Letter to Itō Shōshin (1905)

From The Radical Buddhism Project
Revision as of 21:36, 28 September 2026 by James (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{DISPLAYTITLE:Letter to Itō Shōshin (1905)}} '''English translation for the Radical Buddhism Project.''' == Letter to Itō Shōshin == '''Uchiyama Gudō 内山愚童''' 2 November 1905 I have just read your letter, and I am truly overcome with emotion. I believe that the doctrine of the present-day sect is a false Dharma,<ref>''Gihō'' 偽法: literally, a false or spurious Dharma or teaching.</ref> and that the head temple is a den of demons.<ref>''Makutsu''...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)


English translation for the Radical Buddhism Project.

Letter to Itō Shōshin

Uchiyama Gudō 内山愚童 2 November 1905

I have just read your letter, and I am truly overcome with emotion.

I believe that the doctrine of the present-day sect is a false Dharma,[1] and that the head temple is a den of demons.[2] Yet the people of the place where, through fortunate circumstances, I now serve as resident priest have been followers of the Sōtō sect for three hundred years. Pitifully, however, not only do they know nothing of the character of our patriarch, Zen Master Dōgen—they do not even know his name.

If I were to abandon them, it would be impossible for thousands upon thousands of kalpas to plant the Buddha-seed[3] in this place. Therefore, until the authorities of the sect remove me from my position as resident priest, I am resolved to fight with all my strength, taking the truth of selflessness[4] as my sword.

My temple may not display the signboard of “Selfless Love,” but in substance it certainly is Selfless Love. So please do not hesitate to visit, whether for self-cultivation or for propagation of the teaching.

Source Note

This postcard from Uchiyama Gudō 内山愚童 to Itō Shōshin 伊藤証信 is dated 2 November 1905. It was written shortly after Itō's break with institutional Shin Buddhism and his establishment of the Selfless Love (Muga no Ai 無我の愛) movement. Uchiyama expresses strong sympathy with Itō's critique of established Buddhism but explains why he has chosen a different course: rather than abandon his position as resident priest of Rinsenji 林泉寺, he intends to remain within the Sōtō institution in order to “plant the Buddha-seed” among his parishioners. The letter is especially significant for showing that Uchiyama's increasingly radical criticism of institutional Buddhism did not at this point entail a rejection of Buddhist vocation.

The Japanese text is reproduced in Kashiwagi Ryūhō 柏木隆法, Taigyaku jiken to Uchiyama Gudō 大逆事件と内山愚童 [The High Treason Incident and Uchiyama Gudō] (Tokyo: JCA Shuppan, 1979), 230. Kashiwagi's text derives from documentary materials associated with Chiba Kōdō 千葉広道's history of the Selfless Love movement. Fabio Rambelli also translates substantial portions of the letter in Zen Anarchism: The Egalitarian Dharma of Uchiyama Gudō (2013), where he identifies it as having appeared in Muga no ai 無我の愛, no. 13 (10 December 1905).[5]

Translation Note

Translation by James Mark Shields for the Radical Buddhism Project, from the Japanese text reproduced by Kashiwagi Ryūhō. The translation aims to preserve Uchiyama's Buddhist terminology and the polemical force of the original. Rambelli's published translation of portions of the letter was consulted for comparison.

Notes

  1. ↑ Gihō 偽法: literally, a false or spurious Dharma or teaching.
  2. ↑ Makutsu 魔窟: literally, a “demon cave” or “demon's lair.” Uchiyama is referring polemically to the institutional leadership of the Sōtō school.
  3. ↑ Busshu 仏種, the “Buddha-seed”: the potential or basis for awakening. Uchiyama's use of the expression is significant here because he presents remaining at Rinsenji not as accommodation with the Sōtō establishment, but as a Buddhist vocation directed toward his own parishioners.
  4. ↑ Muga no shinri 無我の真理. Muga 無我 (“no-self” or “selflessness”) here also evokes Itō Shōshin's Selfless Love (Muga no Ai 無我の愛) movement.
  5. ↑ Because Kashiwagi and Rambelli describe the textual provenance differently, the relationship between Kashiwagi's copy and the reported publication in Muga no ai requires further verification.