Editing Meiji Buddhist Modernism (section)

== Murakami Senshō and Historical Criticism ==

Murakami Senshō 村上専精 (1851–1929), a scholar-priest of the Ōtani branch of Jōdo Shinshū, played a central role in establishing modern academic Buddhist studies in Japan. Drawing upon historical and comparative methods, he challenged the assumption that the authority of Buddhist doctrine depended upon the traditional attribution of Mahāyāna scriptures to the historical Buddha. His multivolume ''Bukkyō tōitsuron'' 仏教統一論 [On the Unification of Buddhism], begun in 1901, combined historical criticism with a constructive project of Buddhist reform and unification. Murakami accepted that Mahāyāna scriptures were historically later developments rather than direct records of Śākyamuni's preaching, but he did not therefore dismiss Mahāyāna as religiously illegitimate. Instead, he argued that later Buddhist teachings could embody the Buddha's intention and represent historically developing expressions of Buddhist truth. The controversy surrounding ''Daijō hibussetsuron'' 大乗非仏説論 (the theory that Mahāyāna was not taught by the Buddha) nevertheless challenged inherited conceptions of scriptural and sectarian authority. Murakami's project was thus both critical and constructive: historical scholarship could expose the contingency of inherited Buddhist forms while contributing to the reconstruction of Buddhism under modern conditions.<ref>Shields, James Mark (2017), ''Against Harmony: Progressive and Radical Buddhism in Modern Japan'' (Oxford University Press), 64–74; Sueki Fumihiko 末木文美士 (2005), “Building a Platform for Academic Buddhist Studies: Murakami Senshō,” trans. James Mark Shields, ''The Eastern Buddhist'', n.s., 37, nos. 1–2: 8–27.</ref>

Murakami's historical criticism had implications extending well beyond academic Buddhist studies. If Buddhist scriptures and doctrines were products of historical development, inherited sectarian formulations could no longer claim unquestioned authority simply on the basis of their supposed antiquity. This did not make Murakami a socialist or political radical, but it opened intellectual possibilities that later Buddhist reformers would pursue in more explicitly social and political directions. Seno'o Girō, for example, would later invoke the historical development of Mahāyāna scripture to argue that Buddhism itself had always changed in response to changing social and cultural conditions and must continue to do so in the modern age. Murakami's significance for radical Buddhism therefore lies less in his own political commitments than in helping establish a historical-critical approach through which Buddhist tradition itself could become an object of reconstruction.<ref>Shields (2017), ''Against Harmony'', 64–74; Seno'o Girō 妹尾義郎, “Shinkō Bukkyō Seinen Dōmei sengen” 新興仏教青年同盟宣言 [Declaration of the Youth League for Revitalizing Buddhism] (1931).</ref>

STOP HERE