Editing The New Buddhist Fellowship (section)

== From Social Buddhism toward Radicalism ==

The social implications of New Buddhism varied considerably among members of the Fellowship. For Watanabe Kaikyoku 渡辺海旭 (1872–1933), this-worldly Buddhism developed especially through engagement with poverty, social welfare, and the human consequences of industrialization. A Jōdo-shū priest and Buddhist scholar, Watanabe spent a decade in Germany studying Sanskrit, Pāli, Buddhist studies, and comparative religion. There he became increasingly convinced that Buddhist faith and scholarship must issue in social practice. After returning to Japan in 1910, he established the Jōdoshū Rōdō Kyōsaikai 浄土宗労働共済会 (Jōdo Sect Labor and Mutual Aid Society) and argued that modern religion must investigate not merely the symptoms but the social and economic causes of poverty. Watanabe did not become a revolutionary socialist; his approach remained broadly reformist. Yet his work represents an important extension of ''genseshugi'': the “present world” to which Buddhism must respond was increasingly understood as a world shaped by poverty, labor, and the disruptive effects of modern industrial capitalism.<ref>Shields (2017), ''Against Harmony'', pp. 116–119.</ref>

Inoue Shūten 井上秀天 (1880–1945) pushed New Buddhist social criticism further. A Sōtō Zen priest, traveler, and prolific contributor to ''Shin Bukkyō'', Inoue developed a Buddhist critique of war, nationalism, and Japanese imperial expansion. Travels through South and Southeast Asia, together with his study of Theravāda Buddhism, reinforced his interest in ''ahiṃsā'' (nonviolence), while his encounters with the emerging socialist movement brought him into contact with figures including Uchiyama Gudō. Inoue's commitments became especially consequential around the High Treason Incident (''Taigyaku jiken'' 大逆事件) of 1910–1911, when advocacy of peace could itself attract suspicion of socialism or anarchism. His significance lies not in the construction of a systematic Buddhist socialism but in demonstrating how the New Buddhist critique of sectarianism and religious authority could develop into a Buddhist critique of war, nationalism, imperial expansion, and political repression.<ref>Moriya, Tomoe (守屋友江) (2005). “Social Ethics of ‘New Buddhists’ at the Turn of the Twentieth Century: A Comparative Study of Suzuki Daisetsu and Inoue Shūten”. ''Japanese Journal of Religious Studies'' 32.2: 283–304; Shields (2017), ''Against Harmony'', pp. 124–128.</ref>

The Fellowship's proximity to the emerging socialist movement was nevertheless real. ''Shin Bukkyō'' provided a forum in which Buddhist reformers and socialists could encounter one another, and several New Buddhists—including Takashima Beihō, Sugimura Sojinkan, Mōri Saian 毛利柴庵, and Inoue Shūten—displayed varying degrees of sympathy toward contemporary socialist thought. Yet the Fellowship never became a socialist organization. Its members shared with socialists a dissatisfaction with existing social conditions and, in some cases, opposition to established religious and political authority, while generally resisting revolutionary socialism and materialist metaphysics.<ref>Shields (2017), ''Against Harmony'', pp. 112–128.</ref>