Ichikawa Hakugen, “Zen and Communism”
Ichikawa Hakugen 市川白弦 (ca. 1955, provisional). “Zen and Communism” (Zen to kyōsanshugi 禅と共産主義). (Japanese original here.)
| Contents |
|
1. Translation |
Translation
I
The subject I have been given is so broad that I would like to offer my thoughts on just one aspect of it. In the February issue of this journal (Daijō Zen), Professor Itō Kōan contributed an essay entitled “Seven Abuses within the Zen Tradition.” His identification of these abuses is remarkably apt and provides valuable material for reflection on the part of those of us who practise Zen Buddhism.
Today is not a time for self-defence but for self-criticism and self-renewal. It is a time to reflect on which of the two—self-defence or self-criticism—constitutes genuine fidelity to oneself. The same holds true for the question of Zen and communism. If Zen practitioners merely enumerate the shortcomings of communism and insist that Zen is fundamentally different from such acts of social revolution, communists will surely respond: “Are you, then, satisfied with your present condition? Look beneath your own feet!”[1] And if Zen practitioners declare that they reject violence in every form, communists will ask in return: “What, then, is meant by the unity of sword and Zen?”[2]
II
Those within Buddhist institutions wish somehow to overcome communism, but the means of doing so are exceedingly simple. They consist of nothing other than eliminating the deficiencies within Buddhist institutions and the contradictions within society that communists themselves have identified. If these were removed, there would be no room for communism to take hold, however much it might attempt to spread. To overlook this and agonise over such questions as how to overcome communist thought is to turn something that should not even be a problem into a problem. It is hardly a sign of sound judgment.
Zen practitioners may well devote themselves to the eradication of communism, provided they are free to do so. But the question then becomes whether they are fighting with equal fervour to eradicate reactionary capitalist thought. Against which is the sharp edge of Zen criticism directed: communism or capitalism? This is something Zen practitioners must carefully examine for themselves. If the path by which Zen responds to reality is indeed the “Middle Way,”[3] then surely it must criticise the capitalist social system with equal conviction and strive to overcome it as well.
III
Alternatively, if one maintains that “everything is falsehood and idle talk” and that “the worldly realm is false,”[4] one must ask whether one is devoting as much enthusiasm to spreading such an attitude of detachment from worldly affairs as communists devote to their cause. Moreover, at a time when unemployment, poverty, moral decay, and suicide are increasing daily, and when a nation's educational and cultural institutions are becoming increasingly colonised, we must ask whether encouraging this kind of detached indifference among the masses is truly a sound attitude.
To remain indifferent to society and politics is to leave reactionary politics
free to run rampant. We must recognise that, in the guise of “indifference” or “transcendence,” such an attitude actually amounts to cooperation with reactionary politics. Far from standing outside the political world, it constitutes an even deeper involvement in it.
IV
Now, one of the shortcomings of Marxism is that Marx completely discarded the conception of humanity he had inherited from Feuerbach, dismissing it as something abstract. Herein lies one source of the rigidity and ossification that characterise Marxist theory and practice.
This rigid conception of humanity rejects any underlying “human nature” as a mere abstraction and instead regards people as either bourgeois or proletarian. Of course, I am not suggesting that such an understanding of human beings is entirely mistaken. Nevertheless, this rigid conception of humanity carries, on the one hand, the danger of developing into totalitarianism and, on the other, leaves Marxism without a sufficiently persuasive humanist logic to win over conscientious elements of the upper and middle strata of society.
I believe that the system of thought associated with the “intrinsically pure mind” (jishō shōjōshin 自性清浄心)[5] can give both a class-based understanding of humanity and a theory of social transformation their proper place. I must, however, leave a fuller discussion of this question for another occasion.
Naturally, I am not claiming that Zen exists only where someone takes to the streets with a megaphone, nor am I myself engaged in such activities. But can the Zen tradition really remain as it has been until now? If something must be done, what precisely should it be? This is what I wish to investigate. If anyone knows the answer, I would be grateful to hear it. After all, I myself know any number of ways to justify myself.
Notes
- ↑ The expression ashimoto o mirareyo 脚もとを見られよ (“look at your feet”) evokes a Zen admonition to examine one's own conduct. Ichikawa places this admonition in the mouths of communists.
- ↑ Kenzen ichinyo 剣禅一如 (“the unity of sword and Zen”) is associated with the relationship between Zen discipline and swordsmanship. Ichikawa invokes it to challenge an unqualified claim that Zen has nothing to do with violence.
- ↑ Chūdō 中道 is the Buddhist Middle Way. Here Ichikawa demands that an appeal to the Middle Way entail criticism of the capitalist social system as well as communism.
- ↑ Seken koke 世間虚仮 is a Buddhist expression traditionally associated with the unreliability or falsity of worldly existence. Ichikawa challenges its use as a justification for political indifference.
- ↑ Jishō shōjōshin 自性清浄心 (“intrinsically pure mind”) names a Buddhist idea that the mind is, in some fundamental sense, originally pure. Ichikawa proposes that a philosophical framework built around this idea could give both class-based understandings of human beings and theories of social transformation their proper place. He postpones the explanation of how such a framework would work; the passage should not be read as a fully developed account of his position.
Source Note
“Zen and Communism” (Zen to kyōsanshugi 禅と共産主義) is a short essay by Ichikawa Hakugen 市川白弦 (1902–1986). Ichikawa argues that Buddhist institutions should address the social contradictions identified by communists, criticises religious disengagement from political life, and suggests that the Buddhist notion of intrinsically pure mind might contribute to an account of human beings and social change that avoids some of the limitations he finds in Marxism.
The translation follows Ichikawa Hakugen, 「禅と共産主義」, in 『市川白弦著作集』 (Ichikawa Hakugen chosakushū [Collected Writings of Ichikawa Hakugen]), vol. 2, 『禅と現代思想』 (Zen to gendai shisō [Zen and Contemporary Thought]) (Kyoto: Hōzōkan, 1993), pp. 273–275. The corresponding Japanese transcription is available here. Page markers refer to the 1993 collected edition; the division in the English sentence at the beginning of p. 275 approximates the Japanese page transition.
The original publication year and venue have not been verified. The date ca. 1955 in this page heading and its file identifier is a provisional working estimate, not an established date. The text mentions a February issue of 『大乗禅』 (Daijō Zen) but does not by itself establish the date of this essay.
Translated and annotated by James Mark Shields (2026). The translation remains a working edition pending final comparison with the Japanese source.
How to Cite this Text
Ichikawa Hakugen (ca. 1955 [provisional]). “Zen and Communism” (Zen to kyōsanshugi 禅と共産主義). Translated and annotated by James Mark Shields. The Radical Buddhism Project. Version of 8 October 2026. https://radicalbuddhism.net/wiki/IH55ZC-T.
