opposite: it is incumbent upon the Awakened person to actively work for the social good. Hardayal’s ‘scientific’ nirvana was an unacceptable reduction of the vision. So too was reducing the concept of the Buddha to nothing more than an historical teacher, however highly regarded. It eliminated any understanding of Mahāyāna philosophy, which was to be Japan’s ultimate gift to the world and the basis of its claim to favorable comparison with German idealist philosophy. Surprisingly, perhaps, Takakusu also defended Theravāda practices such as the Procession of the Tooth in Kandy, which Hardayal dismissed as exemplary superstition. For Takakusu, the ritual was not an absurdity but reverence for a great historical figure and ‘respect for the customs of parents’. He urged Hardayal to be cautious about casting off practices he did not understand. Both points go towards Takakusu’s overall cautioning of Hardayal against attempting to create a new religion rather than reform one already established. ‘A religion cannot be created at a moment’s notice’; ‘success or failure depended on the content of a creed and the work it accomplished’. ‘A scientist may prove the absurdity of a religion, but the religion will exist all the same’, and conversely, ‘a philosopher may organize a religion but such a religion will not live’. He might have added that Hardayal’s criticism of fellow Buddhists was at odds with his vision of neoBuddhism as ‘expansive and all-inclusive’, tolerant and syncretic, ‘the broad river of Religion for all nations’. Bringing the vision of Pan-Asian Buddhist fellowship to reality would require tolerance and respect. Takakusu’s second paper responded to the last six points and—although still not very impressed, particularly with Hardayal’s aversion to philosophy and his ‘mono-mania for science’—it was generally more conciliatory. Even then, coming as it did after such a volley of criticism, the final paragraph was a surprise. It was a clear endorsement of the basic principles of neo-Buddhism based on its resemblance to the teachings of Shinran (1173–1264), the founder of the Jōdoshinshū sect. Shinran had married, as had Jōdoshinshū priests following him; in Japan women were ordained; and since a government decree in the Meiji period, Japanese Buddhist priests were not necessarily either celibate or vegetarian.31 Since he had previously explained that the Pure Land and the Bodhisattvas were not metaphysical concepts and that modern Japanese Buddhism endorsed scientific education, Takakusu concluded: Now, it is with pleasure and satisfaction, I can say that the nine proposals of Mr Har Dayal are right up to our expectations. They were roughly: the abolition of vegetarianism; abolition of celibacy; the removal of superstitious elements from Buddhism; prohibition of praying; introduction of more scientific knowledge into Buddhism; exclusion of

98 Judith Snodgrass metaphysics from Buddhism. In fact, I am glad to note much resemblance between his proposals and the teachings of Shinran. (84) The bottom line was that the proposals themselves were good, though the arguments for them were flawed. (84).

Pāli scholarship and Buddhist modernity We learn in his second paper ‘What Buddhism has Taught Me’ just how personal Hardayal’s position was, too.32 The rational construct of humanist Buddhism crafted from the Pāli texts answered his own needs perfectly. It had been shaped to be the religion of the scientific modern world, the answer to the search by Western intellectuals for a philosophy of ethics, one that did not depend on the supernatural or the miraculous. Its ideals of atheism, self-reliance, frugality, ethical conduct, and social democracy were exactly what he had been searching for since his youth. He was of course, not the only Asian to have rediscovered his heritage through English scholarship. Buddhists across Asia welcomed, endorsed, and financially supported the work of the Pāli Text Society. This was particularly easy for the people of India, where Buddhism had died out centuries before because there was no conflict with present practice. It was rather more difficult for those from living Buddhist traditions who were well aware of its inadequacies. Witness, for example, the disputes between Caroline Rhys Davids and the Burmese Buddhist scholar Shwe Zan Aung over the translation of terms in the Abhidhammattha sangaha.33 Nevertheless, the Buddhism of the Pāli Text Society was precisely what nationalist reformers were seeking: a rational version of their indigenous religion, one that was acceptable to their modern educated elites, admired by intellectuals in the West, and validated by rigorous academic scholarship. Letters of condolence from Asian Buddhists around the world are quoted in T. W. Rhys Davids’ obituary in the Journal of the Pāli Text Society. As a Brahmo Samaj representative put it, ‘He placed before the world the best we had ever had in our history’; ‘countered missionary prejudice’; ‘he has done for us what no others have done or can do’. 34 There was also the nationalist benefit. India was the source of the original Pure Buddhism, home to the archaeological sites that proved the historical reality of Shakyamuni, the monuments and sculptures that stood as evidence of a 1,000 years of Buddhist achievement.35 Theravāda countries took pride in being the repositories of Pāli Buddhism and in their monuments of Buddhist civilization. As Hardayal observed, it was the glory of Buddhism that Ceylon, ‘a small, enslaved Asiatic island today is the centre of a European religious movement’.36 The Pure Buddhism of European creation and esteem was the Buddhism of Lala Hardayal, and to a certain extent of Anagarika Dharmapala, although, coming as he did from a Buddhist society, he was quite clear that there was more to it than the West had yet understood. Indeed, this excess

India-Japan dialogue in the 1920s

99

was also a source of pride. ‘The World’s Debt to Buddha’, the paper he presented at the Chicago Parliament, was essentially a recital of quotations from prominent Western scholars. This established its achievements in the voice of its own scholars and that the Buddha’s teachings, dating from centuries before Christ, prefigured the achievements of Western philosophy. Nevertheless, he concluded, Western scholars had glimpsed only part of the wisdom of the Buddha.37

Western Buddhism in Japan The Buddhism of Western scholarship was also present in modern Japanese Buddhism, though in a rather different way. The Japanese celebrated the scientifically established historicity of Shakyamuni in the Lumbini festival; made pilgrimages to the holy sites of India where he had lived and taught; and the Indian origins of Japanese Buddhism were, of course, fundamental, embedded in the lineages of their patriarchs. Aligning the Buddhism of Japan with the evidence of modern scholarship, archaeology, and the historicity of Shakyamuni was not problematic, at least on a popular level.38 References to the Indian King Asoka, an icon of Buddhist humanism by this time, abound. The Young East frequently referred to Shōtoku Taishi (574–622), the early Japanese ruler, as ‘The Asoka of Japan’. Sanchi-type stupas appeared at various sites (Figure 4.3).

Figure 4.3 A monument inspired by the Sanchi stupa seen here against Japanese grave markers and snow. It was constructed in 1927 at Adashino Nembutsuji in Northwest Kyoto, marking the shared heritage of India and Japan in the Buddhist humanism of King Asoka. Photograph by author.

100 Judith Snodgrass However, Japanese Buddhism was a living tradition with a strong and continuing history of scholarship. Though the New Buddhism of Meiji reform was philosophical, rational, compatible with science, and socially engaged, it was nevertheless based in the fully developed Mahāyāna tradition and had been formed through discussion and development among leading Buddhist scholars, highly educated men who were both priests and intellectuals. The delegation went to the Chicago Parliament because they knew of the Western esteem for Pāli Buddhism and sincerely believed that Westerners would see the advantages of Japanese Mahāyāna. Their presentation of Eastern Buddhism was based in Shin Bukkyō, further shaped by the aim of showing how it encompassed all that was admired in the Pāli construct. They distanced it from Western criticisms of both the Theravāda (Buddhism as it was practiced in South and Southeast Asia) and from the Northern Buddhism of Tibet (much denigrated at this time), and emphasized its modernity by pointing to its parallels with the latest in Western philosophy. That is, Japanese reform Buddhists embraced Pure Buddhism, but saw it as the seed from which the great tree of the fully developed East Asian Buddhism had grown.39 Japanese Mahāyāna represented 2,000 years of further development, bringing Shakyamuni’s teachings to fulfilment and making it relevant to the modern world.

Endorsing the mission? Hardayal’s papers in the Young East might each be seen as an endorsement of the Young East’s mission, but with reservations. In ‘Religion and the Twentieth Century’,40 he called for education, democracy, and physical culture, objectives totally in keeping with the Young East project. In ‘Buddhist Propaganda in Europe and America’ (January 1927) he offered advice on how to proselytize in the West, indicating a level of shared mission but also a divergence of aims.41 Hardayal’s overriding concern was to win Western converts over to Buddhism. He recognized that this Western Buddhism would be ‘a new Buddhism, one that is not Asian culturally specific’—he even advocated synthesis with Western systems of thought—and also one that was not necessarily profound. Westerners need ‘only a few big truths… the life of the Buddha and the history of Buddhism’. By contrast, the Young East’s aim was not to convert Westerners but to have them understand and appreciate Japanese thought and culture and, ideally, adopt the principles of Eastern Mahāyāna in their interactions with others. They were explicit that these principles were compatible with other religions. The principle of the shared ‘Buddha nature’ of all beings would be the basis of respect and equality among the people of the world, regardless of race, religion, or nationality; the bodhisattva path of working towards the emancipation and wellbeing of all would bring social justice, and the concept of the Middle Way would mediate between extremes. The Young East, concerned as it was with resolving contemporary political tensions,

India-Japan dialogue in the 1920s  101 spoke specifically of the extremes of capitalism, socialism, and fascism in this context. A lecture given by German Buddhist Bruno Petzold, republished in the Young East, articulated the difference. Without assuming that Petzold represented the views of the Young East, his lecture conveniently encapsulated the statements and actions the journal’s editors had made clear at a conference in November 1925 and reported on in the journal.42 Whereas Hardayal advised on the choice, training, and activities of missionaries, Petzold’s lecture advocated sending abroad not missionaries but scholars. What was needed to fulfil the Young East’s aim was translation, research, lectures in foreign universities, and libraries. In general terms, it was making Mahāyāna accessible in European languages. Petzold proposed the establishment of a Mahāyāna Institute; ‘the West already has a basic understanding of Theravāda. Knowledge of Mahāyāna is still wanting’. (259) It is indeed high time to inform the non-Buddhist world in a systematic way about the true spirit of Mahāyāna and to help Europe and America to gain a correct outlook on this indeed very complex range of spiritual and philosophical ideas. (260) Petzold, an expatriate German, had been ordained in the Japanese Tendai school and was well versed in the complexities of East Asian Mahāyāna thought. His paper concluded with a new twist on the familiar axiom ‘Be a lamp unto yourself’, relevant to the mission to the West: everyone shall understand the Buddha’s teachings ‘by their own inner minds and act accordingly’. That is, the way to propagate Buddhism is to make the teachings available and accessible for this to take place. (273) There is an implied synthesis here, as in Hardayal’s vision, but not necessarily a simplification of the teachings. Hardayal clarified his own concerns about the Young East’s mission in his following article, ‘The Mission of Japanese Buddhists’.43 It opened with unstinting admiration for Japan and predicted the inevitability of its Asian empire within the century. He welcomed the prospect on the basis of it being the lesser of two evils—if not Japan, then it would be a Western power who would do so—and on the grounds of its potential benefits for Asia. ­Japan was a model of successful non-Western modernity and could lead other Asian nations towards this. In what may well be a reference to Tagore, he distanced himself from those spiritual teachers who deprecated economic development: ‘A certain amount of superfluous wealth is necessary for the healthy growth of society’. (11) The welcome for Japan’s empire was further conditional on it being based on the Buddhist principles of equality, shared participation, and opportunities for subject citizens of talent.44 If Japan could rule on the basis of a pan-Asian Buddhist brotherhood, an empire where Japan would be ‘first among equals’, he welcomed it. It was a strong endorsement of the mission stated in the Young East manifesto, but one

102 Judith Snodgrass that recognized other possibilities. As Hardayal wrote, the mission of ‘pious Buddhists of Japan’ (presumably, the Young East and like-minded Japanese) was to ‘discourage the short-sighted policy of national egoism’. (13) What would Japan’s policy be based on, he asked, ‘bayonets or Buddhism’? Hardayal’s article ‘The Glory of Buddhism’ was, as the title suggests, a statement of pride in Buddhism’s Indian origin.45 It was a recital of the great achievements that this religion bestowed upon ancient India and, through it, on the world. More than that, it was a claim that the glory of Buddhism derived from and depended on its Indian origins. The ideals of liberty and equality that made it great were a legacy of the fact that it was born among the educated classes of the free republics of ancient India. It had overcome divisions of color and caste in India and made advanced education accessible on the basis of talent. Though a great religion, it was more than that. It was also a great culture-bearer, taking great art, science, literature to the world as it spread throughout Asia. The Buddhism of India was a force in the civilizing of Asia, comparable to the cultural impact of classical Greece and Rome in the West. In this context, the Mahāyāna, an Indian development, was the means of spreading Indian culture to China, Korea, Japan, and Tibet. ‘Mahāyāna gave to the Far East all that India had developed over a thousand years’. (227) Here too, he speaks of his admiration for modern Japan, linking its victory over Russia to the influence of the Indian sage Bodhidharma, the patriarch of Zen (227). The greatest glory of Buddhism is, he concluded, the precept to love all living beings, thereby aligning his vision and the glory of India with the Young East’s mission to overcome the tensions of race, class, and inequalities through the Buddha’s love. From Hardayal’s writings on Buddhism in the Young East, we see that his mission for Buddhist revival, even given its ambition for world conversion, was essentially focused on India. His neo-Buddhism was a personal faith and he, like Garan Chandra Lal and others, saw in it a hope for healing the social problems and communal tensions of India. His final paper, ‘Why India Lost Buddhism?’ is explicit that in order to survive in India, a religion must be socially relevant, and he followed others in seeing it entwined with the best of Hinduism. It must build on India’s history and heritage, revere Rama and Krishna, and build on the Ramayana and the Mahabharata.46 His program of education and physical culture, creating equality and a moral society with a means of making a decent living, aligned closely with the Young East’s mission for Asia. His commitment to pan-Asianism is evident throughout, starting with the proposal for Bodhgaya. ‘The Far East is our spiritual empire’ and letting the controversy drag on risked squandering long standing bonds. His vision for a pan-Asian Buddhist empire under Japanese leadership recognized Japan as the only Asian nation capable of taking on the task at that time, but it was to be one based on the shared heritage of India, such as was symbolized by the celebration of the Buddha’s birthday in the Lumbini festival. His plans for conversion on the basis of a superficial understanding of Buddhism synthesized with Western systems

India-Japan dialogue in the 1920s

103

of belief suggests a concern for the prestige Western conversion would bestow on the Indian religion, rather than any expectation that they might take on board its deeper philosophy. It is a reflection of his pride in Ceylon’s international recognition. I am reminded of the ‘Occidentalist’ dynamic in the Japanese delegation to the Chicago Exposition over three decades earlier. A major strategy in the mission was to encourage domestic interest in the Buddhist revival in Japan. At that time of Western international dominance, Western recognition of Japanese Buddhism would endorse its claims of being a religion for the modern world and raise interest in its revival among Japan’s Western-educated elite. Might Hardayal’s promotion of neo-Buddhism as world religion have had a similar aim for India? Though both Hardayal and Takakusu were committed to world citizenship, the difference in the geopolitical situations of their respective countries impacted their priorities. Hardayal’s immediate concerns as a revolutionary in colonial India, like those of other contributors from the country, were overcoming internal dissent, creating a sense of shared nationhood, and throwing off their colonial status. It was essentially domestic and nation building: social reform for India, creating national unity, and gaining independence from Britain. Japan in the mid-1920s was, by contrast, already a world power. The Meiji project of unification and creating a sense of nation were well established. The mission of the Young East, as clearly stated in its manifesto, was driven by problems relating to Japan’s position in international politics. The Young East that Takakusu spoke for was concerned with negotiating a place for their nation among world powers. Both men were nationalists but they represented two different manifestations of nationalism: one concerned with creating a national unity as a step towards independence and the other with negotiating the status of his nation among other nations in an international arena. Their cultural backgrounds bestowed on them different views of Buddhism, but one thing they shared was a desire for recognition of what their Buddhism could offer the world at large and a commitment to social reform and world peace on the basis of it. The dialogue that took place in the pages of the Young East between these two committed Buddhist intellectuals was fruitful at a personal level. Hardayal went on to publish a monograph, The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature (1932).47 While no doubt based on the thesis he wrote in the 1920s that bears the same name, it also bore evidence of the impact of his engagement with East Asian Mahāyāna. This can be seen both in its references and in the ideas it contained. Most significantly, the book endorsed the Mahāyāna ideal of the bodhisattva. It opened with an account of the arhat ideal of Shakyamuni’s original teachings and ‘as understood during the three centuries after Gautama Buddha’s death’. After this, however, as he saw it, certain key aspects were neglected and the monks became ‘too self-centred and contemplative’, caring only for ‘their own liberation from sin and sorrow… indifferent to the duty of teaching and helping all human beings’, sentiments that echo Mahāyāna criticisms of the

104

Judith Snodgrass

Theravāda. The bodhisattva ideal, Hardayal wrote, was promulgated by ‘some Buddhist leaders’, as a protest against this. It can only be understood as a corrective to ‘a saintly and serene, but inactive and indolent monastic order’ (2–3). More than this, his examination of nirvana as understood by the early arhat found it ‘doubly defective’. It failed to include the pursuit of ‘intellectual perfection and supreme Wisdom’, and it ‘deprived the world of the services of the holy men and women who had attained nirvana and passed away’. (4) By his account, the Bodhisattva doctrine was a reaction from sometime after the 2nd century BC against the falling away of monks from the original ideals of the arhat, but ‘this tendency towards spiritual selfishness among the monks is exhibited in the later Pāli literature’. He explained the difference between the arhat ideal and Mahāyāna thought in greater depth further into the chapter (16–29). The book clearly favors the Mahāyāna ideal. Though dialogue with Japanese Buddhists may have drawn his attention to these aspects of Buddhism—they are not apparent in his earlier proposal for ‘neo-Buddhism’—they worked to enhance his overall vision of Buddhism as an agent of social reform and provided additional evidence of India’s Buddhist achievements. These concepts that were so relevant to his vision of Buddhism for the modern world had been preserved in modern Japan but had nevertheless been formulated and developed in India, as his scholarship on the bodhisattva in Sanskrit texts attested. The ideal was one of Indian Buddhism before it was exported abroad.

Post script: the end of an era The dialogue between Buddhists of India and Japan in the Young East came to an end in March 1930. Sakurai Gitcho, the publisher who had funded the venture, died in mid-1926. Takakusu and Watanabe held the journal together for as long as they could but struggled without his generous financial support. In July 1929, Takakusu wrote of the ‘sad plight’ of the journal. The article as it appeared in the Young East was actually a translation of one he had published in a Japanese Buddhist journal, Gendai Bukkyō (Modern Buddhism), in May of that year, in an unsuccessful attempt to raise support from the Japanese Buddhist community. He had exhausted all options.48 A letter from A. L. Nair of the Buddha Society of Bombay in the following issue expressed dismay on behalf of the society members, as did letters from England and the United States. The Young East had begun as a monthly, but only four issues appeared between January 1929 and March 1930. These were the last under the founding editors. It was resurrected under the editorship of the International Buddhist Society in late 1934, following Japan’s withdrawal from the League of Nations. Under those auspices, it functioned as a vehicle for the government policy of cultural internationalism and did much to foster knowledge of Buddhism abroad. But its target audience was Western. It was no longer a forum for

India-Japan dialogue in the 1920s

105

‘like-minded Buddhists’ to share ideas on healing the world; it was a vehicle for teaching the world about Japan and its culture. Hardayal’s monograph, with its evidence of the fruitful exchange that had taken place in the pages of the journal, was completed in 1931 and published the following year.

Notes 1 For a more detailed account see Judith Snodgrass, ‘Performing Buddhist Modernity: The Lumbini Festival, Tokyo 1925,’ Journal of Religious History, 33:2 (June 2009): 133–148. In this, as in other articles I have written on various aspects of the Young East, there is necessarily some overlap in contextualizing material, such as explaining the mission of the journal and the historical context that gave rise to it. Each article is nevertheless on a different theme. 2 Young East 1:1 (June 1925): 30; and Young East 1:11 (April 1926): 370–371. 3 Judith Snodgrass, ‘Defining Modern Buddhism: Mr and Mrs Rhys,’ Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East, 27:1 (2007): 186–202. 4 Takakusu Junjirō, ‘The Young East in a Sad Plight,’ Young East 4:8 (July 1929): 254–261. 5 Judith Snodgrass, Presenting Japanese Buddhism to the West: Orientalism, Occidentalism and the Columbian Exposition. 6 Takakusu had met Dharmapala in 1889 when he accompanied Henry Steel Olcott to Japan. He would later introduce him to Sakurai. Steven Kemper, Rescued from the Nation: Anagarika Dharmapala and the Buddhist World, 135 (n. 46). 7 See Jacqueline Stone, ‘A Vast and Grave Task: Interwar Buddhist Studies as an Expression of Japan’s Envisioned Global Role.’ In Culture and Identity: Japanese Intellectuals during the Interwar Years, 217–233. 8 Cemil Aydin, The Politics of Anti-Westernism in Asia: Visions of World Order in Pan-Islamic and Pan-Asian Thought, 93, 111–112. 9 Nancy Stalker, ‘Suicide, Boycotts and Embracing Tagore: The Japanese Popular Response to the 1924 US Immigration Exclusion Law,’ Japanese Studies, 26(2): 153–170. 10 Quoted in Stalker, 166. 11 Aydin, The Politics of Anti-Westernism in Asia; Thomas Burkman, ‘Japan and the League of Nations: An Asian Power Encounters the “European Club”,’ World Affairs 158:1 (Summer 1995): 45–57. 12 Burkman, ibid. 13 Itoh Masanori, ‘British Menace to Japan,’ Young East 1:11 (April 1926): 169–188. 14 ‘To Our Friends and Readers,’ frontispiece, Young East 1:1 (June 1925). 15 Rev. Tai-Sue (Taixu), Young East 1:6 (November 1925): 181–182. 16 S. Yonemura. ‘Solution of Racial Problem and Himalayan Civilization,’ Young East 2:1 (June 1926): 1–4. 17 These include the complete works of Rammohun Roy, Indian journals, and publications on Hinduism. 18 Ganga Charan Lal, ‘Buddhist Renaissance for India’, Young East 3:11 (April 1928): 384–385. 19 Panchanan Mitra, ‘Hindu-Buddhism,’ Young East 3:3 (June 8, 1926): 61–63. 20 Shiva Charan Lal, ‘Buddha, the Greatest Religious and Social Reformer Known to History,’ Young East 4:4 (September 1928):127–128. 21 ‘Mr Gandhi on Buddhism,’ Young East 3:9 (February 9, 1928): 314–315. This is the text of an address Mahatma Gandhi had delivered to Ceylonese Buddhists in Colombo.

106 Judith Snodgrass 22 Rev. U. Ahsaya, Sravasti (Balrampur), India, ‘Buddha Day Celebration at Kusinagara’, Young East 2:3 (August 1926) 101–102. 23 Daljit Singh Sadharia, ‘Science the Redeemer,’ Young East 3:10 (March 1928): 323–326. Emphasis added. 24 Subrahmanya Iyer, ‘Japan Beware!’ Young East 2:1 (June 8, 1926): 61–63. 25 ‘Enlightened India View of Buddha Gaya Problem,’ notes 1:5 (October 1925): 168–170. Clearly, the Young East was keeping in touch with Indian journals and there are frequent notes of matters ‘conveyed from Indian friends’ such as Gandhi’s speech quoted above. At issue was the long and ongoing campaign lead by Anagarika Dharmapala to reclaim for Buddhism the Mahabodhi temple at Bodh Gaya, which had long been in the custody of Hindus. 26 He leaves open the possibility that the existing Mahabodhi Society might carry it out but wonders if it is equal to the occasion. 27 Lala Hardayal, ‘Buddhism and the Future,’ Young East 1:12 (May 1926); ‘What Buddhism Has Taught Me,’ Young East 2:3 (August 1926); ‘Buddhist Propaganda in Europe and America,’ Young East 2:9 (February 1927); ‘The Mission of Japanese Buddhists,’ Young East 3:1 (1927); ‘The Glory of Buddhism,’ Young East 3:7 (December 1927): 224–225; ‘Religion in the Twentieth Century,’ Young East 2:4 (September 1926); ‘Why India Lost Buddhism,’ Young East 4:7 (January 1929). 28 Lala Hardayal, ‘Buddhism and the Future,’ Young East 1:12 (May 1926): 392–395. 29 Takakusu Junjirō, ‘New Age and New Buddhism,’ Young East 2:2 (July 1926): 58–61; 2:3 (August 8 1926): 82–84. 30 Judith Snodgrass, ‘Publishing Eastern Buddhism: D. T. Suzuki’s Journey to the West.’ In Casting Faiths: Imperialism and the Transformation of Religion in East and Southeast Asia, 46–74. The paper describes Pāli scholars’ arrogant rejection of Mahāyāna thought, presented by the Japanese delegation to the World’s Parliament of Religions, and Suzuki’s reaction to it. 31 See Richard M. Jaffe, Neither Monk nor Layman: Clerical Marriage in Modern Japanese Buddhism. 32 Lala Hardayal, ‘What Buddhism Has Taught Me,’ Young East 2:3 (August 1926): 78–81. Part 2 of Takakusu’s conciliatory response follows. 33 Published as Compendium of Philosophy, London, 1910, C. A. F. Rhys Davids (ed), Shwe Zan Aung (trans). On this exchange see Snodgrass, ‘Defining Modern Buddhism,’ 195–198. 34 Journal of the Pāli Text Society, (1922): 28–31. 35 Lala Hardayal’s paper, ‘The Glory of Buddhism,’ Young East 3:7 (December 1927): 224–225, exemplifies this position. 36 Ibid, 227. 37 Anagarika Dharmapala, ‘The World’s Debt to Buddha’. In The World’s Parliament of Religions, edited by John Henry Barrows, 862–880. 38 Except, of course, for the fundamental issue of dating the development of the Mahāyāna to establish that it was taught by Shakyamuni, but I have written of Japanese responses to that elsewhere (Snodgrass 2003). 39 See my paper ‘Japan’s Contribution to Modern Global Buddhism: The World’s Parliament of Religions Revisited,’ Eastern Buddhist NS 43:1 & 2 (2012): 81–102. 40 Lala Hardayal, ‘Religion in the Twentieth Century,’ Young East 2:4 (September 1926): 392–395. 41 Lala Hardayal, ‘Buddhist Propaganda in Europe and America,’ Young East 2:9 (February 1927): 300–304. 42 Bruno Petzold, ‘Japanese Buddhism and Its Propagation to Foreign Countries,’ Young East 2:8 (January 1927): 259–274. Text of a lecture Petzold had delivered to the Young Men’s Buddhist Association in Tokyo on December 8. In

India-Japan dialogue in the 1920s

43 44

45 46 47 48

107

Japan this is ‘Satori no hi’, the celebration of the Buddha’s Awakening. While the southeast Asian Vesak combines celebration of the Buddha’s birth and Awakening, in Japan they are celebrated independently. Lala Hardayal, ‘The Mission of Japanese Buddhists,’ Young East 3:1 (June 1927): 11–13. In one curious line he advises: ‘They should proclaim as the principle of Japanese imperialism “Equal rights to all Buddhists who learn the Japanese language”’. I assume this is a protest against the lack of such recognition in British India. Lala Hardayal, ‘The Glory of Buddhism,’ Young East 3:7 (December 1927): 224–225. Lala Hardayal. ‘Why India Lost Buddhism,’ Young East 4:7 (January 1929): 217–218. First published in London by Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd. Republished by Motilal Banarsidas, 1970. Takakusu Junjirō, ‘The Young East in a Sad Plight,’ Young East 4:8 (July 1929): 254–261.

References Ahsaya U, (Rev.) Sravasti (Balrampur), India, ‘Buddha Day Celebration at Kusinagara’, Young East 2:3 (August 1926): 101–102. Anagarika Dharmapala. ‘The World’s Debt to Buddha’. In The World’s Parliament of Religions, edited by John Henry Barrows, 862–880. Chicago: Parliament Publishing Co, 1893. Aydin, Cemil. The Politics of Anti-Westernism in Asia: Visions of World Order in Pan-Islamic and Pan-Asian Thought, New York: Columbia University Press, 2007. Burkman, Thomas. ‘Japan and the League of Nations: An Asian Power Encounters the “European Club”.’ World Affairs 158:1 (Summer 1995): 45–57. Daljit Singh Sadharia. ‘Science the Redeemer,’ Young East 3:10 (March 1928): 323–326. Gandhi, M.K. ‘Mr Gandhi on Buddhism,’ Young East 3:9 (February 1928): 314–315. Ganga Charan Lal. ‘Buddhist Renaissance for India’, Young East 3:11 (April 1928): 384–385. Itoh Masanori. ‘British Menace to Japan’, Young East 1:11 (April 1926): 169–188. Jaffe, Richard M. Neither Monk nor Layman: Clerical Marriage in Modern Japanese Buddhism. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002. Jaffe, Richard M. Seeking Sakyamuni: South Asia in the Formation of Modern Japanese Buddhism. Chicago and London: Chicago University Press, 2019. Kemper, Steven. Rescued from the Nation: Anagarika Dharmapala and the Buddhist World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2015. Lala Hardayal. ‘Buddhism and the Future,’ Young East 1:12 (May 1926): 392–395. Lala Hardayal. ‘Buddhist Propaganda in Europe and America,’ Young East 2:9 (February 1927): 300–304. Lala Hardayal. ‘Religion in the Twentieth Century,’ Young East 2:4 (September 1926): 392–395. Lala Hardayal. The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd., 1932. Republished by Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, 1970.

108 Judith Snodgrass Lala Hardayal. ‘The Mission of Japanese Buddhists,’ Young East 3:1 (June 1927): 11–13. Lala Hardayal. ‘The Glory of Buddhism,’ Young East 3:7 (December 1927): 224–225. Lala Hardayal. ‘What Buddhism has Taught Me,’ Young East 2:3 (August 1926): 78–81. Lala Hardayal. ‘Why India Lost Buddhism,’ Young East 4:7 (January 1929): 217–218. Panchanan Mitra. ‘Hindu-Buddhism,’ Young East 3:3 (June 1926): 61–63. Petzold, Bruno. ‘Japanese Buddhism and Its Propagation to Foreign Countries,’ Young East 2:8 (January 1927): 259–274. Rhys Davids, C. A. F. (ed and trans), Shwe Zan Aung (trans). Compendium of Philosophy: Being a Translation Now Made for the First Time from the Origianl Pāli of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, London: H. Frowde for the Pāli Text Society, 1910. Shiva Charan Lal, ‘Buddha, the Greatest Religious and Social Reformer Known to History,’ Young East 4:4 (September 1928):127–128. Snodgrass, Judith. ‘Defining Modern Buddhism: Mr and Mrs Rhys Davids and the Pāli Text Society.’ Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 27:1 (2007): 195–198. Snodgrass, Judith. ‘Japan’s Contribution to Modern Global Buddhism: The World’s Parliament of Religions Revisited,’ Eastern Buddhist NS 43:1 & 2 (2012): 81–102. Snodgrass, Judith. ‘Performing Buddhist Modernity: The Lumbini Festival, Tokyo 1925,’ Journal of Religious History, 33:2 (June 2009): 133–148. Snodgrass, Judith. ‘Publishing Eastern Buddhism: D. T. Suzuki’s Journey to the West.’ In Casting Faiths: Imperialism and the Transformation of Religion in East and Southeast Asia, edited by Thomas D. Dubois, 46–74. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. Snodgrass, Judith. Presenting Japanese Buddhism to the West: Orientalism, Occidentalism and the Columbian Exposition. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003. Stalker, Nancy. ‘Suicide, Boycotts and Embracing Tagore: The Japanese Popular Response to the 1924 US Immigration Exclusion Law,’ Japanese Studies 26:2 (September 2006): 153–170. Stone, Jacqueline. ‘A Vast and Grave Task: Interwar Buddhist Studies as an Expression of Japan’s Envisioned Global Role.’ In Culture and Identity: Japanese Intellectuals during the Interwar Years, edited by Thomas J. Rimer, 217–233. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990. Subrahmanya Iyer. ‘Japan Beware!’ Young East 2:1 (June 8, 1926): 61–63. Tai-Sue (Taixu), ‘A Statement to Asiatic Buddhists,’ Young East 1:6 (November 1925): 181–182. Takakusu Junjirō. ‘Enlightened India View of Buddha Gaya Problem,’ notes Young East 1:5 (October 1925): 168–170. Takakusu Junjirō. ‘New Age and New Buddhism,’ Young East 2:2 (July 1926): 58–61; 2:3 (August 8 1926): 82–84. Takakusu Junjirō. ‘The Young East in a Sad Plight,’ Young East 4:8 (July 1929): 254–261. Yonemura S. ‘Solution of Racial Problem and Himalayan Civilization,’ Young East 2:1 (June 1926): 1–4.

5

A.K. Coomaraswamy and Japan A tentative overview Shigemi Inaga

Créer un mythe, c’est-à-dire entrevoir derrière la réalité sensible une réalité supérieure, est le signe le plus manifeste de la grandeur de l’âme humaine et la preuve de sa faculté de croissance et de développement infinies. A. Sabatier, 1879, Exergue, Myths of the Hindus and Buddhists, 1913

1 Prologue: Okakura and the Bengal renaissance On the occasion of his last stay in Japan in 1929, Rabindranath Tagore is known to have paid a posthumous tribute to Okakura Tenshin (Kakuzō). Recalling Okakura’s stay in Bengal from 1901 to 1902, the poet stated, ‘[Okakura] would often buy some very cheap things, like simple clay oilpots that peasants use, with ecstasy of admiration, some things in which we had failed to realize the instinct for beauty’.1 The author of The Book of Tea (1906), Okakura was skilled at discovering unknown beauty in foreign lands and singling out that beauty from its original context. Just as Japanese tea masters highly appreciated Korean rice bowls even though they had been produced for everyday popular use. Okakura also highly valued inexpensive, everyday Indian utensils, appreciating them ‘with [an] ecstasy of admiration’. Ceramics and clay wares were not highly valued in India. However, Japanese tea masters treasured even such cheap wares once they were brought from abroad and put into the meditative, aesthetic context produced by the tea ceremony. Okakura also believed that ‘in the Orient’ no clear distinction existed between the higher arts and lower arts. Such a hierarchical value judgement may have been relevant in the West, but not always in the East, he thought. A.K. Coomaraswamy (A.K.C.) would have readily agreed. Okakura visited India for the first time from 1901 to 1902. During his stay, he produced a manuscript that would be published as The Ideals of the East (1903). Sister Nivedita not only wrote the preface for the volume, but also took care of the manuscript so that Okakura’s original intent was

110

Shigemi Inaga

respected by the British editor. In response, Okakura also expressed his appreciation of Sister Nivedita’s writing. At the beginning of his The Book of Tea, we read, ‘It is rarely that the chivalrous pen of a Lafcadio Hearn or that of the author of The Web of Indian Life enlivens the Oriental darkness with the torch of our own sentiments’. 2 Ernest Binfield Havell’s book The Ideals of Indian Art (1911), which was published amidst the political circumstances of the Swadeshi Movement, clearly owes its title to Okakura’s notion of ‘ideals’.3 A.K.C. was also under the spell of the same idea. It is well known that his famous essay on ‘The Aims of Indian Art’ (1908) contains a quote from The Ideals of the East. In this manifest, A.K.C. declares: But just as through all Indian schools of thought there runs like a golden thread the fundamental idealism of the Upanishads, the Vedanta, so in all Indian art there is unity that underlies all its bewildering variety. This unifying principle here is also idealism, and this must of necessity have been so, for the synthesis of Indian thought is one, not many.4 The idea of oneness, or advaita in the Vedanta tradition, had been absorbed by Okakura, who had paraphrased it in his The Ideals of the East to outline Japanese art history in global and Asian contexts. Okakura wrote, Thus Japan is a museum of Asiatic civilisation; and yet more than a museum, because the singular genius of the race leads it to dwell on all phases of the ideals of the past, in that spirit of living Advaitism which welcomes the new without losing the old.5 Then, Okakura reinterprets this originally Indian idea clearly in terms of Huayan (Jp. Kegon) thinking, adding, The history of Japanese art becomes thus the history of Asiatic ideals— the beach where each successive wave of Eastern thought has left its sand-ripple as it beat against the national consciousness. Yet I linger with dismay on the threshold of an attempt to make an intelligible summary of those art-ideals. For art, like the diamond net of Indra, reflects the whole chain in every link.6

2 ‘Asia is One’ and Advaita It is well known that The Ideals of the East begins with the phrase ‘Asia is one’. This phrase caused much controversy in Japan, especially after its 1945 World War II defeat. Okakura was accused of acting as a propagandist who had promoted the infamous pan-Asianism of the war era. By criticising Okakura, post-war Japanese intellectuals tried to exonerate themselves from their own guilty consciences. Was Okakura’s declaration in 1902 synonymous with the political ideology of Japan’s imperial expansionism that

A.K. Coomaraswamy and Japan

111

aimed to establish the ‘Greater Asian Prosperity Sphere’ in the 1940s? Was ‘Asia is one’ the very core of Okakura’s entire thought? Let me briefly give my hypotheses regarding these issues. Firstly, ‘Asia is one’ was a friendly address by Okakura to his Indian colleagues at the dawn of the Swadeshi Movement. Secondly, the idea of ‘oneness’ or advaita was transmitted to Okakura by Swami Vivekananda during their encounter, upon Okakura’s arrival in India. Sister Nivedita, a devoted disciple of Vivekananda who had just published her Kali the Mother, oversaw the editing of Okakura’s manuscript during his stay in India.7 Hence, she recognized as being ‘of supreme value’ Okakura’s view of Asia ‘as a united living organism, each part dependent on all the other, the whole breathing a single complex life’.8 Thirdly, up until his English writings were finally translated into Japanese in the late 1930s, Okakura had little impact on the Japanese political (and intellectual) scene. Okakura’s English writings were to be politically manipulated after his death in ways for which he can hardly be held responsible.9 I posit that the idea of oneness in Asia was also a valuable notion for A.K.C., especially when he was actively engaged in the Ceylon Social Reformation Society. In his pioneering work on Mediaeval Sinhalese Art (1908), in which Okakura’s work is referred to, A.K.C. insists upon Ceylon’s cultural unity with India: There is scarcely any part of Sinhalese life, or religion or art, which is quite comprehensible without reference to India; the Sinhalese themselves are Indians. … India without Ceylon is incomplete, for in many ways, Ceylon is a more perfect window through which to gaze on India’s past.10 This pan-Indianism is somehow counterbalanced by Okakura’s cultural pan-Asianism. Obviously, both of them emerged from nationalist movements in a modernizing Asia. The infamous ‘Partition of Bengal’ fostered ‘ideals’ of unification in A.K.C. In celebration of these ‘ideals’, A.K.C. reminds us in A Book of Homage to Shakespeare that was published during World War I, ‘Asiatic thought again affirms the unity and interdependence of all life, at the moment when Europe begins to realize that the Fruit of Life is not easily attainable in a society based upon division’.11 The will to defend Asian unity under the political reality of Western expansionism clearly cast a shadow over art history scholarship during WWI and the 1920s. The nationalistic depreciation of the Gandhara statues was one of the main controversial issues. In the aforementioned work, A.K.C. is clear and outspoken about his position on this issue: It is the concentration of attention upon the effeminate and artistically unimportant work of the Gandhara School that has given undue prominence to the Greek influence. It must be admitted also that a certain

112

Shigemi Inaga prejudice has led European investigators to think of classic Greek naturally as the source of all Art, and to suppose that the influence of classic Art have been as permanently important in the East as in the West.12

This very phrase was quoted extensively in a review article written by Sister Nivedita.13 Let me add that from this discourse emerged Ernest Binfield Havell’s idea of ‘essential Indianness’ vis-à-vis Greek influence. In an essay, ‘Buddhist Primitives’, included in his 1918 book The Dance of Siva, A.K.C. maintains the same basic position: Gandhara sculpture cannot be regarded as primitive and autochthonous Buddhist Art; it has not been necessary to emphasize also how little the smug and complacent features of the Gandhara Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, and their listless and effeminate gestures, reflect the intellectual vigour or the devotional passion of Buddhist thought.14

3 Early Japanese reception of A.K.C. Okakura passed away in 1913. The following year, Myths of the Hindus and Buddhists, a posthumous work by Sister Nivedita, was published. In the preface, A.K.C., her co-author, recognizes Nivedita as one of the ‘lovers of Indian Ideals’, and declares that her books became an inspiration of a new race of Indian students, no longer anxious to be Anglicized, but convinced that all real progress, as distinct from mere political controversy, must be based on national ideals, upon intentions already clearly expressed in religion and arts.15 The book is richly illustrated with no less than 32 high-quality, colour reproductions by Abanindro Nath Tagore, Nanda Lal Bose and others, depicting scenes from epic mythologies. In this volume A.K.C. completed Sister Nivedita’s unfinished work by including ‘all those illiterate but wise peasants and women whose knowledge of the purânas has been gained by listening to recitations or reading, by visiting temples (where stories are illustrated in sculpture), or from folk-songs or mystery-plays’.16 This choice was faithful to the dream Sister Nivedita has wished to realize shortly before her untimely death:17 to rehabilitate classical literature through the English transcription of oral vernacular histories, a project closely linked with the coupling of ‘religion and arts’. In her classic study, The Making of a New ‘Indian’ Art: Artists, Aesthetics and Nationalism in Bengal, c. 1850–1920, Tapati Guha-Thakurta aptly summarizes this as follows: In Coomarawamy, as in Okakura, Orientalism acquired more decidedly nationalistic overtones, rooting itself in the patriotic fervour of a rejuvenated Japan, or a deep crisis of self-identity at the denationalization

A.K. Coomaraswamy and Japan

113

of Ceylon. Nivedita, through her direct participation in the Swadeshi movement in Bengal, could most effectively harness these ideas in the project of a nationalist ‘renaissance’ of Indian art.18 With the establishment of the Anglo-Japan Alliance in 1902, followed by the Russo-Japan War (1904–5), Japanese nationalism took a clear turn (towards becoming that of an imperial power). Japan’s victory over Russia drastically modified its position in the world. As a result, Okakura no longer found it possible to publish his manuscript of anti-British political manifesto declaring his solidarity with Indian intellectuals. Three years after Okakura’s death, Kōryō-sha, a Tokyo press, published a Japanese translation of A.K.C.’s voluminous work, The Arts & Crafts of India and Ceylon (originally published in 1913). The Japanese title of this work, which was translated by Sobu Ryokurō and Iwasaki Masumi, was Indo bijutsu-shi. In the preface, A.K.C. concludes that Indians did not believe in art for art’s sake; as was the case of medieval Europe, their art was art for love’s sake. They made no distinction between the sacred and the profane. A.K.C. delighted in the fact that the Indian social system did not aim at the development of ‘the greatest happiness of the greatest number’, and that Indians did not pursue consciously an ideal of beauty. For him, fine art did not appear from the conscious intention to create beautiful painting or poetry. On the contrary, it is the result of an impulse to express, with clear instinct, life and death. This summary of the Japanese translation sufficiently shows that A.K.C.’s basic conviction was faithfully transmitted to the Japanese readership.19 In 1917, Taki Seiichi, chair of the Art History Department of Tokyo Imperial University, mentioned in his article ‘The Recent Criticism on the Gandhara Art’ the names ‘Coomaraswamy and Havell’.20 Taki remarked that in recent scholarship Gandhara art had lost its credibility as the representative of Indian Art and that ‘neo-nationalists’ were shifting their attention to other ‘genuine Indian art’. Clearly, Taki was well informed about the recent shift in the appreciation of the Gandhara sculptures within scholarship on Indian art history. By then, Taki had taken over the role of chief editor of the periodical, Kokka, founded by Okakura in 1890. As I have analysed elsewhere, Kokka published, in the very year of Okakura’s death in 1913, a slanderous, anonymous miscellanea criticizing Okakura’s endeavours.21 The publication of such an article would not have been possible were it not for the chief editor’s permission. Taki himself also harshly critiqued Okakura’s scholarship on Indian art history. In his critiques, Taki relied upon a British authority of the field, Vincent Smith, who had earlier published a diatribe against Okakura. Smith writes, A Japanese author has come to the strange conclusion that ‘a deeper and more informed study of the works of Gandhara itself will reveal a greater prominence of Chinese than of so-called Greek influence. …

114 Shigemi Inaga It would not be worthwhile to notice Mr. Okakura’s rash assertions, but for the attention that his book has received in certain quarters. 22 Around this time, Taki also ambitiously sent an expedition to Ajanta for the purpose of making copies of the cave paintings there.23 While slandering the Bengal modern painting exhibited in Japan (an initiative mounted by Okakura) as ‘small and sentimental art in atrophy’, Taki declared that Japan had to take initiative in the academic investigation of vestiges of ancient Indian pictorial art. According to him, the technical affinity of the Indian murals and the Japanese Buddhist fresco relics would justify Japan’s academic prerogatives. 24 Taki’s competitive enmity towards Western scholarship also reveals his arrogant pride and disdainful sense of superiority toward neighbouring Asian nations. In his writings, one can detect the typical reverse ‘colonial Orientalism’ of the Japanese Empire unconsciously revealing itself. And yet it would be unfair to Taki for us to overlook his scholarly contribution in transmitting, via his English translations, Chinese classical treatises. Indeed, his translations helped Western scholars discover Chinese aesthetics. 25 While in Boston, A.K.C. also consulted Taki’s work as well as the English edition of Kokka magazine. 26

4 The rehabilitation of medievalism in a colonial context One letter included in Okakura’s Complete Works documents an appointment that he tried to make with A.K.C. while they were both in London. 27 Nevertheless, we don’t know if they actually met. No letter from Okakura has so far been included in A.K.C.’s published correspondence. However, the latter did meet, when he gave a lecture in Tokyo in 1920, 28 another important Japanese aesthetician: Yanagi Muneyoshi (1889–1961), known as the founder of the Mingei or the Popular Craft Movement. (Figure 5.1) Though it seems to have been their only encounter, a comparison of the two merits attention; apart from the fact that, inspired by the work of William Morris, both were interested in the rehabilitation of popular handicrafts, 29 they also had a strong affinity for appreciating arts in close connection with religious experiences.30 Yet the most basic connection came through their shared colonial situation. Strikingly, Yanagi was led to discover popular crafts through his contact with Korea, which was ‘annexed’ by Japan in 1910, following the latter’s victory over Russia in 1905. A.K.C.’s investigation into Indian and Sinhalese arts and crafts under British rule parallels Yanagi’s discovery of ‘popular crafts’ in the Korean peninsula under Japanese rule. While immediately after its victory over Russia, Japan became the object of Asian nations’ hopes as a ‘rising sun’, the country’s colonial policy soon began, especially after World War I, to show hideous similarities with the exploitative policies pursued by Western colonial powers. In 1919, the March 1

A.K. Coomaraswamy and Japan

115

Figure 5.1 Yanagi Muneyoshi. Courtesy of the Nihon Mingeikan, Japan Folk-Art Museum, Komaba, Tokyo.

Independence Movement (then disdainfully called the ‘Banzai Incident’ in Japan) occurred in Korean Peninsula. Japanese colonial authorities began a campaign of repression, resulting in massacres with a high number of deaths and casualties (the official record lists 7507 people as killed in the turmoil). After this ‘incident’, Yanagi expressed his sympathy for the cruelties the Korean people had endured in their history (presented in his ‘A Letter to my Korean/Choson Friends’ [1920]). In ‘My Thought on Korean/Choson People’ (1920), Yanagi recognized Korean resentment as legitimate and the ‘ideal of independence’ as a necessary consequence of their ‘resistance, hatred and secession’. At the same time Yanagi, as an aesthetician, believed in the ‘intimate understanding of religion and arts’ as ‘the deepest way to comprehend another nation’. He developed his method of artistic appreciation that identified the ‘sign of sorrow and remorse’ ‘in the lines of Choson ceramics’. Following the colonial government’s decision to demolish the historically significant Kwang-fa Mun gate, located at the entrance of the Korean Imperial Palace, Yanagi published a pathetic farewell address to it (Figure 5.2).

116

Shigemi Inaga

Figure 5.2 Kwanfa Mung Gate. Postcard image, ca 1920s, Collection of the International Research Center for Japanese Studies, Kyoto.

Writing as if the event were a funeral, he stated, ‘Your fate is coming to an end… and yet, those who wish to save your life from death are sentenced to treason’.31 Obviously, Yanagi’s position on the side of the ‘colonizer’ cannot escape criticism. As Guha-Thakurta remarked regarding Ernest Binfield Havell in Bengal: Havell’s defense and reinterpretation of Indian art history remained enmeshed in the paternalistic obligations of the ruler toward the ruled. Even as he repeatedly underlined his opposition to British art administration in India and Western scholarship on Indian art, he continued to define his alternative commitments within the framework of Empire.32 This criticism may be easily applied to Yanagi by replacing ‘British’ with ‘Japanese’. And yet, the final sentence of his warning to his ‘Japanese comrade’ is noteworthy: ‘Our Japanese comrade, listen. All they that take the sword shall perish with the sword’.33 This biblical saying was also cited by A.K.C. with variations in the contemporaneous Indian context: There is serious danger that the degradation of Asia will ultimately menace the security of European social idealism… and that would be a strange nemesis if European post-Industrialists should ultimately be defeated by an Industrialism of Imperialism of European origin established in the East!34

A.K. Coomaraswamy and Japan

117

Japanese colonial rule in the Korean Peninsula was reproducing the same ‘nemesis’ by awkwardly mimicking the British model in India. ‘Victory breeds hatred, because the conquered are unhappy’ is a lesson A.K.C. quotes from Dhammapada, 35 and he adds (without giving the source): ‘The Iron hand crushed the tyrant’s head / And became a tyrant in his stead’ (quoting William Blake). ‘Battles are lost in the same spirit in which they are won’, as Walt Whitman said.36 Therefore, notes A.K.C., ‘every oppressed nationality oppresses some other or embraces the oppression of class by class’.37 Yanagi preached the same warning and lesson to his Japanese compatriots: ‘If you respect your own freedom, why not respect the freedom of the other? If we violate this obvious human ethic, the world shall be your enemy. If so, it shall not be Korea but Japan that perishes’.38 Replacing Japan with Europe, one can see A.K.C. made the same observation: ‘If Asia be not with Europe, she will be against her, and there may arise a terrible conflict, economic, or even armed, between an idealistic Europe and a materialized Asia’.39 Revealingly enough, Japanese militarism became this ‘materialized Asia’, while Japanese society duplicated its oppression toward colonized Korea as well as intensified the ‘oppression of class by class’ within the Japanese Empire. Ironically enough, it was in 1919 that ‘Asia is one’ became a common slogan of those Asian nations that mounted insurrections against colonial oppression. (Beside India, China also saw the May forth Movement against Japan). ‘Asia is one’ was realized in the cosmopolitan (if not ‘transnational’) intellectual environment that emerged after the Versailles Treaty.

5 Ideals of arts and crafts under the colonial conditions India affords the most tragic spectacle of the world, since we see there a living and magnificent organization, akin to, but infinitely more complete than that of mediaeval Europe, still in the process of destruction. … A single generation of English education suffices to break the threads of tradition and to create a nondescript and superficial being deprived of all roots—a sort of intellectual pariah who dost not belong to the East or the West, the past or the future. The greatest danger for India is the loss of her spiritual integrity.40 One can substitute these phrases by A.K.C. in 1918 for the remarks Yanagi made in Korea when, in 1920, he closely observed the artistic education received there by Korean female pupils. Japanese teachers proudly showed him, as exemplary model cases, pieces of huge broidery, deprived of Korean influences: ‘lacking in elegance and taste, just a half imitation of the Western-style model of the Japanese foolish contemporary fabric’.41 Yanagi resentfully regretted ‘the crime of wrong education’, which ignores tradition and he felt ‘sorry for the loss of Korean genuine beauty’.42 Indeed, ‘we shall

118

Shigemi Inaga

accomplish nothing by pressing anything in mould’ as A.K.C. put it.43 Let me note, however, that my juxtaposition of these quotes are not intended to save Yanagi from his condescending positioning of himself as a colonizer.44 Instead, this parallel allows us to examine the genesis of the idea of ‘popular craft’, on one hand, and invites us, on the other, to investigate a concrete case of artistic dialogue that took place between Korea and India surrounding the creation of handicrafts. A.K.C. highly valued the guild system in India and compared it with the case of medieval Europe. The caste system… of which the lines are drawn at once ethnically and culturally (not pecuniarily), represents an integration (not a division) of society in vocational groups… only for the fulfillment of their ‘own function.’ … [These] ‘vocational groups’ [were] directly founded on the instinct of workmanship and the inheritance of aptitude.45 Referring to Sir George Birdwood’s work on Industrial Arts in India, A.K.C. insisted on the ‘guild socialism’ that was prevalent in a ‘non- competitive society’.46 He added, ‘The artificier (Silapan) was also protected from competition and undercutting’. A similar description is easily found in Yanagi’s writings in search of the medieval ideal of craftsmanship.47 Yanagi and his colleagues published a pamphlet ‘Prospectus of the Foundation of the Japan Popular Craft Museum’ in 1926. In a parallel move, Yanagi established the Association for Folk Craft in Kamigamo, Kyoto the following year. He put forward ‘Discipline, Surrender, and Communion’ (in English in the original) as guiding principles, in reference to monastic orders existing in both the East and West. Thereby, Yanagi intended to ‘overcome the misleading conclusions of William Morris’, who, according to him, ‘failed to correctly grasp the spirit of “popular craft”’. Yanagi emphasized the importance of ‘practical usage’, which craftsmen/women keep in mind in their work. The resulting beauty is a manifestation of such practical usage, said Yanagi, and the essence of ‘crafts’ consists of the harmonious combination of ‘usage’ and ‘beauty’.48 Yanagi continues by arguing, ‘The beauty of a recipient (or receptaclebase) [utsuwa] is created by its service for the user, and gains significance thanks to the passion and love of the user. From this mutual love is born the beauty of crafts’. For this reason, even mediocre craftsmen/women can attain craft beauty when he or she is free from individuality or egocentrism. Therefore, unknown craftsmen/women unconsciously enjoy advantages over famous individuals and renowned artists. Indeed, selflessness is proof that craftsmen/women bestowed with it are already on their way to salvation. And the craft can be realized only in ‘cooperation’ with others in ‘innocent absorption’. However, such free creation and faithfulness to work have been lost to the bad habits of capitalism. Working conditions should be modified. Manual labour should again be filled with positive value and signification (Yanagi’s statements as they are summarized by Mizuo).49

A.K. Coomaraswamy and Japan

119

6 Shinran and Nietzsche In the conclusion of The Way of Craft, Yanagi quotes from a famous Buddhist monk, Shinran (1173–1263), who used to say: ‘If even a good man can attain salvation, then why not the bad man?’50 It is striking that a similar upside-down idea is also formulated by A.K.C. in his remarks on Nietzsche.51 According to him, Nietzsche’s doctrine of ‘do what you will’ is ‘neither egotistic nor altruistic’. ‘True and ideal selfishness consists in always watching over and restraining the soul, so that our productiveness may come to a beautiful termination.’ ‘We shall never comprehend the selfishness which Nietzsche and other mystics praise, if we interpret it according to the lights of those who believe that all actions should be praiseworthy’. According to Yanagi, Shinran’s ‘good man’ is still prisoner of ‘praiseworthy-ness’, in as much as he feels himself not guilty. However, Shinran’s ‘bad man’ is ‘beyond good and evil’ so long as he knows that he is not praiseworthy. Thus, to use A.K.C.’s expressions, ‘ideal selfishness’ is ‘more generous than any altruism’. ‘Far… from a doctrine of self-indulgence’, says A.K.C., Nietzsche’s ‘ideal selfishness’ is ‘a form of asceticism or ardour (tapas)’. This is almost synonymous with Yanagi’s ideal vision of the ‘unknown craftsman’. A.K.C. continues, ‘The activity of genius is not an obedience to rules, but dedication of life to what is commanded from within, even though it should appear to all others as evil’. Likewise, Yanagi also locates the ideal of the craft as existing beyond beauty and ugliness. Made of ‘no-minded-ness’ and ‘nothought’, ‘objects of everyday life’ (getemono) are beyond good or evil yet ‘representations of nature itself’; not the fabrications of the individual’s will but a product of an ‘other’s will’ (tariki).52 Here ‘genius’ is also deprived of its usual connotation. Those who wish to be recognized as ‘genius’ can never attain the Ideal. Indeed, ‘the highest attainment and purpose of humanity is the most difficult thing for self-assertive minds to grasp’.53 And it is in the lack of the ‘self-assertive mind’ beyond the ‘self-indulgence’ that Yanagi defines his ideal of the ‘unknown craftsmen’. The only and decisive contrast between the two may reside in Yanagi’s attitude of resignation typical of Japanese Buddhism, which may be located, in appearance at least, at the antipode of Nietzsche’s quest for the Uebermensch or ‘superman’. Nonetheless, both thinkers agree on one point. As A.K.C. states in his ‘Status of Indian Women’, ‘the way of ego-assertion cannot be a royal road to realization of the Self’.54 This is because ‘all that is best for us comes of itself into our hand—but if we strive to overtake it, it perpetually eludes us’.55

7 Asakawa Takumi, Gurcharan Singh and James Cousins ‘Siva is a destroyer and loves the burning ground’, says A.K.C. in his ‘The Dance of Siva’. In the footnote we find the following teaching: Make room for your soul and for other souls. Destroy, because all creation proceeds from destruction. … For all building up is done with

120 Shigemi Inaga debris, and nothing in the world is new but shapes. But the shapes must be perpetually destroyed. … Break every cup from which you drink.56 This violent order clearly contrasts from Okakura’s cherishing a clay pot as a metonymical receptacle of his idea of the ‘cup of humanity’. Fire can destroy clay wares. But without fire the clay ware cannot be shaped. The void within makes room for souls to dwell. In The Book of Tea, Okakura famously declares, The usefulness of a water pitcher dwelt in the emptiness where water might be put, not in the form of the pitcher or the material of which it was made. Vacuum is all-potent because all-containing. In vacuum alone motion becomes possible. One who could make of himself a vacuum into which other might freely enter would become master of all situations.57 How is it possible to reconcile these two apparently opposed statements, between shaping and destroying? Is there any possibility of ‘uniting the virility of European youth and the serenity of Asiatic age’ (to borrow metaphorically A.K.C.’s utterance out of its initial context)?58 Let us search for a possible reply to this question in a friendship fostered in Korea between a Japanese and an Indian. Takumi Asakawa (1891–1931), who introduced Yanagi to the study of Korean ceramics, is known to have taken a picture with an Indian named Singh. The unique photo was offered to Singh by Asakawa with a personal dedication dated 31 August 1920 (Figure 5.3).

Figure 5.3 Asakawa Takumi (1891–1931) and Sardar Gurcharan (1896–1995). Portrait photo, former collection S.G. Singh.

Singh

A.K. Coomaraswamy and Japan

121

In the picture, between the two is placed a Korean white porcelain piece, now a treasured item at the Museum of Oriental Ceramics, Osaka (Figure 5.4). The piece has been frequently exhibited as a historical masterpiece in several exhibitions held by the Popular Crafts Movement. The Indian was recently identified as Sardar Gurcharan Singh (1896–1995) (hereafter G.S.), one of the pioneers of modern Indian pottery. 59 Student records attest that he was admitted to the Department of Ceramics at the Tokyo Superior Institute of Technology (1920–21). After graduating from the Prince of Wales University (where he studied geology, as did A.K.C. in England) and having completed an apprenticeship in ceramics, G.S. came to Japan during the

Figure 5.4 Sinaber motif vase, Blue Flower, second half of the 18th century. Former collection Yanagi Muneyoshi, Collection of the Osaka Oriental Ceramic Museum.

122 Shigemi Inaga summer of 1919, immediately after the infamous Amritsar Massacre which took place on 13 April of that year. As an Indian and Sikh who must have had been very shocked by the Amritsar Massacre, G.S. could not have been indifferent to the massacre of the March 3 Incident in Korea in 1919. Yanagi wrote to Bernard Leach on 31 October 1920 that he had talked about ‘the Korean Questions’ with his colleagues.60 It is plausible that G.S. was involved in these conversations as a person named “Sing” is mentioned in the letter. In 1924, G.S., who had returned to India in 1922, made a donation of 100 yen to the newly founded Korean Popular Art Museum, inaugurated by Yanagi’s initiative. The exceptional sum, despite his modest income, shows his personal devotion to the project of promoting popular crafts in Korea. During his stay in Japan, G.S. was active in the Tokyo branch of the Theosophy Society, which James Cousins, coming from India, strongly promoted. In a poem that Cousins published in the newspaper Japan Advertiser, he praises the potter. He opined that God creates human beings from clay and that they return to soil after death. The potter unconsciously repeats the same process of transmigration. Thus the potter’s work is the most sublime. The circle of shaping and destroying also reminds us of Genesis in the Old Testament. The soil, containing and being the container of the soul, also transmigrates. Thus Christianity and Buddhism collaborate to praise Divine Creation….61 James Cousins also highly praised G.S.’ pottery, made in Japan, as he saw in the pieces the synthesis of India, Korea, and Japan in ceramic ware creation. It seems that G.S. was able to use the kiln at the Seto Pottery School in 1921. The archival record shows that G.S.’ whereabouts and behaviour were constantly reported to the police and the Ministry of Interior during his stay in Seto. Despite the fact, he enjoyed friendships not only with Japanese in the Garakuta (bric-à-brac) Gathering but also with other globetrotters, including dubious secret agents. He was also half-jokingly nicknamed Shūryū-ji Shishi-Bonsatsu Shingu 鷲龍寺獅子梵刹シング or ‘Tiger Singh Brahman of Eagle-Dragon-Temple’, based on his family’s protective divinity.

8 Dance of Siva as the fire, and the clay in the kiln Let us finally interpret G.S.s discovery of the Korean pottery in the light of A.K.C.’s aesthetic reflection. In his ‘Dance of Siva’, A.K.C. quotes from Unmai Vilakkam: ‘The silent sages destroying the threefold bond are established where their selves are destroyed. There they behold the sacred and are filled with bliss’.62 This deliverance cannot be attained without sacrificing the ‘self’ (Figure 5.5). The dance of Siva is a fire of destruction; ‘the place where the ego is destroyed signifies the state where illusions and deeds are burnt away: this is the crematorium, the burning ground where Sri Natarâja dances’.

A.K. Coomaraswamy and Japan

123

Figure 5.5 The Dance of Siva, Cosmic Dance of Nataraja, Brahmanical bronze, South India, 12th Century, Madras Museum (reproduced from Frontispiece. AKC The Dance of Shiva 1924).

Tiruvâtâvurâr Purânam also says: ‘Our Lord is the Dancer, who, like the heat latent in firewood, diffused His power in mind and matter, and makes them dance in their turn’.63 With this A.K.C. links the thought of Meister Eckhart: ‘Just as the fire infuses the essence and clearness into the dry wood, so has God done with man’. This was also a metaphor for a potter’s kiln; the fire infuses the essence and the soil is formed into a solid shape. A Japanese scholar in esoteric Buddhism, Okamoto Kan’ei, notices in these passages quoted by A.K.C. a clear echo of Nietzsche’s idealism: ‘Opening up a world beyond pessimism and optimism; here is the joy of the material which transforms itself through destruction into eternity’.64 In the previous chapter, so as to justify

124

Shigemi Inaga

his reference to Nietzsche, Okamoto also quotes from Mahâbhârata and picks up Krishna’s famous advice to Arjuna: ‘Concentrate on your work, and do not worried about is consequence. Do not be seduced by inaction. For those who realize inner deliberation, there is neither Good nor Evil anymore’ (Figure 5.6).65 In his ‘The Dance of Siva’, A.K.C. mentions ‘the fire which “changes” not “destroys”’.66 This passage is paraphrased by Okamoto as follows: ‘The Dance of Natarâja by Siva signifies a space which vibrates according to the alternation of the drum. His fire does not really annihilate everything, but it shows the phase of flux, fluidity’. 67 He adds: ‘The rhythm he treads… ignites in our soul an immortal torch’.68 Further

Figure 5.6 “Krishna instructing Arjuna” by Surendra Nath Kar (reproduced from Myths of Hindus & Buddhists, 1913, p. 189).

A.K. Coomaraswamy and Japan

125

following A.K.C., the Japanese Buddhist scholar not only quotes Kâlî worship in Bengali prose but also Skrybin’s Poem of Ecstacy (1917), which was inspired by this Hindu sacred figure: ‘By a general conflagration (mahâ-pralaya) the universe (samsara) is embraced / The Spirit is at the height of being, and He feels the tide unending / Of the divine power (sakti) of free will’.69 Yanagi, in praise of Korean pottery, also states in recollection: They (pieces of Korean ceramics) are the spontaneous pulsations of life, recalling the natural rhythm of the winds that blow, the streams that flow, and the clouds that rise into the air. They could be called a direct manifestation of the natural life lived by those who made the pots, of the placid frame of mind in which they rose and lay down in harmony with nature.70 And it was none other than G.S. who conveyed this kiln fire from Korea back to India (Figure 5.7).

Figure 5.7 Sardar Gurcharan Singh, A Piece with lotus motif, Blue Pottery Trust, Delhi.

126

Shigemi Inaga

Notes 1 Rabindranath Tagore, ‘On Oriental Culture and Japan’s Mission’ (address to the members of the Indo-Japanese Association, Tokyo, 15 May 1929), in The English Writings of Rabindranath Tagore, Vol. 3, p. 605. 2 Okakura Kakuzō, The Book of Tea, p. 4. 3 For more details see, Shigemi Inaga, ‘Okakura Kakuzō and India: The Trajectory of Modern National Consciousness and Pan-Asian Ideology Across Borders’, pp. 39–57. 4 Ananda K. Coomaraswamy (A.K.C.), The Aims of Indian Art, 1908. 5 Okakura Kakuzō, The Ideals of the East, p. 12. 6 Ibid., p. 13. 7 Shigemi Inaga, ‘Okakura Kakuzō’s Nostalgic Journey to India and the Invention of Asia,’ pp. 119–132. 8 Sister Nivedita, of Ramakrishna-Vivekânanda, ‘Introduction’, in The Ideals of the East, p. 6. As for the exchange of ideas between Nivedita and Okakura, see Shigemi Inaga, ‘Sister Nivedita and her Kali the Mother, the Web of Indian Life, and Art Criticism: New Insights into Okakura Kakuzō’s Indian Writings and the Function of Art in the Shaping of Nationality,’ pp. 129–159. 9 On this process in the 1930s and 1940s, see Noriko Murai, ‘A Writer Born through Translation: The Invention and Reception of ‘Okakura Tenshin’,’ pp. 164–186. 10 A.K.C., Mediaeval Sinhalese Art, p. 18. 11 A.K.C., ‘Intellectual Fraternity’ (1916), in The Dance of Siva: Essays on Indian Art and Culture, p. 114. 12 A.K.C., Mediaeval Sinhalese Art, p. 256. 13 The Modern Review, Dec. 1909; ‘Mediaeval Sinhalese Art’, in The Complete Works of Sister Nivedita, Vol. 3, p. 52. 14 A.K.C., ‘Buddhist Primitive,’ The Dance of Siva, p. 54. 15 Sister Nivedita & A.K.C., ‘Preface,’ in Myths of the Hindus and Buddhists, pp. v–vii. 16 Ibid., pp. v–vi. 17 See, for example, ‘Art Appreciation’ (1906), The Complete Works of Sister Nivedita, Vol. 3, p. 58. 18 Tapati Guha-Thakurta, The Making of a New ‘Indian’ Art, Artists, Aesthetics and Nationalism in Bengal, c. 1850–1920, p. 182. 19 Kûmaarswami, Indo Bijutsu-shi, Sobu Rokurô, Iwsasaki Masumi (translation), pp. 4–5. The original passage: The Hindus have never believed in art for art’s sake; their art, like that of mediaeval Europe, was an art for love’s sake. They made no distinctions of sacred and profane. I am glad to think that they have never consciously sought for beauty; just none of their social institutions were intended to promote the greatest happiness of the greatest number. For great art results from the impulse to express certain clear intuitions of life and death, rather than from the conscious wish to make beautiful picture or songs. (A.K.C., ‘Preface’ in The Arts and Crafts of India and Ceylon, London: T.N Foulis, 1913, n.p.) 20 Taki Seiichi, ‘Gandara Geijutsu no hihyō nitsuite,’ (Concerning Criticism of Gandharan Art,’ (Journal of Calligraphy, Painting and antiques), pp. 1–8. 21 Shigemi Inaga, ‘Okakura Kakuzō and India: The Trajectory of Modern National Consciousness and Pan-Asian Ideology across Borders,’ pp. 48–49. 22 Vincent Smith, A History of Fine Art in India and Ceylon, pp. 129–130. The corresponding part is in Okakura, The Ideals of the East, p. 78, 92. Taki Seiichi, ‘Gandara…,’ Nr. 103, 1917, pp. 1–6.

A.K. Coomaraswamy and Japan

127

23 On this expedition, see Shigemi Inaga, ‘The Interaction of Bengali and Japanese Artistic Milieus in the First Half of the Twentieth Century (1901–1945)’,pp. 149–181. 24 Taki Seiichi, ‘On the Necessity of Studying Indian Art,’ pp. 14–18. 25 Fujihara Sadao, ‘Children of Tenshin; How the Japanese Art History Was Inherited as a Thought?’ in Bondage in Scholarship, pp. 53–70. 26 A.K.C., ‘The Theory of Art in Asia’ (Chapter 1), in The Transformation of Nature in Art, p. 186, n. 20. In ‘That Beauty Is a State,’ A.K.C. refers to Kokka (no. 244), quoting from Kuo Jo Hsû: ‘The Secret of Art Lies in the Artist Himself’ (The Dance of Siva, p. 41). 27 Jan.25, 1911, letter No.169, in Complete Work of Okakura Tenshin, Hiebonsha, Vol. 7. 28 Yanagi Muneyoshi, Complete Work, Chikuma Shobō, 1989, Vol. 21-1, pp. 638–604. 29 For a comparison of A.K.C.’s and Yanagi’s understanding of museums, see Kuji Tatsuya, ‘Museums as Were Conceived by Anti-modern Thinkers; in Reference to A.K. Coomaraswamy and Yanagi Muneyoshi,’ pp. 235–249. 30 On A.K.C.’s studies of religion conducted in Japan, see Minoru Kasai, ‘A. K. Coomaraswamy’s Comparative Studies of the Thought East and West, and His Critical Consciousness,’ in Hikaku Shisō Kenkyû, Comparative Studies of Thinking, Vol. 10, 1983, pp. 81–189; ‘Time and Eternity: A. K. Coomaraswamy’s Comparative Religious Studies,’ Vol. 11, 1984, pp. 142–149; ‘Hinduism and Buddhism: A.K. C.’s Comparative Religious Studies”, Vol. 12, 1985, pp. 143–146. Though many points suggest A.K.C.’s affinity with Yanagi’s religious thought, the author, Kasai, does not mention the latter. Tamaki Watanabe, ‘Hermeneutics of A.K.C.’, pp. 249–251 compares A.K.C. with René Guénon when referring to M. Eliade. 31 Mizuo Hiroshi, Yanagi Muneyoshi, a Biography, 1992; Chukuma Gakugei Bunko, 2004, pp. 123–138; pp. 143–144. See also Shigemi Inaga, ‘Reconsidering the Mingei Undō as a Colonial Discourse: The Politics of Visualizing Asian “Folk Craft”’, , pp. 219–230; and Yuko Kikuchi, Japanese Modernisation and Mingei Theory: Cultural Nationalism and Oriental Orientalism, pp. 123–143. 32 Guha-Thakurta, op.cit., p. 182. 33 Cited in Mizuo, op.cit., p. 128. 34 A.K.C., ‘Young India’, in The Dance of Siva, p. 135. 35 Dhammapada, quoted by A.K.C. in The Dance of Siva, p. 123. 36 A.K.C., ‘Cosmopolitan View of Nietzsche,’ The Dance of Siva, p. 118. 37 A.K.C., ‘Young India,’ The Dance of Siva, p. 123. 38 Yanagi, ‘My Thought on Choson People’ (1920); quoted in Mizuo, p. 126. 39 A.K.C., ‘What Has India Contributed to Human Welfare?’, Athenaeum, 1915; The Dance of Siva, p. 16. 40 A.K.C., ‘Young India,’ The Dance of Siva, p. 127. 41 An English translation ‘Japan’s Mistaken Policy and Korea’s Fate’ was published in The Japan Advertiser, Tokyo, Wed. 13 August 1919. Here I have included a translation from the Japanese original. 42 Yanagi Sōetsu zenshû (Complete Work of Y.S.), vol. VI, p. 29. 43 A.K.C., ‘Status of Indian Women,’ The Dance of Siva, p. 101. 44 It is more than ironic that Yanagi’s attitude towards the Korean arts and crafts is quite similar to that of Sir George Birdwood. See Yorimitsu Hashimoto, ‘George Birdwood on Indian Arts and Crafts’, pp. 73–77. Also, Miwa Kanaya, “The Birth of Folk-Craft–A Comparison of Muneyoshi Yanagi with A.K.C.,” in Yanagi Muneyoshi and the Mingei Folk Craft Movement, pp. 140–163. 45 A.K.C. ‘Young India,’ The Dance of Siva, p. 125. 46 A.K.C. ‘Hindu View of Art: Historical,’ The Dance of Siva, p. 26. 47 Yanagi, ‘The Way of Craftsmanship’ (1927), in The Unknown Craftsman, p. 208.

128

Shigemi Inaga

48 Yanagi, The Way of Craft (Kōgei no Michi), 1928. 49 Yanagi, The Way of Craft (Kōgei no Michi), 1928; here the text is based on the summary by Mizuo, op.cit., pp. 201–212. 50 Mizuo, op.cit., p. 217. 51 All the quotations in the next two paragraphs are from A.K.C., ‘Cosmopolitan View of Nietzsche’ (1918), in The Dance of Siva, pp. 117–119. 52 Yanagi Muneyoshi, ‘Unknown Craftsman’ (1927), in The Unknown Craftsman, pp. 21–215. 53 A.K.C., ‘Cosmopolitan View of Nietzsche,’ The Dance of Siva, p. 120. 54 A.K.C., ‘Status of Indian Woman,’ The Dance of Siva, p. 86. 55 A.K.C., ‘Sahaja,’ The Dance of Siva, p. 109. 56 A.K.C., ‘The Dance of Siva,’ The Dance of Siva, p. 61. In his ‘Mediaeval Sinhalese Art,’ A.K.C. quotes another pottery proverb: ‘As all earthen vessels made by the potter break at last, so is the life of men’ (The Dance of Siva, p. 268). 57 Okakura Kakuzō, The Book of Tea (1906), p. 24. 58 A.K.C., ‘Young India,’ The Dance of Siva, p. 135. 59 I owe the following information to Yorimitsu Hashimoto, ‘Gurcharan Singh, Indian Potter, His Encounter with Yanagi Muneyoshi and His Trip to Korea,’ in Mingei, from No 247 to No 250, March to June, 2015. See also Gurcharan Singh, Pottery in India and Anupa Lal, ed., Pottery and the Legacy of Sardar Gurcharan Singh. 60 Yanagi, C. W., Vol.21-1, p. 639. 61 James Henry Cousins, ‘Realization, Tides,’ Japan Advertiser, 22 June 1919. 62 A.K.C. ‘The Dance of Siva,’ The Dance of Siva, p. 61. 63 Ibid., p. 59. 64 Okamoto Kan’ei, Indian Art, Its Dominant and Its Expression, p. 182. 65 From the Bhâgavad Gitâ, quoted in Okamoto, p. 138; Cf. Sister Nivedita & A.K.C., Myths of the Hindus & Buddhists, p. 189. The translation of the latter stops shortly before the passage in question. 66 A.K.C., ‘The Dance of Siva,’ pp. 65–66. 67 Okamoto, ibid., p. 163. 68 Ibid., p. 184. 69 A.K.C. ‘The Dance of Siva,’ p. 63; Okamoto, op. cit., p. 187. 70 Muneyoshi Yanagi, ‘Hakeme’ (1954), in The Unknown Craftsman, p. 173.

References Coomaraswamy, Ananda K. The Aims of Indian Art, Broad Campden: Essex House Press, 1908, online public domain, n.p. ———. ‘Buddhist Primitive,’ in The Dance of Siva: Essays on Indian Art and Culture, New York: Dover Publications, 1985(1924), p. 54. ———. ‘Cosmopolitan View of Nietzsche,’ in The Dance of Siva: Essays on Indian Art and Culture, New York: Dover Publications, 1985(1924), pp. 117–120. ———. ‘Hindu View of Art: Historical,’ in The Dance of Siva: Essays on Indian Art and Culture, New York: Dover Publications, 1985(1924), p. 26. ———. ‘Intellectual Fraternity’ (1916), in The Dance of Siva: Essays on Indian Art and Culture, New York: Dover Publications, 1985(1924), p. 114. ———. Mediaeval Sinhalese Art, New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 2003 (1908, second edition), pp. 18–256. ———. ‘Preface,’ in The Arts and Crafts of India and Ceylon, London: T.N. Foulis, 1913, n.p.

A.K. Coomaraswamy and Japan

129

———. ‘Sahaja,’ in The Dance of Siva: Essays on Indian Art and Culture, New York: Dover Publications, 1985(1924), p. 109. ———. ‘Status of Indian Women,’ in The Dance of Siva: Essays on Indian Art and Culture, New York: Dover Publications, 1985(1924), pp. 86–101. ———. ‘The Dance of Siva,’ in The Dance of Siva: Essays on Indian Art and Culture, New York: Dover Publications, 1985(1924), pp. 61–66. ———. ‘The Theory of Art in Asia’ (Chapter 1), in The Transformation of Nature in Art, New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1974, p. 186, n. 20. ———. ‘What Has India Contributed to Human Welfare?’ London: Athenaeum, Oct. 1915. ———. ‘Young India,’ in The Dance of Siva: Essays on Indian Art and Culture, New York: Dover Publications, 1985(1924), pp. 123–135. Cousins, James Henry. ‘Realization, Tides,’ in Japan Advertiser, 22 June 1919. Fujihara, Sadao. ‘Children of Tenshin; How the Japanese Art History Was inherited as a Thought?,’ in Shōichi Inoue (ed.), Bondage in Scholarship (Gakumon wo Shibaru mono), Kyoto: Shibunkaku Publ. Ltd., 2018, pp. 53–70. (Bondage in Scholarship: What Restrains the Academia) Guha-Thakurta, Tapati. The Making of a New ‘Indian’ Art, Artists, Aesthetics and Nationalism in Bengal, c. 1850–1920, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992, p. 182. Hashimoto, Yorimitsu. ‘George Birdwood on Indian Arts and Crafts’, Studies in Victorian Culture (Vikutoria bunka Kenkyû), no. 9, 2011, pp. 73–77. Hashimoto, Yorimitsu. ‘Gurcharan Singh, Indian Potter, His Encounter with Yanagi Muneyoshi and His Trip to Korea,’ in Mingei, No. 247–250, March - June, 2015. Inaga, Shigemi. ‘Okakura Kakuzō and India: The Trajectory of Modern National Consciousness and Pan-Asian Ideology across Borders,’ Review of Japanese Culture and Society, Vol. 24, 2012, 39–57. ———. ‘Okakura Kakuzō’s Nostalgic Journey to India and the Invention of Asia,’ in Susan Fisher (ed.), Nostalgic Journeys: Literary Pilgrimages between Japan and the West, CJR Japan Research Series, Vancouver: University of British Columbia, 2001, pp. 119–132. ———. ‘Reconsidering the Mingei Undō as a Colonial Discourse: The Politics of Visualizing Asian “Folk Craft”,’ Asiatische Studien, Zeitschrift der Schweizerischen Asiengesellschaft, LIII(2), SS, 1999, pp. 219–230. ———. ‘Sister Nivedita and Her Kali the Mother, the Web of Indian Life, and Art Criticism: New Insights into Okakura Kakuzō’s Indian Writings and the Function of Art in the Shaping of Nationality,’ Japan Review, Vol. 16, 2004, pp. 129–159. ———. ‘The Interaction of Bengali and Japanese Artistic Milieus in the First Half of the Twentieth Century (1901–1945),’ Japan Review, Vol. 21, 2009, pp. 149–181. Kanaya, Miwa “The Birth of Folk-Craft–A Comparison of Muneyoshi Yanagi with A.K.C.,” in Isao Kumakura & Kenji Yoshida (eds.), Yanagi Muneyoshi and the Mingei Folk Craft Movement, Kyoto: Shibunkaku Shuppan, 2005, pp. 140–163. Okamoto, Kan’ei. Indian Art, Its Dominant and Its Expression, Unebi Shoten, 1943, p. 182. (Characteristic Features and Expression of Indian Art, 原文：印度 美術の主調と表現)

130  Shigemi Inaga Kasai, Minoru. ‘A. K. Coomaraswamy’s Comparative Studies of the Thought East and West, and His Critical Consciousness,’ in Comparative Studies of Thinking (Hikaku Shisō Kenkyû), Vol. 10, 1983, pp. 81–189. ———. ‘Hinduism and Buddhism: A.K. C.’s Comparative Religious Studies”, in Comparative Studies of Thinking (Hikaku Shisō Kenkyû), Vol. 12, 1985, pp. 143–146. ———. ‘Time and Eternity: A. K. Coomaraswamy’s Comparative Study of Religions,’ in Comparative Studies of Thinking (Hikaku Shisō Kenkyû), Vol. 11, 1984, pp. 142–149. Kikuchi, Yuko. Japanese Modernisation and Mingei Theory: Cultural Nationalism and Oriental Orientalism, London: Curzon Routledge, 2004, pp. 123–143. Kuji, Tatsuya ‘Museums as Were Conceived by Anti-Modern Thinkers; in Reference to A.K. Coomaraswamy and Yanagi Muneyoshi,’ Kokusai Bunka Kenkyû, Vol. 11, 2005, pp. 235–249. Kûmaraswami, tr. by Sobu Rokurô, Iwsasaki Masumi. Indo Bijutsu-shi, Tokyo: Kôryô-sha, 1916, pp. 4–5. Lal, Anupa ed., Pottery and the Legacy of Sardar Gurcharan Singh, New Delhi: Delhi Blue Pottery Trust, 1998. Mizuo, Hiroshi. Yanagi Muneyoshi, a Biography, Tokyo: Chikuma Gakugei Bunko, 2004, pp. 123–138. Murai, Noriko. ‘A Writer Born through Translation: The Invention and Reception of ‘Okakura Tenshin’,’ in Shion Kōno & Noriko Murai (eds.), Translation and Diffusion of Japanese Literature, Tokyo: Bensei Shuppan, 2018, pp. 164–186. Okakura, Kakuzō, Complete Work of Okakura Tenshin, Vol. 7, Tokyo: Hiebonsha, 1993. ———. The Book of Tea, New York: Fox Duffield & Company, 1906, p. 4. ———. The Ideals of the East, Berkeley: Stone Bridge Press, 2007(1903), p. 12. Singh, Gurcharan. Pottery in India, New Delhi: Vikas, 1979. Sister Nivedita & Coomaraswamy, A. K. ‘Preface,’ in Myths of the Hindus and Buddhists, New York: H. Holt & Co., 1914, pp. v–vii. ———. Myths of the Hindus & Buddhists, New York: H. Holt & Co., 1914, p. 189. Sister Nivedita, of Ramakrishna-Vivekânanda. ‘Introduction,’ in The Ideals of the East, Berkeley: Stone Bridge Press, 2007(1903), p. 6. Sister Nivedita. ‘Art Appreciation’ (1906), in Advaita Ashram (ed.), The Complete Works of Sister Nivedita, Vol. 3 Calcutta: Advaita Ashram, p. 58. Sister Nivedita. ‘Art Appreciation ’ (1908), in The Modern Review, Dec. 1909. Complete Works of Sister Nivedita, Vol. 3, Calcutta: Advaita Ashram, p. 37. Smith, Vincent. A History of Fine Art in India and Ceylon, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1911, pp. 129–130. Tagore, Rabindranath. ‘On Oriental Culture and Japan’s Mission,’ in The English Writings of Rabindranath Tagore, New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi, Vol. 3, p. 605. Taki, Seiichi. ‘Concerning Criticism of Gandharan Art’ (Gandara Geijutsu no hihyō nitsuite), Journal of Calligraphy, Painting and antiques (Shoga Kottō Zasshi), Vol. 103, Nov. 1917, pp. 1–8. ———. “On the Necessity of Studying Indian Art,” Osaka Asahi Journal, April, 1918, pp. 14–18. Watanabe, Tamaki. ‘The Hermeneutics of A.K. Coomaraswamy,’ Journal of ­Religious Studies (Shûkyō Kenkyû), Vol. 84, No. 4, 2011, pp. 249–251.

A.K. Coomaraswamy and Japan

131

Yanagi, Muneyoshi. Complete Works, Tokyo: Chikuma Shobō, 1989, Vol. 21-1, pp. 638–604. ———. ‘Hakeme’, in The Unknown Craftsman, 1954, p. 173. ———. ‘Japan’s Mistaken Policy and Korea’s Fate,’ in The Japan Advertiser, Tokyo, Wed. 13 August 1919. ———. ‘My Thought on Choson People’ (1920); quoted in Mizuo, Hiroshi (2004), p. 126. ———. The Way of Craft (Kōgei no Michi), Guroria sosaete, 1928. ———. ‘The Way of Craftsmanship’ (1927), in The Unknown Craftsman, adapted by Bernard Leach, New York: Kodansha International, 1972, p. 208. ———. ‘Unknown Craftsman’, in The Unknown Craftsman, 1927, pp. 21–215.

Part II

World Heritage and a new world order

6

Cultural heritage From nationalism to internationalism Himanshu Prabha Ray

Histories of South Asia during the 1920s and 1930s have focused on local, communal, and national narratives, a tendency which has led to international dimensions and trans-local solidarities in this period being largely overlooked. However, recent years have seen a new focus on Indian ‘transnational nationalists’ or ‘expatriate patriots’ and their myriad political agendas. It is assumed here that transnational forms of solidarity and the pursuit of national sovereignty are not mutually exclusive, but inextricably entwined.1

Though this quotation was written in the context of the anti-colonial movements that had burgeoned all over Asia in the early 20th century, it also sums up the need to map other networks of interconnectedness such as monuments and structures associated with the shared Buddhist heritage of India and Japan, a heritage that acquired centre-stage at the World Parliament of Religions in Chicago in September 1893 for 17 days. One of the objectives of the Parliament was “to forge a public religion for a globalizing society,” which at the end of the 19th century was perceived as the Christian century. 2 It involved representatives of ten world religions such as Confucianism, Taoism, Shintoism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Swami Vivekananda was one of the charismatic speakers who “combined elements of East and West in order to forge a strategy to further an Asian agenda.”3 Though 152 of the 194 papers were on Christianity, there was some representation from other religions; 12 speakers represented Buddhism, 11 Judaism, 8 Hinduism, 2 Islam, 2 Parsi religion, 2 Shintoism, 2 Confucianism, 1 Taoism, and 1 Jainism. The largest non-Christian Asian delegation was thus of the Buddhists. Anagarika Dharmapala, a Theosophist from Sri Lanka, represented Buddhism at the World Parliament, while His Royal Highness Prince Chadradat Chuddadharma, brother of the king of Siam, was the other prominent representative of Buddhism. The impact that these visits had in terms of the revival of interest in Buddhism in the subcontinent has been discussed elsewhere, especially in terms of identifying and claiming control over archaeological sites associated with the life of the Buddha in India.4

136

Himanshu Prabha Ray

In the context of Japan, “the narrative of Zen in the West” begins with the introduction of Japanese Buddhism by a delegation of Buddhist priests from the Meiji Buddhist revival movement at the World Parliament of Religions. The Buddhism that they presented was shaped by the desire to produce an interpretation appropriate for the modern state. 5 At the time of the World Parliament, Okakura Kakuzō, or Okakura Tenshin (1862–1913) as he was popularly known, was the Director of Tokyo Fine Arts Academy and presented the Hooden exhibit that represented several periods of traditional Japanese architecture. Each of the structures showed off contemporary Japanese art to highlight its vitality as it constituted an integration of traditional and modern forms. To what extent did this Asian agenda in understanding religion and the arts provide the foundation for an Indo Japanese dialogue in the context of early Buddhist art and architecture? Chapters in the first section of this book have underscored the crucial role of transnational networks in the late 19th and early 20th century in creating cultural solidarity among the people of Asia to counter Western influences. The Japanese art critic and intellectual Okakura Kakuzō, the founder of the Japan Art Institute, is known for his statement ‘Asia is One’ in his book The Ideals of the East.6 The underlying objective of the book was to elaborate on Japan’s aesthetic heritage. He travelled to India in 1902 and met Rabindranath Tagore in Calcutta, as well as the frail Swami Vivekananda.7 This visit helped consolidate his views on art history and, more importantly, on early Buddhist art in India. These 19th century beginnings are vital to tracing engagement with cultural heritage as it unfolded in the two countries both in the colonial period, as also post the 1950s within the new global order as accepted in UNESCO’s Constitution, adopted in London in 1945. In this Chapter, I focus on two interrelated issues: one, the transformation in the understanding of the Buddhist heritage as a result of the introduction of new disciplines such as archaeology in the 19th century for a study of the past in India and Japan, especially with reference to sites associated with Buddhism; and second, the interconnections forged within the larger ambit of UNESCO’s 1972 World Heritage Convention. I start with a section on the rediscovery of Buddhism in Japan and India in the 19th century and the extent to which this rediscovery moulded religious and national identities in the two countries. It needs to be emphasized that this dialogue took place within a larger global interest in Buddhism, rather than being confined to narrow national interests, as has often been suggested by art historians.

Revival of Buddhism in 19th century Japan and India The Case of Japan: It is often assumed that the history of Buddhism followed a continuous and unbroken trajectory from the ancient to the modern period. This was by no means the case in either Japan or India.8 The 19th century introduced

Cultural heritage: nationalism to internationalism

137

critical changes that had implications for the construction of Buddhist identity in the two countries, also because of the introduction of new disciplines such as art history and archaeology that radically altered our understanding of the past. In this section, I start the discussion with Japan and then move on to the 19th century transformation in Buddhism in the Indian subcontinent. I also bring into focus the engagement of Japanese artists and monks with one of the major sites in India, that of Sarnath near Varanasi on the Ganga. Before World War II, historical archaeology in Japan focused mainly upon temples, roof tiles, and stone monuments, all closely connected with Buddhism. At that time, “historical archaeology” was nearly synonymous with “Buddhist archaeology” and the largest excavation carried out since World War II was that of the Nara palace site. Twenty-two percent of the original area (1,200,000 m 2) had been unearthed by 1974, and work is still going on, as discussed by Suijun Ra in this volume.9 But perhaps one needs to retrace the steps to draw out the trajectory that Buddhism followed from 1868 onward. At the time of the Meiji Restoration of 1868, Buddhism underwent radical marginalization in Japan, as it lost its authority and economic base as a result of the reinvention of Shintoism by the Meiji Government (1868–1912) as the state religion. In Japan, a parishioner system was established in Buddhism in the 15th century, as a result of which the local population was organized as donors to the local temple. This made Buddhism a strong economic force, which was often criticized by Confucian and Shinto priests. Shintoism and Buddhism had been closely intertwined in the past and almost all the Shinto shrines that we see today, with very few exceptions, were earlier part of larger Buddhist temple complexes under the supervision of Buddhist priests. Shinto (and local cults in general) were deeply connected to Japanese Buddhism: Buddhist authors were the first to write doctrines and tales about the Japanese local gods or Kami or avataras, and most shrines dedicated to the Kami belonged to Buddhist temples or were in fact Buddhist temples themselves consecrated to the Kami. Nevertheless, as suggested by Fabio Rambelli, one can detect several tendencies that lay outside the Buddhist system in medieval discourses on the Kami.10 A crucial development in the history of Japan that affected Shinto tradition was that in the middle of the 6th century, Buddhist ideas began to make their way into Japan through China and Korea. From the early 8th century onwards, Buddhist monks toured all over the Japanese archipelago, and in this process began to identify local deities and gave them a name and a description. Sometimes, it is suspected that they were making up legends around them, but it is quite possible that these already existed but lacked written evidence, therefore it was a part of the process of documenting and recording existing gods and giving them a name within the Buddhist pantheon. In the Buddhist pantheon of Japan, there are Indian gods like Rama, Brahma, and Indra and the Japanese local deities are placed below

138  Himanshu Prabha Ray the Indian ones. Yet another important event was the arrival of tantric Buddhism, also called Esoteric Buddhism in the 6th and 7th centuries. Many deities began to take the shape of tantric deities in India, not only in bodily representations like many hands, fierce faces, and with weapons but also in the general understanding that gods were normally violent.11 The most common way through which Indian gods were introduced into Japan was through the concept of avatars. The logic of avatars went beyond the gods, as many cultural developments of Japan were envisioned as manifestations from India or Tenjiku, which was perceived as an imaginary realm in Japanese cultural representations.12 It is suggested that with the exception of references to India as the homeland of Buddhism from where it reached Japan in 623 CE, as stated in an official record and the monk Bodhisena (704–60 CE) who travelled from India, there was little direct interaction between the two countries until the 16th century. This is an issue that I will return to in the last section of the chapter, with reference to maritime interconnectedness that is often overlooked in the context of Japanese Buddhism. Despite the so-called lack of direct contact, Japan adopted the Buddhist worldview that placed India at the centre of the human world or the southern continent known as jambudvipa. It is important to emphasise that interest in India and its culture was not limited to a few clerics and intellectuals; far from it. Notions and practices related to certain aspects and representations of India spread throughout Japanese society. An important factor in this process of diffusion was the widespread idea that Japan was the ultimate stalwart of Buddhism and, by extension, of Indian wisdom after Buddhism had disappeared from India and been marginalized in China and Korea.13 The best example of this is the legend that suggests that the mountain Sumeru began to appear in the 12th and 13th centuries. It is believed that, like gods, these mountains were also reincarnated in Japan. Apart from religion, many other things such as tools, professions, even wrestlers like Sumo apparently originated in India. Legends go on to claim that Japan was even a portion of Magadha that split away due to an earthquake and reached its current location. Yet another aspect was that the Japanese language was claimed to be a version of Sanskrit. Some compared the alphabet of Japanese with Sanskrit alphabet and claimed that the former was based on the latter. However, the most common and recent connections with India were created within Buddhism. This basic understanding of not only Indian but local gods as well continued until the 13th century, when things began to change significantly as Buddhism began to lose intellectual prestige because its monastic base had shrunk considerably in India by this time. New influences from Islam travelled along trade routes to East Asia and doctrinal and ritual innovations

Cultural heritage: nationalism to internationalism  139 filtering in from China emphasized neo-Confucianism as a counter to the Buddhist intellectual system. Thus, the re-localization and re-positioning of the sacred was carried out through a re-reading of ancient Japanese myths (in the light of Chinese and Indian cosmologies), in which the origin of the universe was conceived of as the origin of Japan. This interpretation, which gave Japan a cosmic centrality that counterbalanced its marginality in the international trade routes, eventually led to the development of nativist and culturally chauvinistic positions.14 Rambelli argues that information about India started reaching Japan through Jesuit missionaries in the 16th and 17th centuries. These missionaries were referred to as Tenjikujin, as they were believed to have arrived from India or Tenjiku. “When more concrete information about India began to reach Japan in the early modern period from China and especially from Western sources, self-identification was gradually replaced by sentiments of otherness and rejection.”15 This sense of rejection when coupled with the anti-Buddhist sentiment resulted in the persecution of Buddhism in the early Meiji period. In the 19th century there was a concerted effort to separate the two, as the government sought to resurrect Shintoism as the autochthonous religious tradition of Japan, whose origins dated back to the beginning of Japanese civilization. Many of the local gods who were understood as from India were found in narratives of the origin of Shinto shrines dated from the 14th–17th century period. Thus, the present definition of Shinto as a form of polytheistic, animist nature worship is largely a modern construct, which was aimed at providing a new identity to Shinto shrines after their separation from Buddhist shrines by the Japanese government from 1868 to 1871. It is within this context of government promotion of a state religion that the formation of the history of modern art in Japan needs to be viewed. It is also important to emphasize that the writings of Okakura Kakuzō need to be situated within a larger global world order that was unfolding in the late 19th and early 20th centuries in which Japan had become an important player. To what extent was Okakura influenced by Indian thinkers and what impact did foreign mediators have on his writings? Okakura’s first book in English, The Ideals of the East with Special Reference to the Arts of Japan (written in 1901, published in 1903), was based on the lectures he had given to English and American women in Tokyo. Among them was Josephine MacLeod (1858–1949), who was responsible for Okakura’s trip to India in 1901–2. She came from a wealthy American family and became a devotee of Swami Vivekananda (1863–1902) whom she had met in 1894. She was responsible for propagating Vivekananda’s ideas in the West. She was also closely linked with Sister Nivedita (1867–1911) who was born as Margaret E. Noble in Ireland. She met Swami Vivekananda in London

140  Himanshu Prabha Ray in 1895 and travelled to India in 1898 where she met MacLeod. Nivedita met Okakura in March 1902 and was closely associated with editing and facilitating the publication of his book The Ideals of the East. It is also important to recognize that at the beginning of the 20th century various Asian ethnic groups under colonial domination invented or re- established a cultural identity in order to resist the cultural domination of the West. Torkel Brekke’s study has underscored the construction and politics of religious identity in the Indian subcontinent during the 19th century through explorations of the leadership of three religions: the Hindus of Bengal and the important role of Swami Vivekananda, the Buddhists of Sri Lanka with a focus on Anagarika Dharmapala, and the Svetambara Jains of western India with a discussion on Jainism and the history, archaeology, and politics of religion.16 These developments were by no means restricted to the Indian subcontinent, but need to be studied within larger global currents of interest in the occult as evident from the spread of the Theosophical Society and increased engagement with Buddhism worldwide. Okakura’s book on Asian artistic and cultural history is famous for its opening paragraph in which he sees a spiritual unity throughout Asia, which distinguishes it from the West: Asia is one. The Himalayas divide, only to accentuate, two mighty civilisations, the Chinese with its communism of Confucius, and the Indian with its individualism of the Vedas. But not even the snowy barriers can interrupt for one moment that broad expanse of love for the Ultimate and Universal, which is the common thought-inheritance of every Asiatic race, enabling them to produce all the great religions of the world, and distinguishing them from those maritime peoples of the Mediterranean and the Baltic, who love to dwell on the Particular, and to search out the means, not the end, of life.17 Historians have argued that “the patriotic fever of a rejuvenated Japan” and “a deep crisis of self-identity at the denationalization in India” were two sides of the same coin of Modern Asia.18 While castigating several thinkers and leaders of the 19th and early 20th centuries for appropriating art objects from the past for promoting cultural nationalism, it is often forgotten that post-independence historians and art historians in India involved in the writing of a ‘scientific socio-economic’ history have failed to take into account the ruptures and ‘reinventions’ introduced in the 19th century. This trend is most visible in the writing of the history of India’s ancient past, where the focus continues to be on establishing the veracity of sources and interpretations and an unquestioning reliance on data generated by the Archaeological Survey of India, established during colonial rule in 1871. A case in point is the study of the archaeology of Buddhism, which was first introduced in colonial India in the 19th century. References in Greek literature to Alexander’s invasion of the East moulded European perceptions of the region

Cultural heritage: nationalism to internationalism  141 of Gandhara, located in the north-west of the Indian subcontinent, as the British tried to devise military strategies to establish their rule in Punjab and Afghanistan. These military and political interests impacted discussions about the Greek influence on early Buddhist art, leading to the development of the image of the Buddha in human form.19 In contrast, local knowledge associated many of the abandoned Buddhist stupa sites with Sikandar, the hero of the Persian epic poem the Shahnameh (Book of Kings) of Ferdowsi (935–1020). It is no surprise that not only European authors writing on India, but also post-independence art historians, have continued the colonial legacy but have paid little attention to local knowledge and the Persian legacy in an understanding of the history of Buddhist art in Gandhara.20 In this milieu of history writing, the objections raised by Okakura find no mention and the contribution of Japanese scholars remains marginalized. Okakura pointed out that the actual affinities of the Indian development of the Buddha’s image were largely Chinese, but that the reason for this can probably be sought in the existence of a common early Asiatic art. Okakura argued that the Mongolian origins of the 1st to 3rd century CE Kushan rulers of Gandhara were fundamental and that “a deep and better informed study of the works of Gandhara itself will reveal a greater prominence of Chinese than of the so-called Greek characteristics.”21 Okakura continued a survey of the history of Buddhism in his book and suggested that the first Buddhist period in Japan began with the introduction of Buddhism into the nation from Korea in 552 CE in the Asuka period and continued with the shift in the capital to Nara, 30 kms north of Asuka, in 710 CE. “And it signifies the influence upon Japanese development of that original stream of abstract idealism, which, through the Asoka–Kanishka consolidation, brought the waters of the new faith to China.”22 The response of the British Indologist and a member of the Indian Civil Service, Vincent Smith (1848–1920) was not surprising: “It would not be worth while to notice Mr. Okakura’s rash assertions, but for the attention that his book has received in certain quarters for its attempted vindication of the claims of Asiatic as against European art ideals.”23 This [Smith’s statement] foresees the manner in which Okakura’ s works would be branded as anachronistic and subsequently ignored by the academic world of art history. In his later years, Okakura himself was aware that many of the details in The Ideals of the East pertaining to art history were no longer valid. Only the ideological aspects that touted solidarity among Asian countries were discussed, and these were exposed as almost exclusively negative criticism from the perspective of the history of thought, which took them to be representative of the dangerous implications of modem Japan’s Asianism. 24 Smith was convinced of the superiority of Graeco-Roman civilization and the fact that it was solely due to the invasion of Alexander the Great that

142  Himanshu Prabha Ray India was civilized and by and large this trend has prevailed in Indian art history. Some art historians claim that the National Museum, New Delhi’s narrative on Gandharan sculpture is aligned “firmly with the nationalists.”25 On the contrary, one could as well argue that the arrangement of Gandharan sculptures in the Kushana gallery is a continuation of the chronological framework first adopted in the colonial period at the Indian Museum, Calcutta. 26 This brings me to a discussion of the archaeology of Buddhism as it developed in the colonial period in India and the extent to which this 19th century paradigm continues to be repeated in secondary writings.

Archaeology of Buddhism in India In an earlier publication, I traced the development of the archaeology of Buddhism in colonial India and examined its impact on the reconstruction of India’s Buddhist past, as also the making of a public and academic discourse around these archaeological discoveries. 27 A significant element in the reinvention of Buddhism was the enormous interest that this generated, both in Europe and in North America, in the 19th century and the active participation of donors in the cause, especially from North America. The appeal of Buddhism lay in the European perception that the Buddha had been an opponent of Hinduism, and a majority of Victorians easily comprehended this antagonism. The image of the Buddha as a social reformer who led a crusade against Hinduism not only looms large in Victorian writings, 28 but through Cunningham these ideas found an archaeological manifestation and continue to be repeated to the present. The military surveyor Alexander Cunningham (1814–93) argued that a history of Buddhism would of necessity have to be based on archaeology, since the Sanskrit Puranas make no mention of it and are irrelevant for the purpose. It was this need to develop archaeology in the subcontinent that led to the establishment of the Archaeological Survey of India in 1871. It is important to stress that Cunningham was guided in archaeological research by his quest for the remains of Alexander’s campaign in India and the historical Buddha, as he explicitly states in the introduction to his first report. In describing the ancient geography of India, the elder Pliny for the sake of clearness follows the footsteps of Alexander the Great. For a similar reason, in the present proposed investigation, I would follow the footsteps of the Chinese pilgrim Hwen Thsang, who, in the 7th century of our era traversed India from west to east and back again for the purpose of visiting all the famous sites of Buddhist history and tradition. In the account of his travels, although the Buddhist remains are described in most detail with all their attendant legends and traditions, yet the numbers and appearance of Brahmanical temples are also noted, and

Cultural heritage: nationalism to internationalism  143 the travels of the Chinese pilgrim thus hold the same place in the history of India, which those of Pausanias hold in the history of Greece. 29 Unlike the Chinese pilgrim, however, Cunningham’s explorations in search of the historical Buddha remained confined to north India. An important source that he took recourse to in the identification of sites was the Mahavamsa, the Pali Chronicle recording the history of Buddhism in Sri Lanka, which was composed by a Buddhist monk in Anuradhapura Mahavihara in the 5th century CE. Cunningham established a connection between the 3rd century BCE Mauryan king Aśoka, mentioned in the Mahāvaṁsa and the several stupas that dotted much of north India. He opened the Dhamekh stupa at Sarnath in 1835 and in early 1851, Cunningham and Lieutenant F.C. Maisey dug into the main stupa at Sanchi in central India. The negative fallout of Cunningham’s archaeological work was not only the conflation of data from 5th century Sri Lanka to fix the chronology of Buddhist sites in north India dating to an earlier period, but also the wanton destruction of stupas, which he and his assistants had found in a reasonably good condition, but which early ‘archaeologists’ continued to dig into in search of precious relics. The attempt here is not to retrace the beginnings of archaeology of Buddhism in India or the extent to which Cunningham’s legacy continues to survive in the post-independence period, but to focus on one case study, i.e., the site of Sarnath in order to draw attention to the complex nature of interaction with scholars from Japan, as the colonial government continued to revive the archaeology of Buddhism. This has already been discussed with reference to the site of Ajanta by Yasuko Fukuyama in this volume. Sarnath was linked to events in the life of the Buddha, as the location of his first sermon. The site also presented evidence for the presence of not only Buddhist, but also Jain and Hindu archaeological remains, which remained unexplained in early archaeological reports as the focus continued to be on reviving Buddhism. Archaeological excavations at Sarnath near Varanasi on the river Ganga continued well into the 20th century and have radically altered the understanding of the site from the time of the recovery of a seated stone Buddha image in 1794 and its first recording by Cunningham, who visited it in 1835–6. At that time, Sarnath was a huge mound of brick and stone remains about half a mile long and nearly a quarter of a mile broad. On the north and east were three large sheets of water and one of these had a small Siva temple in front of the lake. Two villages lay close to the monastic complex, one of them known as Barāhi, which was reminiscent of the Buddhist goddess Varāhi, and the other was Guronpur or ‘the village of the teachers.’ An antelope reserve existed in the vicinity, indicating perhaps the ancient name of the site as mṛgadāva or deer park. Also present at Sarnath was a Jain temple to Parsvanath.30 The Aśokan pillar and its capital were, however, discovered in excavations conducted there in 1905 by F.O. Oertel, an engineer in the Public

144  Himanshu Prabha Ray Works Department of the United Provinces. Unknown in the 19th century, they were not part of the initial re-discovery of Aśoka. It was during the 1905 operations that an Aśokan pillar was unearthed in a broken and damaged condition along with the lion capital, measuring seven feet in height. 31 The next set of excavations, conducted under John Marshall and S. Konow, commenced in 1907 in which a major portion of the area in the northern and southern sections of the site was covered. Marshall and Konow unearthed a large and imposing monastery from the 12th century CE (Figure 6.1). 32 Hence, over the centuries, an overall expansion occurred at the site of Sarnath and this continued well into the 12th century. The last historical record from Sarnath is the 12th century inscription on a rectangular slab of sandstone written in Sanskrit. It consists of 26 verses and gives the genealogy of Kumaradevi, the queen of Govindachandra whose inscriptions range from 1114 to 1154 CE. Verse 21 mentions that the queen built a vihara at Dharmacakra or modern Sarnath and that she restored the image of śrī dharmacakra Jina or Lord of the Wheel of Law as it had existed in the days of dharma Aśoka. The inscription was composed by the poet Srikunda and engraved by the mason Vamana. This 12th century reference to the memory of the Mauryan king Aśoka indicates the longevity of the association of the king with major Buddhist sites in the Ganga valley. A remarkable aspect of Marshall and Konow’s excavations were the number of Jain and Hindu icons that were unearthed from monastery 1, attributed to Kumaradevi, and at other locations at the site. These included a sculpture of a standing Tirthankara, as well as heads of Tirthankaras with Naga canopies and about 25 representations of Hindu deities.33 A colossal 12th century image of Śiva killing the demon was found in the

Figure 6.1 Dhamekh stupa at Sarnath with conserved remains of monastery in the foreground. Photograph by author.

Cultural heritage: nationalism to internationalism  145 debris at a height of eight feet above the floor of monastery IV. Another depiction of dancing Śiva was unearthed in the outer courtyard of monastery 1, while images of Ganeśa, Mahiṣāsuramardini, and the Vāmana avatāra were found in archaeological deposits. Most of these sculptures are displayed in the archaeological museum at Sarnath and date from the 10th to 12th centuries CE. It is important to stress that these icons were found in the archaeological deposit and date to a period when the monastic complex was flourishing and new monasteries were being established, as evident from Kumaradevi’s inscription. The only structure dating to the post-12th century period is a 16th century octagonal brick tower that was constructed on top of Chaukhandi stupa by Govardhan, son of Raja Todarmal to commemorate Humayun’s visit to the place (Figure 6.2). An inscription recording the event refers to it as a lofty tower reaching to the blue sky.34 Marshall and Konow did not explain the presence of Jain and Hindu images at Sarnath and these have generally received little attention in secondary writings. One major issue that has confronted historians of ancient India is the so-called decline of Buddhism in India in the 12th century, as suggested by Cunningham, and the relationship between Buddhism and Hinduism in general.35 Of interest to this chapter are the additions made to the archaeological site in the 19th and 20th centuries as the colonial state used Buddhist relics as a tool of diplomacy in cementing ties with friendly countries. Records in the National Archives of Delhi provide interesting details of the discovery and subsequent distribution of relics from the mound of Piprahwa Kot in Basti district discovered in 1897.36 While debating the fate of the relics, Dr. W. Hoey, Officiating Commissioner, Gorakhpur Division, wrote to the Chief Secretary to the Government of the North-Western Provinces and

Figure 6.2 Chaukhandi stupa at Sarnath with a medieval octagonal tower on top. Photograph by author.

146  Himanshu Prabha Ray Oudh and the letter is worth quoting, as it provides insights into the functioning of the colonial administration: It is a matter of common knowledge that the Buddhists are not satisfied because the Bodh Gaya temple is in the possession of the Hindus. The attitude of the Government of Bengal in this matter is necessarily one of neutrality. At the same time the connection of the British government with Buddhist countries renders it desirable that if an incidental opportunity to evince its consideration for Buddhists should arise, advantage should be taken of it to manifest its goodwill. Viewing the Government of India in this case as the British Government I consider its relations with Siam, a country bordering on Burma, would justify the gift for which the application has been made. At the same time I believe that the coveted relic should be forwarded through this Government to the Government of India and transmitted by His Excellency the Governor-General to the king of Siam.37 The Chief Secretary, Vincent Smith, suggested in his reply that while the relics may be of interest to religious communities, the accessories, e.g., the stone coffer, the crystal vase, and small finds, were of importance for the Europeans and that the two classes of objects required different treatment. While the former could be gifted to the king of Siam, the appropriate place for the latter was a museum, such as the Imperial Museum, Calcutta. It was hence decided that the relics would be handed to a representative of the king of Siam on 16 February 1899, who in turn would distribute them to communities from Burma to be displayed at Rangoon and Mandalay and at Anuradhapura, Kandy, and Colombo in Lanka. By the early 20th century, the Mahabodhi Society had attained a position of prominence in the Indian subcontinent and insisted on keeping the relics within the country and re-enshrining them in newly constructed temples. The Mahabodhi Society was set up in Colombo on 31 May 1891 for the revival of Buddhism in India and for restoring the ancient shrines of Bodh Gaya, Benares, and Kusinara. Ven. H. Sumangala was elected President of the Society and Col. Olcott its Director. Anagarika Dharmapala was the moving force behind it, and in 1892, the office of the society was shifted to Calcutta. A generous and rich patron of the society was Mary Elizabeth Foster (1844–1930) of Honolulu, who helped Dharmapala in many of his projects, including the setting up of a branch of the Mahabodhi Society at Ealing in 1926.38 In 1916, the government of India offered the relics of the Buddha discovered at Bhattiprolu in coastal Andhra to the Mahabodhi Society, provided the society erected a suitable vihara for the purpose. A temple was constructed at Calcutta for the purpose and the relics were ceremonially re-enshrined in 1920. The temples selected for the re-enshrinement of relics were by no means newly constructed. Instead relics unearthed during

Cultural heritage: nationalism to internationalism  147 archaeological excavations at the Buddhist mound at Mirpur Khas in Sind were re-enshrined within the archaeological site of Sarnath itself.39 In 1910 Henry Cousens (1854–1933) of the Archaeological Survey of India visited Mirpur Khas and started excavations on the largest mound. At the centre of the mound he found a chamber, within which was a stone coffer containing two earthen pots, gold and coral beads, square copper coins, a crystal bottle, a tiny gold ring, and a small cylinder of gold with ash. Cousens dated the stupa to the 4th century CE.40 By the 1930s, the Mahabodhi Society had become a major claimant for relics unearthed at archaeological sites in India. The new Buddhist temple, or the Mulagandhakuti vihara, at Sarnath was the brainchild of Sri Lankan activist Anagarika Dharmapala, with the help of large donations received from the generous patron Mrs. Foster (Figures 6.3 and 6.4). It was said to mark the spot where the Buddha’s own personal meditation cell had been located in the past. Built at a cost of rupees one hundred and ten thousand (Rs. 110,000/-) the Mulagandhakuti vihara was declared open on 11 November 1931 and to celebrate the occasion, the Government of India presented the Society with relics found at Taxila.41 In his message on the occasion, Rabindranath Tagore wrote: Numerous are the triumphal towers built to perpetuate the memories of injuries inflicted by a murdering race upon another. But let us once for all, for the sake of humanity restore to its full significance, this great memorial of the generous past to remind us of the ancient meeting of nations in India for the exchange of love, and for the offering of the treasure left to the world by the Blessed One to whom we dedicate our homage.42 On the first anniversary of the opening of the Mulagandhakuti vihara, the Archaeological Survey of India gifted Mahabodhi Society relics unearthed during excavations at Nagarjunakonda on the Andhra coast.43 In April 1934, the Director-General of the Archaeological Survey of India started negotiations with the Mahabodhi Society for enshrinement of the relics from Mirpur Khas in the society’s newly constructed temple, Mulagandhakuti, at Sarnath.44 This newly constructed temple became the centre of attraction for visiting Japanese scholars such as Tsushayo Byodo, Director of the Japanese Institute  for Sanskrit Research, Tokyo and the artists Kosetsu Nosu and Kisho  Kawai. At a function held in Calcutta in their honour on 12 December 1932, which was presided over by Rabindranath Tagore, the Japanese Buddhists presented a large and beautiful gilt bronze bell for the Mulagandhakuti Vihara (Figure 6.5). At the request of the Mahabodhi Society and the Imperial Government of Japan, the two artists Kosetsu Nosu and Kisho Kawai were entrusted with the task of painting frescoes in the Mulagandhakuti depicting scenes from the life of the Buddha.45 This

148  Himanshu Prabha Ray

Figure 6.3 Plaque showing list of donors in Mulagandhakuti. Photograph by author.

assignment took five years to complete and followed the special technique of describing natural phenomena by light and shade of a black pigment only, which had originated in ancient China and had developed in Japan for 700 years (Figure 6.6). The case of Piprahwa and Sarnath presents an insightful account of the use of archaeology of Buddhism in the 19th and 20th centuries for cementing ties with political leaders such as the king of Siam (present Thailand) and Anagarika Dharmapal and the Mahabodhi Society by the colonial state. Within this network the Japanese Government found no space, though at the individual level, artists and monks from Japan participated in the revival of Buddhism in the Indian subcontinent.

Cultural heritage: nationalism to internationalism  149

Figure 6.4 Mulagandhakuti temple at Sarnath. Photograph by author.

I would now like to shift focus to the post-independence period and the 21st century to discuss global platforms that replaced the international networks of the 19th and 20th centuries. One such platform was provided by UNESCO’s 1972 World Heritage Convention, which has been ratified by 193 State Parties as of 31 January 2017 and continues to provide an important global platform for the protection and preservation of heritage.

World heritage interventions Heritage is a building block for sustainable development, a vector for social cohesion and reconciliation, and a catalyst for regional cooperation. In a world of change, world heritage is a reminder of all that unites humanity. It is a reminder also of the ties between culture, nature and societies.46

150  Himanshu Prabha Ray

Figure 6.5 T he bronze bell presented to the Mulagandhakuti by the Japanese. Photograph by author.

Heritage, especially World Heritage, is seen as a powerful diplomatic tool worldwide that is considered above the coercive sphere of politics, economics, or military aspirations. India joined the Convention in 1977 and as of 2019 has inscribed 38 properties on the World Heritage list, of which 30 are cultural, 7 natural, and 1 is in the mixed category. India inscribed its first sites on the World Heritage list in 1983, which included monuments such as the 17th-century Taj Mahal and the 16th-century Agra Fort in Uttar Pradesh, the 2nd century BCE to 6th century CE Buddhist caves at Ajanta and the 600–1000 CE rock-cut Ellora caves near Aurangabad in Maharashtra. In 1984, the first two coastal sites were inscribed, namely the group of monuments at Mahabalipuram on the Tamil coast, dated to the 7th and 8th centuries, and the 13th-century Sun Temple at Konarak on the Odisha coast. The Outstanding Universal Value of the temples

Cultural heritage: nationalism to internationalism  151

Figure 6.6 Painting by Kosetsu Nosu relating to the life of the Buddha inside Mulagandhakuti Photograph by author.

at Mahabalipuram included the suppleness and modelling of the stone sculptures that subsequently spread to parts of South-East Asia, such as Cambodia, Champa, and Java. The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), an attached office of the Ministry of Culture, functions as a nodal agency for the nomination of World Heritage sites to UNESCO, though India’s Permanent Representative to UNESCO headquarters in Paris is generally an official from the Ministry of External Affairs, thereby combining culture and diplomacy. Japan joined the Convention much later, in 1992, and has 19 cultural and 4 natural monuments and sites inscribed on the List. These include Buddhist Monuments in the Horyu-ji Area, known for their wooden architecture and dating to the 7th and 8th centuries CE; early 8th century ancient monuments of the Buddhist complex of Nara; Sacred Sites and Pilgrimage Routes in the Kii Mountain Range overlooking the Pacific Ocean and comprising three sacred sites linked by pilgrimage routes to the ancient centres of Nara and Kyoto, reflecting the fusion of Shinto and Buddhist beliefs in the 8th and 9th centuries; and Hiraizumi – Temples, Gardens, and Archaeological Sites Representing 11th- and 12th- century Buddhism. In addition, in 2015, Japan inscribed ‘Sites of Japan’s Meiji Industrial Revolution: Iron and Steel, Shipbuilding and Coal Mining’ comprising a series of 23 component parts, mainly located in the southwest of Japan. These bear testimony to the rapid industrialization of the country from the middle of the 19th century to the early 20th century, through the development of the iron and steel industry, shipbuilding, and coal mining.47 Clearly the attempt has been not only to inscribe sites associated with Buddhism, but also with the Meiji period.

152  Himanshu Prabha Ray The question that this chapter addresses is: given the long interaction between Japanese and Indian thinkers and art historians in the 19th and early 20th centuries, how has the legacy been carried forward in the 21st century with reference to sites associated with Buddhist heritage? A second related issue is that of transnational heritage, as evident in the writings and travels of many Indian thinkers and political leaders to the east. How many transnational sites have been proposed jointly by India and Japan? A distressing response to these questions shows that the only transnational site including both India and Japan was inscribed on the World Heritage list in 2016 and relates to the Architectural Work of Le Corbusier (1887–1965), an Outstanding Contribution to the Modern Movement. It comprises 17 sites spread over seven countries: Argentina, Belgium, France, Germany, India, Japan, and Switzerland.48 This chapter proposes other possibilities for transnational cooperation between the two countries in the field of cultural heritage and diplomacy, especially with reference to maritime interconnectedness that the two countries share. India has a long coastline of more than 7,500 kms, excluding the islands, while, in addition to the four main islands, Japan has over 6,000 small islands of which approximately 430 are inhabited. Yet these maritime linkages are seldom discussed in the context of either Buddhist heritage or transnational networks. There is evidence to support the fact that several significant Buddhist ritual practices were introduced across South-East and East Asia as a result of movements by monks and nuns, starting as early as the beginning of the Common Era. The biography of itinerant monks such as Vajrabodhi (671–741) and his disciple Amoghavajra across Asia from south India, where he spent seven years at the Pallava court to Sri Lanka, to the Malay world and Java, to China, Korea, and Japan are symptomatic of the mobility of teachers and scholars of the Buddhist Sangha.49 Vajrabodhi sailed from Nakapattinam or Nagapattinam eastward with Persian merchants. He stopped at Srivijaya in 717 CE and stayed there for three years, where he met his follower Amoghavajra, before finally reaching China in 720 CE. It is suggested that Vajrabodhi’s visit to the Indonesian archipelago introduced new forms of Buddhism, as evident in the production of ritual bronzes dated from 8th through 10th centuries.50 Vajrabodhi was one of the early masters of the text The Compendium of Principles of All Tathāgatas (sarva-tathāgata-tattva-saṁgraha), which was finalized in the 7th century and is often seen as establishing Tantra as a new and distinct form of Buddhism. The Chinese biography of the Indian Buddhist traveller Dhyānabhadra is based on the translation of a poetic inscription on a stupa, which was erected in the memory of an Indian monk Dhyānabhadra or Suunyaadi’sya, at the Korean temple Kuei-yen Ssu (Jupiter Rock Temple). 51 This inscription was composed in 1378 by a certain Li Se, who, prior to the fall of the Mongols in 1368, had been secretary to the Mongol administrator of

Cultural heritage: nationalism to internationalism  153 Manchuria and Korea. Dhyānabhadra spent his early years studying at Nalanda and in his nineteenth year he travelled to Lanka and from there to China and Korea. He died in 1363 and his body was mummified and later cremated in 1368. The ashes were divided into four parts, one of which reached Korea in 1370, where the relics were buried in Hoeamsaji monastery.52 Nor was Dhyānabhadra an exception, since there are references to his meeting with another Indian Buddhist monk named Mahāpandita with whom he travelled to Tibet. More importantly, for this chapter, the Buddhist monk Bodhisena (704–60) travelled from south India via Champa and Vietnam to Japan and established the Kegon school of Buddhism in that country. His stay has been noted in the official history records called the Shoku Nihongi, where he is referred to as Bodai-Senna. These travels of Buddhist monks between India and East Asia continued well into the 20th century. In Cave 90 at Kanheri, located on the west coast of India near Mumbai, the name of the text Saddharmapundarika-sutra is carved in Japanese by the monk of the Nichiren sect who travelled there in 1912. Cave 90 is one of the oldest caves and is the only one with two Japanese inscriptions engraved in its veranda. It is also the first structure in the world dedicated to housing the Lotus Sutra – the teaching of Buddhism as told by Gautam Buddha towards the end of his life.53 The intertwining of natural phenomena such as monsoon winds and the ways in which these were harnessed historically to create cultural networks across the Indian Ocean provide building blocks for contemporary societies, as they work towards universal values and transborder groupings – both of which underwrite UNESCO’s 1972 World Heritage Convention. The Convention sought to encourage the identification, protection, and preservation of cultural and natural heritage around the world considered to be of outstanding value to humanity. Since then, several monuments and archaeological sites in the Indian Ocean region have been inscribed on its list. It is significant that many World Heritage sites are in coastal areas or river valleys that provide means of communication between the coast and the interior and are known to have participated in the maritime networks historically. It is time to underscore their connectedness within the larger oceanic system and to bring these sites into dialogue with each other, as also those across political boundaries. A brief overview of the World Heritage sites in India shows that at least nine of them were a part of larger maritime networks, though this aspect of their Outstanding Universal Value remains neglected and unstated. Starting with the Buddhist cave site of Ajanta in western India, admired for its rock-cut architecture and paintings dating from the 2nd and 1st centuries BCE to the 5th century CE, there are several coastal sites not often associated with seafaring activity. One of the narratives prominently depicted at Ajanta is that of the seafaring merchant Simhala. The Elephanta caves located on an island off the coast of Mumbai were inscribed on the list in

154 Himanshu Prabha Ray 1987 and are famous for their majestic rock-cut carvings related to the cult of Shiva. Dated to the 5th and 6th centuries, the seven-metre high colossal image of the Trimurti in Cave 1 is one of the 15 forms of Shiva sculpted in rock at Elephanta. The carvings have been praised for their aesthetic appeal, but the World Heritage inscription does not address the issue of the location of these stupendous images on an island surrounded by the sea. An important World Heritage site at Goa includes the churches and convents dating from the 16th century, built by the Portuguese. However, 20 km southeast of Goa is an early site on the Kanara coast known as Chandor or Chandrapura on the river Paroda, leading to the sea. On the east coast of India at least two World Heritage sites need to be brought into the discussion: one, the group of monuments at Mahabalipuram; and the other the Sun temple at Konarak. The 7th and 8th century group of monuments at Mahabalipuram includes 40 architectural structures including rock-cut temples, open air relief on rock showing the descent of the Ganga, and rock-cut caves. It is vital for a comprehensive appraisal of coastal centres and maritime communities, that the intertwined strands of religious architecture, economic activity, and political intervention be examined and understood. In recent years Indian Ocean studies have acquired vibrancy and dynamism. Moulding these into World Heritage transnational nominations would certainly push them forward on a global platform. However, this needs vision and flexibility on the part of the World Heritage Committee and States Parties if the dialogues are to be translated into the preservation of the maritime heritage of the Indian Ocean, both monumental and intangible, but more importantly the living heritage, which includes maritime communities using traditional means of boat construction and navigation skills. This chapter has drawn attention to the archaeology of Buddhism in the 19th and early 20th centuries in Japan and India. Moving forward, it is pertinent that these interconnected networks be consolidated in promoting an inclusive understanding of maritime cultural heritage that cuts across political boundaries and ties in with UNESCO’s global vision and its mandate for promoting understanding and collaboration between nation states. Thus, maritime archaeology needs to move beyond ‘contested’ to ‘connected’ history and heritage, where World Heritage becomes the foundation for preserving popular memory and living heritage.

Notes 1 Caroline Stolte, ‘Enough of the Great Napoleons!’ Raja Mahendra Pratap’s Pan-Asian Projects (1929–1939), Tim Harper and Sunil Amrith edited, Sites of Asian Interaction: Ideas, Networks and Mobility: 172. 2 Richard Hughes Seager, The World’s Parliament of Religions: The East/West Encounter, 1995. 3 Seager: 111. 4 Himanshu Prabha Ray, The Return of the Buddha: Ancient Symbols for a New Nation, 2014: 26–30.

Cultural heritage: nationalism to internationalism

155

5 Judith Snodgrass, Presenting Japanese Buddhism to the West, 2003. 6 Yoshiaki Miura, Okakura Tenshin and India, China Report, July 1, 1986, Volume: 22 issue: 3: 277–285. 7 Rustom Bharucha, Another Asia: Rabindranath Tagore and Okakura Tenshin, 2006. 8 Himanshu Prabha Ray, The Return of the Buddha: Ancient Symbols for a New Nation. 9 Kōichi Yokoyama, “Early Historic Archaeology in Japan”, Asian Perspectives, 19 (1), 1976: 27–41. 10 Fabio Rambelli, “Re-Positioning the Gods: “Medieval Shinto” and the Origins of the Non-Buddhist Discourses on the Kami”, Cahiers d’Extrême-Asie, 16, 2006–2007: 305–325. 11 Rambelli, Re-Positioning the Gods: 319–320. 12 Fabio Rambelli, “The Idea of India (Tenjiku) in Pre-Modern Japan: Issues of Signification and Representation in the Buddhist Translation of Cultures”, in Tansen Sen edited, Buddhism across Asia: Networks of Material, Intellectual and Cultural Exchange: 259–290. 13 Rambelli, “The Idea of India” (Tenjiku): 262. 14 Rambelli, “Re-Positioning the Gods”: 321. 15 Rambelli, “The Idea of India” (Tenjiku): 284. 16 Torkel Brekke, Makers of Modern Indian Religion in the Late Nineteenth Century. 17 Okakura Kakuzō, Ideals of the East with Special Reference to the Art of Japan: 1. 18 Tapati Guha-Thakurta, The Making of a New Indian Art: 182. 19 Himanshu Prabha Ray and Daniel T. Potts edited, Memory as History: The Legacy of Alexander in Asia, Daniel Michon, Archaeology and Religion in Early Northwest India: History, Theory, Practice. 20 Himanshu Prabha Ray edited, Buddhism and Gandhara: An Archaeology of Museum Collections, Routledge. 21 Okakura, Ideals of the East: 77–78. 22 Okakura: 80. 23 Vincent Smith, A History of Fine Art in India and Ceylon: 129. 24 Inaga Shigemi, “Okakura Kakuzō and India: The Trajectory of Modern National Consciousness and Pan-Asian Ideology across Borders”, Review of Japanese Culture and Society, December 2012: 47-. 25 Kavita Singh, “The Museum is National”, Saloni Mathur and Kavita Singh edited, in: No Touching, No Spitting, No Praying: The Museum in South Asia: 114 [107–131]. 26 Himanshu Prabha Ray, “Decoding Gandharan Art: The Making of Museum Collections in India”, Himanshu Prabha Ray edited, in: Buddhism and Gandhara: An Archaeology of Museum Collections: 255. 27 Ray, The Return of the Buddha. 28 Philip C. Almond, The British Discovery of Buddhism. 29 Alexander Cunningham, The Ancient Geography of India: Buddhist Period: viii. 30 Alexander Cunningham, Archaeological Survey of India Report volume I: 105–107. 31 F.O. Oertel, “Excavations at Sarnath”, Archaeological Survey of India – Annual Report 1904–05: 68–70. 32 His excavations were conducted over two seasons of fieldwork and the report may be found in the Archaeological Survey of India Annual Report of the years 1906–07 and 1907–08. 33 Daya Ram Sahni, Catalogue of the Museum of Archaeology of Sarnath: 164–166.

156 Himanshu Prabha Ray 34 35 36 37

38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49

50 51 52 53

Archaeological Survey of India – Annual Report 1904–05: 74. Himanshu Prabha Ray, Archaeology and Buddhism in South Asia. Ray, The Return of the Buddha: 115–119. National Archives of India, 1899 Foreign Department, External A Proceedings April 1899, nos. 92–117: Presentation to the king of Siam of certain Buddhist relics discovered near Piprahwa in the Basti district. Visit of Phya Sukhum to India to receive the relics: No. 94, no. 4366 – VII-32 dated 13th April 1898. The Maha Bodhi Centenary Volume 1891–1991: 49–52. Ray, The Return of the Buddha: 115–119. More Buddhist Relics: Discovery in Sind, The Times of India, February 28, 1910: 9. Buddha Relic Found at Taxila: Government Presents It to Mahabodhi Society, The Times of India, November 4, 1931: 10. Opening of the New Buddhist Temple at Sarnath, The Times of India, November 13, 1931: 10. Buddha Relic: Viceroy’s Gift to Benares Society, The Times of India, December 29, 1932: 10. Buddhist Relics to Be Presented to Mahabodhi Society, The Times of India, April 4, 1934: 14. http://www.chitralekha.org/articles/kosetsu-nosu/kosetsu-nosu-japaneseartist-who-painted-sarnath, accessed on 17 March 2019. As stated by Irina Bokova, the former Director-General of UNESCO at the 35th session of the World Heritage Committee on 20 June, 2011. https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1484, accessed on 18 March 2019. Himanshu Prabha Ray, “Transnational Heritage: Building Bridges for the Future”, Himanshu Prabha Ray edited, Decolonising Heritage: The Global, the National and the Transnational: 219–252. Jeffrey Sundberg and Rolf Giebel. “The Life of the Tang Court Vajrabodhi as Chronicled by Lü Xiang: South Indian and Śrī Laṅkān Antecedents to the Arrival of the Buddhist Vajrayāna in Eighth-Century Java and China,” Pacific World: Journal of the Institute of Buddhist Studies (Third Series) 13, 2011: 129–222. Peter D. Sharrock and Emma C. Bunker, “Seeds of Vajrabodhi: Buddhist Ritual Bronzes from Java and Khorat” Andrea Acri edited, Esoteric Buddhism in Mediaeval Maritime Asia: 238. A. Waley, “New Light on Buddhism in Medieval India”, Mélanges chinois et bouddhiques, 1, 1932: 355–376. Kojiro Tomita, Korean Silver-Work of the Koryō Period, Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts, Vol. 39, No. 231,1941: 2–7. Insider’s Guide to … Kanheri caves, The Hindustan Times, April 28, 2016, https://www.hindustantimes.com/art-and-culture/insider-s-guide-to-kanhericaves/story-HeQ2XG6fgZALkAJ3bqvVbN.html, accessed on 28 January 2019.

References Almond, Philip C. The British Discovery of Buddhism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Bharucha, Rustom, Another Asia: Rabindranath Tagore and Okakura Tenshin, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2006. Brekke, Torkel, Makers of Modern Indian Religion in the Late Nineteenth Century, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Cultural heritage: nationalism to internationalism

157

Buddha Relic Found at Taxila: Government Presents It to Mahabodhi Society, The Times of India, November 4, 1931: 10. Buddha Relic: Viceroy’s Gift to Benares Society, The Times of India, December 29, 1932: 10. Buddhist Relics to Be Presented to Mahabodhi Society, The Times of India, April 4, 1934: 14. Cunningham, Alexander, Archaeological Survey of India, Four Reports during the Years 1862–65, volume I, Simla: Government Press, 1871. Cunningham, Alexander, The Ancient Geography of India: Buddhist Period, London: Trübner and Co., 1871. Guha-Thakurta, Tapati, The Making of a New Indian Art, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Insider’s Guide to … Kanheri Caves, The Hindustan Times, April 28, 2016, https:// www.hindustantimes.com/art-and-culture/insider-s-guide-to-kanheri-caves/ story-HeQ2XG6fgZALkAJ3bqvVbN.html, accessed on 28 January 2019. Kakuzō, Okakura, Ideals of the East with Special Reference to the Art of Japan, London: John Murray, 1905. Michon, Daniel, Archaeology and Religion in Early Northwest India: History, Theory, Practice, New Delhi: Routledge India, 2014. Miura, Yoshiaki, Okakura Tenshin and India, China Report, July 1, 1986, Volume: 22 issue: 3: 277–285. More Buddhist Relics: Discovery in Sind, The Times of India, February 28, 1910: 9. National Archives of India, 1899 Foreign Department, External a Proceedings April 1899, nos. 92–117: Presentation to the king of Siam of certain Buddhist relics discovered near Piprahwa in the Basti district. Visit of Phya Sukhum to India to receive the relics: No. 94, no. 4366 – VII-32 dated 13th April 1898. Oertel, F.O., Excavations at Sarnath, Archaeological Survey of India – Annual Report 1904–05, Delhi: Swati Publications, 1990 (reprint): 68–70. Opening of the New Buddhist Temple at Sarnath, The Times of India, November 13, 1931: 10. Rambelli, Fabio, Re-Positioning the Gods: “Medieval Shinto” and the Origins of the Non-Buddhist Discourses on the Kami, Cahiers d’Extrême-Asie 16, 2006–2007: 305–325. Rambelli, Fabio, The Idea of India (Tenjiku) in Pre-Modern Japan: Issues of Signification and Representation in the Buddhist Translation of Cultures, Tansen Sen edited, Buddhism across Asia: Networks of Material, Intellectual and Cultural Exchange, ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute, Singapore, 2014: 259–290. Ray, Himanshu Prabha, Archaeology and Buddhism in South Asia, London – New York: Routledge, 2018. Ray, Himanshu Prabha edited, Buddhism and Gandhara: An Archaeology of Museum Collections, London, New York: Routledge, 2018. Ray, Himanshu Prabha, Decoding Gandharan Art: The Making of Museum Collections in India. Himanshu Prabha Ray edited, Buddhism and Gandhara: An Archaeology of Museum Collections, Routledge, London – New York, 2018: 232–260. Ray, Himanshu Prabha, The Return of the Buddha: Ancient Symbols for a New Nation, London – New York: Routledge, 2014. Ray, Himanshu Prabha, Transnational Heritage: Building Bridges for the Future, in: Himanshu Prabha Ray edited, Decolonising Heritage: The Global, the National and the Transnational, Routledge, London and New York, 2019: 219–252.

158 Himanshu Prabha Ray Ray, Himanshu Prabha and Daniel T. Potts edited, Memory as History: The Legacy of Alexander in Asia, New Delhi: Aryan Books International, 2007. Sahni, Daya Ram, Catalogue of the Museum of Archaeology of Sarnath, Calcutta: Superintendent Government Printing, 1914. Seager, Richard Hughes, The World’s Parliament of Religions: The East/ West Encounter, Chicago, 1893; Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1995. Sharrock, Peter D. and Emma C. Bunker, Seeds of Vajrabodhi: Buddhist Ritual Bronzes from Java and Khorat, Andrea Acri edited, Esoteric Buddhism in Mediaeval Maritime Asia, ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute, Singapore, 2016: 237–252. Shigemi, Inaga, Okakura Kakuzō and India: The Trajectory of Modern National Consciousness and Pan-Asian Ideology across Borders, Review of Japanese Culture and Society, XXIV, December 2012: 32–57. Singh, Kavita, The Museum Is National, Saloni Mathur and Kavita Singh edited, No Touching, No Spitting, No Praying: The Museum in South Asia, Routledge, New Delhi, 2015: 107–131. Smith, Vincent, A History of Fine Art in India and Ceylon, Oxford: Clarendon, 1911. Snodgrass, Judith, Presenting Japanese Buddhism to the West: Orientalism, Occidentalism, and the Columbian Exposition, Chapel Hill & London: University of North Carolina Press, 2003. Stolte, Caroline, ‘Enough of the Great Napoleons!’ Raja Mahendra Pratap’s PanAsian Projects (1929–1939), Tim Harper and Sunil Amrith edited, in: Sites of Asian Interaction: Ideas, Networks and Mobility, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014: 171–190. Sundberg, Jeffrey and Rolf Giebel, ‘The Life of the Tang Court Vajrabodhi as Chronicled by Lü Xiang: South Indian and Śrī Laṅkān Antecedents to the Arrival of the Buddhist Vajrayāna in Eighth-Century Java and China,’ Pacific World: Journal of the Institute of Buddhist Studies (Third Series) 13, 2011: 129–222. The Maha Bodhi Centenary Volume 1891–1991, Calcutta: The Maha Bodhi Society of India, 1991: 49–52. Tomita, Kojiro, Korean Silver-Work of the Koryō Period, Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts, 39 (231), Feb. 1941: 2–7. Waley, A. New Light on Buddhism in Medieval India, Mélanges chinois et bouddhiques, 1, 1932: 355–376. Yokoyama, Kōichi, Early Historic Archaeology in Japan, Asian Perspectives, 19 (1), 1976: 27–41.

7

Globalisation and the formation of East Asian art collections The Freer Art Gallery Mitsuteru Narayama

1 Introduction of Freer Gallery of Art Located in Washington D.C., the Freer Gallery of Art is a world-renowned sanctuary for Asian art. The gallery, under the jurisdiction of the Smithsonian Institute, was opened in 1923 with pieces collected by Detroit magnate Charles Lang Freer (1854–1919). Freer donated the collection to the United States federal government in 1906. Conditions set by Freer prohibit any sale of the gallery’s collection and forbids any lending to other facilities as well. The driving force behind treating the collection as a closely guarded secret is thought to be the crises he bore full witness to in Japan, China, and India. From the end of the 19th century to the beginning of the 20th century, Asian nations were engulfed in the maelstrom of Western advancement, and the subsequent complex political and economic climate led to the scattering of their artworks, traditional artefacts, and antiques. Although Freer, possessing a fervent interest in Asian art, was able to add to his collection as a beneficiary of this situation, there is no doubt that his feelings of admiration were accompanied by irrepressible shame as a product of the emerging nation of America, as he came to know the value of the Asian works that he collected. Works of art are manifestations of people’s deeds during a certain time and place in history. Freer did not collect these works just to satisfy feelings of exoticism or curiosity; he understood that Asian art was a manifestation of a long history with a strong identity. How did Freer, who visited various Asian nations to appreciate such a heritage, perceive the screening, inordinate trade, and subsequent scattering of these works? Freer, fortunately, found great success. His mission was to create a collection of such quality and abundance that it would allow Asian art to be understood systematically; one that would not suffer another schism and that would be preserved for generations to come. He accomplished the mission with his own hands: he invested his passion and personal funds to create the collection. He believed that the scattering of artworks due to political and economic pressures must not occur again, no matter the hardships faced. Such conviction from Freer brought about a rare treatment of these pieces as closely guarded secrets. The orders to not sell or lend the collection’s pieces continue today and contribute to the gallery’s unique reason for existing.1

160  Mitsuteru Narayama This chapter uses the Freer Gallery of Art as an example to depict the historical background of the collection of Asian art works in various places from the late 19th century to the beginning of the 20th century.

2 Japonism and the Freer Gallery of Art’s Asian art collection The collection of works in the Freer Gallery of Art includes roughly 15,000 pieces;2 however, the Charles Lang Freer collection, which forms the nucleus of the gallery, is dedicated to Asian art. It comprises Indian, Chinese, and Japanese works and its quality rivals that of the renowned Museum of Fine Arts in Boston. As previously mentioned, the close-guarded nature of the collection is noteworthy. The following is a presentation of exemplary works as expansive as these pages allow. Figure 7.1 is an extremely valuable piece in the history of Chinese Buddhism. It is a relief that adorned the walls of the Southern Xiangtangshan Caves, excavated in what is now Handan, Hebei at the time of the Northern Qi Dynasty during the latter half of the 6th century. The reliefs of the Xiangtangshan demonstrate the intermediary style in the transition from the previous Northern Wei style to Sui style and had already attracted the attention of researchers of Buddhist art since the onset of the 20th century. This valuable piece was victim to the whims of modern history and was torn brazenly from the wall where it was first produced. It now adorns the walls of the Freer Gallery in the United States. Figure 7.2 is also an exceedingly valuable piece of Chinese Buddhist history. The materials utilised in the piece are rare and most of it is cast from hemp and lacquer. This technique is thought to be invented by the Chinese; however, there are presently no other remarkable pieces that use this technique. Excluding this piece, there are only a few pieces extant in Japan’s Nara region that date back to the 8th century. Hence, this piece is a priceless research sample for studies of production techniques utilised for depictions of the Buddha.

Figure 7.1 Gathering of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.: Purchase – Charles Lang Freer Endowment, F1921.1.

Globalisation and East Asian art collections  161 Figure 7.3 is an exemplary piece of the Freer Gallery of Art’s Japanese collection: a folding screen created by Tawaraya Sotatsu, a painter from the first half of the 17th century during the Edo period; some say the piece would undoubtedly have been a national treasure if it had remained in Japan.

Figure 7.2 Historical Buddha. Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.: Purchase – Charles Lang Freer Endowment, F1944.46.

Figure 7.3 Waves at Matsushima. Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.: Gift of Charles Lang Freer, F1906.231.

162  Mitsuteru Narayama Many connoisseurs of Japanese fine art are struck by the bold abstraction of the roiling waves and dunes and novel aesthetic sense that eschews convention. It is said that Freer purchased this piece from Japanese art dealer Bunshichi Kobayashi in 1906 for $5,000.3 There is nary a Japanese person who does not know of the exploits of 19th-century Edo painter Katsushika Hokusai. Figure 7.4 is his painting Raijinzu (Image of the Thunder God), which he painted at the age of 88. It is a bold composition that cleverly employs the power of negative space and a coiling blackness. It is a magnificent piece and is a product of the maturation of Hokusai’s state of mind in the final years of his life. While he is a famous painter among the Japanese, there are few outstanding examples of his paintings in Japan. As the Freer Gallery of Art’s collection cannot be removed from the premises, one must go to the United States to witness it first-hand. The following is a look at what sparked Freer’s interest in and collection of Asian art. After Freer moved from his birthplace of New York to Detroit, he saw a business opportunity in the rapidly expanding railroad industry and made a fortune in freight car manufacturing. Many major industrialists in late-19th century American society, such as Carnegie or Rockefeller, often used the wealth they had amassed for cultural programs as contributions to society. Such great men were collectors and connoisseurs of the arts, and were strongly affected by a sense of Japonism at the time, as Freer was. Not long after Freer began collecting works of art, he was drawn to the works of impressionist painter James McNeill Whistler. Although Whistler was based in the United Kingdom, Freer was influenced by his admiration of Japonism and began purchasing Japanese works of art from around 1890 onward. Figure 7.5 is a clear demonstration of the Japonism that Whistler and Freer admired. This work was painted in the latter half of the 19th century by Whistler. A Western woman (according to Annotation 4, the woman is confirmed to be French) robed in a beautiful Japanese kimono stands in front of a folding screen, holding a fan. This piece, titled The Princess from the Land of Porcelain, is the epitome of the Japonism that was popular in Europe during that time. It is said that this work was displayed in the dining room called The Peacock Room in the mansion of an affluent Englishman and, as in Figure 7.6, has been relocated to the Freer Gallery of Art. What is of note, however, is that the many pieces of Chinese-made chinaware are in this room with the painting. In late-19th century Europe, there was no clear distinction between Japonism and Chinoiserie, and these pieces were included in efforts to satisfy feelings of curiosity and xenophilic senses of exoticism.

Globalisation and East Asian art collections  163

Figure 7.4 T hunder God. Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.: Gift of Charles Lang Freer, F1900.47.

164  Mitsuteru Narayama

Figure 7.5 The Princess from the Land of Porcelain. Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.: Gift of Charles Lang Freer, F1903.91a-b.

3 Scattering of Asian art Freer possessed an intense interest in Japanese art; however, Ernest Francisco Fenollosa (1853–1908) would steer his collection in a new direction. The 1900s saw the deepening of the friendship between Freer and Fenollosa, who had already left the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston. Fenollosa pointed out that much of Japanese art had been influenced by China and that Japanese Buddhist traditions had been influenced by India, which piqued Freer’s interest in investigating the roots of Japanese art. Freer visited Asia

Globalisation and East Asian art collections  165

Figure 7.6 The Peacock Room. Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.: Gift of Charles Lang Freer, F1904.61.

four times from 1895 to 1919, around the same time that he developed his relationship with Fenollosa. It is believed that what he saw during his time in China particularly drove him to establish the prohibition of outflow of pieces from his collection. As mentioned previously, various nations in Asia were swallowed by the maelstrom of the advancement of major Western powers, such as the United Kingdom and France, and the complex political and economic climate born from this advancement led to the scattering of works of art across many nations. Having lost the clout it had gained through dominating Asia with an overwhelmingly influential army, the Qing Dynasty at the time was virtually economically bankrupt, unable to deal with mountains of domestic and foreign issues. Regardless, the large daily expenses of the royal palace where the emperor lived remained unchanged, and the treasures handed down from dynasty to dynasty in the Forbidden City began to slowly leak out of the country toward the end of the 19th century in order to cover these costs. The leakage of many of the artefacts was not due to them being stolen; rather, they were auctioned off or offered as collateral in loans from banks based in the United Kingdom to make up for the daily expenses of the Imperial family and government officials. Following the Qing Dynasty’s collapse in 1911, in particular, many high-ranking bureaucrats and revolutionaries thought it would be advisable for them to sell their ancestral treasures to foreigners. These treasures were even out on display in flea markets and bazaars in Beijing.

166  Mitsuteru Narayama This is exactly when Freer made his way to China. Unexpectedly blessed by the domestic chaos in the country, Freer purchased pieces of art for a ‘fair’ price at the time. However, he was not completely drunk on the self-satisfaction of completing his collection. He must have felt joy as well as an increasing sense of shame, the more he became privy to the value of the Chinese artefacts he had collected, the very same works that were the heart of Asian art. Art is a tangible form of a nation’s tradition and identity that has been cultivated over eons. It is a form of respect towards one’s ethnic ancestry. This was something that he lacked, being from the United States, which was still in a nascent state as an emerging nation. Since the 19th century, Westerners have attributed the stigma of backwardness to non-Western civilisations. Japonism and Chinoiserie are simply lenses through which to view the unfamiliar. They are concepts to satisfy feelings of exoticism and are wholly different from a genuine understanding and respect for Asian culture. The story related to Figure 7.5 states that plainly. Whistler painted the daughter of a wealthy Frenchman at the patron’s behest, but her father, in his rage, refused to accept the completed painting.4 This was because he could not accept the image of his daughter wearing clothing from a backward foreign nation. In other words, Asian culture was a symbol of backwardness. However, Freer did not think of Asian culture as such. Asian works of art were products of a long history and a strong identity. He respected works with a different sense of values from the West and travelled to various nations of Asia in order to gain an understanding of its cultures. How did such a man perceive the inordinate trade of such works between dealers and collectors? The following is a presentation of an affront to cultural heritage that happened during his time. The Longmen Cave Temples are situated at the outskirts of Luoyang in China’s Henan province and are registered as a World Heritage Site. Figure 7.7 is one of these temples and is a photograph from the year 1904 of the inside of Binyangzhongdong, which is thought to have been excavated at the beginning of the 6th century. When Freer visited this area, the second image of the bodhisattva from the right was in this state; however, currently the head is no longer on the wall. It has been torn from the wall and is in possession of the Osaka City Museum of Fine Arts in Japan (Figure 7.8). According to reports of the inordinate trade of works to Freer by Langdon Warner, who had been backed by the very same man, a European dealer sent a marked photo album of Longmen to an agent in China. Bringing along a local stonemason, they extracted the collector’s desired item. Warner expressed his misgivings, saying he suffered from intolerable pangs of conscience.5 Freer also felt shame for his past involvement in such dealings. This was a destruction of Asian identity that was meant to be treated with respect.

Globalisation and East Asian art collections  167

Figure 7.7 The inside of Binyangzhongdong in 1904, Bessatsu Taiyō Okakura Tenshin, Heibonsha, 2019, p. 27. (Taiyo Okakura Tenshin-The Master of Modern Art, Heibonsha).

4 Donation of the collection and the rules In this section, I would like to explain Freer’s mission and conclude the essay. Freer was witness to the disorderly trade and scattering of artworks. He, fortunately, found great success in business. His mission was to create a collection of such quality and abundance that it would allow Asian art to be understood systematically; one that would not suffer another schism and that would be preserved for generations to come. To accomplish his mission, he invested his private funds and travelled the continent of Asia, collecting pieces of art with fervour. The ideology of the Freer Gallery of Art is that ‘an unexpected scattering of artworks due to political and economic pressures must not occur again no matter the hardships faced’. He donated his collection to the Smithsonian Institute in 1906 before his death. As is widely known, he imposed two restrictions when making this donation: that the collection must not be traded off nor lent to other galleries. Thus, Washington D.C.’s closely guarded collection of Asian artworks was created. Many people must think the gallery to be outmoded

168 Mitsuteru Narayama

Figure 7.8 T he head of bodhisattva from Binyangzhongdong (Masterpieces from the Osaka Municipal Museum of Art, Naniwa Printing, 1986, Plate 184).

and insular upon hearing that none of the works are to be lent to other facilities, or quite possibly that Charles Lang Freer was a stingy upstart of a man. However, such an ‘insular’ and ‘outmoded’ ideology is the pride and raison d’être of the Freer Gallery of Art, which aims to reconstruct Asian art and Asian identity. Numerous pieces of Asian art have been scattered across the four corners of the world by political trifles. I wish nothing more than for people to remember the American who collected Asian fine art in an effort to protect Asian dignity, not only as an exotic appreciation, but also out of respect.

Notes 1 The following were referenced in regard to the details of Charles Lang Freer’s collection of art and the Freer Gallery of Art: Freer Museum (ed.) Freer Museum, Kodansha, 1971, Yoshiaki Shimizu ‘Charles. L. Freer (1854–1919) and Freer Museum-as an Example of Japanese Art Collection in the US’,

Globalisation and East Asian art collections 169

2 3 4 5

International Research Center for Japanese Studies (eds.), 51st Nichibunken Forum, 1994, Warren I. Cohen (ed.), Kazuho Kawashima (trans.), East Asian Art and American Culture, Skydoor, 1999, Yuriko Kuchiki, Tōyō no shihō o ekai ni utta bijutsushō: House of Yamanaka, Shinchosha, 2013, Bessatsu Taiyō Freer Museum, Heibonsha, 2019. From a collections search ‘Open F|S| Collections’ of the Freer Gallery of Art website. https://www.freersackler.si.edu/collections/ Charles L. Freer, In Favour of B. Kobayashi, Paid October 20, 1906, Charles Lang Freer papers (FGA), Freer Sackler Archives, Freer Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C. “Open F|S| Collections” https://www.freersackler.si.edu/object/F1903.91a-b/ Warner to Freer, July 13, 1913, Charles Lang Freer papers (FGA), Freer Sackler Archives, Freer Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.

8 Survey trips to China by Meiji era Japanese art historians and the development of Buddhist Art History in Japan – through the example of the Shaka triad image in Horyuji Suijun RA In the period shortly after the Meiji Restoration (1868), Japan was going through rapid changes as it struggled to reinvent itself as a modern nation whilst maintaining its cultural identity as an Asian nation. The designation of cultural properties and the development of government policies to protect them were considered important steps in this process. Studies of Buddhist art history in Japan started almost as the direct result of the development of cultural property policies during this time. This chapter will take a look into the burgeoning phase of Buddhist art history in Japan, and the long-lasting impact that the studies during this time had on later academic developments, through the example of how academic discussions on the famous gilt bronze Shaka triad image of Horyuji in Nara developed over time. More specifically, the chapter will focus on how Meiji (­1868–1912) studies on the Shaka triad evolved, first through its recognition as a cultural property, and then through the physical evidences of Buddhist artworks in China, provided by the numerous expeditions conducted by Japanese scholars at the time. The chapter will discuss these points in the following order. The first section will cover the basic historical facts on Horyuji and the Shaka triad image. The second section will examine the development of Japanese cultural property policies during the Meiji era and how they encouraged academic interest in the artworks of Horyuji. Thirdly, the chapter will explain how the newly ignited interests in the stylistic origins of Japanese Buddhist art prompted a flurry of Japanese expeditions to China and Central Asia, and how the fruits of these expeditions contributed directly to the development of academic discussions on the Japanese ‘Tori style’ Buddhist images represented by the Shaka triad. In the concluding section, the chapter will go over the direction taken by the more recent studies, and attempt to summarize and explain why the academic discussions evolved in the way they did.

Survey trips to China by Meiji era  171

I  Horyuji and the Shaka triad Horyuji is one of the oldest temples in Japan, both according to historical records and in terms of existing and functioning temple facilities. Before discussing how its cultural value was reevaluated after the Meiji era, this section will provide an overview of the temple and the Shaka triad. The founding of Horyuji After Buddhism itself reached Japan in the middle of the 5th century via the Korean peninsula, Emperor Kinmei (reign 539–71 CE) issued an imperial decree in 594 CE promoting Buddhism. Shortly after, noblemen began to build temples for the sovereign and their own families. It was during such times that Prince Shōtoku (Shōtoku Taishi, 574–622 CE) and his family built Ikarugadera in Ikaruga, which later became known as Horyuji. Ikaruga is in the present Nara prefecture and is located to the northwest of Asuka, where the capital was at the time (Map 8.1). Prince Shōtoku had built the family palace there, which he moved into in 605 CE, and thus he most likely built the family temple, Ikarugadera, around the same time.

Map 8.1  Location of Ikaruga. Map data © 2019 Google, SK Telecom Imagery © 2019 TerraMetrics. Google Maps/Google and the Google logo are ­registered trademarks of Google LLC.

172  Suijun RA Although the specific circumstances under which the temple was founded is unknown, the name first appears in Nihonshoki (the chronicles of Japan, compiled in 720 CE) under the entry of the year 606, and it was after the early 8th century that the temple began to be called Horyuji, as it is today. Presently, scholars agree that the temple was built sometime during the early 7th century, before the prince passed away in 622 CE. Note: The international boundaries, coastlines, denominations, and other information shown in any map in this work do not necessarily imply any judgement concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such information. Overview of the Horyuji Western Complex and the Shaka triad Horyuji presently spreads over a vast temple ground covering 187,000 square kilometers and houses two complexes, the west and the east. Including some of the oldest wooden structures in the world, its architectures were listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1997. The Shaka triad is located in the Western Complex, which is the main quarters of the temple (Map 8.2). The south-facing Western Complex consists of a five-tiered Pagoda, Main Hall, Lecture Hall, and the corridors. The Pagoda and the Main Hall are enclosed by a corridor that opens in a gate on the south side and connects to the Lecture Hall on the north. The Shaka triad is located in the center of the dais in the Main Hall as the main object of veneration for the entire temple.

Map 8.2  Map of Horyuji Temple Grounds. Redrawn by the author, based on ­‘Horyuji garan haichi zu’ on the first pages of Katsuaki Ohashi [ed] Horyuji ­bijutsu ronsou no shiten, Tokyo: Kabushikigaisha Gurafu sha, 1998.

Survey trips to China by Meiji era  173 The walls of the hall were originally decorated with brilliantly colored murals painted in the late 7th century and were of great value, in that it not only showed Chinese influence but also the Indian, Central Asian, and Persian influences that travelled through the Silk Road. Unfortunately, the original murals of the Main Hall were damaged severely in a fire in 1949 while the Main Hall was being dismantled for repair, and the blackened murals and the charred pillars are currently preserved in a special warehouse behind the temple Treasure Hall. The Shaka triad sits in the center of the dais (Figure 8.1) and is placed on top of two tiered, square-shaped pedestals. The triad consists of Shaka sitting in the middle, with two bodhisattvas standing on either side. The three images share a single large lotus-shaped halo. Shaka shapes the mudra bestowing fearlessness with his right hand and the sword mudra with the

Figure 8.1  Shaka triad in the Main Hall of Horyuji’s Western Complex. Seventh century. Nara. Courtesy of Tasaburo Yoneda. After Nara rokudaiji taikan kankokai [ed] Nara rokudaiji taikan dai 2 kan, Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1968, Plate 2.

174  Suijun RA left; he sits in the meditation pose on top of a square pedestal, the surface of which is draped with his skirt. He has an elongated face with almond shaped eyes and both ends of his lips are turned slightly upwards, as if he is smiling. The bodhisattvas are fairly identical, both wearing a large crown with three peaks on the head, with a lotus petal shaped halo behind the head. Both stand on top of a lotus pedestal, holding a jewel in each hand, the left in front of the stomach and the right in front of the chest. ‘Heavenly garment (ten’i)’ or a long scarf covers both shoulders, crosses beneath the knees, is slung over the elbows, and then falls onto the lotus pedestal, slightly spreading outwards while forming drapes. Ribbons on both sides of the crown fall onto his shoulders in the same manner and locks of hair flow along his upper arms, forming tight curls. Such details emphasize the overall symmetrical design of the triad. The Shaka triad has an inscription on the back of the halo, which states that the image was completed in 623 CE. According to the inscription, Prince Shōtoku’s mother Anahobe no hashihito kogo passed away in 621 CE and a year later in 622 CE, the Prince and his consort Kashiwade hime fell ill. Thus, the statue was originally issued to wish for recovery from illness and longevity. However, because the couple passed away the same year, the triad was completed as an image to honor the deceased. The inscription also mentions the name of the artisan who created the statue, Shiba no kura tsukuri no obito tori busshi. The inscription of the Shaka triad is believed to be authentic and, therefore, the statues were most likely completed in 623 CE. Although there actually is no contemporary record providing information on the original location of the triad, judging from the oldest mention of its location in the Horyuji engi compiled in 747 CE and how it lists the triad at the top of all Buddhist images in the temple, it is clear that the triad was venerated in the Main Hall by 747 CE. The fire of 670 CE and the academic debate over the date of the Western Complex Although it may not have direct effect in considering the Shaka triad, an important point in considering the dates of the artworks remaining in the Western Complex of Horyuji is the fact that this is not the original complex from the time of foundation, but was rebuilt sometime between 670 CE and the early 8th century. The imperial record of history, Nihon shoki, states that the temple was burnt to the ground on the night of April 7th, 670 CE, ‘without leaving behind a single building’. This article led to the historian Kurokawa Mayori proposing in 1890 that the present day Horyuji was rebuilt and completed in 711 CE, after the fire. Kurokawa’s suggestion then started a debate known as the ‘Horyuji saiken hi-saiken ronsou’ (debate over whether Horyuji was rebuilt or not) that lasted for almost half a century, over whether

Survey trips to China by Meiji era  175 the buildings of the current Western Complex are the original buildings from when the temple was built. This debate is worth mentioning in relation to the development of art history in Japan (which the chapter will discuss in the next section), in that it is a phenomenon that represents the state of studies surrounding cultural property at the time. This is to say, the opposition was mainly between historians who emphasized the importance of written history, and scholars in the emerging fields of art and architectural history, who were building their studies on data accumulated through surveys issued by the government since the late 19th century to establish the foundation of cultural property policies in Japan.1 Thus, in a way the debate represented the academic trend of the time when art historians were just beginning to gain momentum and, for this reason, defended their views with much passion. However, ironically, an excavation conducted in 1939 provided material evidence that proved historians to be right, for it revealed remains of a fullfledged temple complex to the southeast of the current Western Complex, that was not only older, but that also had clear traces of having survived a fire. This complex, known as the Wakakusa Complex, followed a layout where the Pagoda and the Main Hall lined up in the south to north direction layout, which is older in style than that of the Western Complex. 2 The size of the Pagoda and the Main Hall were roughly the same as the present buildings and, interestingly, the line connecting the center of the buildings tilted 20 degrees to the west compared to the buildings in the present day Horyuji grounds. Furthermore, the rooftiles found from the site showed evidence of fire. Thus, Ishida Mosaku who lead the excavation argued that the Wakakusa and the Western Complex could not have existed at the same time, considering the significant difference in the angle in which the buildings were lined up and, moreover, if one were to fully restore the temple grounds of the Wakakusa Complex, it would overlap with the grounds of the Western Complex. Thus, Ishida concluded that the temple did burn to the ground in 670 CE as stated in Nihon Shoki and then was rebuilt in the present location.3 As for the specific construction date of the Main Hall where the Shaka triad is located, it is believed to have been built sometime between the 680s and 690s, according to an passage in the Horyuji engi stating that the corridors and the guardians placed in the corridor gate were completed in 711 CE, and studies on the patterns in the textiles depicted in the Main Hall murals.4 Thus, as clearly stated in the inscription, the Shaka triad was completed in 623 CE to honor Prince Shōtoku and his family. Then it became the main object of veneration in Horyuji around the end of the 7th century when the present Main Hall was built, and remained so till the present day. As explained in this section, the historical significance of Horyuji and the Shaka triad cannot be disputed. However, academic interest in Horyuji grew even more rapidly after the end of the 19th century, together with the development of Japanese cultural properties policies.

176  Suijun RA

II Japan’s cultural property policies during the Meiji era and designation of Horyuji artworks as a National Treasure The organization of Japanese cultural properties policy from the end of 19th century to the beginning of 20th century stimulated academic interest in the temple and its artworks especially in the emerging field of art history. Eventually, this interest was directed towards the stylistic origin of Buddhist artworks in Japan. To follow this development, this section will begin by explaining how cultural properties policies were first placed in Japan. “Shinbutsu bunri rei” and the crisis of cultural property After the Meiji government defeated and took over the Edo Shogunate in 1868, it administered a new policy called ‘Shinbutsu bunri rei’ (edict on the separation of Shinto and Buddhism), promoting the separation of Buddhism and Shinto, which worships indigenous Japanese deities. Before Meiji, in the context of a tradition known as shinbutsu shūgō or ‘the unity of spirits and buddhas’, it was common practice in Japan to redefine and see the indigenous deities as the local manifestations of the universal deities of Buddhist religion. This practice began to take place as early as the 8th century and manifested itself in forms such as jingūji, where Buddhist temples were built adjacent to Shinto shrines and the monks read sutras and prayed in front of Shinto deities. This became so common that almost all Shinto shrines had their own Buddhist temple. Therefore, at the time of the Meiji Restoration, temple-shrine complexes existed throughout Japan. The aim of ‘Shinbutsu bunri rei’ was to defy the Edo Shogunate policy of making Buddhism the national religion and to establish Shinto as the national religion. Thus, as part of this policy, the government banned shinbutsu shūgō, and attempted to get rid of any Buddhist influence in Shinto shrines. This led to the closure and/or merger of many temples and, unfortunately, to an unexpected movement where locals destroyed Buddhist ­images and ritual objects in the temples. This anti-Buddhist movement at the beginning of Meiji resulted in the persecution and destruction of Buddhist temples and their cultural properties, and is known as haibutsu kishaku (movement to abolish Buddhism). Perhaps the most well-known example of haibutsu kishaku is the Kofukuji temple in Nara, which was one of the largest and the oldest temples dating back to the early 8th century, built as the family temple of the Fujiwara clan. In Kofukuji, the head priest was a member of an aristocratic family and in order to show allegiance to the Meiji government and the emperor, he renounced Buddhism and became a Shinto Priest for the adjoined Kasuga Shrine. Many Kofukuji monks followed his example and, as the result, one of the largest temples in Nara was deserted in no time, which led to destruction and outflow of many cultural properties.

Survey trips to China by Meiji era  177 Establishment of policies for protecting cultural property Meanwhile, being aware of the chaos and the precarious state that the cultural properties were in at the time, the government began to take measures to seek out the relics in need of protection. In 1871, it announced the ‘Koki kyūbutsu hozon kata’ (edict for the preservation of antiquities and old items), and ordered surveys of cultural properties owned by temples and shrines. This movement to re-acknowledge the value of Buddhist Art took place partially in response to the Meiji tendency for enlightenment and westernization. Among those who contributed the most to the execution of these measures were the American scholar Earnest Fenollosa and his student Okakura Kakuzō (Tenshin). The two met while Okakura was enrolled in Tokyo University, where Fenollosa arrived in 1878 to teach. The government surveys were in full swing by 1883–4, and Fenollosa and Tenshin participated in these surveys, which were issued by the Kunaishō (­ Imperial Household Agency) and Monbushō (Ministry of Education). Although surveys of cultural properties had been conducted prior to this, 5 the newly issued surveys were fundamentally different in that they were conducted with the goal of building the foundation for establishing a bureau that would specialize in art. In 1888, the Rinji zenkoku homotsu torishirabe kyoku (Bureau for Provisional Inspection of National Treasures) was established within the Imperial Household Agency, and the ongoing temple and shrine surveys increased in number and became more systematized. Because the bureau was located within the Imperial Museum, the surveys were supervised by Kuki Ryuichi (1852–1931), who was the director of the Imperial Museum, and Okakura, who was the head of the Art Department in the same museum (he was also the president of the Tokyo Fine Arts School at the time). The surveys led by the two under the bureau later bore fruit in the form of the first officially accepted version of Japanese art history, Histoire de l’Art du Japon.6 It is also to be noted that in these surveys, artworks were separated into ten levels. This was the beginning of the current cultural property designation system.7 The law and the system for the protection of cultural properties were finally completed in 1896 and 1897, when the Koshaji hozonkai (Committee for Preservation of Old Temples and Shrines) was established and the Koshaji hozonho (Law for the Preservation of Old Temples and Shrines) was decreed. As the result of this development, in Horyuji, the Shaka triad and Bhaiṣajyaguru statues in the Main Hall were designated as National Treasures, and the Main Hall, the five-tiered Pagoda, Middle Gate, and the corridors as Specially Protected Architecture. The number of paintings, sculptures, art, and craft works surveyed under the leadership of Imperial Household Agency in the Provisional Inspection of National Treasures from 1888 to 1898 had reached a total of 215,091.8 It was through the

178  Suijun RA accumulation of vast knowledge and experience gained from these surveys, and the establishment of the system for recognizing the value of and protecting the cultural properties, that the academic discipline of art history began to take form in Japan. Needless to say, this also resulted in a surge of academic interest in the architecture and artworks in Horyuji, the development of which will be discussed in the next section.

III The development of theories on the origin of the Shaka triad – Japanese surveys in China and its effect The newly developed interest in the artworks of Horyuji led to the formation of some exciting academic insights on the Shaka triad of the Main Hall. This section will introduce the emergence of discussions on the origin of the Shaka triad, and how they developed together with the first-hand information gained through academic surveys of Chinese archaeological sites conducted by Japanese scholars. Creator of the Shaka triad and ‘Tori style’ Buddhist images As the chapter mentioned earlier, the inscription on the back of the Shaka triad states that the statue was created for Prince Shōtoku and his wife in 623 CE, and that it was crafted by the artisan Shiba no Kura Tsukuri no Obito Tori. This name bears information of special importance in considering the style and the origin of the Shaka triad. To examine the name in parts, the first part, ‘Shiba’, is a Chinese family name. The second part, ‘Kura Tsukuri’ means the maker (tsukuri) of saddles (kura); the third part ‘Obito’ means the head or the leader; and the fourth part, ‘Tori’, is the given name. Thus, in its entirety, the name reads ‘Tori the head of saddle makers of the Shiba clan.’ The phrase ‘kura tsukuri’ or saddle maker implies that there were members in the Shiba clan in Japan that had ability to cast metal objects to create the different parts of the saddle, and therefore possessed the skills to create a variety of metal objects, which eventually covered Buddhist images such as the Shaka triad. Another important fact in considering the stylistic origin of the Shaka triad is that Tori’s name appears in connection to the creation of another Buddhist image. Nihon shoki records that ‘Kuratsukuri no Tori’ started the construction of a three yard, six foot bronze Buddha for the temple Gangoji in 605 CE and completed it in 606 CE. Gangoji was the first full-fledged temple to be built by the government, and in order to prepare for the establishment of the temple, the then minister Sogano Umako sent an envoy to Baekje, asking them to send over monks, temple architects, an expert on the finial (the metal part on the top) of the pagoda, an expert on roof tiles, and sarira (most likely to be buried under the pagoda). The actual year of completion is believed to be 609 CE, as stated in the inscription on the halo of this Buddha recorded in Gangoji engi (History on the Origin of Gangoji).

Survey trips to China by Meiji era  179 In any case, the image was created in the beginning of the 7th century, before the Horyuji Shaka triad was created. The Buddha image of Gangoji remains today in the same spot where it was created, which was formerly the location of one of the temple’s Main Halls. The statue was damaged severely in a fire in 1196 and the original parts can only be seen in the upper part of the head – including the eyes, nose, and the forehead – the hairline and some of the curls, and the thumb and the middle finger of the right hand. However, the remaining parts and the overall balance of the repaired body is strikingly similar to the central figure of the Shaka triad, with its elongated face, almond-shaped eyes, stylized draping of the robe, and strict sense of symmetry. Nihon shoki also mentions that in creating the Gangoji Buddha, Tori presented a model on which the Buddha was based. This suggests that Tori had considerable influence over the style in which the Buddha should be made and that the style possibly came from China, where his family originated from. Presently, it is believed that Tori and artisans in his circle actively created Buddhist images around the Soga clan and Prince Shōtoku, for there are several other bronze images of similar style in Horyuji.9 The style seen in these statues together are known as the ‘Tori style’. Kurokawa Mayori and the beginning of studies on the origin of the Tori style Tori and his achievements are recorded in historical documents such as the ones mentioned above, and had been known for a while. However, with rising interest in the artworks of Horyuji, scholars began to take more notice of these facts and to pursue the origin of the ‘Tori style’ represented in the Shaka triad, with more enthusiasm and precision. Kurokawa Mayori was one of the first scholars to seriously consider the origin of the Tori style and the route through which it traveled. In his 1901 paper ‘Kodai butsuzou no setsu’ (a theory on ancient Buddhist sculptures)10, he introduced an article from the manuscript, Fuso Ryakki that mentions the name of the Chinese man, Shiba Tatsuto. Tatsuto was Tori’s grandfather, who arrived in Japan in 522 CE. It also mentions that Tatsuto built a small shrine where he venerated a deity, which was rumored to be ‘a deity from China’. China during the early 6th century when Tatsuto arrived in Japan was divided into the north and the south kingdoms. The north was ruled by Northern Wei, a nation founded by the Tuoba tribe with nomadic roots. Meanwhile, the south was ruled by a succession of Han Chinese dynasties and in 522 CE, it was ruled by the Liang dynasty. Taking these facts into account, because Fusoryakki refers to Shiba Tatsuto as ‘­Chinese’, Kurokawa  concluded that Shiba Tatsuto was a Chinese man from Liang, who brought over a Buddhist image from the same dynasty, and that the  very first ­Buddhist images in Japan must have taken after that

180  Suijun RA of China’s  Liang  dynasty. Thus, although Kurokawa’s theory was based purely on written evidence, he was probably the first to point out the possibility that the Tori style was directly influenced by the contemporary ­Chinese style, especially that of the southern Liang dynasty. Okakura’s trip to China and his views on the origin of the Tori style One of the first individuals to consider the origin of the Tori style based on onsite observation of Chinese artworks was Okakura Kakuzō himself. Through his government-issued surveys in Nara, Okakura had accumulated vast knowledge on the earliest Buddhist images in Japan and had become acutely aware of the need to examine artworks remaining in Asia to gain a deeper understanding of the origin of Japanese artworks. Additionally, in 1891, the afore-mentioned director of the Imperial Museum, Kuki, decided that the museum should edit a volume on Japanese art history.11 At the time, Okakura had just begun to teach the subject at the Tokyo Fine Arts School and thus, was still developing his ideas on the framework of Japanese art history. The plan for the publication of an o ­ fficial volume on Japanese art history had great meaning to Okakura, for he considered establishment of the field as a crucial part of art/cultural policies in Meiji Japan. The volume was to be written with cooperation from historians such as Kurokawa and Kosugi Onson. In his note planning for the volume, Okakura provided the table of contents, where he divided the book into 12 chapters, each assigned to an era with distinct stylistic characteristic. His notes for the chapter on Tenji era (668–71 CE) show that he planned to start the chapter with discussion on ancient Indian Buddhist images, Gandharan Buddhist images, and the routes connecting China, India, and Central Asia, and only then discuss the actual Japanese artworks and their characteristics.12 It is clear from the plan that he saw interactions with neighboring countries as the crucial element for the evolution of Japanese art. Thus, in order to prepare for the volume, he needed to examine the actual artworks in China, and so, in July of 1893, he set off on a survey trip to China under orders from the Imperial Household Agency, together with his student and photographer, Hayasaki Kokichi. One of the greatest discoveries for Okakura during the trip was the Longmen Grottoes in the suburbs of Luoyang, Henan province. All Okakura knew about the site prior to his visit was that ‘there are some stone Buddhas in Longmen’. Thus, great was his excitement upon reaching the site. In the September 19th entry of his diary, he recalls he ‘cried out in joy’ as ‘splendid sight with countless Buddhas’ suddenly unfolded before his eyes.13 Especially interesting is his observation on the Buddha in the famous Binyang zhongdong cave (Figure 8.2). He describes that the image ‘was clearly in a classical style not in the least different from those by Tori the

Survey trips to China by Meiji era  181

Figure 8.2  B  uddha and attendants in the Binyangzhongdong. Sixth century. Longmen Caves. After Hiroshi Sofugawa, Ken Okada [ed] Sekai bijutsu daizenshu toyohen dai3kan sangoku nanbokucho 3, Tokyo: Shogakukan, 2000, Plate 216.

maker  of  Buddhist images’, and that these images were most likely created during Northern Wei. He then goes on to describe the style as the ‘proper style of the Six Dynasties (Southern and Northern Dynasties)’.14 Although his description of the Binyang zhongdong image is quite brief, it is worth noting that he immediately recognized the images as those created in Northern Wei and was able to note their stylistic resemblance with Tori style images in Asuka. Thus, although Okakura did not elaborate much on the specific route through which the style reached Japan, he was the first to point out the stylistic similarity between Tori style images and artworks in China. Okakura’s Ideals of the East, published in 1903, shows the direct influence his expedition to China had on his views on the roots of the Tori style. The one exception to this is the colossal bronze of Ankoin, on the site of the Asuka temple, which history reports to have been cast in the fifteenth year of Suiko’s reign. Its proportions were too large to allow of its entering the door of that great temple, and this taxed the ingenuity of the sculptor Tori. … Luckily for us, the Horinji [should be Horyuji. Possibly a misprint] temple near Nara was built close to the residence of Prince Wumayado, and remains rich in the architectural and other art specimens of this period. In the Kondo, or the Golden Hall, is still

182  Suijun RA to be seen the Sakya trinity, cast by Tori, under the command of the prince. … In these statues we find the same Han type that we noticed in the rock-cut temples of Riumonsan [Longmen Grottoes] more than a century earlier.15 Furthermore, in a lecture titled ‘Shina no bijutsu’ (Art of China)16 that he gave after returning to Japan, he shared the impression he received from the trip: ‘All of our art seems to have come from China. There is nothing that did not come from China’. In addition to the many talks and reports Okakura gave and wrote after his trip, photographs taken by Hayasaka also caused a sensation and inspired many scholars to take interest in China and its artworks. They included architectural historians Ito Chuta and Sekino Tadashi; art historians Omura Seigai and Hirako Takurei; and the 22nd Abbot of the Nishi Honganji subsect of Jōdo Shinshū Buddhism, Otani Kozui. Ito Chuta’s survey trip and his views on the origin of the Tori style The first scholar to discuss the specific route through which the Tori style travelled was Ito Chuta, who was the professor of Architectural History at Tokyo University. Ito had been studying the origin of the architecture in Horyuji and, thus, it was his great wish to visit China and examine its Buddhist sites. This wish was realized in 1902, when he travelled through China on his way back from a trip to Europe. Ito also visited the Longmen Grottoes, but one of his greatest academic achievements from the trip was that he brought attention to the Yungang Grottoes in Datong, the construction of which also began during the Northern Wei period. Although the existence of the cave had been known for centuries, Ito was the first to encourage academic attention towards the grottoes. Ito mentions that he heard about the Grottoes for the first time from the governor of Datong, when he asked him if there were any remains from the Northern Wei period in the area. Having reached the site, he immediately recognized its importance.17 As his main interest was architecture, his reports on the caves focus on the architectural decorations and patterns. However, in studying the artistic styles of Longmen and Yungang both built during the Northern Wei reign, he recognized that the styles of Northern Wei could be divided into two periods. During the first period, the Tuoba clan that founded Northern Wei maintained its own customs and language, and its art ‘was mostly western style (Ghandaran style) with much visible inclination towards the Roman and Classic style’. The second period was after the Tuoba clan abolished its own customs and language to follow the Han Chinese language and practices, and the art during this time presented ‘in addition to the western and ­Roman classic style, some Han elements’.18 Ito’s view was that the artworks

Survey trips to China by Meiji era  183 in Yungang were representative of the first period and those in Longmen, the second. Ito then hypothesized that the style seen in the first period reached ­Koguryo first, then permeated throughout the Korean peninsula, and then to Japan. This is based on the fact that Koguryo had been sending almost yearly tributes to Northern Wei. It is to be noted that in contrast to Kurokawa, Ito suggests that the influence came through Korea, rather than directly from China. This view, that during the Asuka period a lot of the Chinese influence came through the Korean peninsula, has been supported by the majority of art historians to this day. Hirako Takurei’s survey trip and his view on the origin of the Tori style The next theoretical develpment came with studies by the art historian ­ irako Takurei. After graduating from the Tokyo Fine Arts School, he H published many papers on Buddhist art history before he passed away in 1911 at the age of 35. Hirako visited the Yungang and Longmen Grottoes in 1906 and, having focused more on the details of the Buddhist images than Ito who specialized in architectural history, concluded that the Tori style Buddhist images such as the one in the former Gangoji and Horyuji were created in the style of the Sinicized later Northern Wei style prevalent in the Longmen Grottoes, where the carving is shallower and more two dimensional, compared to the three-dimensional, round-bodied sculptures of Yungang. He also hypothesized that the style of the first official Buddhist image that arrived from Baekje in the mid 6th century was also similar to that of Longmen. This shows that he too supported the view that the Northern Wei style entered the Korean Peninsula and then reached Japan. Chronology of the development on theories on the origin of the Tori style As discussed in this section, the argument on the origin of the Tori style evolved hand in hand with the survey trips taken by Japanese scholars and the observations they made from the trips. To summarize the development in chronological order, although based purely on written evidences, historian Kurokawa Mayori was the first to address in detail the origin of the Tori style in his 1901 paper, where he proposed that the it was influenced directly by the style of Buddhist images created in the southern Chinese Liang dynasty. Then an academic turning point occurred in 1897 when Okakura Kakuzō visited Longmen and identified the style of the images in Binyang zhongdong cave as that of Northern Wei. Although Okakura did not discuss the exact route through which the Northern Wei style reached Japan, he noticed its similarities with Tori style, as is apparent in his Ideals of the East. Later in 1902, Ito Chuta

184  Suijun RA visited  Yungang and Longmen. His major accomplishments were that he discovered the academic significance of Yungang and that he noticed the shift in Northern Wei style from the earlier more Western (Gandharan) style such as the one seen in Yungang to the later more Sinicized style in Longmen. Ito concluded that the Tori style was closer to that in Yungang, which would have entered Japan through the Korean Peninsula. In 1906, Hirako Takurei visited Yungang and Longmen. Upon conducting a thorough comparison of the sculptures, he concluded that, rather than Yungang, the Tori style follows the Sinicized Northern Wei Style and suggested that the style entered Japan via the Korean Peninsula, most likely from the kingdom of Baekje. The discussion over the roots of the Tori style Buddhist images continued for a surprisingly long time, well into the 1980s. However, the mainstream view was more or less along the lines of what Hirako suggested: that the Tori style was influenced by the Sinicized Northern Dynasties’ style represented in Longmen. This chapter has presented how the recognition of the importance of Horyuji and its artworks stirred academic passion to discover their stylistic origin and how this pursuit led to a number of academic expeditions to China. The fruits of these expeditions had direct influence on the establishment of the mainstream view on the origin of the Tori style, as seen in works such as the Shaka triad. Next, in the conclusion, the chapter will take up the later developments of this discussion and consider why this discourse was so important for art historians in Japan for such a long time.

IV  Conclusion: the later developments – why not the south? The origins of the very first Buddhist images created in Japan remained an important issue for Japanese scholars, and the theory that considered Northern Wei to be its origin persisted as the mainstream view for over half a century. However, this view disregarded a simple and yet important point, which was: why not the south? Theoretically, southern Chinese style could have had influence on Japan through multiple channels. Firstly, it could have had direct influence through images brought to Japan by immigrants such as Shiba Tatsuto. Secondly, it could have reached Japan through the Northern Dynasties and then through the Korean peninsula. This is because although it is historically accurate to assume that the Northern Wei style such as that in Longmen was established as the result of the Sinicization of the Tuoba clan as Ito suggested, it is also possible that the Tuoba clan absorbed the Chinese influence from the Southern Dynasties ruled by the Chinese. Thirdly, the official arrival of Buddhism and Buddhist images in Japan was from Baekje. It was also from Baekje that the Japanese summoned the artisans they needed to build the very first full-fledged Buddhist temple complex, Gangoji. Baekje at the time was ruled by China’s Liang dynasty, which was one of the Southern Dynasties. Thus theoretically, it would be logical to assume

Survey trips to China by Meiji era  185 that the Buddhist artworks in the Southern Dynasties would have had both direct and indirect influence on Japanese artworks. However, interestingly, this rather simple but natural logic continued to be ignored or refuted by the advocates of the Northern Wei roots theory. This most likely has to do with the fact that no major artworks from the Southern Dynasties were known at the time and, as art history is based on the study of actual artworks, the attention of the scholars focused on the vast amount of material evidence from the Northern Dynasties. Upon careful comparison between the remaining Northern Wei images and Tori style images, scholars after Hirako such as Hamada Seiryo, Naito ­Toichiro, and Mizuno Seiichi all supported the view that Tori style works were based on the Sinicized Northern Wei style, such as that represented in Longmen. It was Yoshimura Rei who finally pointed out in the 1960s that the artworks in the Longmen Grottoes exhibited influence from the south. Based on this observation, he suggested that since the Buddhist images of the Southern Dynasties would have been considered stylistically the most advanced in China at the time, the artworks in Longmen were also based on the Liang Southern Dynasties’ style. He further argued that because Japan absorbed Buddhist culture from Baekje, which was under the rule of Liang, the common stylistic elements seen in the Longmen style and the Tori style was that of Liang.19 Much like the previous theories viewing the origin of the Tori style to be Northern China were supported by findings of pre-war academic surveys in Northern China, Yoshimura’s point was supported by later discoveries of artworks from the territories of the southern dynasty. These images were excavated from Sichuan province, which during the Southern and the Northern Dynasties period, was ruled by the south. The oldest of the images precedes the Sinicized images in Longmen and yet shares the same characteristics as the Tori style images (Figure 8.3). These discoveries paved the way for those like Yoshimura who hoped to consider the influence of the Southern dynasties, and this was the final major turn in theories regarding the origin of Tori style Buddhist images, which started at the beginning of the 20th century. Thus, most of the overview of Japanese Buddhist history published today recognizes the validity of both influences on the origin of the Tori style, the influence of the later Northern Wei style represented in Longmen and the influence of the Southern Dynasty Liang style that arrived either directly or through the Korean kingdom of Baekje. In hindsight, the view that the Southern Dynasties were more influential in establishing the style of Chinese Buddhist art in the 6th century and of a later period in Japan seems rather natural. However, because art history is based primarily on evidence presented by actual objects, scholars had no other choice but to rely on works remaining in the northern cave temples until works from the Southern Dynasties were discovered in Sichuan. This tendency was probably especially strong among early scholars, since the very discipline of art

186  Suijun RA

Figure 8.3  A mitabha image from Maoxian, Sichuan Province, dated 483 CE. Photograph by the author. Courtesy of Sichuan Museum, Chengdu, Sichuan, PRC.

history was new in Japan at that time and scholars were acutely aware of the fact that the uniqueness and the strength of their field was based on material evidence provided by actual artifacts. Furthermore, the excitement of standing before the caves of Longmen and Yungang and witnessing for the very first time the physical evidence that Japanese Buddhist art indeed had

Survey trips to China by Meiji era  187 its roots in China must have been great for the scholars. Perhaps an ember of this excitement did play a role in the reluctance among advocates of the Northern Dynasties roots theory to admit the influence of the Southern Dynasties. The debate over the origin of the Tori style represented in the Shaka triad started with the very beginning of Japanese policies on cultural property and developed hand-in-hand with the Japanese academic expeditions to China and the establishment of the discipline of art history itself in Japan. Thus, looking closely at its development over the years gives us an insight into how unique historical situations motivated scholars and played a role in establishing the influential academic arguments of the time.

Notes 1 This included scholars such as art historian Hirako Takurei, Sekino Tadashi and Adachi Yasushi. 2 The layout where the Pagoda and the Main Hall and the Lecture Hall are vertically lined up is known as the Shitennoji style, after the Shitennoji temple in Osaka. For detailed report on excavation, see Mosaku Ishida, ‘Horyuji wakakusagaranshi no hakkutsu ni tsuite’ [on excavation results from Horyuji’s Wakakusa complex], Kenchikushi, 1987, 2–3. 3 See Ishida, ‘Horyuji wakakusagaranshi no hakkutsu ni tsuite’, 1987. 4 Eizo Ota, ‘Horyuji hekiga no kinmon to sono nendai’ [on the patterns of textiles depicted in the Horyuji murals and their dating], in Bijutsukenkyujo [ed], Bijutsukenkyujo hokoku Horyuji kondo kenchiku oyobi hekiga no monnyo kenkyuu [report by research center of arts, study on the architecture of Horyuji’s Main Hall and the patterns in its murals], Tokyo: Bijutsukenkyujo, 1953. 5 Ninagawa Noritane had conducted surveys in Shosoin and, in 1879, the thenhead of the Printing Bureau in the Ministry of Finance, Tokuno Ryosuke, and Edoardo Chiossone had conducted a four-month survey on ancient shrines and temples. See Gen Nakamura [ed], Okakura Tenshin arubamu [Okakura Tenshin album]: 26. 6 The book was first published in 1900 for the Exposition Universelle de Paris, and later published in Japanese under the title Kohon teikoku nihon bijutsu ryakushi (manuscript of the abbreviated history of Japanese Art). 7 Doshin Sato, ‘Nihon bijutsu’ tanjo: kindai nihon no ‘kotoba’ to senryaku [the birth of Japanese art: ‘vocabulary’ and strategy of modern Japan]: 181. 8 Shigemi Inaga, ‘Nihon saihakken’ [rediscovery of Japan], in Ryo Furuta [ed], Bessatsu taiyo: Okakura Tenshin kindai bijutsu no shi [special edition of Taiyo: Okakura Tenshin, master of art in modern Japan]: 18. 9 Such as the bronze Shaka Buddha and attendant image with boshi year inscription in Horyuji, and bronze figurines of Maya and celestial beings in the Horyuji treasures housed in Tokyo National Museum. 10 Mayori Kurokawa, ‘Kodai butsuzo no setsu’ [a theory on ancient Buddhist sculptures], Kokka: 134. 11 Nagahiro Kinoshita, Okakura Tenshin: 167. 12 See Kinoshita, Okakura Tenshin: 171. 13 Kakuzō Okakura, ‘Shina ryoko nisshi’ [travelogues of China] in Kenjiro ­Kumamoto et al. [eds], Okakura tenshin zenshu 5 ryoko nikki, ryokonisshi [complete works of Okakura Tenshin vol. 5, diaries and travelogues]. 14 Okakura, ‘Shina ryoko nisshi’. 15 Kakuzō Okakura, Ideals of the East with Special Reference to Japan.

188  Suijun RA 16 Kakuzō Okakura, ‘Shina no bijutsu’ [art of China], Dainihon kyoikukai zasshi: 143. 17 Chuta Ito, ‘Shina ryoko dan sono ichi’ [travels through China 1], in Chuta Ito, Ito Chuta kenchiku bunken dai 5 kan kengaku ryokou [architecture related articles by Ito Chuta vol. 5, survey trips]. 18 Chuta Ito, ‘Shina sansei no sekkutsuji’ [cave temples in China’s Shanxi], Kokka: 198. 19 Rei Yoshimura, ‘Nanbokucho butsuzo yoshiki ron’ [study on the styles of ­Buddhist images during Southern and Northern Dynasties period], Kokka, 1983, 1066. Also by Yoshimura, ‘Torishiki butsuzo no genryu’ [the origin of Tori style Buddhist images], Museum: 345.

References Inaga, Shigemi, ‘Nihon saihakken’ [rediscovery of Japan], in Furuta, Ryo [ed], ­Bessatsu taiyo: Okakura Tenshin kindai bijutsu no shi [special edition of Taiyo: Okakura Tenshin, master of art in modern Japan], Tokyo: Heibonsha, 2013. Ishida, Mosaku, ‘Horyuji wakakusagaranshi no hakkutsu ni tsuite’ [on excavation results from Horyuji’s Wakakusa complex], Kenchikushi, 1987, 2–3. Ito, Chuta, ‘Shina ryoko dan sono ichi’ [travels through China 1], in Chuta Ito [ed], Ito Chuta kenchiku bunken dai 5 kan kengaku ryokou [architecture related articles by Ito Chuta vol. 5, survey trips], Tokyo: Ryuginsha, 1936. Ito, Chuta, ‘Shina sansei no sekkutsuji’ [cave temples in China’s Shanxi], Kokka, 1906, 198. Kinoshita, Nagahiro, Okakura Tenshin, Kyoto: Mineruba shobo, 2005. Kurokawa, Mayori, ‘Kodai butsuzo no setsu ’ [a theory on ancient Buddhist sculptures], Kokka, 1901, 134. Nakamura, Gen [ed], Okakura Tenshin arubamu [Okakura Tenshin album], ­Tokyo: Chuokoronbijutsushuppan, 2013. Okakura, Kakuzō, Ideals of the East with Special Reference to Japan, London: John Murray, Albmarle Street, 1905. Okakura, Kakuzō, ‘Shina no bijutsu ’ [art of China], Dainihon kyoikukai zasshi, 1894, 143. Okakura, Kakuzō, ‘Shina ryoko nisshi’ [travelogues of China] in Kumamoto, Kenjiro et al. [eds], Okakura tenshin zenshu 5 ryoko nikki, ryokonisshi [complete works of Okakura Tenshin vol. 5, diaries and travelogues], Tokyo: Heibonsha, 1979. Okakura, Kakuzō and Fukuchi, Mataichi, Kohon teikoku nihon bijutsu ryakushi (manuscript of the abbreviated history of Japanese Art), Tokyo: Ryubunkan ­Tosho Kabushiki Kaisha, 1916. Ota, Eizo, ‘Horyuji hekiga no kinmon to sono nendai’ [on the patterns of textiles depicted in the Horyuji murals and their dating], in Bijutsukenkyujo [ed], Bijutsukenkyujo hokoku Horyuji kondo kenchiku oyobi hekiga no monnyo kenkyuu [report by research center of arts, study on the architecture of Horyuji’s Main Hall and the patterns in its murals], Tokyo: Bijutsukenkyujo, 1953. Sato, Doshin, ‘Nihon bijutsu’ tanjo: kindai nihon no ‘kotoba’ to senryaku [the birth of Japanese art: ‘vocabulary’ and strategy of modern Japan], Tokyo: Kodansha, 1996. Yoshimura, Rei, ‘Nanbokucho butsuzo yoshiki ron’ [study on the styles of Buddhist images during Southern and Northern Dynasties period], Kokka, 1983, 1066. Also by Yoshimura, ‘Torishiki butsuzo no genryu’ [the origin of Tori style Buddhist images], Museum, 1979, 345.

9

Japanese encounters with Ajanta Yasuko Fukuyama1

The Ajanta caves, excavated in the Sahyadri hills of the Deccan plateau in India, are well known for their ancient Buddhist temples adorned with magnificent sculptures and a rich array of paintings. During the two hundred years since its discovery in 1819, this cultural heritage has continued to fascinate generations of art historians, artists, and connoisseurs, and a considerable number of studies have been done of Ajanta by scholars from India and abroad. This includes notable works by scholars and artists from Japan. From the Meiji period through the Taisho period, India was recognised by the Japanese as the birthplace of Buddhism, especially among Buddhist monks, scholars of Buddhist studies, and Japanese artists, influenced by the thoughts of Kakuzō Okakura (1863–1913). The resulting encounter between the Japanese and Ajanta was nothing less than a direct and vibrant cultural exchange. This essay briefly reviews the relationship between the Japanese and Ajanta since the first decade of the 20th century, in order to explore how the Japanese regarded Ajanta through their works.

1 The Japanese and Ajanta in the first decade of the 20th century 1.1 Kakuzō Okakura and Ajanta In the 19th century, Indian and English artists made facsimile copies of the paintings at Ajanta to document them. In Japan, Ajanta was introduced at the beginning of the 20th century. The first mention of Ajanta in a publication written in Japanese can be found in a book from 1901 titled Kōhon Nihon Teikoku Bijutsu Ryakushi, 2 which was the very first art history book by Japanese scholars, originally published in French for the Exposition Universelle de Paris 1900 with the title Histoire de l’Art du Japon.3 Intriguingly, in the preface, Shuichi Kuki, the editorial supervisor and the then director of the Imperial Museum, had already pointed out that the kondō murals of the Hōryūji temple bore a striking resemblance to the

190  Yasuko Fukuyama Ajanta paintings. However, we know that this renowned discourse did not belong to Kuki, but to Kakuzō Okakura (1862–1913), who showed great reverence for Indian art as the original source of Japanese art and played a key role in developing the aesthetics of the Japanese and encouraging the welcoming of a new cultural movement. It is also to be noted that Nihon Bijutsushi (Japanese art history), transcripts of lectures given by Okakura in 1890 at the Tokyo Fine Arts School, contains a description of the Hōryūji murals, in which Okakura pointed out that an indirect influence from India should be considered for those paintings, with no mention of Ajanta.4 This prompts the question of who gave such an idea to Kuki. Given the editorial information in Kuki’s preface that Okakura had been appointed as one of the project members of the publication and was deeply engaged in the contents until he was expelled from his position as principal of Arts School in March 1898, one likely reason comes to mind. As Griffiths’ two volumes on Ajanta had been published in 1896–7,5 Okakura could have referred to them for his study and for the above-mentioned publication. Moreover, the hypothesis of identification of a famous scene with foreigners in the front aisle of Cave 1, proposed in the past by J. Fergusson, must have been crucial for Okakura in constructing the dynamic flow of Japanese art in Asian art; that is, the chronological date of Cave 1 was considered to be around the 7th century, based on the interpretation that it represented the embassy sent by Khusro II Parves (590–628 CE) to Pulakeshin II Calukya (c. 608–42 CE),6 and its close date to the Hōryūji murals could also have drawn attention. Therefore, it is most likely that Kuki’s account was based on Okakura’s view. In fact, Okakura’s initial visit to India was made in 1901–2 to investigate ancient Buddhist sites in India, sponsored by the Administration of National Treasures Protection under the Ministry of Home Affairs.7 It is well known that soon after returning to Japan, he gave a brief presentation on Ajanta at a meeting of the Society of History and pointed out that the sources of the Hōryūji murals could be sought in the Ajanta paintings. Specifically, the painting of wall No. 6 (Figure 9.1) at the kondō provides a good example for comparison with the Ajanta paintings.8 Comparing the left attendant of the Amitabha Buddha with the dvarapāra of Ajanta Cave 1,9 there are slight similarities, such as the posture of the figure’s equipoised stance, bent in three places, called tri-bhanga—one of the distinctive features of the Gupta period. In addition, the mudrā or finger gesture and the brushstrokes seen in various styles, like fluid, fine, and bold lines and a sure and relatively thick line, are also similar in the two works. Indeed, most publications related to the paintings at the kondō hall have espoused Okakura’s view without any doubts. However, his comparison of the stylistic and thematic similarities does not apply to all the paintings at the kondō hall. As early as the first half of the 20th century, Ono Genmyō (1883–1939) was pointing out differences between the two10 and A. K. Coomaraswamy, who enjoyed

Japanese encounters with Ajanta  191

Figure 9.1 Part of the painting of wall No. 6 at the kondō, Hōryūji (Asahi Shinbunsha (ed.), Horyu-ji Kondo Hekiga, 1994). Courtesy of Hōryūji and Benrido.

an intimacy with Okakura, also opposed Okakura’s opinion in his History of Indian and Indonesian Art: I am inclined to agree, like Visser, with most of those who have seen both Hōryūji and Ajanta, that there exists no very close connection between the two, and that the sources of the Japanese work are to be sought rather in Khotan than in India. But it seems as though the Japanese must have depended in some degree upon Indian sources.11 Even Nousu Kōsetsu (1885–1973), who was a member of the Kokka–sha party charged with copying the paintings in 1917, did not share Okakura’s opinion, believing instead that the indirect connection between the two could be explained by the argument that similarities with Indian art can be seen in the background and execution of the kondō paintings at Hōryūji because of the influence of Chinese monks in the Tang dynasty. Adding to this idea, he

192  Yasuko Fukuyama suggested that their theme and style were Chinese rather than Indian.12 As mentioned above, opinions on this subject are divided among scholars. 1.2 Taikan Yokoyama and his works inspired by Ajanta Before turning to the next point, a few remarks should be made concerning the influence of the great intellectual Okakura. His journey to India and the talk about his experiences attracted many Japanese artists and actually led them towards India. Some of them even visited Ajanta. Of particular note, Taikan Yokoyama (1868–1958) and Shunsō Hishida (1874–1911) stayed in India between February and July 1903 to visit several Buddhist sites. Yokoyama did not make any copies of the Ajanta paintings, but his works suggest that he was inspired by them. An adorned female figure on the right of his work titled Sakya to Majo (Figure 9.2),13 depicting the temptation of Mara’s daughters, bears a very close resemblance to a female figure seen in

Figure 9.2 Taikan Yokoyama, Sakya to Majo (The temptation of Mara’s daughters), 1903, Nagano prefectural Shinano Art Museum. Courtesy of Nagano prefectural Shinano Art Museum.

Japanese encounters with Ajanta  193 the ‘Interpretation of Maya’s dream’ in Ajanta Cave 2.14 One more point is the hand gesture of Shakyamuni. In the enlightenment scene, it is usual for Shakyamuni’s right hand to touch the ground, showing the back of the hand. However, here his palm is shown. This type of gesture can be seen in the enlightenment scene in the antechamber of Cave 1 and the left aisle of Cave 26.15 One more work in which he adopted some sources from the Ajanta paintings and architecture is a work titled Shakya Chichi ni Au (Shakyamuni meeting his father) (Figure 9.3).16 Although the same subject was

Figure 9.3 Taikan Yokoyama, Shakya Chichi ni Au (Shakyamuni meeting his father), 1903, Currently whereabouts unknown (Ryuso Saito (ed.), Taikan Sakuhin-shu, Tokyo: Nihon Bijutsu-in, 1925). Courtesy of Nihon Bijutsuin.

194  Yasuko Fukuyama not  depicted in Ajanta, it is obvious that the pillared porch in Taikan’s painting was derived from the projected entrance of the façade of Cave 19,17 and the richly adorned elephants are quite similar to some in a battle scene from Simhala Avadana in the right aisle of Cave 17 (Figure 9.4). What is more, the scattered flowers on the ground are also a typical representation seen in the Ajanta paintings. Shino Satō notes that female attendants depicted between Shakya and Śuddhodana show some resemblance with ones depicted beside dvarapāra on the left rear wall of Cave 1.18 The exuberant representation of the above two works indicates that Taikan enthusiastically absorbed Indian art into his artistic activities. 1.3 Ajanta and the Otani expedition in India A group also explored Ajanta at the beginning of the 20th century; namely, the Otani expedition, dispatched by Otani Kōzui (1876–1948), the 22nd abbot of the West Hongwaji monastery, which was the headquarters of the Jōdo Shinshū—the Pure Land sect of Buddhism—in Japan. This expedition

Figure 9.4 A battle scene of Simhala avadana. Drawing by author.

Japanese encounters with Ajanta  195 is renowned for its exploratory investigation of many sites in Central Asia, but the first expedition on which Kōzui embarked took place in India between 1902 and 1904. There were 12 members of the expedition to India, three of whom were appointed to conduct a general survey of Ajanta and several sites in western India. These three—with Fujii Senshō (1859–1903) heading the party, and Shimaji Daitō (1875–1927) and Akiyama Yūei as assistants—spent four days at Ajanta, from December 10 to 13, 1902. Fujii’s account describes the arduous task of accessing the Ajanta caves; each member’s role in the investigation; their stay in Fardapur, where their lodge was located; and the conditions of each member. We can easily appreciate their experiences, vividly recounted in his writings ‘Indo-Mōbai Tsūshin’ (Diary of Mumbai, India), ‘Indo-naichi-ryokō Jitsujō’ (Travel report on India) carried in Aibai Zenshū, and Indo-reiketsu Tanken Nikki (Diary of the exploration of the cave temples of India).19 Before turning to a detailed explanation of the work they carried out at Ajanta, let us devote a little more space to the background of Fujii. Before joining the expedition, he had been sent to London to investigate the current ecclesiastical system. In addition to his task, he worked temporarily as an art historian at the Victoria and Albert Museum for a prior appraisal and classification of collections from Eastern Asia.20 Accordingly, he may have had many chances to see the copies produced by Griffiths. His account clearly shows that he was aware of the superiority of Ajanta at an earlier stage: The cave temples of Ajanta are well known for the beauty of the mural paintings. I have seen the copies in London and, compared with the Hōryūji kondō-hekiga, Ajanta is dozens of times as large in scale and its paintings are much more splendid and magnificent.21 Turning now to the works carried out by the party, Fujii wrote in detailed reports that Shimaji surveyed three or four caves to examine the paintings in each one, carrying volumes of Griffiths with him, and Akiyama made an effort to draw a roadmap to Ajanta, connecting it from the neighbouring village of Fardapur. He also carried a camera, taking photographs of several caves as well as the panoramic view of all the caves from the ravine. In Shin Seiiki-ki, ‘Mōbai Tsūshin’ is illustrated by three photographs with a brief explanation.22 Furthermore, Fujii’s other reports give lively and exciting accounts of such experiences as their escape from injury when meeting a leopard on the way to Fardapur after taking photographs and dishes of goat meat being served to them every day. They made no attempt to copy the paintings, but Fujii gave a significant account on their state of preservation. In the ‘Mōbai Tsūshin’ he noted the following: Most of the cave temples in western India are in a desolate condition because of vandalism by non-Buddhists, but only Ajanta has retained a comparatively preserved state because it had been veiled by luxuriant

196  Yasuko Fukuyama jungles until its discovery, … even so, the caves were inevitably very damaged by long-term deterioration caused by strong sunlight and heavy rain. We found this damage had become much worse than that seen in the volume by Griffiths from 30 to 40 years earlier. What can we do about it? Wire nets covering some doors and windows have been applied as protection against bats, but in some of the caves the atmosphere is terribly stuffy and has led to the corrosion of the paintings. For some without any nets, the surfaces of the paintings are subject to progressive decay due to bats residing there. 23 It seems obvious that he had realised the need for their preservation, deploring their serious condition. 24

2 The Japanese and Ajanta in the 1910s, focusing on Kokka-sha’s copying project Various commentaries reveal that in the 1910s ten Japanese artists, not only traditional Japanese painting artists but also oil painters, such as Sanzō Wada and Kunitarō Suda, visited Ajanta. What prompted them to travel to this ancient site? It goes without saying that such artists as those mentioned earlier and their reports must have wielded enormous influence over their peers and contemporaries, but the fact that a photograph exhibition of Ajanta caves was held at the Department of Art History at Tokyo Imperial University in 1915 exemplified the deep interest of the Japanese in Ajanta. 25 Furthermore, it deserves special mention that one of Coomaraswamy’s works, The Arts and Crafts of India and Ceylon, published in 1913, was translated into Japanese in 1916. 26 Under the circumstances, Kyokkō Machida (1879–1967) was probably the first Japanese artist to make private copies and sketches of the Ajanta paintings. The art historian Kōichi Machida, the son of Kyokkō, says in an essay of his, ‘The Ajanta Cave Temples’, that Kyokkō had studied under the supervision of A. Foucher, an art historian, who advised him to tour India on his way back to Japan. He then travelled to some ancient Buddhist sites in 1912 and made some drawings.27 Unfortunately, we cannot see any of these sketches or drawings now, but there is no doubt that even after returning to Japan, he continued to regard Ajanta as an intriguing site, because in a 1913 article he described seeing the volumes that included reproductions of the Ajanta paintings at the Tokyo Art School. 28 Given Japanese artists’ attraction to Ajanta, the next attempt was a very organised one—namely, a party dispatched by Kokka–sha, the publisher of the East Asian art journal Kokka. 29 As a matter of course, Okakura’s view deserved the attention of many Japanese, but it was an initial series of articles by Taki Seiichi on Ajanta in 1917, describing its general information, that prompted Kokka–sha to set in motion the dispatch of a party of Japanese artists to make faithful copies of the paintings.30 At that time,

Japanese encounters with Ajanta  197 Taki had already visited India to see the Ajanta caves with his own eyes. His comparative examination of the original paintings at Ajanta, the photographic reproductions from earlier times, and the primary publications resulted in his critical comment that such publications were far from satisfactory because the copies did not precisely convey the paintings’ original elegance. He added further that it was regrettable that the copies had been made by British artists and in the Western style, without regard for the Eastern elegance shown in the Ajanta paintings, and he asserted conclusively that only Japanese artists with a thorough knowledge of East Asian painting could express such an elegance properly. Soon after his article, financial support from Hara Tomitarō (1869–1939), a successful silk exporter and intellectual, turned the project into reality. There was also substantial support from government offices, trading companies, and renowned artists. 31 The party was then granted permission, with the willing consent of the Hyderabad Archaeological Department under the Nizams. In 1917, Kokka–sha commissioned art historian Sawamura Sentarō, as a superintendent, and artist Asai Kanpa (1897–1985) to visit Ajanta. They were joined by two other artists who had already been staying in India. Kanpō Arai (1878–1945), known as an artist affiliated with the Nihonbijutsu-in (Japan Art Institute) and under the care of Rabindranath Tagore (1861–1941) in Calcutta, joined as a chief artist. He was accompanied by Nousu Kōsestu, 32 who had visited India in private and happened to be in Ajanta. They engaged in the execution of the copies using a method called ageutsushi-hō. This was a typical method used by Japanese painters to produce a faithful copy, in which the copier lays a piece of paper over the painting and then repeatedly rolls and lifts the bottom of the paper slightly so that the copier can draw the lines of every small portion of the paintings after studying and memorising the exact line or form. Consequently, this process lasted almost three months, from December 15, 1917 to March 2, 1918. Later on, of the three artists, Arai’s achievements in the Ajanta project were highly appreciated, leading to his appointment with the greatest honour as Chief Artist of a copying project of the kondō murals at Hōryūji. One year later, Arai wrote an essay thinking back on the work at Ajanta and the stay at Fardapur. He described the warm feelings he had fostered towards Ajanta, created through seeing several publications, and his longing to visit the place until he could finally go there and see it with his own eyes. He recalled that when he stood at the site and saw the original paintings, he felt as if he had met an old friend after a long silence, adding that he could not help but have respect for the sublime beauty and feeling of dignity of the site. He also provided an artist’s account, producing copies of unfinished or interrupted parts of paintings, consisting of just a line and without colours, which were very useful in revealing his process of gaining practical knowledge about how to draw the wall paintings. 33 Moreover, his late publication Amida-in zakki includes an essay of reminiscences of Ajanta, ‘Ajanta-hekiga mosha yodan’ (A titbit of the

198  Yasuko Fukuyama copying work at Ajanta), describing how he had come to join Kokka–sha’s party, the immense assistance of the Bombay branch of Mitsui Bussan in offering financial support for all the expenditures of the project, the conservation programme carried out by Hyderabad, 34 some special concerns about preventing the fragile paintings from flaking or turning into fragments when copying work using the ageutsushi-hō method, and even his junior colleague Asai Kanpa’s incredible efforts in drawing the ceiling paintings. 35 Here let us leave the artist’s view and return to the copies after completion. All the copies were brought to Japan without any trouble and after some arrangement they were exhibited at the Nihonbashi Bijutsu Club on October 5, 1918. The following is a list of the works: • • • • • • • • •

A Part of the jātaka scene on the front wall of Cave 9 Standing Buddha, pillar in Cave 10 Bodhisattva, front aisle of Cave 17 Buddha, left wall of Cave 19 Female figures, left wall of right shrine at the rear aisle of Cave 2 Enlightenment (Mara’s Attack), left wall of Antechamber, Cave 1 Bodhisattva, rear wall of Cave 1 The Visit of the Persians, part of a narrative scene, front aisle of Cave 1 The Banquet of the Persians, part of the hall ceiling of Cave 1

All these paintings, published in Kokka, are reproductions in chromoxylograph of the original copies. However, a fire following a heavy earthquake in 1923 burnt not only some documents and photographs but also the precious original copies housed at the Tokyo Imperial University. Some rough drawings and draft versions remain in several museums in Japan (Figure 9.5).36 Some remarks may be added about the exhibition held at the Bijutsu Club. Surprisingly, almost 100 ink rubbings of inscriptions at the Ajanta caves were also exhibited. They also seem to have been lost in the Great Kanto Earthquake of 1923. At the lecture hall in the Western-style building of the club, two memorial lectures were given: ‘On the Copies of the Ajanta Paintings’, read by Prof. S. Taki, who was the first person to advocate the Ajanta project in order to make copies of the paintings before they before their quality worsened, and ‘Ajanta Paintings and Some Decorative Motifs’, presented by Prof. Sawamura, who devoted himself to the project as a superintendent at Ajanta.37 The exhibition successfully attracted the attention of over 2,500 people. After six months, on and April 5 and 6, 1919, the exhibition and some lectures were held again at the head office of Osaka Asahi Shinbnsha. Besides the two scholars mentioned above, Prof. Ryōzaburō Sakaki (1872– 1946) and Prof. Torajirō Naitō (1866–1934), both well-known experts in the fields of Buddhist studies and art history, also gave lectures.38 The exhibition in Osaka was regarded as a successful achievement, with great appreciation shown by thousands of visitors, including scholars of various fields, artists, and intellectuals. In addition, all of the copies and ink rubbings from Ajanta

Japanese encounters with Ajanta  199

Figure 9.5 Kanpō Arai, Shakanyoraizu (Shakyamuni Buddha), 1918, Sakura-shi Museum – Kanpo Arai Memorial. Courtesy of Sakura-shi Museum – Kanpo Arai Memorial.

200  Yasuko Fukuyama were opened to public view at the Kyoto Imperial Museum during April 15 to May 31 of that year. In addition to the reproduction of copies in a series of editions of Kokka, miscellaneous notes in some issues of Kokka also indicate some important aspects. At the beginning of the project, when Kokka–sha decided the dispatch the team, it showed some sense of anticipation that the project might have trouble copying work in the gloomy caves, located in a critical environment, and that it would be difficult for the team to complete the entire project in the initial attempt. Kokka–sha, thus, expressed low expectations in advance of the project. However, soon after finding that the copies by the three artists were highly praised by many, he acknowledged that the ambitions in sending the party had not been altogether futile.

3 The Japanese and Ajanta in the 1930s 3.1 Tetsurō Sugimoto: copying and examining the Ajanta paintings Another Japanese artist working on the execution of faithful copies in the same year as Kokka–sha’s party was Kiriya Senrin (1877–1932). His initial visit to India in 1911 had brought to him a close friendship with Tagore, and it is known that he had many chances to visit India even after completing the copies. Unfortunately, all the copies that he completed are missing. However, it is remarkable and unprecedented for an artist that he presented no less than six academic articles on Ajanta after 1917. In particular, a number of articles serialised for five months in 1918 give a general description of each cave.39 Twenty years after Kokka–sha’s attempt, in 1937–8 Tetsurō Sugimoto (1899–1985) visited Ajanta and Sigiriya in Sri Lanka to make copies of the ancient paintings at each site. As soon as he returned to Japan with the paintings he had produced, the Imperial Gift Museum of Kyoto (the predecessor of the Kyoto National Museum) held an exhibition displaying the works, which were given to the museum as a whole in 1944. According to his writings, he decided to visit India as a result of comments from three outstanding scholars: Sentarō Sawamura, who was one of the team sent by Kokka–sha and had experienced the systematic copying as a superintendent; Junjirō Takakusu (1866–1945), a scholar of Indian philosophy; and art historian Bunzaburō Matsumoto (1869–1944). Prior to his journey, the latter two both advised him to study nothing but ancient Indian art in order to pursue the essence of East Asian art. He also studied under the supervision of renowned scholars and artists such as Takakusu, the art historian Genmyō Ono, and Arai, who had carried out the great project at Ajanta 20 years earlier. Then, in 1937, he finally received permission from the Department of Cultural Affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to depart for Ajanta to make the copies, through the cooperation of the Japan-India

Japanese encounters with Ajanta  201 Association. Even after reaching India, however, Sugimoto faced several problems requiring solutions before he could commence the copying at Ajanta. In particular, he had trouble even obtaining permission for copying at the site. After some interviews with a Nizam ruler of Hyderabad and G. Yazdani, the director-general of the Archaeological Department, permission was given, with various conditions set by these authorities, one of which was to let Syed Ahmad accompany Sugimoto during his work at the caves. He was the same man who had made a great career from executing the line drawings of the Ajanta paintings for part of the illustrations of Yazdani’s Ajanta. Sugimoto chose to copy the following paintings: The dvarapāra titled Padmapāni on the left wall of the rear aisle of Cave 1; a part of the Jātaka scene from Cave 1; and a Yaksa figure titled Bodhisattva bearing garlands on the right pilaster of the rear aisle of Cave 17. He spent a relatively long time completing these copies, greeting the new year of 1938 while doing so. During his stay in India, he established an intimacy with Abanindranath Tagore (1871–1951) and the Birla group. In particular, the latter gave him financial support for his copying project. After returning to Japan, Sugimoto spoke in newspapers and on the radio about his knowledge of ancient Indian paintings and their techniques.40 Indo-kodai-hekiga o saguru (Exploring ancient Indian paintings), published in 1940, provided a vivid account of his experiences beginning with his departure for India, including some events in Bombay and Ajanta. Some photographs attached to his descriptions included a precious picture of Sugimoto himself engaged in the copying of Cave 1’s Padmapāni.41 Moreover, three years later he published another book, Indo kodai hekiga no kenkyū (Studies of ancient Indian paintings), consisting of his explanations of their techniques and representations, such as brushstrokes and gradations, from his viewpoint as an artist. This also included a call for the conservation work carried out by Hyderabad, a description of the difficulties in executing copies in the dim light of the caves, as well as some colour and monochrome reproductions of his copies.42 His criticism of previous conservation work also deserves special mention. He noted a drastic discolouration of the original paintings due to the shellac covering over the surface of the Ajanta paintings, applied at the time of Griffiths, as well as the crude or sloppy work of the conservation programme carried out by Hyderabad in filling flaked parts with plaster after removing not only tiny fragments but also other parts with a loss of colour due to age deterioration, all of which, unfortunately, made the paintings lose half their aesthetic value. His work at Ajanta and Sigiriya having been appreciated, Sugimoto was nominated for Chief Artist in charge of the copying project of the kondō-hekiga at Hōryūji. However, this was for just a brief period and he failed to take up the post.43 Even so, he was fortunate to receive subsequent opportunities to execute wall paintings for the official residence of the prime minister of India and for the multimillionaire Kilachand’s mansion,

202  Yasuko Fukuyama and he succeeded in creating many masterpieces of religious themes from his precious experience of copying the ancient paintings.44 3.2 Hiroshi Yoshida: Ajanta in Ukiyo-e technique There is a very rare work depicting the front view of Ajanta Cave 1, titled Cave Temple in Ajanta (1931),45 which was executed using the Ukiyo-e print technique, which was very popular in Japan from the 17th to the 19th century. The artist who made this print is Hiroshi Yoshida (1876–1950). He first trained in the watercolours and oils of Western art, and later developed the skill of transferring subtle gradations of colour and form typical of much Western art to a traditional Japanese medium that emphasised sharply defined contrasts. In 1930–1, he journeyed through South East Asia and India to get inspiration for prints. From 1931 to 1932, on the basis of his sketches and oil paintings, he produced a series of 32 prints.46 Cave Temple in Ajanta was executed as one of them. Some exhibition catalogues carry a few photographs that show him sketching the caves and a watercolour depicting the exterior of Cave 19. His works of Ajanta capture the impressive light and shadow of the cave in the dry season of India very well. Moreover, the print recalls Yoshida’s words: ‘True art is cosmopolitan and the result therefore of external influences as well as of the inherent vitality and life of the different nations’. 3.3 Yonejirō Noguchi and Ajanta paintings Before concluding this chapter, I’d like to refer to one more Japanese poet, Yonejirō Noguchi. He is well known as Yone Noguchi in the West and as the father of the internationally renowned artist Isamu Noguchi. In 1935– 6, he was sent to India as part of a cultural exchange programme under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. During his three-month stay, at several universities and some conferences hosted by the Hindu Mahasabha, he gave lectures on various topics, such as Japanese art—more specifically Ukiyo-e, Noh plays (a traditional form of Japanese theatre), and Japanese poetry—paeans to Nature, and political discourses like on Japanese nationalism. In his incredibly busy schedule, he also visited museums and ancient archaeological sites. In Calcutta, the Japanese artist Kousetsu Nousu, who we have already met in a previous section, accompanied Noguchi to several museums, where the latter undoubtedly acquired a basic knowledge of Indian art from ancient to modern times. His publication in 1936 contains a chapter on the Ajanta caves, describing how he reached the caves, his stay at the guest house of the Nizam, the history of the caves, and the Ajanta paintings themselves.47 What was most interesting to him was the depiction of female figures: their attractive hand gestures, their tempting looks, and the alluring curves of their hips seemed to him to be rather similar to those in Hindu sculptures, and he points out

Japanese encounters with Ajanta 203 that the paintings were totally inappropriate in this place of tranquillity. This discrepancy between the serene cave and the flirtatious females in the paintings inspired him to write a poem, titled ‘Inscription to Ajanta frescos’.48 It should be noted that this poem was included in the book Tateyo Indo (Stand up, India!) of 1942,49 which literally encouraged India to form a united cultural front with Japan and China against the West. As you know, this was in the midst of World War Two, and Noguchi turned out to be a spokesman for Japanese imperialism.50 Nonetheless, his intuitive respect and honest praise for ancient Indian art never changed. I would like to add one more reason for why Noguchi looked into Ajanta paintings: he was keenly interested in modern Indian dance, as well as traditional dance. During his stay in Bombay, he enjoyed a dance performance by Uday Shankar.51 Thus, there is no doubt that his eyes were glued to the energetic paintings in Ajanta.

4 Conclusion In conclusion, the resulting encounter between the Japanese and Ajanta was nothing less than a direct and vibrant cultural exchange, after a lapse of two millennia, following the excavation of the early caves. The Japanese who visited Ajanta in the early 20th century were attracted and profoundly influenced by its exuberant art. However, their responses were neither passive nor derivative. They consciously selected specific features or motifs from the paintings and architecture, and appropriated them in their own works in a distinct manner. In other words, they successfully revived a dormant Ajanta in their history, aesthetics, and art. It might well be said that this process led them to establishing their identities as artists in the rapid modernisation of the early 20th century. Their descriptive accounts and artistic works definitely allow us to rediscover the richness of Ajanta and to appreciate that art has always fed on art.

Notes 1 I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to the Hōryūji temple, Benrido, Nihon Bijutsuin (The Japan Art Institute), Nagano prefectural Shinano Art Museum, and Sakura-shi Museum-Kanpo Arai Museum for generously allowing me to use photographs of invaluable works. 2 Imperial Museum (ed.), Kōhon Nihon Teikoku Bijutsu Ryakushi (Art history of imperial Japan): 3. 3 Maurice de Brunoff (ed.), Histoire de l’Art du Japon. 4 Kakuzō Okakura, Nihon Bijutsushi (Japanese art history): 72–74. 5 J. Griffiths, The Paintings in the Buddhist Cave Temples of Ajanta. 6 Jas Fergusson, ‘On the Identification of the Portrait of Chosroes II among the Paintings in the Caves at Ajanta’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 11/2: 155–170. The identification is no longer accepted among scholars. 7 Okakura’s visit to Ajanta was at the end of March 1902. 8 The wall paintings at the kondō hall were heavily damaged by a fire in 1949. As part of the preservation project, the first attempt to make copies of the paintings

204

9 10 11 12

13

14 15 16

17 18 19

20

21 22

23 24

Yasuko Fukuyama

commenced in 1940. A few decades later, between 1967 and 1968, a second attempt was carried out by 14 artists famed for their Japanese-style works. As for the reproduction, see Asahi Shinbunsha (ed.), Hōryūji Kondō Saigen Hekiga (Reproduction of the mural paintings of the kondō hall, Hōryūji). See Osamu Takata and Tsugusato Omura, Ajanta Hekiga (The Ajanta murals), vol. 1, Pl. C1-13. Genmyō Ono, ‘Bukkyō kankei no ko-hekiga ni kansuru zakkan’, Bijutsu Shunpō, 17–3: 101–106. A.K. Coomaraswamy, History of Indian and Indonesian Art: 154. K. Nousu, ‘Hōryūji to Ajaṇṭā no hekiga no ishu’ (Differences between Hōryūji and Ajanta), Chawan, 109, 1940: 18–21. See also K. Nousu, ‘Indo Ajaṇṭā no hekiga to Hōryūji Kondō’ (Ajanta murals in India and the kondō murals of the Hōryūji temple), Gendai no Bijutsu, 1–4, 1918: 11–17. This work is one of hanging scrolls of a diptych. The other is a painting titled Nyūmi Kuyō (Serving a bowl of gruel), by Hishida Shunsō, and both of them are now housed in Nagano Prefectural Shinano Art Museum. See also the exhibition catalogue Hishida Shunso: A Retrospective, Pl. 044. Takata and Omura, Ajanta Hekiga, Pl. C2-10-1. Takata and Omura, Ajanta Hekiga, Pls. C1-15-1, C26-3. Ryūzō Saitō (ed.), Taikan Sakuhinshu (Works of Yokoyama Taikan). For an analysis of this painting, see Shino Satō, ‘Yokoyama Taikan to Ajanta Hekiga-1903nen saku Shaka Chichi ni Au wo chūshin nin’ (Reception of Ajanta painting in Yokoyama Taikan’s Shaka Chichi ni au), Indo-Kōko-Kenkyū (Indian Archaeological Society, Japan), 32, 2010–2011: 57–70. Takata and Omura, Ajanta Hekiga, Pl. C19-1. Satō, ‘Yokoyama Taikan to Ajanta Hekiga’, p. 65. ‘Indo-Mōbai Tsūshin’ and ‘Indo-naichi-ryokō Jitsujō’ are included in Chapter 4 of a volume titled Aibai Zenshū, which gathers his posthumous writings (Daitō Shimaji (ed.), Fujii Senshō Ikō: Aibaku Zenshū (Posthumous works of Fujii Senshō): 538–614. As for the description of the investigation of Ajanta, see Shimaji, 1906, pp. 546–549, 574–578. It is notable that the ‘Mōbai Tsūshin’ included in the Shin-Seiiki-ki shows three pieces of precious photo reproductions, having the same description for the most part (Yoshitaro Uehara, Shin Sei-iki-ki (New Records on the Western Regions), Tokyo: Yūkosha, 1937, pp. 107–122). See also Senshō Fujii, Indo Reiketsu Tanken Nikki (Diary of the exploration of the cave temples of India), Shinshū-ji, 1977, pp. 24–26. Fujii is renowned as one of the staff working for the volumes titled Shinbi Takikan, which were collected works of art published in 1899–1903, but also as a model of the protagonist in Yashi no Hakage, by the novelist Tōson Shimazaki (1872–1943), contributing to a magazine titled Myyōjō. Shimaji, Fujii Senshō Ikō: Aibaku Zenshū, p. 546; Uehara, Shin Sei-iki-ki, p. 112. In addition to the photo reproduction involved in Shin-sei-iki-ki, we can see another two photographs with brief descriptions in Indo-satsuei-cho, issued by Hongwanji in 1905 (Meiji 38): one is a general view of the Ajanta caves and the other is the interior of Cave 19. Honganji Shitsunaibu (ed.), Indo Satsuei cho (Photographs of India), Kyoto: Honganji Shitsunaibu, 1904: Pls. 42 and 43. Shimaji, Fujii Sensho Ikō, p. 549; Uehara, Shin Sei-iki-ki, p. 114. As is known, since 1843, when J. Fergusson noted the urgent need for the paintings’ preservation, many scholars have made the same points about saving the paintings from further deterioration. After several attempts in the 1910s, in 1920 the Nizam government extended an invitation to L. Cecconi, an Italian restorer, for the project of the paintings’ conservation. However, the resulting shellac applied to cover the surface of those paintings with numerous cracks

Japanese encounters with Ajanta 205

25 26 27 28

29

30 31 32 33

34

35 36

37

38

has unfortunately led to a change in the original colours, which is still a serious problem. Bijutsu Shinpō (ed.), ‘Geien Gasshi’, Bijutsu Shinpō 14–8, 1915, p. 336. A.K. Coomaraswamy, Indo Bijutsushi (Sobu Rokurō and Mazumi Iwasaki, Trans.). Kōichi Machida, Ajaṇṭā sekkutsu ji’in (The cave temples of Ajanta), Asahi Shinbunsha, 1987: 131–132. Kyokkō Machida, ‘Ajaṇṭā no hekiga’ (Ajanta murals), Kaiga Seidan, 1–3, 1913, pp. 26–29. Considering the date, the volumes would have been Griffiths’. For his first impression of Ajanta, see also Kyokkō Machida, ‘Indo zakkan’ (Miscellanies on India), Bijutsu Shinpō, 12–2, 1913: 68–70. Kokka reported on the progress of the project regularly, from its conception up to the response to the exhibition of the copies. See ‘Nihon-jin ni yoru Ajaṇṭā hekiga mosha’ (The copying of Ajanta paintings by Japanese artists), Kokka’s miscellanea, 329, 1917: 149; ‘Ajaṇṭā hekiga mohon no tōchaku’ (Arrival of the copies of the Ajanta paintings), 336, 1918: 394; ‘Ajaṇṭā kutsu-in hekiga mohon-ten oyobi kōen no ki’ (Report on the exhibition of the copies of the Ajanta paintings and the lectures), 341, 1918: 150–152. Seiichi Taki, ‘Indo Ajaṇṭā Sekkutsuji no hekiga 1–4’, Kokka, 322–325, 1917. For example, the then Director-General of the Department of Commerce, the British ambassador to Japan, the Consulate of Bombay, Mitsui Bussan, Taikan Yokoyama, mentioned above, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He joined the project one month later when the two artists began the work. Kanpō Arai, ‘Taizai shoken’ (Notes on my stay), Bijutsu Shunpō, 42–4, 1919: 54–57. For further information on his achievements as a painter, see also Taizō Nonaka (ed.), Arai Kanpō—The Man and His Work, Tokyo: Chūōkōron bijutsu shuppan, 1974. There is a detailed account of his days, written during his stay in India, in Indo-nisshi. Some ink drawings attached to the texts are of great value in knowing the Ajanta and Jalgaon of the time (Nonaka, Arai Kanpō: 59–101). He is famous for his dvarapāra on the right wall of the rear aisle in Cave 1 and the Birth of Buddha on the left wall in Cave 2, but Indo-sukecchi also has some landscape drawings, such as a remote scene on the way to Ajanta, the village of Lenapur located up the Wagora River, and a view of Ajanta Caves 9 and 10 from the opposite bank. They are all helpful for imagining the rural life and customs of the people. His essay gives a description of this; two or three hundred people were engaged in the conservation works. Some were repairing the broken pillars and some were mending the torn wire netting for the protection from bats and bees (Arai Kanpō, Amida-in zakki (Miscellany of the Amida Temple): 58. Arai, Amida-in zakki: 52–64. As for Arai’s copies, some are housed in Tochigi Prefectural Museum and Sakura-shi Museum – Kanpo Arai Memorial. See Sakura-shi Museum – Kanpo Arai Memorial (ed.), Arai Kanpo Sakuhin-shu (Works of Kanpo Arai), Sakurashi Museum – Kanpo Arai Memorial, 2007. Sawamura gave a series of papers to Kokka dealing with the sculptures seen in Ajanta. See also S. Sawamura, ‘Ajanta sekkutsuji ni okeru chōkoku 1–5’, Kokka, 351–352, 355, 360–361, 1919–1920; ‘Ajanta no sekkutsuji no chōkoku teki monyō ni tsuite 1–9’, Kokka, 377–378, 383–385, 393–396, 1921–1923. The contents of lectures on that day were as follows: ‘Trade and Buddhist Art in Ancient India’, given by Prof. R. Sakaki; ‘On the Ajanta Paintings’, by Prof. Taki; and ‘The Value of the Art of Ajanta’, by Prof. Sawamura. Later on, the abstract of each lecture was carried in Shinbi. See also R. Sakaki, ‘Kodai Indo no tsūshō to Bukkyō geijutsu’, Shinbi, 8–9, 1919: 27–28; S. Sawamura, ‘Ajaṇṭā

206

39

40

41 42 43

44 45 46

47 48 49 50 51

Yasuko Fukuyama

geijutsu no kachi’, Shinbi, 8–9, 1919: 28–29; and Seiichi Taki, ‘Ajaṇṭā hekiga no mosha ni tsuite’, Shinbi, 8–9, 1919. 27. There was another paper with valuable information on the copying work, given by Sawamura. See also S. Sawamura, ‘Ajaṇṭā dōkutsu no hekiga mosha ni tsuite’, Bijutsu Shunpō, 160, 1918: 85–86. Senrin Kiriya, ‘Ajaṇṭā hekiga zuan no kenkyū ni tsuite’ (Studies on the Ajanta murals), Gendai no Zuan Kōgei, 41, 1917: 27–29; Senrin Kiriya, ‘Ajaṇṭā dōkutsu ji no kenkyū 1–5’ (Studies on the Ajanta caves), Bijutsu no Nihon, 10-7– 11, 1918. Blessed not only with artistic talent but with a delicate sense of beauty and profound knowledge for ancient Indian art, he owned some Buddhist and Hindu sculptures, and this multi-talent resulted in some papers referring to the Mughal miniature paintings as well as sculptures. See also Senrin Kiriya, ‘Indo geijutsu no kenkyū’ (Studies on the Art of India), Shinkō Bijutsu, 4–2, 1920: 410–414. He presented several papers: ‘On the Ancient Paintings’ on radio, ‘On the Indian Style of Gradation’ at the Artists Club of the Kyoto branch of Asahi Shinbun, and ‘Wall Structure of the Ancient Paintings in India’ at the Department for the Preservation of National Treasures, Ministry of Education. Tetsurō Sugimoto, Indo no ko-hekiga o saguru (Exploring ancient Indian paintings). Tetsurō Sugimoto, Indo kodai hekiga no kenkyū (Studies on ancient Indian paintings). As a result, for the first project copying the paintings at Hōryūji kondō, among the artists of the Kyoto school, Irie Hako (1887–1948) was appointed chief artist, as was Kanpō Arai, mentioned above, his work at Ajanta, after being sent by Kokkasha, being more appreciated. See Asahi Shinbunsha (ed.) Sekai-jū-dai-deshi Shūkyōga-ten (Religious paintings of ten great disciples in the world). Hiroshi Yoshida, Yoshida Hiroshi zen moku-hanga shu (The complete woodblock prints of Yoshida Hiroshi): 124, Pl. 163. With regard to the print series, some scholars point out that he drew inspiration for this series from an India series made by the British artist Charles Barlett. See Yasunaga Koichi, ‘Yoshida Hiroshi: His Personality and Art’, in Hiroshi Yoshida, Yoshida Hiroshi zen moku-hanga shu: 26. Yoshida produced six prints depicting the Taj Mahal using the same blocks and changing colours to create varying impressions. See Yoshida, Yoshida Hiroshi zen moku-hanga shu: Pls. 154, 155, 167, 173 and 174. Yonejirō Noguchi, Indo ha kataru [India Speaks]: 1936: 163–167. Yone Noguchi, ‘Inscription on the Ajanta Fresco’, in The Ganges Calls Me – Book of Poems–: 17–18. Yonejirō Noguchi, ‘Ajanta hekiga daisan’, Tate-yo Indo [Stand up, India]: 88–92. Madoka Hori, ‘Yone Noguchi and India: Towards a Reappraisal of the International Conflict between R. Tagore and Y. Noguchi’, in Takao Uno (ed.), Changing Perceptions of Japan in South Asia in the New Asian Era: 119–128 Noguchi, Indo ha kataru: 94–98.

References A.K. Coomaraswamy, History of Indian and Indonesian Art, London: E-Glodston, 1927. A.K. Coomaraswamy, Indo Bijutsushi (Sobu Rokurō and Mazumi Iwasaki, Trans.), Tokyo: Koryōsha, 1916. Arai Kanpō, Amida-in zakki (Miscellany of the Amida Temple), Nara: Ikaruga Kokyōsha, 1975.

Japanese encounters with Ajanta 207 Asahi Shinbunsha (ed.), Hōryūji Kondō Saigen Hekiga (Reproduction of the mural paintings of the kondō hall, Hōryūji), Tokyo: Asahi Shinbunsha, 1995. Bijutsu Shinpō (ed.), ‘Geien Gasshi’, Bijutsu Shinpō 14–8, 1915, p. 30. Daitō Shimaji (ed.), Fujii Senshō Ikō: Aibaku Zenshū (Posthumous works of Fujii Senshō), Tokyo: Morie Shoten, 1906. Commission Impériale du Japon (ed.), Histoire de l’Art du Japon, Paris: Maurice de Brunoff, 1900. Exhibition catalogue Hishida Shunso: A Retrospective, Tokyo: The National Museum of Modern Art, Tokyo, 2014, Pl. 044. Exhibition catalogue Sekai-jū-dai-deshi Shūkyōga-ten (Religious paintings of ten great disciples in the world), Tokyo: Asahi Shinbunsha, 1984. Fergusson, Jas. ‘On the Identification of the Portrait of Chosroes II among the Paintings in the Caves at Ajanta’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 11/2, 1879, pp. 155–170. Genmyō Ono, ‘Bukkyō kankei no ko-hekiga ni kansuru zakkan’, Bijutsu Shunpō, 17–3, 1918, pp. 13–18. Griffiths, J. The Paintings in the Buddhist Cave Temples of Ajanta, 2vols, London: W. riggs, 1896–7. Hiroshi Yoshida, Yoshida Hiroshi zen moku-hanga shu (The complete woodblock prints of Yoshida Hiroshi), Tokyo: Abe Publishing, 2017 (second edition). Honganji Shitsunaibu (ed.), Indo Satsuei cho (Photographs of India), Kyoto: Honganji Shitsunaibu, 1904. Imperial Museum (ed.), Kōhon Nihon Teikoku Bijutsu Ryakushi (Art history of imperial Japan), Tokyo: Nōmushō, 1901, p. 3. K. ousu, ‘Hōry ūji to Aja ṇṭā no hekiga no ishu’ (Differences between Hōryūji and Ajanta), Chawan 109, 1940, pp. 18–21. K. Nousu, ‘Indo Ajaṇṭā no hekiga to Hōryūji Kondō’ (Ajanta murals in India and the kondō murals of the Hōryūji temple), Gendai no Bijutsu 1–4, 1918, pp. 11–17. Kakuzō Okakura, Nihon Bijutsushi (Japanese art history), Tokyo: Heibonsha, 2014, pp. 72–74. Kanpō Arai, ‘Taizai shoken’ (Notes on my stay), Bijutsu Shunpō 42–4, 1919, pp. 54–57. Kōichi Machida, Ajaṇṭā sekkutsu ji’in (The cave temples of Ajanta), Tokyo: Asahi Shinbunsha, 1987, pp. 131–132. Kokka miscellanea, ‘Ajaṇṭā hekiga mohon no tōchaku’ (Arrival of the copies of the Ajanta paintings), 336, 1918, p. 394. Kokka miscellanea, ‘Ajaṇṭā kutsu-in hekiga mohon-ten oyobi kōen no ki’ (Report on the exhibition of the copies of the Ajanta paintings and the lectures), 341, 1918, pp. 150–152. Kokka miscellanea, ‘Ajanta no sekkutsuji no chōkoku teki monyō ni tsuite 1–9’, Kokka, 377–8, 383–5, 393–6, 1921–23. Kokka miscellanea, ‘Nihon-jin ni yoru Ajaṇṭā hekiga mosha’ (The copying of Ajanta paintings by Japanese artists), 329, 1917, p. 149. Kyokkō Machida, ‘Ajaṇṭā no hekiga’ (Ajanta murals), Kaiga Seidan 1–3, 1913, pp. 26–29. Kyokkō Machida, ‘Indo zakkan’ (Miscellanies on India), Bijutsu Shinpō 12–2, 1913, pp. 68–70. Madoka Hori, ‘Yone Noguchi and India: Towards a Reappraisal of the International Conflict between R. Tagore and Y. Noguchi’, in Takao Uno (ed.), Changing Perceptions of Japan in South Asia in the New Asian Era, International Research Center for Japanese Studies, 2011.

208

Yasuko Fukuyama

Osamu Takata and Tsugusato Omura, Ajanta Hekiga (The Ajanta murals), Tokyo: NHK Publishing, 2000, vol. 1, Pl. C1–13. R. akaki, ‘Kodai Indo no tsūshō to Bukkyō geijutsu’, Shinbi 8–9, 1919, pp. 27–28. Ryūzō Saitō (ed.), Taikan Sakuhinshu (Works of Yokoyama Taikan), Tokyo: Nihon Bijutsuin, 1925. S. Sawamura, ‘Ajaṇṭā dōkutsu no hekiga mosha ni tsuite’, Bijutsu Shunpō 160, 1918, pp. 85–86. S. Sawamura, ‘Ajaṇṭā geijutsu no kachi’, Shinbi 8–9, 1919, pp. 28–29. S. awamura, ‘Ajanta sekkutsuji ni okeru chōkoku (1)–(5)’, Kokka 351–2, 355, 360–1, 1919–20, pp. 43–47, 77–89, 207–222, 410–422, 443–455. Sakura-shi Museum- Kanpo Arai Memorial (ed.), Arai Kanpo Sakuhin-shu (Works of Kanpo Arai), Sakura-shi Museum- Kanpo Arai Memorial, 2007. Seiichi Taki, ‘Indo Ajaṇṭā Sekkutsuji no hekiga 1–4’, Kokka, 322~325, 1917, pp. 291–300, 331–340, 355–369, 395–408. Senrin Kiriya, ‘Ajaṇṭā dōkutsu ji no kenkyū (1)–(5)’ (Studies on the Ajanta caves), Bijutsu no Nihon, 10–7~11, 1918, 7: pp. 8–12, 8: pp. 10–13, 9: pp. 6–9, 10: pp. 5–6, 11: pp. 4–6. Senrin Kiriya, ‘Ajaṇṭā hekiga zuan no kenkyū ni tsuite’ (Studies on the Ajanta murals), Gendai no Zuan Kōgei, 41, 1917, pp. 27–29. Senrin Kiriya, ‘Indo geijutsu no tankyū’ (Studies on the Art of India), Shinkō Bijutsu, 4–2 1920, pp. 410–414. Senshō Fujii, Indo Reiketsu Tanken Nikki (Diary of the exploration of the cave temples of India), Shinshū-ji: Iiyama, 1977. Shinbi, 8–9, 1919, pp. 27–28; Shinbi, 8–9, 1919, pp. 28–29; Shinbi, 8–9, 1919, p. 27. Shino Satō, ‘Yokoyama Taikan to Ajanta Hekiga-1903nen saku Shaka Chichi ni Au wo chūshin nin’ (Reception of Ajanta painting in Yokoyama Taikan’s Shaka Chichi ni au), Indo-Kōko-Kenkyū (Indian Archaeological Society, Japan), 32, 2010–1, pp. 57–70. Taizō Nonaka (ed.), Arai Kanpō—The Man and His Work, Tokyo: Chūōkōron bijutsu shuppan, 1974. Takao Uno (ed.), Changing Perceptions of Japan in South Asia in the New Asian Era, Kyoto: International Research Center for Japanese Studies, 2011. Tetsurō Sugimoto, Indo no ko-hekiga o saguru (Exploring ancient Indian paintings), Kyoto: Ritsumeikan Shuppanbu, 1940. Tetsurō Sugimoto, Indo kodai hekiga no kenkyū (Studies on ancient Indian paintings), Kyoto: Ritsumeikan Shuppannbu, 1943. Yasunaga Koichi, ‘Yoshida Hiroshi: His Personality and Art’, in Hiroshi Yoshida, Yoshida Hiroshi zen moku-hanga shu, Tokyo: Abe Publishing, 2017, pp. 23–27. Yone Noguchi, ‘Inscription on the Ajanta Fresco’, in Yone Noguchi (ed.), The Ganges Calls Me – Book of Poems, Tokyo: Kyobunkwan, 1938, pp. 17–18. Yonejirō Noguchi, ‘Ajanta hekiga daisan’, in Yone Noguchi (ed.), Tate-yo Indo [Stand up, India], Tokyo: Shōgaku-kan, 1943, pp. 88–92. Yonejirō Noguchi, Indo ha kataru [India Speaks], Tokyo: Dai’ichi Shobō, 1936. Yoshitaro Uehara, Shin Sei-iki-ki (New Records on the Western Regions), Tokyo: Yūkosha, 1937.

Glossary

Ananda K. Coomaraswamy (1877–1947) Pioneer historian of Indian art and foremost interpreter of Indian culture to the West. A close friend of the Tagore family, he was part of the literary renaissance and the swadeshi movement and organized the India Society in England. ‘Asia is One’ A slogan that first appeared in Okakura Kakuzō’s The Ideals of the East (London: J. Murray, 1903). Chicago Columbian Exposition, 1893 Also known as the World Columbian Exposition was held in Chicago to celebrate the 400th anniversary of Christopher Columbus’ arrival in the Americas in 1492. Dharampala Anagarika (1864–1933) Sri Lankan Buddhist monk, Buddhist revivalist and writer, established the Maha Bodhi Society at Colombo in 1891 and moved its offices to Calcutta in 1892. Edo period 1603–1868 (江戸時代 Edo jidai) Also known as the Tokugawa period (徳川時代 Tokugawa jidai) in Japan was a period of economic growth and the rise of arts and culture. Fujishinkyo Religious principles based on the concept of non-duality. Gandhara art A style of Buddhist visual art that developed in northwestern Pakistan and eastern Afghanistan and flourished largely during the Kushan dynasty (1st century BCE to the 7th century CE). Ho-o (or Phoenix) Pavilion The Japanese Pavilion at the Chicago Columbian Exposition named after the mythical bird (phoenix). Hōryūji-temple Temple built by Prince Shotoku (shotoku taishi 聖徳太子, 574–622) and his family, known for its mural paintings of the birth of the Buddha Shakyamuni. Japonism Trend in the late 19th and early 20th century to collect works of Japanese art. Jorasanko Jorasanko Thakur Bari in Jorasanko, North Kolkata, West Bengal, India, is the ancestral home of the Tagore family and is a part of the Rabindra Bharati University campus. Lala Har Dayal Singh Mathur (1884 –1939) An Indian nationalist revolutionary and freedom fighter. Maha Bodhi Society The Maha Bodhi Society is a South Asian Buddhist society founded by the Sri Lankan Buddhist leader Anagarika

210

Glossary

Dharmapala and the British journalist and poet Sir Edwin Arnold. The organization’s self-stated initial efforts were to resuscitate Buddhism in India and restore the ancient Buddhist shrines at Bodh Gaya, Sarnath and Kushinara. Meiji era 1868–1912 (明治 Meiji) An era characterized by industrialization, the spread of Western influences and the rise of Japan as a modern nation state. Okakura-Kakuzō (1862 –1913) Also known as Tensin Okakuro/Okakura Tenshin, a Japanese art critic and intellectual. Author of three influential books: The Ideals of the East (London: J. Murray, 1903), The Awakening of Japan (New York: Century, 1904) and The Book of Tea (New York: Putnam’s, 1906) Pali Tipitaka The Pali canon that forms the doctrinal foundation of Theravada Buddhism. Pan-Asianism The ideology of Asian solidarity and cooperation that grew out of anticolonial movements across Asia but also discredited because of Japan’s use of the idea for aggression during World War II. Raja Rajendralal Mitra (1822–1891) The first modern Indian Indologist and scientific historiographer. He was a pioneer figure in the Bengali Renaissance. Shinbutsu shugo 神仏習合 The practice of viewing indigenous deities as local manifestations of Buddhist figures. Sister Nivedita (1867–1911) Born Margaret Elizabeth Noble, she was an Irish teacher, author, social activist, school founder and disciple of Swami Vivekananda. Swami Vivekananda (1863–1902) Born Narendranath Datta, he was an Indian Hindu monk, chief disciple of the 19th-century Indian mystic Ramakrishna Paramhansa and founder of the Ramakrishna Math and the Ramakrishna Mission. A key figure in the introduction of Vedanta and yoga to the Western world and best known for his speech at the Parliament of the World’s Religions in Chicago in 1893. Taisho period, 1912–1921 Characterized by political liberalism and social and cultural openness. Teaism The tea ceremony in Japan indicative of the aesthetic and cultural aspects of Japanese life, best outlined by Okakura Kakuzō in his long essay, The Book of Tea (1906). The Tokyo Fine Arts School (1887–1952) Developed from Japan’s Commission for Investigating National Painting. Okakura was one of its founders and headed it between 1888 and 1898. World’s Parliament of Religions, 1893 A meeting of exponents of different religions was held on the sidelines of the Columbian Exposition.

Index

Note: italic page numbers refer to figures. Abanindranath Tagore 62 Advaita 50, 54, 55, 71, 111 Ajanta 55, 57, 114, 143, 150, 153, 189, 192–194; Tetsuro Sugimoto 200; Ukiyo-e technique 202; see also Okakura A.K.C. 111–114, 116–119, 121–124; popular crafts 118; Muneyoshi Yanagi 114; see also Ananda Kentish Coomaraswamy Alexander Cunningham 9, 142 Anagarika Dharmapala 6–7, 8, 13, 75, 76, 87, 88, 98, 140, 146, 147; see also Dharampala Ananda Kentish Coomaraswamy 11, 2, 63, 109, 113, 190; see also A.K.C. Asakawa Takumi 119, 120 bairagya 73 Bhudev Mukhopadhyaya 10 Bodh Gaya 8, 9, 13, 40, 41, 55, 76, 95, 146 Buddha 1, 8–11, 13, 14, 16, 25–44 Buddha enlightenment 8, 32, 193, 198 Buddhism xviii, xx, xxi, 1, 8–11, 13–16, 25–44, 56, 75–77, 86, 90–92, 94–97, 99, 100, 104, 135, 141–143, 147, 151, 153, 160, 161, 178, 179, 182, 190, 198, 199; Bengal, centre of Buddhism 75; on love 28, 29, 30, 32, 35, 42, 61, 69, 91, 93, 102, 118, 140, 147; Mahayana Sutra 43; Nepalese Buddhist texts 43; Rajendralal Mitra 75 Buddhist archaeology 137, 138, 139, 42, 145, 175; Meiji cultural property policy 170, 171, 175

Buddhist Art 9, 13, 95, 112, 136, 141, 160, 170, 177, 183, 185, 186 Buddhist modernity 86, 98, 105 Buddhist relics 114, 143, 145–147, 153, 177; tool of diplomacy 14, 145–149 Calcutta 7, 31–34, 43, 59, 62, 75, 77–79, 136, 142, 146, 147, 197, 202 Charles Lang Freer 159–165, 168 Chicago Exposition 4, 103 Chinoiserie 162, 166 Colonial 6, 13, 69, 79, 89, 94, 127, 129, 135, 136, 145, 146, 148 colonialism 1, 8, 11, 70; Asian nationalism 1; Buddhist Archaeology 142–48; Buddhism and pre-colonial connections 13; Cultural identity 140; discourse 69; the idea of Asia 12; Indian archaeology 140; Japan and India under colonialism 70; Lala Hardayal 86, 94, 95, 103; Pan Asianism 11; Pure Buddhism 86; response to 5, 69; Yanagiand Japanese colonialism 114–117 cosmopolitanism 53, 70–72 cultural exchange 49, 53, 55, 57, 59, 61, 63, 65, 189, 202, 203 cultural nationalism 140 dharma 27, 28, 31, 38 Dharmapala 6, 8, 9, 12, 13, 75, 76, 98, 135, 140, 146, 147; In Japan 87–88; see also Angarika Dharmapala Eurocentricism 26 European enlightenment 27, 69, 72, 73, 177 European art 51

212 Index The Freer Gallery of Art 159, 160, 162, 167, 168 Gaganendranath Tagore 63 God 45, 60, 73, 74, 76, 77, 95, 96, 122, 123, 162, 163; AKC 123; Buddha as a figure of God 8; Deism 73; Rabindranath Tagore, Buddhism and Advaita 32; Rammohun Roy 77; Swami Vivekananda’s critique of Buddhism 37–42, 76; Theravada Buddhism 95 globalization 159 Hirai Kinza 74 Hirako Takurei 182–184 Hiroshi Yoshida 202 Hishida Shunso 79 Hooden 136; see also Phoenix Hall 4–5 Horyuji 10, 170–184, 187, 189, 190, 192, 195, 198, 202 Ideals of the East 7, 10, 49, 51–55, 59, 62, 65, 78, 109, 110, 136, 139–141, 181, 183 Indian art 9, 11, 55, 57, 62–64, 79, 110–113, 116, 190, 191, 194, 200–203; Abhinindranath Tagore 79; Bichitra Art School 63, 64; exchange with Japan 63; Popular crafts 118 Indian religion 26–27 Ito Chuta 182–183 Jambudwipa 138 Japanese art 3, 9, 49, 51, 52, 54, 55, 63, 65, 77, 110, 136, 162, 164, 177, 180, 190, 202 Japanese art history 51, 55, 110, 127, 180, 190 Japonism 160, 162, 166 Kami 137 Katsushika Hokusai 162 Keshab Chandra Sen 72 Kokka-sha 191, 196, 197, 200 Kuratsukuri no Tori 178 Kurokawa Mayori 174, 179, 183 Kushan 141 Lala Hardayal 86, 87, 94, 98 League of Nations 85, 89, 92, 104 Longmen Caves 166, 180–186

Mahabodhi Society 1, 75, 95, 99, 130, 146–148, 170–172, 180, 181 Mahayana Buddhism 85, 87, 89, 96, 103 Meiji Restoration 2, 71, 77, 137, 170, 176 modern 13, 26, 40, 41, 69, 73, 74, 100, 102, 104, 114, 121, 136, 139, 140, 144, 152, 160, 167, 202, 203; Buddhism 92, 97–99; Dharmapala and Buddhism 8, 13; Indian perceptions of Japan 77–81; India and Japan 79–81; Japan 2, 4, 5, 10, 170; Lala Hardayal 87; Meiji Restoration 71; Rammohun Roy 73; Tagore 26; Vivekananda 40; The Young East 85, 88, 92 modernity 3, 5, 6–9, 11, 16, 25, 69, 88, 98, 100, 101 moral principles 25, 42, 44, 53, 69, 75–77, 81, 88; Buddhism 4, 21, 29–32, 36, 37, 39, 43, 91, 94, 102; dharma 28, 36; Japan 81 Nara 10, 137, 142–145, 151, 160, 170–173, 176, 180, 182 Okakura Kakuzo 2, 3–5, 7, 9–12, 50, 61, 77–79, 109–114, 120, 136, 139, 140–141, 189, 192; Advaita 111; Advaita ashram 54; Ajanta 55, 189–192; A.K.C. 113; Bengal School of Art 62; Indian art 113, 141; Izure 57–61; Ideals of the East 51–53; Japanese art 49; Japanese imperialism 117; religion and art 56; religious harmony 54; Sister Nivedita 53, 112; Survey trip to China 180–181; Tokyo Fine Arts School 49; The White Fox 60 Pan Asianism 8, 10, 11, 77, 86, 94, 102, 110 The Peacock Room 162, 165 Rabindranath Tagore 5, 25, 49, 57, 58, 60, 63, 70, 86, 88–90, 109, 136, 147, 197; Buddhism 31–32; Buddhologists 32–35; dharma 27–31; Izura 63; Japanese nationalism 80–81; Jorasanko 60; Okakura 57, 79; religion 27; The Young East 89; universalism 79

Index 213 Rajendralal Mitra 43, 75 reformist 6, 8, 70, 72 religion 5–10, 13–15, 40–45, 56, 64, 65, 91, 98, 127, 135–140, 176; Art and aesthetics 6, 56, 112–115, 136; Buddhism 30–32, 137; Dharmapala 8; Hinduism 5, 71–73, 75; Okakura 9, 10; Politics 13, 15; Rabindranath Tagore 27, 28, 34, 60, 61; Swami Vivekananda 6, 7, 36–41, 74, 75–77; The Young East 86, 88, 93–95, 97, 100–103; universal religion 71, 73

Buddha 35–37; On Dharampala 76; On religion 70, 71, 75 syncreticism 72, 73, 97

Sardar Gurcharan Singh 119, 120, 122, 125 Sarnath 9, 40, 76, 137, 143–145, 147–149 Shinran 97–98, 119 Shaka Triad 170–175, 177–179, 184, 187 Shintoism 10, 135, 137, 139 Shunso Hishida 59 Sister Nivedita 139; A.K.C. 110, 111; Art criticism 62, 112; Ideals of the East 7, 10, 49, 76, 109; Myths of the Hindus and Buddhists 11, 112 Swami Vivekananda 2, 5–12, 25, 44, 49, 51, 59, 64, 65, 70–74, 79, 111, 135, 139, 140; Buddhist doctrines 37–42, 76; Far East 70; Hindu revivalism 71; Okakura 57; On

Upanishad 31, 32 Universalism 5, 10, 12, 70, 73, 75, 79

Taikan Yokoyama 59, 62, 63, 192–194 Takakusu Junjiro 87, 105 Taki Seiichi 113–114 Tawaraya Sotatsu 161 Tetsuro Sugimoto 200 Tokyo Fine Arts School 8, 49, 77, 180, 183, 190 Tori style 170, 178–185, 187

Vedanta 8, 25, 35–38, 40–44, 55, 76, 110 World Heritage 149, 152–154 World Parliament of Religions 70, 72–74, 76, 87, 135, 136 Yanagi Muneyoshi 120, 121, 122, 125; Japanese imperialism 114–118; popular crafts 118 Yonejiro Noguchi 202 The Young East 85–95, 99, 100– 104; Buddhist modernity 98; LalaHardayal 94; JunjiroTakakusu 87, 92–97, 103, 104 Yungang Grottoes 182, 184, 196